tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.comments2024-03-12T18:32:47.843-04:00Future Defense VisionsDouglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08755293848669014693noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-77780973073581733142015-12-10T17:46:40.843-05:002015-12-10T17:46:40.843-05:00The utter absence Of regional "good guys"...The utter absence Of regional "good guys" means any US ground invasion would be spectacularly stupid. The locals, and Russia, should be allowed to have their fun while NATO works toward containing the mess. With his Ukraine adventure sputtering Putin is succumbing to the same counterproductive escalation syndrome Presidents Johnson and Nixon displayed in Southeast Asia. Putinist posturing and inflated airstrike effectiveness reports (airpower narcissism never ends!) won't save Russia from a prolonged and costly mess if it insists on escalation. Just as the US imitated Soviet stupidity by remaining in Afghanistan, the NeoSoviets are imitating our idiocy in Iraq by their Syrian intervention. <br /><br />The key difference is we have the Atlantic ocean between us and our mistakes. Russia has no similar barrier. Old MSgthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01012766252669188552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-29420027258789829322015-11-04T20:48:14.314-05:002015-11-04T20:48:14.314-05:00Feedback from Twitter
John Schindler
@20commit...Feedback from Twitter <br /><br />John Schindler<br />@20committee<br /> <br />Nov 03<br /> <br />A foward-looking US Army not mired in corruption and careerism would have made @MacgregorDoug a top GO. Douglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08755293848669014693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-82370785071022784702015-11-04T18:54:36.155-05:002015-11-04T18:54:36.155-05:00I was informed of the RSG concept a few days ago w...I was informed of the RSG concept a few days ago when one of the Intel Officers I was talking with brought up the new idea. I found the brief online and was instantly captivated. I have a multitude of questions, but since I know you are probably bombarded daily with the 5W's about the concept. So here are a few:<br /><br />1. How does the Maneuver Support and other enablers (Chem, MP, ENG, EOD etc.) fit into this scenario/concept? Has there been any thought to adding in another "BSTB" concept such as what was seen in the 2000's? Since sustainment was underestimated in the wargame, would another BN of enablers that don't fit well under a sustainment BN be feasible?<br /><br />2. Why was CA put under Sustainment?<br /><br />3. How does the Army "patch" system work into this? Obviously in its own way, this would make Divisions (as we know them currently) become obsolete.<br /><br />4. Obviously this concept would shake up fundamental Army institutions that include DOTMLPF... What is the plan to overhaul this MASSIVE undertaking if this plan was granted? How can we guarantee those who have vested interest in the current system not sabotaging this concept due to idealogues and sacrilege against the current system? With the current 7-10 year bureaucratic system in place to field just 1 piece of equipment, how can we guarantee this new concept would take shape as well as whats delivered in the brief?<br /><br />I apologize about all the questions, but as stated this concept has taken hold of my interest. Thanks for your time sir.<br /><br />4. Airborne formations? Does it even exist in this concept?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-52535479098213730142015-06-20T18:14:20.867-04:002015-06-20T18:14:20.867-04:00I'm not a land combat expert but this post is ...I'm not a land combat expert but this post is absolutely fascinating. I'm going to have to get copies of your books. Thanks for sharing your thoughts in this post.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-40874964958229899582014-09-15T18:32:05.381-04:002014-09-15T18:32:05.381-04:00Our NATO allies have been using tanks in Afghanist...Our NATO allies have been using tanks in Afghanistan for years. Most of Afghanistan is flat. In the mountainous areas lighter tanks can traverse. It's our own stupidity and foot infantry bias that prevents us from using tanks in Afghanistan so we can fight the enemy from superior mounted cross country mobility, protection and firepower. In addition -- to be able to dismount. Douglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08755293848669014693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-43480399861938117782014-09-15T18:30:44.595-04:002014-09-15T18:30:44.595-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Douglas A. Macgregor, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08755293848669014693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-72533200206889769612014-09-06T00:21:19.768-04:002014-09-06T00:21:19.768-04:00Now one can see how precise were your predictions....Now one can see how precise were your predictions. Lets hope the one from 2008 will come true if needed in a dire straits Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-27981861448473563122014-06-20T10:35:07.800-04:002014-06-20T10:35:07.800-04:00Doug, Thanks for your service and insight. I agre...Doug, Thanks for your service and insight. I agree 100% with your assessment. BTW, Bamberg was a long time ago - wasn't it. CW4 Randy McGuire, USA, Rtd.Randall McGuirehttp://www.co.lampasas.tx.us/default.aspx?Lampasas_County/Electionsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-14195412965197034562014-03-06T22:09:57.456-05:002014-03-06T22:09:57.456-05:00Does anybody else realize how self-inflicted all o...Does anybody else realize how self-inflicted all of these problems have become?<br /><br />Speaking as a non-American, there are times I wonder if anybody recognizes this, but pretty much every major problem over the past 30 to 40 years that the US has faced is largely self-inflicted.<br /><br />This includes in the military<br />- Worn out equipment that is not replaced<br />- Endless cost overruns of expensive, ineffective weapons<br />- Excessive careerism<br />- Declining quality of training<br />- Broken military procurement<br />- No real focus on warfare; a peacetime garrison mentality<br /><br />In the civilian world<br />- Hallowing out of the manufacturing base<br />- Financial deregulation<br />- Corporate tax evasion<br />- Political corruption <br />- Declining education standards<br />- Destruction of the middle class<br /><br />The relative gains as a whole that the rest of the world has made on the whole could have been largely averted. <br /><br />Ok this is not a comprehensive list, but the point is how appallingly self-inflicted these are. Most alarming of all is a collective inability to think, to self-reflect, and to correct previous mistakes. AltandMainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01014823246265859953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-30855531479858369032014-02-15T00:23:46.238-05:002014-02-15T00:23:46.238-05:00Thank you for this post. With respect to spending ...Thank you for this post. With respect to spending on interdepartment and inter services competition over their 'pet rocks' I found the following astonishing.<br /><br />"Myth 2: The intelligence community is underfunded. This is frankly an incredibly shocking statement...and it comes from the Director of National Intelligence, General James Clapper. In his words:<br /><br />“Never before has the IC been called upon to master such complexity and so many issues in such a resource-constrained environment...”<br /><br />Apparently General Clapper never learned to never say, “Never say never.” As the Washington Post describes later describes:<br /><br />“Spending in the most recent cycle surpassed that amount based on the $52.6 billion detailed in documents obtained by The Post, plus a separate $23 billion devoted to intelligence programs that more directly support the U.S. military.”<br /><br />That’s $75 billion on intelligence, by my calculations. To be clear, the U.S. spends more on intelligence than every other country in the world--besides China and Russia--spend on all their military spending. The United Kingdom has the third largest military spending in the world, and it only spends $60 billion per year on its whole military.<br /><br />Worse, in historical terms, the amount spent on intelligence rivals any time during the Cold War. In other words, far from being “resource-constrained”, the intelligence community has never had as much money on hand as it does now.<br /><br />Frankly, General Clapper can only get away with calling the budgeting environment "resource constrained" because a majority of our representatives don't have the ability (or the time) to read the secret IC budget . He can only get away with it because academics can't chart the budget historically, or in detail. He can only get away with it because think tanks and lobbyists funded by defense and intelligence contractors spread this myth through reputable journalists."<br /><br />- See more at: http://onviolence.com/#sthash.kdA38eMG.dpuf<br />RickWilmesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-38990988994622470922014-01-17T13:18:51.154-05:002014-01-17T13:18:51.154-05:00My son served a year there (Afghanistan) with the ...My son served a year there (Afghanistan) with the 1st Inf Div, he came back and got out. Even as a lowly Specialist, he could see the pointlessness of the sacrifice in blood and treasure.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01364425881279274467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-2692538714500169052013-06-12T07:04:22.982-04:002013-06-12T07:04:22.982-04:00Hey, nice site you have here! Keep up the excellen...Hey, nice site you have here! Keep up the excellent work!<br /><br /><a href="http://www.ima-maritime.com/phd-naval-architecture-ship-building.htm" rel="nofollow"> PHD Ship Building</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08493918846946071954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-9209360298385814902013-04-20T01:06:31.144-04:002013-04-20T01:06:31.144-04:00Much has changed in warfare, but what remains the ...Much has changed in warfare, but what remains the same from days of the caveman to today's MAGTF or Army combined arms battalions is that ALL (non-nuclear) WARFARE IS INFANTRY CENTRIC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-21802772609080713192013-02-22T20:12:35.338-05:002013-02-22T20:12:35.338-05:00Maybe it would be best to retire every two-, three...Maybe it would be best to retire every two-, three- and four-star officer, start merging or closing their commands, then promote a fresh wave of the best junior officers who are not beholden to any gatekeepers/branches/service and have combat experience.<br /><br />Let these new leaders reform the services as they see fit.<br /><br /> Paralushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18237133841423658945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-60244293691488785192013-02-06T01:25:02.785-05:002013-02-06T01:25:02.785-05:00In closing, Sir, I have no illusions that this lit... In closing, Sir, I have no illusions that this little essay will change your thinking drastically. You've been doing this far longer than I have. I have no PHD or college to speak of, I was an NCO not a Colonel and the list goes on. I would simply say, respectfully Sir, please be careful that you don't advocate something that will leave a grunt like myself flat footed and reliant on machines when what he really needs is the right training and equipment to fight. I love tanks and I love A 10's especially in a firefight but they will never replace the Army and Marine Infantryman. I apologize for the length and several posts I just had a large thought I wanted to get out onto print. If you did read through all of this thank you for doing so. If you care to respond my email is Arnie2407@yahoo.com<br /><br /> Respectfully,<br /> James A ArnettAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-37858703421238467512013-02-06T01:21:31.226-05:002013-02-06T01:21:31.226-05:00Dear sir,
As a former US Army Infantryman and ...Dear sir,<br /><br /> As a former US Army Infantryman and team leader who fought in Iraq I have a few questions for you. Far be it for me to question an individual with a PHD let alone an army Colonel (I got out as only a Sergeant), as such I mean no disrespect. My father however retired not long a go as a LT.Col from Special Operations (we were actually in Iraq together and got to see each other there) so I did spend a lot of my young life in and around officers and still find it easy to respectfully speak my mind.<br /> It seems to me, sir, you are essentially advocating a return to the defense transformation of the 1990's. Using superior surveillance and target acquisition equipment combined with information and communication’s gear,the Military can gain the ability to see and quickly understand what was happening on the battlefield, discern the enemy’s intentions and through the use of precision weapons defeat him quickly with a minimal over all foot print. If that is actually what you are advocating, I would say respectfully, Sir, that my own ground combat experience in the current war did not bare this out. <br /> The best satellite in the world is still just hardware. It can only show you what it sees, which can be inaccurate when the enemy uses basic counter measures such as camouflage, blinding into the local population, dispersion of combatants and deception. It’s also subject to the interpretation of those viewing the information it sends. No piece of hardware can tell you how the enemy will react once they have been engaged in close combat. Only a serious understanding of the enemy, gained by close combat, can tell you with any degree of certainty how the enemy might react when he is engaged. Even in this situation it still remains an unknown and a unit commander, from the General to a team leader, can only use that information to mitigate possible threats. Not one of these systems or ideas can change the fact that the enemy is still making his own decisions. The lessons of warfare still apply even if you have the very best possible understanding of the enemy disposition and weapons that are far superior. As long as the enemy has the will and some means to resist history tells us, then he will and even the very best Military will take causalities.<br /> More over this type of thinking fails to take into account the fact that to win a war you must put troops on the ground. None of the surveillance and target acquisition hardware has thus far provided the dominate battle space knowledge it promised. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, commanders at all levels were forced to try and gain their own local intelligence and were faced with engagements by forces that they had no prior knowledge of. Any protracted land engagement by U.S. Forces is accompanied by nation building operations after the conclusion of major combat operations. U.S. forces then have to engage on some level with the local population. This Capabilities Based thinking leaves the U.S. Military mostly unprepared to a conduct a likely COIN Operation. It is unreasonable to think that a major defeat on a conventional battlefield will lead to a population accepting a force of outsiders coming into their country and dictating policy no matter how good their intentions.I doubt very highly, Sir that I would need to site an example of this to you as you have for more schooling than I do. Suffice it to say there are many historical examples of this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-72886973531138112672012-12-11T19:34:25.122-05:002012-12-11T19:34:25.122-05:00Okay, I get Iraq and the need for armor, but what ...Okay, I get Iraq and the need for armor, but what about Afghanistan?<br /><br />guteAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-80333326864420164292012-07-24T00:05:30.623-04:002012-07-24T00:05:30.623-04:00I would be interested in your analysis of whether ...I would be interested in your analysis of whether or not Syria has Iraq's allegedly missing WMD and the possibility that Syria may use WMD against it's protesting population.<br /><br />Should the US be concerned about Syria's possible use of WMD and is this concern a justification to get involved in the conflict?RickWilmesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-67253422058277997152012-03-01T12:46:30.994-05:002012-03-01T12:46:30.994-05:00This is a good place to ask this question.
When t...This is a good place to ask this question.<br /><br />When the Swedish Army ordered the CV90 they didn't have money for both an infrared sight and gun stabilization.<br />They chose to get the Advanced infrared sight and forego gun stabilization.<br /><br />Out of curiosity do you think that was a good choice for a vehicle to be used the wooden northern part of Sweden?<br /><br />P.S. you like the Puma but that looks a lot like the CV90.<br />btw i'm biased having driven one for 10 months.Adrianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03274387964872145961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-52790120690320181112012-02-09T15:23:41.234-05:002012-02-09T15:23:41.234-05:00Colonel,
Great article and this goes well with y...Colonel, <br /><br />Great article and this goes well with your article in the Infinity Journal. Taking the two articles together and the force structures you have advocated in the past, what should the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps look like in the future? In other words, with a focus on the Pacific, AirSea Battle, and a defense budget of 250-300 billion a year, which eggs go in which baskets? Does the U.S. maintain a Marine Corps of three divisions and three air wings? Do Marine infantry regiments replace U.S. Army IBCTs on a 1 for 1 basis (deactivate 25th ID, 10th MTN)? Or does the Marine Corps downsize to only man the seven MEU(SOC)s, fleet security regiment, MSG, and MarSoc? <br /><br />If future combat will require highly mobile, armored forces, should the active U.S. Army consist predominately of HBCTs and ABCTs while the reserves and ANG consist of IBCTs and maybe even the Stryker vehicle (I know you are not a huge fan of this vehicle)? <br /><br />I hope COIN is dead for the conventional forces and remains the main focus of SF – maybe with a SBCT paired with each SFG. <br /><br />I believe that you have mentioned in the past that you like the German Puma IFV as a replacement to the M2 Bradley – does the Bradley replaced or just restored? What are your thoughts on the Ground Combat Vehicle? The Marine Corps EFV was killed for performance and cost reasons, but now the U.S. Army is asking the defense industry to build a vehicle that carries a 9-man squad and a crew of three for between 9-11 million! The EFV was designed to carry a three man crew plus 17 Marines for around 19 million. I get the feeling that the military and defense industry do not get the fact that the U.S. is close to the financial brink.<br /><br />If the U.S. Army is going to continue down the “medium force” road what combat system or systems do you recommend – CV90, etc? Could the GCV become a one size fits all platform?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-91200869199131798242011-05-10T23:54:27.226-04:002011-05-10T23:54:27.226-04:00very good ideas, what can be done to get congress ...very good ideas, what can be done to get congress to act?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-58903586140869396862011-03-28T13:36:39.258-04:002011-03-28T13:36:39.258-04:00The army is always considering Doug's proposal...The army is always considering Doug's proposals. However, unless he categorically states that more general officer slots are needed there will be no changes, although, they love to adopt his language.ENhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12193563623321560413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-35751668265332398402010-03-26T06:32:13.879-04:002010-03-26T06:32:13.879-04:00I love readding, and thanks for your artical.........I love readding, and thanks for your artical.<a href="http://twroom5320.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twchat530.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twroom999.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twgirlmiss.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirltube.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.080sexy.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://room66.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://channeljp.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://channel0204.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twroomlove.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.topmeimei.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twroom222.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twroomnice.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://080cam.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://080adult.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twgirl258.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://channelasia.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirl080.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://misslive.me" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twgirlasia.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twgirltube.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twroom5320.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twroom080.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twchattalk.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twchatvideo.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.channelvideo.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirl5366.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirl104.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirlsex.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.080meme.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twroomhi.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twgirltw.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.080channel.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirl777.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.room66.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twchatez.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.dxshow.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://080sexy.com" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://www.twchatmeme.info" rel="nofollow">.</a><a href="http://twgirllove.info" rel="nofollow">.</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-39988180384328094332009-08-07T14:30:06.836-04:002009-08-07T14:30:06.836-04:00I am flabbergasted that we folks back home only fo...I am flabbergasted that we folks back home only found out about the malicious bungling in Iraq years after it happened. That's some press we have here: the civ. P.R. arm of the DoD.<br />& As for the old Iraqi govt., I'd still like to know what Saddam Hussein did to earn our enmity that he wasn't doing when envoy Rumsfeld was gladhanding him back in'83.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09627763602113398717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4451765907731094087.post-41037700157102452542009-06-15T01:22:40.219-04:002009-06-15T01:22:40.219-04:00The performance of the Stryker in Iraq doesn't...The performance of the Stryker in Iraq doesn't justify it's purpose in the Army. First of all, it was never used in the invasion of Iraq, which is a very important point. When the 3ID went into Iraq, they faced heavy weaponry such as dense small arms and rpg fire, anti-aircraft guns, auto-cannons, recoilless-rifles, and even tank guns. They also move through difficult terrain for tactical purposes. There were a number of times where their ability to move became very restricted because of the wheeled supply trucks couldn't keep up with them. <br /><br />The Stryker units were sent into Iraq after the country was already occupied where they can move on roads more freely and faced lightly armed insurgents backed by airpower. They would not fare too well if they backed up a tracked armor unit fighting against a better armed and organized enemy and tackling much more difficult terrain. While we may not face an army like the Nazi's or Soviets, an enemy like Hezbollah where they made good organized use of anti-tank missiles can make the Stryker useless where it's limited tactical mobility will be highlighted. In the future, more deadly anti-tank weapons may be more readily available and the Stryker would not be able to keep up due it's drive train limitations. <br /> <br />Another important issue that determines the existence of the Stryker is the purpose of our Army. Mr.Macgregor is against long-term occupations like what we're having in Iraq and Afghanistan. If the our military avoids these kinds of situations the Stryker would not be necessary. <br /><br />The throughout the cold war the Army had very little interest in wheeled vehicles due to the fact in combat experience they have very limited value. I'm surprised that they still continue to largely depend on wheeled trucks to supply combat formations. During WW2 in Europe tanks had be pulled out from the front lines to help out with logistical duties during bad weather, in the Korean and Vietnam war specialized tracked logistical vehicles were made to carry supplies in difficult terrain. In wars that we are fighting now and into the future, combat units will need to be more self-sufficient and much more dispersed which demands more durability and tactical mobility than a wheeled vehicle can offer. <br /><br />I would agree that the Stryker isn't a total failure like Macgregor and many other harsh critics have said, however the Army is investing far too much money into these vehicles at the expense of more important issues. While the Stryker is a good vehicle for peacekeeping or military police roles, using it for a rapid-deployment unit where it's suppose to be versatile and self-sufficient in a variety of difficult environments is a bad idea.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com