Another perspective on the future of the Marine Corps
Summary: A guest post by Bill Woods (officer USMC, retired), a follow-up to Why a Marine Corps? by GI Wilson and H. Thomas Hayden.
Your central theme that Marine amphibious capabilities lend themselves to a wide variety of operations other than “amphibious assaults on fortified coastlines” is a crucial key to understanding the relevancy and versatility of today’s Marine Corps. Unfortunately, the Marine Corps will continue to be used as a “second land army” for the foreseeable future. The unwillingness of our politicians to declare war and reinstate the draft meant the US Army could not carry the burden of a long war alone. Trying to fight a long war with a relatively small, peacetime army is impossible.
On the positive side, the Marine Corps is gaining valuable operational experience and developing a cadre of proven combat leaders at all levels. On the negative side, besides the obvious one of dead/wounded Marines, is that decisions concerning weapons/equipment/organizations tend to be in favor of “beefing” up. That thought is not always supportive of our other sea based missions.
The romance of special ops might not long survive their re-tasking as assassins:
- James Bond is not just our hero, but the model for our geopolitical strategy, 18 May 2009
- Stratfor looks at “The Utility of Assassination”, 26 February 2010
- The biggest re-branding exercise in the history of the world, 21 August 2010 — A new image for America.
Afterword and contact info
- For more about this website, see the About the FM website page.
- You can subscribe to receive posts by email; see the box on the upper right.
- Contact us (WordPress keeps your contact information confidential):