The US Marines Bold Risky Plan to Defeat China

[DougC]

From the Task & Purpose YouTube channel a discussion of Force Design 2030. Video discusses the deactivation of tank battalions, artillery, infantry bns, and aircraft. Will the Corps be more lethal on the 21st battlefield after the transformation? Reminds me of the historical issues the Corps faced in 1920s-30s becoming an amphibious force to cross hostile beachheads.

 

[Lead Belly]

Why would US fight China for taking Taiwan? Chips for my connected car?

Monroe Doctrine needs to be re-examined as this "Kerry Doctrine" is not helping the citizens at large, just aids a select few connected ones.

 

[etmo]

I don't get the Monroe Doctrine reference -- that's all Western Hemisphere stuff

The US military plan to defeat China is to accuse China of DEI violations and assume China will immediately surrender

 

[Lead Belly]

The US military plan to defeat China is to accuse China of DEI violations and assume China will immediately surrender

I'm out of the loop, for sure....I was born in the wrong epoch.

 

[karlac]

I don't get the Monroe Doctrine reference -- that's all Western Hemisphere stuff

The US military plan to defeat China is to accuse China of DEI violations and assume China will immediately surrender

This woke, politicized military of ours couldn't whip a platoon of Honey Boo Boos ...

 

[DaBull]

From the Task & Purpose YouTube channel a discussion of Force Design 2030. Video discusses the deactivation of tank battalions, artillery, infantry bns, and aircraft. Will the Corps be more lethal on the 21st battlefield after the transformation? Reminds me of the historical issues the Corps faced in 1920s-30s becoming an amphibious force to cross hostile beachheads.

Just in time to see that swarms of drones and decades of ATGM technology have been savaging lightly armored (particularly on top) vehicles by the thousands each year in Ukraine. Maybe they think they will race from the beach to the capital before a Amazon delivers a container ship of drones to the enemy.

 

[DaBull]

I don't get the Monroe Doctrine reference -- that's all Western Hemisphere stuff

The US military plan to defeat China is to accuse China of DEI violations and assume China will immediately surrender

Reminds me...I was in Vietnam in December and met a young man with a masters degree in English language and culture that was teaching English to Vietnamese in schools in Saigon.

Somehow climate change came up and he was confused. He had no idea that the world was at a tipping point and would come to an end if something drastic wasn't done soon. He had never heard such a thing from anyone in his government, press, schools, or friends and family. He also thought it was preposterous.

 

[Nicholst55]

I firmly believe that the Marines ditching their tube artillery is a huge mistake, and one that will cost a lot of American lives. I guess they figure that they will always be within range of naval gunfire (they won't) and that we will always have air superiority/dominance (we won't). The 101st Airborne didn't bring their artillery along for Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan, and that proved to be a very costly mistake for them. When they rotated out and the 82d replaced them, they DID bring their artillery. I feel that Main Battle Tanks are obsolescent, at best, and have been for some time. The explosion in the field of attack drones is certainly an indicator of that. New tanks have anti-drone protection, but I question how effective that will be when 50 drones attack one tank.

 

[Dredens]

I feel that Main Battle Tanks are obsolescent, at best, and have been for some time. The explosion in the field of attack drones is certainly an indicator of that. New tanks have anti-drone protection, but I question how effective that will be when 50 drones attack one tank.

I don’t feel that tanks (even MBT’s) are necessarily obsolete. I do agree with you, however, that things like drones are definitely a game-changer for them. There will likely be a role for tanks in a combined arms force. It just likely won’t be in massed armored formations like were used to, at least until the defensive technology against drones becomes more widespread, affordable and scalable at the tactical level (or at least effective enough in a wide area to be deployed at a strategic level).

 

[Moonpie]

Would some sort of a thin metal sun shade/drone bomb shield on top of a tank be a workable idea?

 

[DoubleDuty]

This woke, politicized military of ours couldn't whip a platoon of Honey Boo Boos ...

This woke, politicized military of ours couldn't whip a platoon of Honey Boo Boos ...

Really we have kind of sucked since the 2nd World War, we have brave soldiers, but end up half assing our fight. The civilian leadership has really fucked it up. They don't learn from history.

 

[Big Green]

I don’t feel that tanks (even MBT’s) are necessarily obsolete. I do agree with you, however, that things like drones are definitely a game-changer for them. There will likely be a role for tanks in a combined arms force. It just likely won’t be in massed armored formations like were used to, at least until the defensive technology against drones becomes more widespread, affordable and scalable at the tactical level (or at least effective enough in a wide area to be deployed at a strategic level).

I firmly believe that the Marines ditching their tube artillery is a huge mistake, and one that will cost a lot of American lives. I guess they figure that they will always be within range of naval gunfire (they won't) and that we will always have air superiority/dominance (we won't). The 101st Airborne didn't bring their artillery along for Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan, and that proved to be a very costly mistake for them. When they rotated out and the 82d replaced them, they DID bring their artillery. I feel that Main Battle Tanks are obsolescent, at best, and have been for some time. The explosion in the field of attack drones is certainly an indicator of that. New tanks have anti-drone protection, but I question how effective that will be when 50 drones attack one tank.

It’s not that tanks are obsolete necessarily, it’s that we can’t move them on our own. We own no aircraft that support moving them and have to rely on Air Force C-5s and Naval ships. Part of the 2030 plan is to get us to a point where we are more self-sufficient.

You can fit 2 M999s (newest 155mm artillery) on a KC-130, I did it several times moving them around the world. 20,000 pounds of cargo, crew, and 60,000ish pounds of fuel puts you right at some limits that require Squadron CO authorization but we’ve done it many times. Oh, and those were legacy Hercs, the Js should perform better and get to altitude faster and be able to step climb more, reducing fuel consumption and increasing range.

 

[popper]

Distance was a problem in WWII, still is. Battle tanks in China - transport them to west China where they might be successful. How many sandy beaches in Nam? How many tanks? Same problem attacking Iran - loong distance. We've shown we are not successful protecting Red Sea shipping. Aircraft work but TTT is too long.

 

[Dredens]

Would some sort of a thin metal sun shade/drone bomb shield on top of a tank be a workable defense against remote drones will almost always be something in the electronic warfare realm.

The best defenses against drones will generally be something in the realm of electronic warfare. The technology exists, and it’s not necessarily “new”, but the need has only been realized by Big Army to develop that technology further. Whether it’s an omnidirectional jammer, or if it’s some sort of portable or mountable directional jammer, this will likely be what anti-drone technology will end up at the tactical level. Like sure, you can use an expensive SAM system to down a $400 drone but it’s hardly economical in the long run. Even something less expensive like the CIWS that uses less expensive ammunition than SAM’s will add up over time when you’re talking about repeated waves of drone swarms having to be fended off.

 

[Wudidiz]

Artillery and tanks won't be relevant once Iran, China or Russia pops a major nuke. Bin Biden is promoting Iran's nuclear capabilities and they are crazy enough to do it.

 

[DoubleDuty]

Artillery and tanks won't be relevant once Iran, China or Russia pops a major nuke. Bin Biden is promoting Iran's nuclear capabilities and they are crazy enough to do it.

Iran is getting close and Bidens puppeteers are on climate change and persecuting Trump. None of which will matter if they get Nuclear Weapons

 

[seeker_two]

I firmly believe that the Marines ditching their tube artillery is a huge mistake, and one that will cost a lot of American lives. I guess they figure that they will always be within range of naval gunfire (they won't) and that we will always have air superiority/dominance (we won't). The 101st Airborne didn't bring their artillery along for Operation Anaconda in Afghanistan, and that proved to be a very costly mistake for them. When they rotated out and the 82d replaced them, they DID bring their artillery. I feel that Main Battle Tanks are obsolescent, at best, and have been for some time. The explosion in the field of attack drones is certainly an indicator of that. New tanks have anti-drone protection, but I question how effective that will be when 50 drones attack one tank.

With the prevalence of drones and infantry-carried AT missiles, tanks are becoming more of a liability than a strength. If you could convert half of the M1 Abrams chasses to self-propelled artillery or anti-aircraft/missile platforms, you'd be on the right track....

 

[Younggun]

With the prevalence of drones and infantry-carried AT missiles, tanks are becoming more of a liability than a strength. If you could convert half of the M1 Abrams chasses to self-propelled artillery or anti-aircraft/missile platforms, you'd be on the right track....

The tank has been called obsolete many times. I don’t think it’s going to pan out this time either.

I think the age of tank battles may be ending and we won’t see large tank units going head to head. But that was never really all that common. Tanks for most of their history have been heavily armored mobile short range artillery that had the ability to knock out other heavily armored short range artillery.

Drones are just another weapon on the battlefield. Sure, they’ve hit some tanks. But they also hit trucks, IFVs, artillery, MLRS, etc. I imagine instead of tanks disappearing we will see the widespread adoption of electronic countermeasures, both passive and active. There’s already some in use in Ukraine.

I do know that if you get rid of your tanks and the other side doesn’t, your going to have a bad time. Which is why Ukraine was still asking for tanks regardless of how many Russian tanks were destroyed by artillery or damaged by drones. That is a very good indicator of a tanks usefulness on a modern battlefield, imo.

 

[seeker_two]

I do know that if you get rid of your tanks and the other side doesn’t, your going to have a bad time. Which is why Ukraine was still asking for tanks regardless of how many Russian tanks were destroyed by artillery or damaged by drones. That is a very good indicator of a tanks usefulness on a modern battlefield, imo.

....or stodgy old strategists who haven't realized that UKR has had more success using asymmetrical warfare than traditional infantry tactics against a numerically superior force.

 

[Iowashooter]

Glass half empty or half full…

I believe it’s empty

- our government has fallen into the abyss of poor leadership, resolve and insight

- warmongers in Congress want to send folks to war to enrich their own corrupt pockets

- the military has gone weak and woke due to its irrational embrace of DEI and LBGT BS