The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - March 20, 2010




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Marines Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Question For Marines here
Claymore    10/29/2007 2:11:32 AM
Some of the Marines here mention how diverse and adaptable the Marines are. I am sure If I was a Marine i would too. But I am curious what you guys feel the Army does better in terms of certain missions and how you see their role. Is their little respect for the job they are doing in A-Stan and Iraq or do you think they are doing a good job.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2
Carl S       11/22/2007 9:43:10 PM
Corams book understates the importance of Gray.  While Col Wyly was doing a lot of theoretical development, being the prophet in the wilderness, mentoring new diciples, Gray was when at various command levels doing the real world application.  As a divsion commander he released a lot of frustrated officers to accomplish a higher level of training, and showed many more that there was more than drilling by the book.  By knowing when to keep his mouth shut and exactly when to speak Gray made in to the Commadants office where he could institutionalize the changes Wyly proposed.  I suspect Gray worked hard to position a number of like minded generals for a shot a the commadants office.  Krulak certainly was of the same mold as Gray & following him to CMC four years later helped lock in Grays changes, then take them a step further.  The other Commadants of the last 20 year have been less spectacular personalities than Gray and Krulak but I think several other have helped carry the USMC into the 21st Century. 
 
Quote    Reply

hiker    Carl S., your points are well taken   11/23/2007 5:35:28 PM

    I can see how your account and Coram's account can both be true, and although I do love the book, I suspect your criticism that he has underestimated Gray's role is correct.  The only defense I can offer (which is a partial one) is that the book is about Boyd and the interactions you describe go past the area of Boyd's involvement.  I'll admit that defense is a little weak. 

    On firmer ground, I would say this: Coram loves Boyd as a fighter pilot who went on to achieve fantastic change within the US military (he basically designed the F-16 and there were also many other achievements).  His strongest affinity is for Boyd's personality type, which in some ways was probably similar to Mike Wyly's and, as you imply, he was someone who did not know when to shut up.  In fact, a combination of the two types is necessary to achieve real change inside the military, according to Coram's more detailed description of what happened in the Air Force.

    There, Boyd had a figure very similar to Gray, the man who was his superior officer and a person who was a master of the bureaucracy---yet appreciated a great value of what Boyd had to offer.  I suspect that Coram has a similar affinity for Wyly as he does for Boyd---and he resents the fact that Wyly's career was destroyed. I also think that Coram probably feels---at least on an emotional level---that Gray should've done more to defend Wyly.  On the other hand, I am sensitive to the fact that this is not a game they were playing, and that if Gray had "let his career go down in flames" defending Wyly, he would have failed in his quest to achieve reform in the Marine Corps.

    Having said that, I want to make clear that Boyd always made it crystal clear at the beginning of his "recruitment" of an acolyte such as Wyly that following him was going to ruin the acolyte's career.  As he put it, "you have a choice between being something and doing something."  One of the key points of the book is that without people "who do not know when to shut up" a bureaucratically tied-up institution like a branch of the U. S. military will never change.

    In addition, Mike Wyly was a Marine Captain in Vietnam.  His troops were taking tremendous casualties until he came up with some new approaches to combat.  So he was aware, in a very deep and personal way, that these bureaucratic battles he was fighting inside the Marine Corps were ultimately life-and-death issues

 
Quote    Reply

ambush       11/23/2007 8:01:39 PM

Corams book understates the importance of Gray.  While Col Wyly was doing a lot of theoretical development, being the prophet in the wilderness, mentoring new diciples, Gray was when at various command levels doing the real world application.  As a divsion commander he released a lot of frustrated officers to accomplish a higher level of training, and showed many more that there was more than drilling by the book.  By knowing when to keep his mouth shut and exactly when to speak Gray made in to the Commadants office where he could institutionalize the changes Wyly proposed.  I suspect Gray worked hard to position a number of like minded generals for a shot a the commadants office.  Krulak certainly was of the same mold as Gray & following him to CMC four years later helped lock in Grays changes, then take them a step further.  The other Commadants of the last 20 year have been less spectacular personalities than Gray and Krulak but I think several other have helped carry the USMC into the 21st Century. 

  Strongly agree.  I have statd it before and wil stae it again, in my opinion General Gray saved the Marine Corps from becoming just a small version of the Army and paved the way for those that followed him. 
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S       11/24/2007 8:18:31 PM
One Marine officer remarked, rather cruelly, that Wyly was the rodeo clown who distracted the bull while Gray wrestled it down.

I dont think that is a accurate description of Col Wyly but Gray definitely made the beast behave as he wanted.  Exactly how that happend is not clear to me & deserves further study.
 
Quote    Reply

hiker       11/25/2007 12:18:27 PM

One Marine officer remarked, rather cruelly, that Wyly was the rodeo clown who distracted the bull while Gray wrestled it down.

I dont think that is a accurate description of Col Wyly but Gray definitely made the beast behave as he wanted.  Exactly how that happend is not clear to me & deserves further study.

I'm not sure if the remark by the Marine officer was something you heard personally or something you heard secondhand.  If you heard personally, I'm sure you would be aware of whether there was cruelty implied.  If you heard it secondhand, you might have been mistaken in thinking this was a cruel comment.  Rodeo clowns are brave and respected guys who also subject themselves  to considerable risk to try to keep the main radio contestants safe.  So the term "clown" might be misleading in this context.  I am struck by how similar this image is to my own images of the two men: the image of a diversionary force combined with the main force or a "fixing" force combined with a maneuver force.

Here is a partial summary of the two chapters in the book by Coram that focus on the Marine Corps.  While Boyd was a captain in Vietnam, he had a distinguished platoon leader named James Webb.  Wyly ended up recommending Webb for the Navy Cross.  Webb later went on to write probably the most famous Vietnam novel, Fields of Fire.  Currently, he is somewhat famous for switching from Republican to Democrat and being elected as a Senator for Virginia.  At the time of the key events in the evolution of the Marine Corps that are the subject of this discussion, however, Webb was initially the Assistant Secretary of the Navy. 

  p. 389, Boyd:   "James Webb was named Secretary of the Navy in 1987, and one of his jobs was to appoint a new commandant of the Marine Corps.  Wiley and G.I. Wilson arranged for Webb to meet Al Grey, a three star who brought maneuver warfare to the second Marine division at Lejeune.  'He's dynamite.  We think he's a warrior,' they told Webb.  Soon after, Gray, much to his surprise was given a fourth star and appointed commandant of the Marine Corps."

Upon re-reading these 2 chapters, I can definitely say that Coram has not in any way de-emphasized Gray's role in bringing maneuver warfare to the Marine Corps.   In addition, Gray and Wyly met Boyd independently and both thought he was something the Marine Corps needed very badly.  Although Wyly had previously (upon Bill Lind's recommendation) invited Boyd to make a presentation to his students, Gray, before he knew Wyly to any extent and not through Wiley's recommendation, immediately invited Boyd into Lejeune himself as soon as he (Gray) took over Lejeune.

Here is part of Coram's introduction of Gray. (p. 382, Boyd)  "He was a warrior: a forceful, decisive, and highly unconventional Marine.  He was also a devoted student of Boyd's and a man who believed in maneuver warfare."

Gray is presented as fighting tirelessly for the maneuver warfare approach.  Presumably, (as you imply) he mixed this effort with a measure of tact.  It is clear from Coram's account that tact was something Wyly never used, in regard to the value of manouver warfare. (Irony?)  Wyly was the one closest to Boyd and apparently central in the development of the specific ideas that became the centerpiece of the Marine's maneuver warfare strategy.  Gray, obviously, is the one who actually was able to force this strategy to become Marine Corps doctrine over the wishes of the majority of senior officers who were initially reluctant to move in this direction.  Interestingly, it appears from Coram's account that Wyly played a key role (as mentioned above) in elevating Gray to commandant.  In the final analysis, they were a well-balanced team, though not always working closely with each other.


 
Quote    Reply

hiker    Error in my post   11/25/2007 12:22:38 PM
Should read: "When Wyly was a captain in Vietnam he had a platoon commander named James Webb," not "When Boyd was a captain in Vietnam..."
 
Quote    Reply

Mike From Brielle       12/11/2007 7:03:59 PM
 

Between operations in Al Anbar and  Tal Afar which took place under the latitude of a commanders intent for a given tactical Area of Operations for which he was responsible, were accomplished in a manner that would latter be reminiscent of the Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) to be later associated with the SURGE. In these operations the commander had the discretion of allowing his forces to operate in a manner consistent with his tactical goals, it is not up to his discretion to rewrite his strategic guide lines.  The TTP's utilized generally under the surge could not be implemented generally until there was a commander that was amenable to these TTP's.  As stated previously when given discretion to follow there own judgment to achieve a specific operational (but limited) objectives both the Army and Marine Corps did so in a manner that reflected best Military practices. 

IMHO
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2010StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy