Tag Archives: Berger

Current Events, Recent Posts

The Corps VIII

Image 2 Comments

I served under 13 Commandants. First was Pate #17, and the last was Mundy #30. Of course  there have been 8 since my retirement leaving us with you know who  at #38. I had my favorites and my not so favorites. I did have one  who isn’t on either list.  Who might that be you ask? David M. Shoup. He did something that I doubt many of you know about.  He did give us the short sleeved shirt, which was a good thing, but then he did something I cannot forgive him for even to this day. He took away my EGA from our khaki and tropical uniforms. Yes, that is a fact.  Here is a photo of me at MB Yokosuka Japan in 1960. Note the collar emblems.

And here I am a year later on the same tour sporting our new short sleeved shirt, sans the EGA’s.This move sent shock waves throughout the Corps; every enlisted Marine from Pvt to SgtMaj was pissed. It caused such an outburst that  CMC came out with an explanation why he removed the EGA from enlisted uniforms. It seems the illustrious Uniform Board recommended the move due to complaints from Marines about the emblem punching holes in the collars of khaki and tropical shirts. Of course, that did not go over very well, since even to this day officers wear their rank insignia on their collars, and they have the same small pins the EGA had. Bad move CMC Shoup!

The result of Shoup’s move was, a private in khakis or tropicals without his cover was a nobody.  You know we were all taught to take our covers off inside! Therefore nothing on his uniform let the uninformed civilian know who or what he was. Hell, he could be a baggage boy at the airport or a bellhop.

So, why are you telling us this Jim, you ask? Well, as I said there were some FAVS and not so FAVS. I personally knew a few who made CMC and none of them are on my FAV list. There are three, however, who are most FAVS. They are Mundy, Wilson, and my most FAV is Robert H. Barrow. Those three understood the Corps’ values, traditions, and the true meaning of Semper Fidelis. They alone had more to do with saving our Corps than any of the rest during my time served.

We all know what is going on in our Corps today, which point to total and complete destruction of the Corps we knew. Here is a letter CMC Barrow wrote to the Les Aspin, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee back in 1992. I ask you to carefully read what General Barrow was saying 29years ago, and listen to what the Woke Flag officers imbedded in our Corps are saying today about needed changes. Remember, General Barrow fought in WW II, Korea, and Vietnam; all three of those wars were different. Were he alive today, I am certain he would send a similar letter to the Senate today.

If I could communicate with my FAV CMC’s today, my only question would be why did you not give the enlisted back their well deserved EGA’s?

CMC Green Letter No. 1-92-1

I am sure my FAV three CMC’s are screaming from their graves. God bless the three of them!

Originally posted 2021-12-16 11:34:35.

Current Events, Recent Posts

Is This The Plan?

6 Comments

For those unfamiliar, the Proceedings is a monthly journal published by the U.S. Naval Institute, which is a non-profit membership association serving a community of individuals who participate in an open forum to debate key issues in the Sea Services. There is no government support and they do not lobby for special interests. It is an  independent, professional military association with a mission, goals, and objectives that transcend political affiliations. In other words it “ain’t” woke  or non-woke. Every essay published in the Proceedings is very well documented and researched; they are strictly opinion pieces, but oh so interesting.

Please read this well thought-out and thoroughly documented essay that could very well be “The Plan.” Pay special attention to paragraph I have highlighted in blue. God help us!

Welcome to the U.S. Naval Institute

The home of influential debate since 1873

The U.S. Naval Institute provides an independent forum for those who seek to advance and strengthen the naval profession.

By Commander Norman R. Denny, U.S. Navy Reserve (Retired)
December 2021

Vol. 147/12/1426

COMMENTARY
For decades, the U.S. Marine Corps has attempted to tweak its force structure to enhance performance within a constrained funding environment. Rather than continuing to make changes around the margins, we would be better off revisiting a debate started following World War II and prematurely truncated during the Korean War. Does the United States need a light infantry force specializing in amphibious operations as a separate service, or should the Marine Corps be resized to the small police force it was prior to World War I and the amphibious organization incorporated into the Army?
The discussion after World War II was primarily prompted by President Harry S. Truman, along with General of the Army George C. Marshall (who later served as a Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense) and General of the Army and future President Dwight D. Eisenhower. While admittedly all three were Army (President Truman was a captain in World War I and rose to colonel and regimental commander in the reserves), they were clearly knowledgeable about the U.S. defense requirements. Although the discussion ceased with Korea, the question was effectively answered in 1957 by Brigadier General Victor Krulak in a letter to then Marine Corps Commandant General Randolph Pate, “The United States does not need a Marine Corps. However, for good reasons which completely transcend cold logic, the United States wants a Marine Corps.”
Krulak was right in 1957, and what he said is even more true today. The Army, Navy, and Air Force are fully capable of performing the Marine Corps’ missions. The Army can assume the light infantry and amphibious assault responsibilities. The 1944 invasion at Normandy, the largest invasion in history, was solely an Army effort for the United States. As far as Marine Corps air, the Navy and Air Force are fully capable of close air support, while the Army can also execute the needed rotary and tilt wing missions. The nation wants the Marines. The question may be how to keep the aspects the nation wants, while eliminating the Marines as a separate branch and reaping the benefits of a simplified chain of command, smaller overall force, and another base realignment and closure (BRAC) evolution.

Deconstructing the Marine Corps

So, what aspects does the nation want? If the Marine Corps answers that question, the answer will probably be what it currently has, but with better funding. The informal Marine Corps propaganda apparatus, which President Truman begrudgingly complimented as second in the world only to Joseph Stalin’s, will demand the status quo. For the first time in a generation, the lack of significant numbers of former service members in Congress—coupled with national fatigue after fighting an unsuccessful, two-decade-long war—may allow this topic to be discussed seriously.

Perhaps the easiest part of the current Marine Corps to remove is aviation. There is unlikely to be a huge support community with the nation for Marine aviation, especially the fixed-wing aspects. For most Americans, their knowledge of Marine aviation is likely limited to watching Flying Leathernecks (1951) and The Great Santini (1979). Likewise, the average citizen may see no difference between Marine rotary and tilt-wing aviation and its Army equivalents. The average citizen likely sees no difference because the differences that do exist—primarily the ability to fly from ships—are minor. The nation does not need a separate Marine Corps aviation force and few in the nation likely know enough about it to want it. Eliminating Marine aviation by incorporating it into the Army and Navy would halve the size of the service, which currently is around 184,000 active-duty members.

The U.S. public is far less likely to accept the complete disappearance of the Fleet Marine Forces, the ubiquitous “Mud Marine.” Stripped of aviation, the Marine Corps would resemble the Army’s XVIII Airborne Corps, both in size (approximately 88,000 troops) and capabilities—both are light infantry, both are air-mobile, and both are capable of airborne and amphibious operations. Both consider themselves to be “elite” forces with strong esprit de corps. Transition of the Fleet Marine Forces into the Army’s yet-to-be created XIX Marine Amphibious Corps would retain the needed amphibious expertise, simplify the chain of command, and could be done in a way that retains many of the unique elements that make a Marine a Marine.

Establishing the Army’s XIX Marine Amphibious Corps at Camp Pendleton on the west coast would give the nation a light infantry “center of excellence” on each coast. Reducing the Marine Corps Commandant to a three-star general, mirroring the XVIII Corps commander, would help reduce the gradual increase in rank structure seen over the past 50 years across the Department of Defense (DoD). Army traditions are likely flexible enough to retain many of the cherished Marine Corps’ accoutrement, like the dress blues and the eagle, globe and anchor emblem. The Army airborne troops currently have their maroon berets and cavalry units have their cowboy hats and spurs. Also, if the XVIII Corps can informally use the term “top” for the command first sergeant, the XIX Corps might well use “gunny” for E-7s. Likewise, young men and women could enlist to be Marines and continue to go through Parris Island for boot camp.

Incorporating the Marine Corps into the Army would significantly simplify the DoD chain of command and eliminate the need for the Commandant to go to the Army and beg for future armor and artillery support. Likewise, the Marines of the XIX Corps would have an equal chance of obtaining any new capabilities integrated into the Army, while potentially allowing Army leaders to reduce the operational tempo of both Corps, although both will still be rapid-deployment units.

To say that Marines would resist incorporation into the Army and Navy is a gross understatement. However, there are concessions that might make it slightly less toxic for the Marines and less objectionable to the public and Congress. Allowing Marine fixed-wing pilots inducted into the Navy to finish out their career using Marine Corps ranks and uniforms would likely help and given the Navy’s history of mixed uniforms, would probably go unnoticed by the public. Similar concessions for the generation of current Marines incorporated into the Army could potentially ease their transition. But regardless of how successful these mitigation efforts are, the DoD would likely be looking at a decade of angst and occasional confusion. The key will be Congress, which will have to rewrite legislation, including U.S. Title 10. As mentioned previously, there are fewer Marines in Congress today than at any time since the early 1950s (there are 15 Marine Corps veterans in the 117th Congress). This, coupled with the inevitable savings from another round of base closures, might be enough to see the initiative championed by President Truman and advocated by Generals Eisenhower and Marshall completed.

General Krulak correctly stated the United States does not need but wants the Marine Corps. For the best interests of the nation, the DoD should at least learn if the U.S. public and Congress will accept a XIX Marine Amphibious Corps. If the answer is yes, then a myriad of questions will have to be answered: Does the nation need two separate light infantry corps? Which Marine Corps installations will be closed or reduced? How many Marine Corps military and civilian personnel, made redundant by the changes, will be discharged? And what, if anything, will remain as a Navy police force? If the topic is given a fair hearing, the answers may surprise us all.

Commander Norman R. Denny, U.S. Navy Reserve (Retired)

Commander Denny is a retired reserve naval intelligence officer with service beginning in Vietnam in 1972 as an aviation electrician’s mate and retiring in 2010 as a commander. In addition to his reserve service, he was a civilian electronics engineer for the Army Missile Command and an intelligence analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), with four deployments to Iraq. After retiring from DIA, he served as a senior intelligence analyst for U.S. Central Command with one additional Iraq tour.

Originally posted 2021-12-13 12:27:55.

Current Events

Anonymous

11 Comments

Still working on my letter, but in the meantime,  a quick post from a very old and dear friend who never served . A school classmate who lived up the street from me; a fishing and camping friend. He follows the blog, but since he has no experience in the military he doesn’t feel qualified to comment. So, I will post it for him as Anonymous. I believe he has an interesting theory. Your thoughts? 

I’ve read every post…don’t nearly understand the jargon, but I’ve formed a crazy opinion of what’s going on, so I won’t embarrass myself by exposing it to the general group. It’s this…someone is trying to “blend” the Corps out of existence. What happens if you begin and continue to add water to your favorite Scotch? It will lose its quality. In the case of the MC, I don’t buy this crap of “making it look like our society”. If they continue with the women, homos, Sikhs, etc., the Corps will soon look like any other branch of the service or your favorite high-tech corporation (pick one, FAANG maybe?). In such an event it will be easy for the “management” boys to say how it would be so cost-effective to “merge” the Corps into Branch X. And just like that—over 200 years of history actually becomes history.

Your CMC strikes me as acting like a Trojan Horse. He doesn’t believe that America needs a Corps that we citizen civilians have always admired and respected. He and his fellow Copperheads won’t risk the outcry of dissolving the MC in one fell swoop, so they are going through this charade of “making it look like the rest of America”. I personally don’t understand why they don’t see the value of a highly trained strike force that would be available to serve our country. There are so many potential hotspots as we speak. Ye gods!

I’m looking forward to your next “open letter to___”.

 

Originally posted 2021-12-04 10:26:24.

Recent Posts

The Corps Part VI

10 Comments

Here is more of CMC’s “Talent Management Plan.” There is that word “Management” again. Seems there are many more “things” attached to this plan than meets the eye. This one will surely shake up the retired community even more than Parts I-V. Read on and cry Marines.

Marine Corps plan calls for some future Marines to skip boot camp.

By Jeff Schogol from Task and Purpose

“We Make Marines,” proclaims a banner at Marine Corps Recruit of  Depot Parris Island, South Carolina, summarizing the service’s ethos that recruits have to prove they have the mental and physical toughness to serve in the Corps by surviving boot camp. By the time men and women receive their Eagle, Globe, and Anchor, they have proven that they have the physical and mental toughness to earn the coveted title of “Marine.”

But Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger wants “exceptionally talented Americans” to be able to bypass the Corps’ traditional rites of passage and begin serving “at a rank appropriate to their education, experience, and ability.”

Berger’s radical new Talent Management plan calls for allowing civilians with critical skills to be able to join the Marine Corps “laterally” as opposed to starting at the very bottom as new recruits.

“As a result of the significant lead time necessary to build expertise, we are unable to respond quickly to changes in the security environment that demand urgent course corrections,” Berger wrote in his plan, which was first made public on Nov. 3. “The rapid rise in importance of the cyber domain, for instance, has challenged us to find creative ways to quickly build critical skills at mid-career and senior levels. Unless we find a means to quickly infuse expertise into the force – at the right ranks – I am concerned that advances in artificial intelligence and robotics, among other fields where the speed of technological change is exponential, will force us into a reactive posture.”

Berger made clear that this option would be limited to certain military occupational specialties, adding it would be “difficult to imagine a scenario” in which a civilian could skip boot camp in order to join a combat arms field like infantry or artillery.

He also wrote that Marines no longer on active duty who now have “critical career experience” should be able to return to service at a higher rank.

“For example, I can envision a Marine who left active duty as a captain or corporal rejoining our ranks as a lieutenant colonel or gunnery sergeant, respectively, after spending 5-7 years working in a cyber or IT field where the service currently lacks capacity,” Berger wrote. “With the right education and experience, that same corporal might also be eligible to return as a mid-grade or senior officer.”

The new talent management plan could involve a “cultural shift” in how the Marine Corps attracts the best possible people, said Lt. Gen. David Ottignon, deputy commandant for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

For example, how will Marines who have gone through The Crucible at Parris Island or San Diego respond to the idea of allowing civilians to bypass boot camp to become Marine Corps cyber experts? Ottignon pondered with reporters on Monday.

“How does that line up to a culture of a Marine Corps at roughly 180,000 Marines that go through this exacting training that makes us all one in the same – uniformity in what we do?” Ottignon said. “That’s a cultural thing that we’re going to have to work through.”

The Marine Corps has been here before. Former Commandant Gen. Robert Neller initially considered allowing civilians with cyber skills to become Marines without going through boot camp in 2017.

But Neller faced a conundrum: He did not want to bring in people who did not meet Marine Corps grooming standards.

Then-Marine Brig. Gen Loretta Reynolds, who led Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command at the time, recalled in 2016 that Neller once asked her: “Do I have to start letting guys with purple hair and earrings in?”

Ultimately, the Marine Corps decided to establish a Cyber Auxiliary division of civilian volunteers, not Marines. “You can have purple hair, too, but no EGA [Eagle, Globe, and Anchor],” Neller said in 2019.

The question of whether cyber experts who bypass boot camp can hold the title of Marine has not gone away.

“That’s clearly what the commandant has laid out as something to discover and analyze,” Ottignon said on Monday. “And I don’t know the answer to it yet. I don’t think the commandant knows the answer to it yet – other than we know there’s exquisite talent out there.”

That’s why Ottignon’s team is coming up with various options for exactly how the Marine Corps can attract people with the skills that the Corps needs most, he said.

“We think – we could be wrong – you could take a young man or woman, let’s say out of George Mason University that works in cybersecurity and sees opportunities in government; and we show them: Look, no kidding, you’re going to be on an offensive/defensive team and get skill sets; that might be attractive to them. His [Berger’s] point is: How do you do that; and that’s the cultural piece that I offered to you.”
Jeff Schogol

Jeff Schogol is the senior Pentagon reporter for Task & Purpose. He has covered the military for 15 years. You can email him at schogol@taskandpurpose.com, direct message @JeffSchogol on Twitter, or reach him on WhatsApp and Signal at 703-909-6488. Contact the author here.

Perhaps unknown to many we do have people serving in the Corps today and have been for many years who never went through boot camp. They are part of the Marine Corps Band i.e., “The President’s Own” at Marine Barracks, 8th & I, Washington, D.C.  They are recruited annually, contracted for four years, enter as E-6’s, and wear a harp in their chevrons vice cross riffles. I recall when at RS, Chicago, we were given an annual quota to recruit musicians and set them up for a specific date when someone from the Band would come and give them an audition. If my memory serves me correctly we did have a few during my three years who were accepted.

Of course, there are also actual full-fledged Marines serving in the Band. They came from Bands and D&B’s throughout the Corps. Of course they come in at whatever rank they are and they do wear cross rifles in the chevrons. A very good friend of mine, GySgt D B Wright with whom I served at the Barracks was a member of the Band for several years having been recruited from the Barracks’ D&B. I am certain DB will comment on this post.

There is, of course, a reason for needing these members. They are seriously accomplished musicians and some play instruments not found in a normal Marine Band or D&B. The President’s Own plays at all White House presidential events and must be capable of providing peculiar groups depending on the event and who is the guest of honor e.g., a string quartet capable of playing tunes from different countries all over the world.

They are; however, never deployed anywhere in the world, will never ever see combat or anything thing similar. In fact, the president, I believe, actually owns this Band, not the CO, MB Washington, D.C.

Why would an accomplished musician take  four year hitch starting out as an E-6 you ask? Think of the impact on one’s resume having played for presidents  at the White House in the famous Marine Corps Band. That’s huge.

So, does this set a precedent for CMC to bring in folks without the requisite boot camp and MCT. As far as this Marine goes . . . absolutely NOT!

Originally posted 2021-11-29 08:28:39.

Current Events

The Corps Part V

1 Comment

LOL. This one is funny even if it is a tragedy. I can see it coming. Cpl  Finicnick reports to his company commander that his Lt is an asshole and uses drugs. It matters not that Cpl Finicknick was a Sgt six months ago. OMG This reminds me of the HQMC imposed HumRel classes in 1970  that required us to sit in groups of officers and enlisted and everyone was allowed to say whatever they wanted. LOL, That did not happen in our battalion thanks to Major John I. Hopkins (MajGen, USMC (Ret) Deceased). God Bless him.  But I heard absolute horror stories from my peers from other units.

The Marine Corps wants junior Marines to have a say in who their leaders are

“Beginning in 2022, we will institute 360-degree feedback for leaders, on a pilot basis” says Commandant Berger.

BY  | PUBLISHED NOV 24, 2021 8:51 AM

Junior Marines could help determine whether officers and senior enlisted leaders are selected for promotion as part of the Marine Corps’ efforts to revamp its evaluation process.

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger is calling for promotion boards to incorporate “360-degree feedback” into their decisions about which leaders will be selected to advance to the next rank.

Berger’s direction on using 360-degree feedback is part of his Talent Management plan, which was released on Nov. 3. The plan also requires the Marine Corps to retain more first-term Marines and creates the possibility that civilians with critical skills could bypass boot camp to join the service.   This will be Part VI, so stay tuned.

Currently, promotion boards largely base those decisions on Marines’ fitness reports, which only include notes on their performance from two of their supervisors, Berger wrote. In some cases, those supervisors do not serve in the same location as the Marines they are evaluating or don’t interact with them often.

“[Three hundred and sixty]-degree feedback, by contrast, includes the perspectives of a larger number of seniors, peers, and juniors and can include unflattering feedback that is prohibited from inclusion in a Marine’s FITREP,” Berger wrote.

This type of evaluation is already in use elsewhere in the Defense Department and it has shown to be effective in “identifying traits of toxic leadership” and helping to reduce the chances that toxic leaders will be promoted, according to Berger’s plan.

“Beginning in 2022, we will institute 360-degree feedback for leaders, on a pilot basis,” Berger wrote. “This feedback will be made available to the Marine and their reporting senior, with the aim of encouraging leadership growth. No later than 2024, we will incorporate 360-degree feedback into the selection board and assignments processes to ensure that this important input is properly considered by those selecting and assigning our future leaders.”

The Marine Corps has looked for lessons from business leaders as well as other military branches as it developed the pilot program for the 360-degree reviews, said Yvonne Reed-Carlock, a spokeswoman for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

“The purpose of implementing 360-degree leadership reviews is to equip Marine leaders with real, honest feedback to identify their hidden strengths and unidentified weaknesses and to provide them with professional coaching to further develop and advance the capabilities of our force,” Reed-Carlock said. “To accomplish this, the pilot will solicit input from a Marine’s seniors, peers and subordinates to fully inform the picture provided to the Marine.”

The pilot program early next year is expected to include about 200 people to fine-tune the questions leaders are asked and to make sure that the right type of feedback is collected, said Lt. Col. Jim Armstrong, who works for the Marine Corps’ Manpower Management Division.

The Marines taking part in the pilot program will be field grade officers – majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels – as well as senior enlisted leaders such as master sergeants and sergeants major, said Armstrong, who serves as the operations officer for the officer assignments branch.

Based on the pilot program’s results, Marines at other ranks and leadership positions could also receive 360-degree feedback, Armstrong said.

A 360-degree evaluation system is meant to prevent the promotion of senior leaders who may later be deemed unfit to command, such as one colonel who asked a former captain if she had been drinking before she was raped rather than referring her to trained staff for help. More robust performance evaluations may have also identified a brigadier general as a toxic leader before his subordinates reported him to the Department of Defense Inspector General’s Office, which determined that he had “disparaged, bullied, humiliated them, and devalued women.” 

For years, proponents have been calling for the Marine Corps to adopt a 360-degree evaluation system, but other military branches such as the Navy and the Air Force have used this type of feedback sparingly and for certain leaders and civilian executives.

After the Fiscal 2014 National Defense Authorization Act required the defense secretary to look into using this sort of feedback in evaluations, a study from the RAND Corporation recommended against doing so. Wow, sanity from the RAND Corporation for a change.
A sergeant instructor, evaluates officer candidates during close order drill at Marine Corps Officer Candidates School aboard Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, June 21, 2019. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Phuchung Nguyen)

Many of the people whom RAND interviewed for the study, including experts within the Department of Defense, said they did not feel that 360-degree feedback was the best tool to combat toxic leadership, especially in cases where toxic leaders had no desire to change their ways.

“Participants again pointed to other ways of finding these people that would be much more cost-effective (such as through anonymous reporting channels, climate surveys, informal discussion, or inspector general complaints),” the study says.

While federal agencies have used 360-degree feedback as part of coaching and mentoring, the government as a whole – including the Defense Department – has been reluctant to include this type of feedback for promotions, said Katie Kuzminski, a senior fellow and director of the Military, Veterans, and Society Program at the Center for a New American Security think tank in Washington, D.C.

“There was a fear that if the [360-degree feedback] were used for promotions or true evaluations as opposed to personal development that there could be some challenges with that – particularly if your peers in your unit are also your competition: There would be a way to skew the outcomes to make yourself look good by making someone else look bad,” Kuzminski said.

Berger is going much further than the rest of the military by looking at how the Marine Corps can use this type of feedback for promotions, she said.

“I do think that if any service can take the lead on this front, I think it would be the Marine Corps,” Kuzminski said. “Just from a cultural perspective, I think the real value that they place on taking care of fleet really matters – and certainly for more senior positions, there’s this saying that you hear from senior folks: If you had a helicopter full of 10 general officers in the Marine Corps crash today, you would have equally high competitive talent remaining to replace them.” Really? In today’s Corps? Hell that may even help save us. Let’s make it a C-130 with 50 on board. LOL Just kidding, of course.
I trust everyone caught the name of this new plan; the “Talent Management Plan..” That says it all; when was the last time you heard anything coming out in the Corps dealing with “management.” In my day that word was toxic to Marines. Oh well, just another day in the “New” Corps. When will it end? Surely this action will help recruiting; just knowing they can have an effect on their mean Gunny should help. 

Originally posted 2021-11-28 08:33:35.