While the Navy continues to express confidence in aircraft carrier battle groups with all the supporting surface ships. Similarly, the Marine Corps continues to push for amphibious assault vehicles and equipment. But are these preferences supported by technological, tactical and strategic trends?
The future appears to lie in the green coastal waters where littoral combat ships range and in the "black water" of the deep where submarines reign. Cruise missiles and UAVs are powerful force multipliers that will diminish the effectiveness and necessity for large, expensive surface vessels. LCSs and submarines are both relatively small, but versatile are not only combat vessels, but useful for missions such as surveillance and SF operations.
A century ago battleships were the epitome of Naval power, World War Two saw them eclipsed by aircraft carriers as naval warfare became air warfare. There is evidence to suggest that in this century naval warfare will become black water submarine warfare.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Monday, September 20, 2010
Is Africa the Next Afghanistan?
The possibility of The United States expanding its Global War on Terror is not idle speculation it is happening. Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom has grabbed all the headlines, but years ago the Bush administration established an American military presence in central and east Africa. These troops, based out of places like Djibouti, have been training and advising weak democracies like Ethiopia and Kenya.
Jihadi Violence has been part of African history since Islamic armies first spread into North Africa in the 7th century. Algeria, the Sudan and Somalia are only the most recent flare ups. So far, media accounts seem to indicate the military's COIN, advising and training missions have been going well, but they have also been growing as underscored by the creation of the new Africa Command at the end of the Bush administration.
Like fire fighters, the goal the U.S. troops in Africa is to help local governments damp down local militant Islamists before another Sudan or Somalia is created. Hopefully this long term commitment will prove to be a success and demonstrate that not all the battles we fight with the militant Islamists have to be large-scale endeavors like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Jihadi Violence has been part of African history since Islamic armies first spread into North Africa in the 7th century. Algeria, the Sudan and Somalia are only the most recent flare ups. So far, media accounts seem to indicate the military's COIN, advising and training missions have been going well, but they have also been growing as underscored by the creation of the new Africa Command at the end of the Bush administration.
Like fire fighters, the goal the U.S. troops in Africa is to help local governments damp down local militant Islamists before another Sudan or Somalia is created. Hopefully this long term commitment will prove to be a success and demonstrate that not all the battles we fight with the militant Islamists have to be large-scale endeavors like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Monday, September 13, 2010
New Dawn or Shining us on?
President Obama seems to want things a couple of ways when it comes to Operation Iraqi Freedom, now renamed Operation New Dawn. His narrative for years has been Bush policies failed, especially the surge and Iraq was spiraling out of control. Obama's Vice President Biden even advised the country be split into three mini-states. Now that they own Iraq they are rushing to take credit for the progress Bush's policies and as important his determination to stay and win instead of withdrawing prematurely as Obama wanted to do as a senator and candidate.
The Obama administration recently presided over the withdrawal of combat forces from Iraq as called for in the Status of Forces Agreement negotiated by the Bush administration. Obama keeps harping on his plan to have ALL troops out of Iraq sometime in 2011. Does this mean regardless of conditions on the ground. What about the 4000 American Special Forces troops "assisting and advising" Iraqi forces? They only get to help kill our enemies until the hour glass runs out? What kind of war-winning strategy is that?
Obama may discover in 2011 that al-Qaeda and its ilk are not on the same schedule and as al-Qaeda and the Taliban are fond of saying in Afghanistan, "you have the watches, but we have the time."
The Obama administration recently presided over the withdrawal of combat forces from Iraq as called for in the Status of Forces Agreement negotiated by the Bush administration. Obama keeps harping on his plan to have ALL troops out of Iraq sometime in 2011. Does this mean regardless of conditions on the ground. What about the 4000 American Special Forces troops "assisting and advising" Iraqi forces? They only get to help kill our enemies until the hour glass runs out? What kind of war-winning strategy is that?
Obama may discover in 2011 that al-Qaeda and its ilk are not on the same schedule and as al-Qaeda and the Taliban are fond of saying in Afghanistan, "you have the watches, but we have the time."
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Secretary of Defense for a Day: 3 Items
What would you do if you were the Secretary of Defense for a day? This is the "thought experiment" I considered recently and these are the top three items I would put on the agenda:
1. There is too much duplication, expense and inefficiency among the four services. I would reorganize the branches by folding the Marine Corps into the Army and return the Air Force to its original condition as a Corps within the Army.
2. Refocus efforts into combat effectiveness. This does not always mean embracing the latest piece of technology. I would focus on ways to reduce the Army's tooth to tail ratio so tactical units like platoons and companies can operate independent of bases for up to weeks at a time.
3. I would put a stop to all of the silly uniform changes such as the Navy's weirdo bluish digital camouflage and the Air Force's digital tiger stripe uniforms. i.e. we're at war - pick one uniform!
1. There is too much duplication, expense and inefficiency among the four services. I would reorganize the branches by folding the Marine Corps into the Army and return the Air Force to its original condition as a Corps within the Army.
2. Refocus efforts into combat effectiveness. This does not always mean embracing the latest piece of technology. I would focus on ways to reduce the Army's tooth to tail ratio so tactical units like platoons and companies can operate independent of bases for up to weeks at a time.
3. I would put a stop to all of the silly uniform changes such as the Navy's weirdo bluish digital camouflage and the Air Force's digital tiger stripe uniforms. i.e. we're at war - pick one uniform!
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Captain Un-America
Although combat takes places half a world away in places like Afghanistan and Iraq the war is with us - it is part of our culture. Since the Vietnam War the left has rejected war and the military as part of our legitimate past and present. The comic book super hero Captain America was born in the dark days of World War Two when the leftists who would reject him as adults marveled at his exploits as children.
In an era when the phrase "flag waving" is used with derision it should come as no surprise that the left views Captain America in much the same way it views America: big, lumbering and jingoistic. The generations who gloried in America's exceptionalism are dying off only to be replaced by multi-cultural minded vanilla beans. Sometimes I wonder how America still produces the millions of young men and women who still want to serve proudly in our armed forces.
Classic Captain America rarely had time to second guess himself and his motives; he was too busy fighting the Nazis and Red Skull. Does anyone believe he will be cracking Jihadi's skulls? Something tells me the newest incarnation of Captain America set to hit the silver screen next year will not be so lucky and neither will we.
In an era when the phrase "flag waving" is used with derision it should come as no surprise that the left views Captain America in much the same way it views America: big, lumbering and jingoistic. The generations who gloried in America's exceptionalism are dying off only to be replaced by multi-cultural minded vanilla beans. Sometimes I wonder how America still produces the millions of young men and women who still want to serve proudly in our armed forces.
Classic Captain America rarely had time to second guess himself and his motives; he was too busy fighting the Nazis and Red Skull. Does anyone believe he will be cracking Jihadi's skulls? Something tells me the newest incarnation of Captain America set to hit the silver screen next year will not be so lucky and neither will we.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Top Guns vs. Mouse Jockeys
The military is in a period of serious transition and transformation. It would be a significant phenomenon even if we were enjoying a period of relative peace. The GWOT has forced decisions to be made in an uncertain prism of war that has created a tug of war between current needs and and future needs. This has had an impact on military organization, training and education, but the most visible impact is the increasing role of technology.
UAVs have almost become a symbol of the reliance on technology in the GWOT to provide force multipliers in an era of flat or shrinking troop levels. This is particularly evident in the Air Force as this service has been at the cutting edge of technology for decades. Many observers believe the F-22 and F-35 fighters will be the last manned fighters built by the U.S. This is doubtful, but we already see the first indications of a split between what I call Top Guns versus Mouse Jockeys. To the chagrin of actual pilots, a subculture of "virtual pilots" are being trained to "pilot" the growing fleet of UAVs. Originally the idea was to retrain pilots for the UAV jobs but the growth in the fleet has made the Air Force rethink the training process and has created a new occupational specialty to accommodate the operators.
The trouble is UAVs are very much a tactical asset similar to artillery support or a gun ship. The Army has cannons and helicopters, but the Reapers and Predators are the property of the Air Force and CIA. The Air Force mouse jockeys sit in a room on a base in the U.S. and "fly" the UAVs. Perhaps these assets could be better utilized if the operators were in theater soldiers instead of airmen who have probably never set foot in Afghanistan or Iraq. Under my plan the UAV fleet as well as Air Force and Marine Corps planes would be reorganized into an Army Air Corps. This could go along way toward erasing costly and inefficient service rivalries and help the air forces come to terms with the idea that tactical air support and logistical support are and will probably continue to be their core missions.
A war of UAVs and A-10 attack planes is a very different war than the one with spectacular dogfights and massive bombing raids the Air Force has been planning and equipping for since World War Two. But this is the war we have drawn and we have to do what is necessary to fight it most effectively without regard for pet weapons and outdated organizations.
UAVs have almost become a symbol of the reliance on technology in the GWOT to provide force multipliers in an era of flat or shrinking troop levels. This is particularly evident in the Air Force as this service has been at the cutting edge of technology for decades. Many observers believe the F-22 and F-35 fighters will be the last manned fighters built by the U.S. This is doubtful, but we already see the first indications of a split between what I call Top Guns versus Mouse Jockeys. To the chagrin of actual pilots, a subculture of "virtual pilots" are being trained to "pilot" the growing fleet of UAVs. Originally the idea was to retrain pilots for the UAV jobs but the growth in the fleet has made the Air Force rethink the training process and has created a new occupational specialty to accommodate the operators.
The trouble is UAVs are very much a tactical asset similar to artillery support or a gun ship. The Army has cannons and helicopters, but the Reapers and Predators are the property of the Air Force and CIA. The Air Force mouse jockeys sit in a room on a base in the U.S. and "fly" the UAVs. Perhaps these assets could be better utilized if the operators were in theater soldiers instead of airmen who have probably never set foot in Afghanistan or Iraq. Under my plan the UAV fleet as well as Air Force and Marine Corps planes would be reorganized into an Army Air Corps. This could go along way toward erasing costly and inefficient service rivalries and help the air forces come to terms with the idea that tactical air support and logistical support are and will probably continue to be their core missions.
A war of UAVs and A-10 attack planes is a very different war than the one with spectacular dogfights and massive bombing raids the Air Force has been planning and equipping for since World War Two. But this is the war we have drawn and we have to do what is necessary to fight it most effectively without regard for pet weapons and outdated organizations.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
What Time is it in Kandahar? Part II
According to the way the Kandahar Offensive was sold in the spring it would be a lot like the Marjah Operation, but bigger and better. Now its the middle of August and according to the International Herald Tribune the military is no longer allowed to use the phrase "Kandahar Offensive." Military and civilian spokesmen have walked the whole thing back and are portraying the operation as largely a "civilian surge" with reconstruction taking a front seat to combat operations. An unnamed civilian official was quoted as saying, "...it's not going to be an aggressive military campaign. They've looked at it and realized it wouldn't work." General McChrystal was still in charge when this was said; is he the "they?" Is it President Obama? President Karzai?
Based on recent statements by General Petraeus regarding sitting down with the Taliban, it seems everyone believes a military solution is no longer the solution. Instead of spending so much time writing a new COIN manual perhaps General Petraeus should closely study Sri Lanka's dismantling of the Tamil Tigers. What was the point of going ahead with the Bush Administration's intention to send a surge into Afghanistan? I thought the point was to try to repeat the success seen in Iraq, but if the extra troops are not going to be used to shred the hardcore Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters the whole things takes on aimless quality that feeds into the "we're out of here in 2011" message the Americans and Afghans have been getting from the Obama administration.
Based on recent statements by General Petraeus regarding sitting down with the Taliban, it seems everyone believes a military solution is no longer the solution. Instead of spending so much time writing a new COIN manual perhaps General Petraeus should closely study Sri Lanka's dismantling of the Tamil Tigers. What was the point of going ahead with the Bush Administration's intention to send a surge into Afghanistan? I thought the point was to try to repeat the success seen in Iraq, but if the extra troops are not going to be used to shred the hardcore Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters the whole things takes on aimless quality that feeds into the "we're out of here in 2011" message the Americans and Afghans have been getting from the Obama administration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
