Originally Posted by SteveMetz
I would disagree with that statement. Ulitmately, the decision is political and has nothing to do with strategy. And the Marines have a lot of friends in Congress, plus the best PR in the business.
Don't forget...this isn't the first time we've debated this. In the early to mid-twentieth century, when it became obvious that the Navy no longer needed troops to repel boarders, the future of the Marine Corps was being questioned, seriously, and the Corps decided to re-define their role from that job to being the pre-imminent authorities on amphibious operations, in spite of the fact that the Army had plenty of experience at it. And, they successfully sold that idea.
What the author of the piece quoted seems to be doing is finding a reason to keep the Marines, rather than just assessing the probabilities, and I suspect that's how the whole debate will progress. In the end, political realities will prevail and the Marines will be given some job to do.
Bookmarks