The Marine Corps plans to give up its tanks, dramatically remake its artillery batteries, cut its helicopter fleet and take a host of other “radical” steps in arguably the most sweeping American military overhaul in a century — all with the goal of preparing for a potential 21st-century conflict with China. And a little global pandemic hasn’t stopped the Corps from hitting a very different beach. Seventy-five years after storming beaches at Iwo Jima, Marine Corps leaders unveiled a blueprint this month concluding that the branch’s traditional approach no longer meets the nation’s needs. “The Marine Corps we have been building for many years now is increasingly out of step with the problems they’re going to face” in confronting China, said Chris Brose, chief strategy officer at Anduril Industries and former staff director for the Senate Armed Services Committee. “There are reasons for why that is the case,” he added. “The Marine Corps has borne the burden of a lot of the deployments overseas post-9/11. They were optimizing for a different set of challenges.” Pentagon officials argue that China’s rapidly improving military capabilities make the prospect of a traditional Iwo Jima-type shore landing exceedingly unlikely, and the Corps instead will shift its resources toward becoming a “stand-in” force that can operate within enemy range rather than fighting its way into theater from the sea. In a sweeping planning document released last week, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David H. Berger laid out a host of other major changes designed to remake the service with the recognition that preparing for a World War II-style conflict — or even a major ground- and air-based operation such as the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq — can no longer be the service’s top priority. Some critics are already arguing that the new approach is too China-centric, but top Marine officials stress that now is the time for systematic change. “I am convinced that the defining attributes of our current force design are no longer what the nation requires of the Marine Corps,” Gen. Berger said in the document, which lays out a decadelong plan to shift the service into a more modern role. “With the shift in our primary focus to great power competition and a renewed focus on the Indo-Pacific region, the current force has shortfalls in capabilities needed to support emerging joint, naval and Marine Corps operating concepts.”
Gen Berger hasn’t exactly been instilling much in the way of confidence, as of late. He’s been giving in to the pressures of political correctness, and undermining the cohesion of the Corps. So, we’re a bit leery of whatever grandiose plans he may have for the future of the Marines. Historically, the mission of the Marine Corps is to “secure the beachhead.” In other countries, they are called the “naval infantry.” And, our Marines execute that mission better than any other naval infantry on the planet. Period. But, sounds like Gen. Berger wants to somehow change their mission to a “more modern role,” whatever the heck that means. As a former “field grade” Army officer, I’ll remain skeptical, given the General’s spectacularly poor decisions as of late, until we’re provided more specifics. Regardless, I know my brothers and sisters in the Corps will rise to the challenge and do us proud no matter what.
Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger has ordered the removal of all Confederate paraphernalia from Marine bases across the globe. Gen. Berger sent a directive to senior staff outlining a list of initiatives he is “prioritizing for immediate execution,” Military.com reported. The commandant’s memo did not specify what types of Confederate paraphernalia he wanted to be removed and banned, nor did he issue a timeline to comply with the order. It is not exactly clear what Confederate items the commandant was referring to. For instance, there are no Marine bases named after Confederate generals. The U.S. Army has ten such facilities, but no other service, including the Marines, are named after former Confederates. “Last week, the Commandant of the Marine Corps directed specific tasks be reviewed or addressed by Headquarters Marine Corps staff,” Berger’s spokesman, Maj. Eric Flanagan said. “Many of the tasks were published on Twitter Friday. Other tasks not published previously are mostly administrative matters.” Flanagan added that details about the matter would come at a later date. The commandant also called for a series of other progressive policies, including finding more ways to include women in combat roles and ordered the Corps to look into instituting a yearlong maternity leave for female Marines. Berger also called for parental leave policies for same-sex partners. Military.com noted that several Marines have been punished or booted from the service over accusations of racist social media posts, and the Pentagon is pressing the services to track extremism in the ranks.
How disappointing.. While nobody should ever condone hate and bigotry, this whole attack on southern heritage by the Marine Corps commandant is ridiculous. It’s just more political correctness in our military. The stars and bars are still part of some southern state flags, for crying out loud. How is he gonna reconcile that? What a moron.. This commandant is just bending over and grabbing his ankles to please the pc police. Hopefully Trump will fire him.. Unreal…
A Marine veteran who was discharged over ignoring an order to take down a Bible verse taped to her computer may have her case heard by the military’s highest court. Former Lance Cpl. Monifa Sterling received a bad-conduct discharge and was reduced in rank to an E-1 private after refusing an order from her supervisor while assigned to Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, in 2013. “No weapon formed against me shall prosper,” she had taped to the side of her computer in triplicate, Military Times reported Wednesday. When a staff sergeant told her to take down the variation on Isaiah 57:14, she refused and was ultimately discharged. Her violation of a lawful order, along with other low-level offenses, led to the decision, the newspaper reported. The Bible verse “could be interpreted as combative … [and] could easily be seen as contrary to good order and discipline,” the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Appeals said in February. Private Sterling, a native of New York, lost her appeal but the case has been taken up by the nonprofit organization the Liberty Institute. “To me, this is analogous to: What if a Marine wants to get a tattoo of a cross on their shoulder or on their back. Is the Marine Corps going to tell them that is religious, and you can’t do it?” said Michael Berry, the Liberty Institute attorney overseeing the veteran’s appeal, Military Times reported. Private Sterling’s upcoming appeal will hinge on her legal team’s presentation of religious rights protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The 1993 law says that the government must provide a good reason to restrict religious activities, the newspaper reported. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may hear the veteran’s case sometime later this year, the newspaper reported.
In recent months we’ve seen a LOT of cases in the military, where clearly those of faith (including Chaplains) have come under fire for practicing their faith. And, we’ve come to the defense of these servicemembers, and their Chaplains. However, in this case, it would appear that this junior enlisted Marine was simply insubordinate. And, she apparently has a history of poor conduct. So, my initial gut reaction is that she was in the wrong. If you have a problem with a directive, there IS a process through which to appeal a directive. In this case, she simply chose to ignore the directive altogether. And, you cannot have that in any military command. So, while we normally, passionately support those in our armed services (especially of Christian faith, who seem to be under the most fire) for the right to practice their faith without reprisal from an ever-increasing politically correct military brass…in this case, at least from what we’re hearing…this isn’t about religious freedom. It’s about military discipline.