Are These The Last Days Of The U.S. Marine Corps?

[Warph]

Are These The Last Days Of The U.S. Marine Corps?
By Michael Snyder, on August 11th, 2013

     

Are the current personnel cuts the beginning of the end for the U.S. Marines?  Could these actually be the last days of the U.S. Marine Corps?  A decade ago, such a notion would have been absolutely unthinkable, but times have changed.  The Marine Corps was already in the process of drawing down from a peak of 202,100 Marines to 182,100, and now Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is warning that the sequester cuts may force the Army to be cut down to a size of 380,000 and the Marine Corps to be cut down to a size of 150,000.  Unfortunately for the Marines, even larger cuts may eventually be coming.  Many in the Obama administration and in the Pentagon are now openly questioning whether there will be an important role for the Marines to play in the future.  After all, the U.S. military has not conducted a major amphibious landing since the Korean War.  As our politicians look for even more ways to cut military expenses in the years ahead, the Marines may end up being very tempting "low hanging fruit" that the bureaucrats can't resist.  And unless another major conflict erupts, it seems clear that more cuts are probably coming.  In fact, even the New York Times admits that "deep reductions" to the U.S. military have long been an important goal for Barack Obama.

So does Barack Obama plan to go after the Marines?  Well, for now Barack Obama is publicly praising the Marines.  In fact, Obama made the following promise to the Marines during a recent speech at Camp Pendleton...

"After all you've given to our nation, you have to know your nation will always be faithful to you."

Will Obama keep that promise?

Well, considering his track record perhaps you should not hold your breath.

In any event, the Marine Corps brass is certainly bracing for very deep budget cuts right now.  Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Jim Amos says that the Marine Corps is going to do "the very best we possibly can" with what they are given...

Amos said he assumes the Corps' planned shift to more operations in the Pacific will continue, but the size of the force and the number of missions it will be able to undertake will be reduced if the budget cuts stay in place."We're going to do less with less," Amos told the House committee. "That doesn't mean we're going to do it poorly or we're going to do it inadequately. We'll do it the very best we possibly can."
Unfortunately for the Marines, they are being given less and less these days.

You see, the cuts to the Marines did not start with the sequester.  The truth is that plans to reduce the size of the Marines started very early in the Obama administration.  For example, the following are recommendations for cuts that came from the 2010 Force Structure Review Group report...

• A 13 percent drop in ground combat forces, including an 11 percent reduction in infantry, 20 percent reduction in cannon artillery and a 20 percent reduction in armor

•A 16 percent drop in fixed-wing tactical aviation squadrons

• A 9 percent drop in logistics

• A 7 percent drop in Marines assigned to non-operational billets

• And a 12 percent drop in the civilian work force.

And back in 2010, Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated that the Marines had "gotten too big" and he also publicly questioned the future of the Marines...

"All of the military services have been challenged to find the right balance between preserving what is unique and valuable in their traditions, while at the same time making the changes necessary to win the wars we are in and prepare for the likely future threats in the years and decades to come," he said. "Looking ahead, I do think it is proper to ask whether large-scale amphibious landings along the lines of Inchon [the Marine's invasion of the Korea peninsula in 1950] are feasible."
Of course part of the problem for the Marines is that they are still considered to be a part of the U.S. Navy.  The following is from a recent Fiscal Times article...

The Marines, while considered a separate branch of the military, are actually part of the Navy. They're often referred to as the "infantry of the Navy."

"The Marines don't have a separate fiscal existence. They are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Navy," Adams said.
When it comes time to cut the Navy budget, it is often the Marines that feel the most pain...

But the Navy has authority over the Marine's personnel budget–expected to be $12.9 billion in 2014. This means that Navy brass can decide how it pays to train, house, feed and maintain readiness of the troops.

Because of this, according to Adams, the Marines often find themselves the victims of Navy spending fights.
And right now the U.S. military is experiencing a spending squeeze that they have not felt in many, many years.  In addition to personnel cuts, a whole host of other Marine programs could be cut back significantly because of the sequester...

Fewer F-35B Joint Strike Fighters, MV-22 Ospreys, AH-1 Cobras, and UH-1 Hueys. No Marine Personnel Carrier. Maybe no Joint Light Tactical Vehicle to replace the Humvee. 8,000 fewer Marines on active duty. The Marine Commandant has put all that on the table as part of his proposal to the Defense Secretary's Strategic Choices and Management Review. If sequester goes into effect in its full 10-year, $500 billion glory – and all signs so far are it will – then Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos stands ready to sacrifice almost everything except the Amphibious Combat Vehicle and combat readiness.
As the size of the U.S. Marine Corps gets whittled away, we need to be very careful that we do not lose a very important part of our culture.  The Marines have a very special place in U.S. history, and we should never forget the blood that so many of them shed to defend our liberties and our freedoms.

Unfortunately, our liberties and our freedoms are being eroded at an astounding pace today, and even the Marines themselves are quickly becoming an endangered species.

After surviving the Japanese and the North Koreans, it is a shame that many old vets may have to watch the Marine Corps that they love fall victim to Barack Obama and the bureaucrats.

The few and the proud are rapidly becoming fewer, and it just doesn't seem right.

[Ross]

This is just plain wrong Warph in my opinion.
I was telling someone there was talk about doing away with the Marines 6 months back
and they said something to the effect that, that could never happen.
They talked about moving more Marines back to the Navy Ships.

Personally I think it would be a great mistake and a disgrace to our Marines past and present and those that have died protecting our country.

I also fear it goes much deeper than that, and I will continue to wear my tin foil hat.

It will be a sad day when the Marines are no longer.

I am just an old swabbie that appreciated and respected the Marines that were aboard my ships.

[jarhead]

Warph,
This doesn't surprise me at all. Those POS MacArthur and Truman tried their damndest to get the 1st Marine division all KIA at the Chosin Reservoir in Korea so they could do away with the Corps, but it back fired on them.
When has my beloved Corps ever been treated fairly ? I can speak on this from my experience. My company spent 57 continues days in the bush, back to the rear for 3 days and right back out for 54 days. Our clothes literally rotted off our bodies. Seams on trousers rotted away and guys wore sand bags like loin clothes under their "open trousers" to cover their vitals while waiting to get resupplied with some "used" clothes. Then I got to fly down to Red Beach, Da Nang for 3 days to see my brother who was in a supply unit. They had warehouses full of boxes of new jungle utes and boots. Why would it so difficult to make sure we at least had clothes ?
We were supposed to get 3 C-ration meals a day while in the bush, so says the letter my wife got from some brass when I first got to Nam, but then what that meant was two meals a day. So we would get resupplied and you might get 10 boxes of C-rats. OK, that's five days worth of chow but you could bet your sweet bippy it would be at least 7 days, or more, before the next resupply. Maybe that was their way to keep us lean and mean---and it worked.
Then when we did get back to the rear there were cases of C-rats scattered every where in the tents. The REMF's and malingers would remove nothing but the smokes and pound cake and cans of fruit.
I hope this doesn't come across as me bitch'n cause I aint---just pointing out some facts. I loved it that I was part of the toughest sons a bitches in the Nam who did with less but ALWAYS got the job done no matter which shit job we were told to do.
My beloved Corps has been cut to bare bones before but when the SHTF in a bad way our country needs us.
Thanks for the kind words you ol Squid.

[Warph]

World War II and Korea Stat's

Marines: first in , last out.

Marine KIA ratio to Army:

Army - 29% in a fire fight

Marine - 6% in a fire fight