Dust to Dust; Room to Room

The Colonel's bride, the comely and kind-hearted Miss Brenda, is getting a new bathroom.

More accurately, the old master bathroom is getting a makeover.  A tub that was never used and a dinky-dimensioned shower stall have been removed.  In their place, a much larger shower area (far too big to be called a stall), complete with his and her shower heads and a built in bench, has been taking shape for the past several weeks. 

The old floor tile in the master bath (can you still call it that if there is no bath tub?) has been removed -- amid clouds of dust the likes of which have not been seen since Steinbeck.  

The Colonel doesn't know which is worse -- dealing with the dust or following the comely and kind-hearted Miss Brenda around countless showrooms trying to find just the right tile design for the new floor.  

Both make the Colonel's eyes water. 

Frankly, the Colonel doesn't care what the tile looks like.  In fact, when he heads for the shower all the Colonel cares about is satisfactory water pressure and a dry towel.  As long as he doesn't have to trudge from a tent to a outdoor field expedient "shower" consisting of a suspended holey-bottom bucket filled by a lance corporal who searched high and low to find the coldest water in camp..., well, you get the picture.

Or maybe you don't.  Maybe you are one of the unlucky ones who have never been so grimey for so long so far removed from civilization that a bucket full of cold water dumped over your head by a lance corporal bent on revenge for the speed and duration of the latest forced march (aka: hike, for you unlucky ones) is the nearest thing to nirvana a grimey grunt can imagine.

Anyway, the Colonel's house has been a dusty hell-hole for the past month and he's about had enough of it.  So, imagine the Colonel's chagrin to hear the comely and kind-hearted Miss Brenda announce that the current renovation heretofore confined to the master bathroom is but the first of many renovative phases.

"Stop your whining, knucklehead," the comely and kind-hearted Miss Brenda responded to the Colonel's dust-detesting grumblings.  "You better get used to the mess -- now that we have the contractor's attention, I'm not letting him go until we get all the other things fixed in this house."

"What other things?"

"Well, the master bedroom is going to look pretty shabby compared to the new bathroom, so I'm thinking a new paint job and new carpet is in order."

"Is that all?  Whew!  The Colonel was worried you were talking about doing a lot more than just that."   

"Wasn't through, knucklehead.  And quit referring to yourself in the third person.  That makes my head hurt."

"Can the Colonel get you an aspirin?"

"No!  Just listen!  I want new carpet in the living room and new quartz countertops in the kitchen..."

"Okay, but..."

"Shut your piehole, knucklehead!  I wasn't finished with my list."


When the comely and kind-hearted Miss Brenda makes a list, it ain't ever a short one.  There's no wasted effort with the Colonel's bride.  She can combine a thousand and one errands in a trip to town and prioritize them on a fuel-consumption optimized list that would bring a tear to a stingy logisticians glass eye.  

The Colonel knows what you're thinking.  You think he is exaggerating.  "...a thousand and one errands? Seriously, Colonel?"

Yes.  A thousand and one.  Not gonna make the Colonel out a liar over one stinking errand.  


"...and, I want a fancy new front door..."

The Colonel is resigned to renovation purgatory for the foreseeable future.  

Wait until the comely and kind-hearted Miss Brenda sees the Colonel's list...             

      

True Faith and Allegiance

Over the next several weeks, as their matriculation aboard college campuses nationwide concludes with graduation, a select few young men and women will receive commissions as officers in the  armed forces of the United States.  The Colonel pens this open letter to them:

In the Colonel's not-so humble opinion, you brand new ensigns and second lieutenants, on the cusp of careers in the officer corps of the greatest republic in the solar system, are the luckiest people on your respective campuses. Your civilian classmates will have jobs – maybe. You will have a sacred mission.

You, ladies and gentlemen, will, as you are commissioned, take an oath of office. You will most likely have several more opportunities to reaffirm that oath as you are advanced in rank.  Do not take that oath flippantly.  It means everything.

As commissioned officers, your oath of office has two unique features.  One, it never expires – you will carry your sworn obligation to your graves.  And, two, you swear allegiance to only one entity – not your service chief, not your service secretary, not the Secretary of Defense... not even the President. As a commissioned officer, you swear allegiance only to the Constitution of the United States. When you take the oath as a member of the officer corps of the armed forces of the United States, your overriding responsibility is the support and defense of the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. That’s not the Colonel’s opinion, that’s what the oath actually says. 

The oath itself is found in the Constitution.

May the Colonel be so bold as to posit that swearing allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and solemnly swearing that you will support and defend it, is the single most important promise you will ever make.  It is a promise that carries with it (by virtue of the phrase "true faith and allegiance") your pledge of personal honor to place no other consideration above it -- upon pain of death.  

If you can't, in good conscience, make that promise  -- DON'T!  

The Constitution of the United States embodies the ideals on which our nation was founded.  Every cherished principle of our Republic, every law and statute, flows through and from the Constitution.  Its language, though arcane to our ears, contains the genius of our forefathers whose considerations were not only of their present condition, but also, and perhaps more importantly, your future.    

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the disciplinary code by which you will exercise your authority as an officer, is not just some arbitrary set of rules -- its application is governed by the rights guaranteed in the Constitution.  To understand the application of the UCMJ, you must know and understand the Constitution. Consider, with great solemnity, when you hold a subordinate accountable for his actions under the UCMJ, that you are held accountable by the Constitution to which you have sworn your true faith and allegiance. 

As an officer, you will, eventually, have the great honor of presiding over the promotion of a subordinate.  You will administer the oath of office to that subordinate as he or she assumes an office of greater responsibility inherent with increased rank.  And, when you get a chance to administer the oath of office, don’t be the one reading it from a notecard.  Commit the oath of office, both officer and enlisted, to memory.  Administer the oath from memory, with emphasis.

So, this old Colonel gives you new officers some post-graduate homework – perhaps the most important homework you will ever have.  Learn the Constitution.  Don’t just read the Constitution. Study it.  Understand it.  Learn it inside out. It is the most critical stone in your professional foundation, because you are not just military leaders, you are our nation’s leaders.

The Syrian Tar Baby

The latest installment in the U.S. Forever War series is the current escalation of involvement in the civil war that has wracked Syria over the last decade.

Although he prefers quick wars executed with overwhelming force, the Colonel is not necessarily opposed to extended military operations abroad, if there is a clear mission to be accomplished that can be logically, and Constitutionally, connected to our vital national interests as expressed in a national grand strategy.

The Colonel, who pays rather close attention to such things, has not heard much discussion or debate on any vital U.S. interests served in punching through the ropes at the fighters in the ring in Syria.  He's heartened to hear at least a modicum of debate over the Constitutionality of such actions.  But, the Colonel is yet to hear anyone, in or outside of the administration, clearly connect targets to vital national interests.  

To be sure, the region in which the present political state of Syria now sits is currently more geopolitically important than many other regions around the globe.  Historically, the region, owing to its location astride trade routes and buffer zones between rival empires has had more than its fair share of great power interest.  Some of the more titanic military clashes in antiquity occurred along the Levantine Corridor -- the Western end of the Fertile Crescent opposite Mesopotamia.  Since Pharaoh Necho II of Egypt and Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon clashed over control of the region in 609 B.C., the Levant has been the battleground for numerous competing empires -- Persian, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, Abbasid, Ottoman, and British to name a few of the more persistent.  During the Cold War between the Russian and U.S. empires (and their allies) a series of proxy wars were fought in the region (nominally the Arab - Israeli conflict).  

Today, the region is beset by a mishmash of competing religious (inter and intra), cultural, racial, tribal, and clan forces of such a complex and confusing nature that even the most dedicated observer has difficulty keeping them all straight.  Add to the mix the designs of a resurgent Russia and an expansionist Iran butting heads with a distracted America (all armed to the teeth and infused with new-found nationalist pride) and you have the makings of a jolly good shoving/shooting match whose escalation to all-out war might just be studied in centuries hence by Chinese military professionals honing their skills in service to Sino world hegemony. 

All the more reason for current U.S. policy makers and advisers to take a deep breath and critically analyze the situation in Syria vis-a-vis U.S. vital interests and national grand strategy.

The proximate cause for the coming strike on Assad's toys is his use of chemical weapons in his fight against rebels seeking his overthrow.  Mind you, the chemical weapon use "red line" across which Assad has stepped comes on top of a half million dead by "conventional" means and millions more displaced.  Two American administrations have called for eventual Assad regime change, but the Colonel sees nothing in the promised coalition (Britain, France, and perhaps Saudi joining the U.S.) air campaign that will bring about that eventuality -- Russia and Iran won't allow it.  

If you are looking for the Clausewitzian Center of Gravity, the attack of which will provide the solution to this whole mess, look no further than Putin and the Mad Mullahs in Teheran.  Until their influence in Syria, and the larger region, is significantly reduced (if not eliminated), there is zero chance for an end state acceptable to the U.S. and its allies.  While the current Iranian regime can be dealt with by application of a high/low mix of military hard power and economic soft power, putting Putin back in a smaller box must be far more carefully managed -- he possesses the second largest nuclear arsenal in the solar system (outside of the sun itself), after all, and his conventional forces are nothing to be trifled with.  

Extreme economic pressure on Putin and his oligarch patrons is the key -- the center of gravity -- that can be used to pry Russia out of Syria.  Putin's hold on the reins of power in Russia is dependent in large part on his popularity and a cult of personality.  A more robust containment strategy employing extreme economic pressure with our NATO allies can break his stranglehold on power, and perhaps return Russia to a more productive role in world affairs.

The Colonel expects the military professionals (the strategic intelligence and deep thoughtfulness of several of whom the Colonel knows first hand) and national security advisers providing courses of action to the President, have tried to nail down Trump's desired end state in Syria and tie proposed actions to a larger strategy in service of American vital interest.  The Colonel does not envy their task.  The Colonel suspects that it has been a frustrating exercise for both the President and his advisers, made all the more taut by Trump's twitter boasts.

President Trump's publicly expressed desire for extrication from the Syrian Tar Baby will not be accomplished by a feel-good fusilade of GPS-guided kinetics -- particularly if only fired in response to a crossed "red line" and not in connection with a far larger set of strategic goals. 

And, make no mistake, the rising peer competitor in the East is paying very close attention to our handling of Russia and Iran vis-a-vis Syria (and with regard to other meddling in places like Ukraine and Yemen, respectively).  The Colonel firmly believes, without a hint of hesitation in his military mind, that the vital national interest of these re-United States is best served by maintenance of an unchallenged position as the globe's guarantor of individual freedom and fair-market capitalism.  Yes, that means U.S. global hegemony.  Would you rather another superpower assume that mantle?  Russia?  China?  The Bureaucratic Socialist Republic of Europe?

Now, if you will excuse the Colonel, he has some plowing to do.                  

Thinking Big on Korea

President Trump is reportedly preparing for two historic meetings this spring.

One, with Special Counsel Mueller, could set the tone for the remainder of President Trump's time in office and determine Mr. Trump's political future.

The other, with North Korea's dictator, could completely reshape the geopolitical landscape in Northeast Asia for decades to come.

To survive the first, President Trump and his advisers must think small.  To cement his place in history as one of our nation's greatest Presidents, he must think big on Korea. 

If and when he meets with Mr. Mueller, President Trump must pay close attention to the smallest details of his answers to questions and resist the urge to ramble or embellish -- admittedly not his strong suit.  But, if President Trump can successfully escape the nuanced jaws of the perjury trap many see being laid for him, he has the opportunity to put the last year and a half of investigatory distractions behind and make a big (the Colonel can't resist it -- HUUUGE) deal on the Korean Peninsula.

To really change the geopolitical landscape in Northeast Asia, however, President Trump and his advisers must not just "think out of the box" -- they must think BIG.

The "box" in which U.S. policy towards North Korea has been contained for nearly three decades now has been containing the specter of a nuclear armed and capable regime.  For the first four decades of the Korean dilemma previous to that the calculus was fairly straightforward -- the U.S., South Korea, and their allies merely had to maintain a conventional force deterrent on the peninsula to ensure South Korea's political and economic freedom.

To be sure, the political arc in South Korea did not always bend in perfect alignment with the American conception of "Jeffersonian Democracy;" but, the population south of the DMZ enjoyed vastly more political, social, and economic freedom than their brothers in the north and by the fourth decade following the Korean War, the difference in the economic vitality between the two Koreas was stark.  The Republic of Korea (South Korea) was booming; the Democratic People's Republic -- neither democratic, of the people,  nor a republic --  of Korea (North Korea) was starving.  As has been demonstrated time and again (see: East Germany, the USSR, Cuba, et. al.), free-market capitalism will rapidly out-distance socialist command economies with ease, and nowhere is this more clearly demonstrated than the dramatic difference between the plights of the divided Korea peoples.  

The Colonel fears that Mr. Trump and company are preparing to enter into the same fairly limited objective negotiations with the current Kim regime that was attempted by American administrations with the two previous Kim regimes.  The stated goal -- at least the the one the Colonel can best decipher -- is the "denuclearization of the Korean peninsula."  That sounds like a lofty goal, but can the Colonel be frank?  That is a bandaid on a gangrenous mortal wound.

Think big, people!

Thinking big in Korea requires understanding a bit of the history that got the Korean people to this point.  As the markets of Northeast Asia (specifically China, Korea, and Japan) opened to European trade through the 19th Century, Japan, in particular, transformed itself more rapidly than the rest of the region, and, by the turn of the century, began to exert itself colonially.  Japan outright occupied Korea from 1910 until Japan's defeat in 1945.  As with the rest of Eurasia, post-war "administration" of Korea was divided between the USSR and the Western Powers.  A line delineating Russian and U.S. control in Korea was hastily and "temporarily" drawn on the map along the 38th parallel.  And, as happened with West and East Germany, the Russians had no intention of allowing reunification of the Korean peninsula -- at least not under control of the West.  Relatively free elections were held in the south -- the Russians installed a dictator in the north.

Five years after the close of WWII -- June 25th, 1950, to be exact -- the North Korean army, armed and organized by the Soviet Union, swept south in a bid to re-unite the peninsula under communist dictator Kim Il Sung.  Three years of bitter fighting later an armistice was signed between the U.S. and South Korea on one side and China (who had joined the fight with major land forces) and North Korea on the other.  No peace treaty -- just an agreement to maintain a demilitarized zone roughly along the original 38th parallel dividing line.  Since 1953, a tense cease fire has existed.  No peace; instead, a constant build-up and modernization of forces on both sides to the point that the combined military might facing north and south constitutes the world's most densely packed potential for destruction and loss of life.  War today on the Korean peninsula, even if it remained "conventional," would result in more military and civilian casualties, in the shortest period of time, in the history of human civilization.  No hyperbole -- just fact. 

So, "denuclearization" of the peninsula, alone, does not solve the underlying problem, nor prevent potentially the greatest catastrophe since the end of World War Two. 

What, then, is the answer?

One possible key to dissipating the explosive gases fogging all reason in the region is find agreement on a deal that would cement a peace treaty and normalize relations between all concerned.  Each side would need assurances, in word and deed, that the existential threat posed by the other was radically minimized, if not gone altogether.

Here's what each side needs:

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK, aka North Korea) is ruled by a third generation, hereditary, personality cult dictatorship which maintains its grip on power with one of the largest militaries in the world -- justified (whether we see it as valid or not) by the threat of invasion leading to regime change by the world's most powerful nation.  Kim Yong Un has one overarching concern -- to remain in power.  To do so, he must maintain the belief among his 25 million subjects that he (and a huge military force) are all that stands between them and complete annihilation.  There once -- four or five decades ago -- might have been the dream of accomplishing Granddaddy Kim's goal of Korean re-unification under the north's form of government.  But, that possibility has long since passed with the south's achievement of military parity with the north, and the enormous economic disparity between north and south.

What Kim Yong Un wants is an assurance that his regime will survive for the foreseeable future.  He also needs to demonstrate to the world technological accomplishments (currently nuclear power/weapons and ballistic missiles) to maintain the fiction of his omnipotence and omniscience in the minds of his people.  A peace treaty that guarantees no attempt at regime change by his enemies, allows for peaceful technology development with which to impress his people, and lifting of economic sanctions to further boost the economic well-being of his people and their consideration of their leader, might be enough to achieve the goal of denuclearization. 

For China's part, the conventional wisdom is that the PRC isn't keen to see the buffer between them and the democratic west gone with reunification of the Korean peninsula under a true representative republican government.  The Colonel thinks this argument has outlived reality. The Chinese communist party is no longer a shaky regime, threatened by competing powers in the region.  The PRC has matured into a regional hegemon on the cusp of world super-powerdom.  Although the PRC has historically enjoyed seeing the U.S. stuck in the Korean tar baby, they would probably love more to see U.S. forces removed from Korea and would probably support a peace treaty that accomplishes that end.        

All hereditary dictatorial regimes eventually collapse.  The trick is to manage the inevitable collapse of the DPRK so that it does not destabilize the region.  Were the DPRK to collapse today, the great economic disparity between the two Koreas would make the process of reunification extremely difficult and detrimental to all of the Korean people.  The reunification of Germany in the last century is instructive.  The economic disparity between East and West Germany was significant and it took a reunified Germany a decade to regain its former economic footing as a Europe-leading economy.  The current disparity between North and South Korea is an order of magnitude larger.  Bringing the North up to rough parity with the South will take generations.  There is little interest in the south for such a sacrifice.   

So, immediate reunification is, for all practical purposes, off the table.  Normalization of trade relations between North Korea and the rest of the world (Vietnam being a good, if not nearly an exact, analog) made possible by a peace treaty with verifiable disarmament conditions would go a long way towards opening up the DPRK to enlightening ideas.  Given the brainwashed condition of the North Korean people, it will take a generation or more of slow progress toward a more open society, but trade and communication almost always empowers people to eventually choose freedom over slavery.

For the United States' part, a peace treaty codifying verifiable denuclearization and strategic systems disarmament is the holy grail on the Korean peninsula.  Further, the U.S. needs assurances that North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile technology will cease to contribute to proliferation of such technology to regimes such as Iran.  Surely, the nation with the greatest economy on the planet can find sufficient inducements to convince the Kim regime to take this offer.

We must make the DPRK and their Chinese patrons an offer they can't refuse.  Appeal to Kim's venality if we must.  We have nothing to lose by going big on Korea -- and everything to gain.                              

         

Shifting the Homeland Defense Paradigm

The Colonel, who can't stand the man, is generally in agreement with President Trump's plan to use the U.S. military to secure our southern border.

In fact, the Colonel has opined for decades that this course of action is not just a good idea, but an imperative.  There is no more important mission for the Department of Defense than defending the Homeland.  

The Colonel fears, however, that the plans provided POTUS by SECDEF for use of military force on the border will be more of the same minimal, half-hearted, support-role-only effort that has characterized previous border deployments.

A paradigm shift in thinking is required.

Senior military commanders and civilian defense officials have historically (at least over the last century) balked at using regular military forces for border control.  There seems to be three major reasons for this reticence: fear of political fallout over militarization of the border, misinterpretation of the restrictions of posse comitatus, and worry over adverse impact on training and deployment tempo.

The Colonel, in order to get to the issue for which he believes the greatest shift in thinking is required, will summarily address the first two reasons.  

Militarization of the border.  Seriously?  Let's, for the sake of argument, posit that a half million persons cross our southern border illegally each year (the Colonel believes that number is low) and that 99% of those persons will otherwise be productive and law-abiding (the Colonel believes that number is high).  That leaves 5 thousand (1% of 500,000) persons with nefarious intent -- violent gang activity, drug smuggling, human trafficking, armed robbery, etc... (not to mention terrorism) -- a clear and present danger to the security of the citizens of the United States -- invading our territory annually.  We've been fighting similar-sized insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan for 15 years now.  Surely, a similar-sized military operation on our southern border is warranted.  

Restrictions of Posse Comitatus.  In 1878, a Democrat Party (primarily from southern states) controlled United States Congress passed, and President Rutherford B. Hayes signed into law, an amendment to the 1879 Army Appropriations Act that, in response to the excesses of post-Civil War Reconstruction, codified limitations on the future use of federal forces for domestic law enforcement.  In the late 1950s, U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 67, § 1385 established that: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." This law prevents state and local authorities from using federal forces to enforce state and local laws.  HOWEVER, the Constitution gives the President unfettered authority to use federal military forces in whatever capacity he deems necessary to protect the rights and safety of American citizens -- checked, of course, by Congressional oversight and funding.  A simple presidential emergency declaration would set aside any posse comitatus restrictions (see the use of the 101st Airborne Division in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1956 and Oxford, Mississippi in 1962).  Frankly, from a purely Constitutional standpoint, the Colonel would prefer an act of congress authorizing military operations on the border.  But, given the fact that Congress has generally shirked this requirement since 1945, the Colonel will take what he can get.  

So, concerns over militarization of the border and the restrictions of posse comitatus are specious, particularly given the serious nature -- a clear and present danger -- of the threat to the security of the citizens of the United States by thousands of nefarious actors invading across our southern border annually.  The Colonel does not advocate use of federal military forces to apprehend illegal immigrants already within the interior of the United States -- that is clearly in the purview of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and should remain so.  He does, however, advocate for the establishment of a narrow security zone along the more rural and more inaccessible sections of the southern border in which the full range of "low-intensity" U.S. military capabilities -- honed to near-perfection over the last 15 years of counter-insurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan -- would be authorized to intercept persons in the act of illegally entering (invading) the territory of the United States.

Oh, and lest he be accused of prejudice toward the populations south of the border, the Colonel would advocate for northern border defensive deployments should a threat from that direction warrant.    

This, then, brings us to the red herring so often trotted out by senior military and civilian defense officials to oppose use of regular military forces in border defense roles -- such action will be detrimental to training and operational tempo.  The question begged is this: "What is the mission of the United States military, if not primarily to defend the territory of the United States?"

And, any military commander worth his or her rank and salt should know how to maximize training opportunities and even create required training opportunities in the midst of what on the surface seems to be inopportune or inconducive situations or environments. 

One of the Colonel's more influential mentors taught him the following early in his career:  "Training is everything, and everything is training."  With this philosophy, even the most mundane, "administrative" (non-combat) garrison chore can be used to train for some critical component of a unit's combat mission.

Using this philosophy as an infantry battalion operations officer, the Colonel and his staff section put every possible administrative instruction to subordinate units in the same operational order format that would be used for combat.  Believe it or not, the Marine Corps, arguably the most forward-leaning, combat-focused service, used "bulletins" whose format differed considerably from combat operational orders to provide instruction on 90% of a unit's activities.  Not only that, but there was an onerous administrative inspection regime built around ensuring that non-combat orders and bulletins conformed to a strict format.  This meant that an operations section spent only 10% of its time training on the writing of combat orders, and subordinate units saw combat operations order formats only 10% of the time.  Putting almost all administrative instructions and orders in combat operational order format increased training opportunity by ten-fold for all concerned.

When a military professional internalizes the philosophy of "everything is training" it changes the way he or she conducts everything his or her unit does 24/7.

Instead of mustering a "ten-man working party" from a 40-man rifle platoon to accomplish a logistics section material handling requirement (which results in the ten most junior Marines from across the platoon's three squads being taken away from their normal teammates and placed under the control of a Marine from the logistics section), a leader viewing "everything as training" responds to the working party requirement by giving a rifle squad (nominally 10+ Marines) a mission -- in combat order format -- to which it responds in team integrity, with its leadership intact to ensure accomplishment of the mission all the while learning valuable lessons in leading men in inglorious tasks. 

This "everything is training" philosophy writ large can accomplish a large proportion of a combat unit's training for mission essential tasks even when participating in events which on the surface are very dissimilar to that unit's actual combat missions.

Leadership imagination and enthusiasm is the key.

When the Colonel took command of an infantry battalion in Hawaii in 1997, he was "advised" that training areas on the island were so restrictive in size and availability that battalion-sized field exercises were all but impossible.  Also, the prevailing attitude was that battalion-level exercises interfered with smaller unit training.  The Colonel was lucky to have a tremendously talented battalion operations officer who quickly bought into the "everything is training" philosophy and built a "battalion in the defense" exercise that took place completely within the confines of the battalion's barracks area.  The battalion's complete mobile combat operations center was set up in the central physical training field and the subordinate rifle companies were given sectors in a 360 degree defense.  Each company in turn designated platoon, squad, and fire team sectors for which each drew defensive fire plan sketches.  Each company submitted complete map overlays of their sectors' defenses to the battalion operation center.  At the completion of a few hours training, squad, platoon and company leaders cycled through the battalion operations center and saw how their individual plans fit into the entire battalion's defensive plan, and how the battalion operations center would coordinate their calls for battalion-level and higher artillery and close air support based on their plans.  One day; highly productive training at all levels from four-man fireteam to 800-man infantry battalion; all without leaving the "administrative" confines of the battalion barracks area.  

Likewise, battalion training hikes -- the Marine Corps term is "forced marches" -- in the confines of the urban area of Marine Corps Base, Kaneohe Bay, were used not only as hours and hours of heavy-load carrying physical conditioning, but also as opportunities to exercise command and control.  The battalion's scout sniper and target acquisition platoon moved ahead of the battalion column, conducting route reconnaissance and establishing overwatch positions (reporting back via radio).  At each rest break, the battalion operations center supervised a company commander face to face handover and "passage of lines" as the next company in trail took over at the head of the battalion column.  Down the chain of command, subordinate units practiced (at least in theory) the immediate actions for close security during halts in the march. 

When a combat organization keeps its combat mission in mind, even the most non-combat activities can provide valuable combat-related training.   

So, deploying Marine Air-Ground Task Forces or Army Brigade Combat Teams to the Southwestern border area of the United States (where many of them are already stationed) need not be detrimental to training.  Command and control, and logistical support, of forces spread over a wide area is one of the most difficult and critical tasks of a combat organization -- border security provides great training opportunity for both.  Live-fire ranges aboard the many military bases in the Southwest can be used to maintain proficiency for heavy weapons not required for the border security mission.  

Will the border security mission increase an already strenuous operational tempo?  It will if we don't reexamine and prioritize our world-wide defensive commitments in light of the threat literally at our gates.

Don't tell the Colonel it can't be done.  Not only can it be done.  It must be done.