PDA

View Full Version : Army Can Learn from the Marines



thedrifter
01-23-04, 06:45 AM
01-22-2004

Army Can Learn from the Marines







By Ralf W. Zimmermann



Despite all the talk about “jointness,” the five uniformed services continue to use very different operational and tactical concepts.



A recent op-edit article in The Washington Post, “The Risk of Velvet Gloves,” highlighted that point. In the essay, Lt. Col. Gian P. Gentile, the former executive officer of the 1st Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division, defended the Army’s more heavy-handed approach to peace enforcement in the Sunni Triangle against Marine Corps criticism that more flexible tactics are needed.



The Army officer, now a history teacher at West Point, clearly describes the war as his unit fought it about six months ago. Given the tactical and political situation then, the “feed ‘em beans and kill ‘em approach” was temporarily acceptable and probably effective. Now, more operational flexibility is in order.



After last June, our British allies – experienced in controlling a violent insurgency in Northern Ireland – and the U.S. Marines rightfully shifted to a more careful approach in the Shi’ite region of southern Iraq. Operating in the more violent Sunni Triangle, the Army, with the exception of our special ops troops and paratroopers, stuck to more traditional ways: Overwhelming firepower, overpowering numbers and maximum force protection.



Although the Army was at times successful in averting ambushes and capturing political fugitives, the heavy-handed approach came at a price. The sledgehammer method humiliated many Iraqi families, Sunni and Shi’ite alike. As a consequence, a substantial number of neutral Iraqis went underground and joined the insurgency. For many Iraqis, resistance against the U.S. occupiers is mainly about religion and preserving one’s human dignity.



Could we have overstated force protection at the end of major combat operations? It seems clear now that the United States should never have totally disbanded the Iraqi Army. Following the Patton method of World War, a dignified treatment of the former adversary could have led to a potential use of certain draftee-based formations for the policing and disciplining of the Iraqi populace. Iraqis could have maintained order and discipline, while U.S. forces remained free to isolate the country’s borders against foreign insurgents.



Now the situation in Iraq is much more complex than facing down an emaciated Iraqi Army at its borders. Despite all of the positive spinning, the insurgency is far from over.



Outright civil war is still a possibility: Shiites make up 60 percent of the population and will demand appropriate representation in the new government as well as and revenge for past oppression. And even if we follow the current Bremer plan, to build a representative government through caucuses, Shi’ites are likely to rebel. Both options are tough to realize and one has to fear for GI Joe and Jane being caught in the middle of a dirty civil war.



To build internal goodwill and avoid civil war, the Marines may just be what’s needed. Having worked with the Marines, I know they are flexible and employ common-sense solutions.



Despite what many Army leaders think, today’s Marine Corps leads in many ways. Their procurement process adopts user-friendly combat gear way ahead of the Army. They also don’t care who makes it, as long as the trooper in the field finds it helpful.



Marines also don’t follow regulations blindly. Look how they roll up BDU sleeves in a practical manner, while the Army wrote volumes of regulations about it. When I visited British and Marine Forces in Kuwait city at the end of Desert Storm, I was surprised how laid back they were. While Army troops suffered heat casualties from 24-hour wear of flack jackets and helmets, our Marine comrades adjusted their uniform policies to the environment and the enemy situation – and morale was good.



In the current Iraq situation, I say give the Corps a chance! Despite Iraq’s religious and tribal differences, the Marines bring a great spectrum of capabilities to the battlefield. Because the Corps is a quick intervention force, it follows a very focused and judicious approach when applying weapons and force. To overcome a small ambush in a populated area, you probably don’t want to use artillery battalions, helicopter raids and B-52 strikes. And here’s one more Marine advantage for limited warfare: All troops are well-trained riflemen.



Despite my Army pride, I see the Iraq conflict as a milestone for an accelerated push for quicker joint integration. The Army picked an excellent new leader in Gen. Peter Schoomaker to force a rapid transformation and to prevent teaching the wrong history lessons. His initial guidance to the field identifies him as pragmatic, flexible and “joint” oriented. He knows that old, doctrinaire thinking won’t cut it in small, politicized conflicts.



The most encouraging innovation about the Army’s new boss is his Marine approach to training: From now on, all Army soldiers will add a second military specialty – that of rifleman.



Contributing Editor Lt. Col. Ralf W. Zimmermann (USA Ret.) is a decorated Desert Storm veteran and former tank battalion commander. Since his retirement, his columns have regularly appeared in Army Times and other publications. His recent novel, “Brotherhood of Iron,” deals with the German soldier in World War II. It is directly available from www.iUniverse.com and through most major book dealers. Zimm can be reached at r6zimm@earthlink.net or via his website at www.home.earthlink.net/~r6zimm.

The Risk of Velvet Gloves
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28301-2004Jan18.html


http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=340&rnd=863.7955062053819


Sempers,

Roger
:marine:

kentmitchell
01-23-04, 06:01 PM
The Army never gets it.
They don't admit we wrote the book on amphibious warfare.
They don't admit we developed vertical envelopement.
And now this writer says the army is taking the Marine approach and all soldiers will add a second military specialty--rifleman.
Hellooooo! Every Marine is a rifleman FIRST.
It's not a difference in semantics, it's a difference in attitude.
OOOrah!

Sixguns
01-23-04, 06:30 PM
Yeah, I imagine the rocket scientist who came up with the idea will be receiving some high-powered Army medal for having such forward thinking. Apparently, the Army of One refers to "the one place they get all their good ideas -- the Marine Corps!"

SF,

Sixguns

mrbsox
01-24-04, 07:22 AM
The most encouraging innovation about the Army’s new boss is his Marine approach to training: From now on, all Army soldiers will add a second military specialty – that of rifleman.

Lets see if I got this right .....

WE all know that a MARINE is a rifleman first ,

And now we know that a soldier will be a rifleman second ,

Did the Army just admit that

:marine: THE MARINES ARE NUMBER ONE :marine:

Terry

greybeard
01-24-04, 09:39 AM
Did the Army just admit that

THE MARINES ARE NUMBER ONE

Doesn't really matter if the Army admits it or not-the rest of the world already knows it all too well.
The US Army won't even admit they have a morale/discipline problem. Why would they possibly admit they have a problem in basic core beliefs? I believe the former is a direct result of the latter. As far as the "Velvet Glove' article goes, the writer forgets there is an iron fist under that glove. Walk softly-carry a big assed stick & know when it's appropriate to use it-& know when it's not.