Report proposes seperating Marines for counterinsurgency and Army for conventional war

Sounds good to me. Maybe the Army can start focusing on actually getting some weaponry that would be capable of fighting another country instead of sand niggers.

theres like 30,000 infantry marines. and you have about 20,000 green berets. seems like the green berets will be able to train more terrorists than the marine corps could deal with.

What would it be called tho? Were not exactly francophone so we cant just call it a gendarmerie. US Security Forces?

>Were not exactly francophone so we cant just call it a gendarmerie.
What are the French going to do about it?

More like, it wouldnt fit at all. Id rather have something uniquely American desu.

>I still think the best way to do this would be creating an entirely new branch modeled after the carbieneri or a gendarmerie.

this 'pacification and civilian affairs' but with guns and zip ties

if none of you can see the implications of this further down the line you're fools, my posse comitatus hurts just thinking about it.

just police state my shit up, bruh

Attached: nostep.png (500x307, 34K)

All of them.

And 5 of each.

Until we have dozens of fleets of continental sized robot land battleships rolling over the rest of the world all with an enless number of redundant color schemes and brqnch names.

please enlighten us, mr. retardo.

fucking stupid

Counter insurgency requires the short term expeditionary capabilities of the Marines and long term strategic occupation that the Army can do. Plus what are SF, Rangers, Civil Affairs, PSYOPS supposed to do now that they've been so geared to COIN?

This doesn't seem like a good idea.

For one, the existing division, where the Marines have light supply lines, and are built around expeditionary warfare, and where the Army is built around a much heavier logistical backbone and is intended for heavier combat, is a good idea.

Secondly, counterinsurgency is much more about doctrine than equipment or organization. Any infantry unit can perform counterinsurgency if the command knows what they're doing and gives them clear mission objectives. It makes sense to have units available for both conventional and unconventional warfare.

I'm kinda ok with it in that regard but we all know it's just the corps trying to stay relevant. The general rabid nature of marine fuckups would be more forgivable in that role, but given the way potus uses the marines already... Thats the worrisome part

>Plus what are SF, Rangers, Civil Affairs, PSYOPS supposed to do now that they've been so geared to COIN?
Take a fucking break and get their shit together to shake off all the bullshit that's fallen on them over the last 20s like ladder climbing officers chasing numbers and politicians using them improperly

there is nowhere near that many green berets. There is about 3-4,000 GB's

I don't know dick about shit but this sounds pretty smart to me. Marines should be a fast attack force, get there in big hurry and start killing things. Army can come in for the long haul.

It's been longer than 20 years. The infestation of ticket punchers has been around since the mid-80's.

The Federal Guard?

This will just leave the Marines over-extended and the Army with nothing to do. Nobody is stupid enough to fight the US in a straight-up war.

They'd be better off leaving everyone in their intended role and not getting entangled in COIN.

But if they're going to do it anyway, why would they do some lame shit like re-purpose the USMC? Leave them to be the shock troops. Instead, when you decide to occupy a country, bite the fucking bullet and shell out the treasure necessary for an occupation force so "clear and hold" can actually work.

You don't need fit young men with billions of dollars in equipment to hold down the block. Prior service, middle age, or overweight men would be fine, so the recruitment pool is enormous. All they need to do is embed in an area, handle a rifle, and keep an eye on shit. The Army can do patrols and provide a QRF when the occupation force encounters resistance.

Given the current nature of conflicts, this would honestly make more sense the other way around- optimize the Army for the kind of wars that the US actually finds itself fighting in the present day while making the Marines a 100% ready-to-go expeditionary conventional force with no concessions made to a counter-insurgency role.

>fewer manned aircraft

how is this a good thing?

>about 20,000 green berets

You're probably looking at command if you're getting that number. Support and administration is included in that number.

Tim Kennedy recently said there's about 10 guys in every ODA. That would put qualified SF guys at around 6,000.

The implication is that they're replaced with unmanned equivalents. Though I'm not really sure what "fewer manned aircraft" even means in relation to the Army, since you're not likely to automate a transport helicopter. Less Apaches and Kiowas? They don't have much else.

SS

>Give the dumbest branch counterinsurgency roles.
That will go down pretty well.

>GUNNY I SHOTTED DA SIBILIAN COZ HE WAS MAKING FUNNY FACES AT ME :(

In-N-Out Burger™ Special Snack Delivery

This unfortunately -The USMC would baloon to 6-12 divisions, the Army would shrink from 10 to 3-6 and we have a small army prepared for conventional threats and a large USMC, a primarily light force, ill-prepared for neer-peer combat. Then no one has a clue with what to do with the National Guard. The USMC will be unable to deal with heavy and mechanized enemy forces effectively while the National Guard is at mobilization training getting back to active duty standard, and conscripts are being drafted into basic training

The USMC would balloon in size but the impetus would be there to shrink the army to half it's size.
We currently have 2 armored divisions 1st Cav is basically almost a tank division sorta)
An airborne division
a Helicopter Air Assault Division
A Mountain (light) Division
One Light (multipurpose) Infantry Division
Two Mech divisions (The 4th ID has gone largely (heavy) Stryker unfortunately)
3 Armored Motorized (Stryker) divisions.

This isn't including the National Guard Light Infantry divisions

Where exactly do you cut the army? Reduce the motorized forces that the Army has been so keen for?
Reduce the Heavy force? (1st Armored, 1st Cav, 1st ID, 3rd ID)
Get rid of the Airborne/Air Assault divisions?
Cut the light divisions? (10th Mountain, 25th ID)

Not only that but the one branch that won't accept Branch transfers. We're suddenly going to give them the entire COIN mission

Do you realize that gendarmerie are effectively civilian police forces in almost all countries that still have gendarmerie. They might also do law enforcement for military, but in the end aside from some special squirrels like hostage rescue teams, guards for specific high security targets like nuclear power plants or airports and riot suppression teams they are boys in blue. In some countries they are also effectively border patrol and coast guard, but in general gendarmerie are 98% civilian law enforcement agencies. If they are sent to foreign conflict zones, they are there enforce law for own troops and to train local police forces, not to participate in actual fighting outside of self defense.

>US Security Forces?
Federal police for military bases and towns that are too small to have police department of their own. Border patrol and customs.

Attached: Bezoek_Koninklijke_Marechaussee_Schiphol_(5833008425).jpg (1920x1278, 374K)

>dump the Green Beret counterinsurgency mission so crayon-slammers can kill themselves trying to think

Sounds like a disaster and the end of the USMC

can we finally classify infantry back to light , medium , and heavy like in my osprey books i used to check out?
marines and rangers were always "light" infantry in those books.

So Israel is letting go of the Army from their Foreign Legion?

>Marines in charge of Hearts & Minds.

Gee, what's the worst that could happen...

Since th Army swallowing the Guard totally destroyed it's original purpose as citizen militias motivated for the home front, we'd probably need a new Patriotic Guard if we're ever invaded.

>destroy USN
>destroy USAF
>destroy USMC
>land in California
>suddenly confronted by the Patriotic Guard
>20 million people
>by the way they have nukes
No. Thanks.

t.invader

Attached: 1527476035500.jpg (1200x900, 146K)