default-img
icon "Not Yet Openly At War" by LtCol Scott Cuomo et al February online

Home Forums Commentary "Not Yet Openly At War" by LtCol Scott Cuomo et al February online

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #80376

    This is one of the most important article to appear in the Gazette in recent years. The team of authors presents a clear and logical analysis of the opportunity that the National Defense Strategy offers the Marine Corps. What is the Corps doing to seize the initiative in defining the service’s future in terms of the nation’s strategic requirements?

    #80748
    Forrest Allen
    Participant

    What a fantastic article. After reading this article, I also had the chance to sit through a PME lead by LtCol Cuomo and the discussion was excellent. It is easy for the Marine Corps to attempt to stick to the status quo but what will that mean for the future of our organization. Failing to challenge our status quo has the possibility of making us obsolete. A new way of thinking must come to the front of our brains for us to find a relevant and prevalent place in the new NDS.

    #84787
    Bradley Fultz
    Participant

    An excellent article indeed. Thought provoking and provides purposeful suggestions for reshaping the MAGTF to remain most relevant in the current fight. Persistent presence at the contact layer of activities however is not adequately addressed in the article. The effectiveness of this proposal requires forward deployed, persistently present Marines in and around key terrain throughout the world. Phase 0 Operations–and such operations must be a whole of government endeavor. Gaining access to countries inside of the contact layer, especially when said counties are under pressure from adversaries willing to pay large sums to deny access to US forces is much easier said than done, specifically when we are talking about the numbers that the article suggests.

    #85066

    Gentlemen, thanks so much for the collective feedback. Our co-author team is certainly grateful for it! We’ve learned a bunch from the feedback received thus far and look forward to continuing to learn more!

    One quick comment on the challenges with gaining access throughout the contact layer’s key maritime terrain. We certainly agree this must be a whole-of-government endeavor and did our best in the article and subsequent PMEs to reinforce the same. We also believe the situation will remain fluid and increasingly in our favor if approached in way that is whole-of-government and focused on reassuring our allies and deterring potential adversaries, instead of one that over-emphasizes large-scale Marine formations conducting more traditional amphibious assaults.

    Perhaps we’re starting to see the fluid nature of these dynamics playing out with key allies such as Japan (https://twitter.com/GregPoling/status/1110606697482080262) and the Philippines (https://globalnation.inquirer.net/174078/lorenzana-china-encroachment-very-concerning and https://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2019/04/us-and-philippines-said-to-be-in-talks.html). Congress’ focus and increasing bipartisan consensus on the subject is increasingly clear as well (https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-concurrent-resolution/13 and https://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/a-new-approach-for-an-era-of-us-china-competition).

    Thanks again and look forward to continuing the dialogue!

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.