Announcement

Collapse

New Site - PLEASE READ

Hello All,
My name is Ashley and I am the one that moved the forum to its new hosting location. This was done for security reasons and try to keep the forum from going down every other day. I understand that the new forum looks very different from the old one but I promise almost everything you had before you still have it might just be in a different place.

Items that are gone due to a limitation of the new hosting/ forum update:
- Awards
- Flags

As I was going thought your posts I was able to fix a lot fo the issues you were listing. Below is kind of a running list of issues an what is fixed and what I am still working on.

Items that I have fixed from your comments:
- Smilie are now working.
- Color/Theme changes
- Signature are now showing up. (Here is how to edit them https://screencast.com/t/OJHzzhiV1)
- Ranking is now showing up.
- Private messaging is now working.

Some issues I am still working on are:
- Missing items from the Calendar
- Like button the posts is giving an error.

One other note I have seen a lot is theme/color related items. I know this is important to all of you but at the moment the most important thing was getting you back a functioning forum with as many features I can get you back from before.

Theme/color is something we can change but it the moment I do not have the time and resources to fix all of the issue and design the site. I did do some theme updates yesterday but it is very time consuming. Please just be patient with the forum as we get it back to as close as I can to what you had before.

If anyone has any issues that they are running in to please let me know in the post below. Please give me as much detail as possible .
https://forums.armchairgeneral.com/forum/world-history-group-welcomes-you/armchair-general-magazine/5034776-new-site-please-read
See more
See less

Rule Of Three.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
    I read the article- and proved that it over-simplified reality
    You haven't "proved" anything except that you are trolling.


    Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
    What? Decisionmaking is decisionmaking, and the OODA loop theory works well in an individual but falls apart at large organizations with staffs and bureaucracies.
    Again, you are showing you lack of knowledge on the subject. OODA loop doesn't only apply to an individual. It applies to any two-sided conflict; individual or large military formations.


    Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
    9th Marines inactivated in 1994. And added the three battalions of the 9th Marines (with the regimental headquarters) from 2007-2014, so a few years ago there would have been 27 battalions in 8 regiments- again violating your supposed rule.
    I was in V1/9 (The Walking Dead) when it was inactivated, we became V2/1...same base.....same barracks.....same Marines....only difference was that we could no longer wear the black PT shorts for unit PT.

    Again, it isn't my "supposed rule" it is USMC doctrine.

    You need to learn what 'task organized' means. Then try to not show your ignorance on this subject.

    Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
    We're clearly talking about active duty and not USMCR, since you listed 24 battalions and 8 regiments, which is why I noted the disparity between 8 regiments and 3 divisions. If you'd been including the USMCR, then the numbers would be 33 (24 active and 9 reserve), 11 (8 active and 3 reserve), and 4 (3 active and 1 reserve).
    Read and learn for once:

    http://www.marines.mil/News/Messages...mplementation/


    Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
    Except when it doesn't, as I showed in both normal peacetime organizations and during employment in conflict. Like I said, a cute little memory aid from the perspective of the squad level- meaningless at larger organizations.
    You have shown absolutely nothing concerning the subject of this thread. The only thing that you have shown is a complete lack of basic comprehension of what the Marine doctrine is and how Marines operate.

    Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
    That your "rule" is not really a "rule".
    Again, no matter how many times you type that crap in this thread, it still isn't my rule, it's doctrine.

    I answered the OPs question, you have decided to come on the thread and troll on a subject that you have no idea about. Go find some more internet links, but if you really want to understand the Corps, enlist, pick up a rifle and follow your Fireteam Leader.
    Last edited by Nichols; 25 Jun 17, 00:56.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      From the USMC Infantry side of the house....the rule of three is pretty solid.

      One Marine directly leads three Marines; Chain of Command.
      ...
      If you try to lead more than three people, generally you run into problems.
      So the "Rule of 3" applies up to at least regimental level?

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      It really doesn't start to fall apart. I'm specifically talking about the combat power chain of command.
      ...
      But only in the "combat power chain of command"? I'll argue that there is more combat power in weapons platoon than in 3 rifle platoons, more in weapons company than in 3 rifle companies, and more in an artillery regiment than in the 3 rifle regiments. But none of those units count, because it would create a number larger than 3.

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      ... It's not my idea, the rule of three has been driving the Marine Rifle Squad since 1943.
      Now its only the rifle squad?

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      ...
      ... The Corps just spent $6.3 million to get this capability to all 24 Infantry Battalions. Notice 24 is dividable by 3....8 Infantry Regiments;
      ...
      But 8 is not divisible by 3, so the "rule" doesn't apply from regiment to division, even if it does (as I've shown it doesn't) at lower echelons. But you don't seem to know if it applies only at the squad or at all echelons.

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      ... Yet somehow it manages to work out in the Corps.

      Again......Yet it manages to work in the Corps.
      ...
      Except that it doesn't. I've shown at multiple echelons that there aren't really only 3 subordinates at any point except the fireteam and the rifle squad. Above that, it becomes more complicated.

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      ...Again, you are showing you lack of knowledge on the subject. OODA loop doesn't only apply to an individual. It applies to any two-sided conflict; individual or large military formations.
      Where did Boyd develop his theory? Does it continue to work outside that (and similar) instances? The OODA-loop theory falls apart at larger and more complex interactions.

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      ....
      Again, it isn't my "supposed rule" it is USMC doctrine.
      You haven't posted a doctrinal manual yet- just some administrative messages about equipment distribution.

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      You need to learn what 'task organized' means. Then try to not show your ignorance on this subject.
      I know what task organized means, and I've actually used it. I've also shown than, in both peacetime structure and in actual operations, the USMC doesn't follow a "rule of 3", plenty of Marines have handled more subordinates than 3 in both peace and war, without running into OODA issues.

      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      ...
      I answered the OPs question, you have decided to come on the thread and troll on a subject that you have no idea about. Go find some more internet links, but if you really want to understand the Corps, enlist, pick up a rifle and follow your Fireteam Leader.
      And there you have it- no one can understand the Corps without being a private. That's idiotic.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        So the "Rule of 3" applies up to at least regimental level?
        No, try reading what I posted. You're showing ignorance regarding this subject.


        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        But only in the "combat power chain of command"? I'll argue that there is more combat power in weapons platoon than in 3 rifle platoons, more in weapons company than in 3 rifle companies, and more in an artillery regiment than in the 3 rifle regiments. But none of those units count, because it would create a number larger than 3.
        You can argue until the cows come home. When it is time to take and hold an objective.....all the support Marines become provisional infantry.


        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        Now its only the rifle squad?
        I gave a short history, somehow you have now decided that it is only the rifle squad........you need to work on your comprehension


        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        But 8 is not divisible by 3, so the "rule" doesn't apply from regiment to division, even if it does (as I've shown it doesn't) at lower echelons. But you don't seem to know if it applies only at the squad or at all echelons.
        Again, your lack of understanding task organization is evident.

        You have shown a complete lack of knowledge in reference to the Corps. Here's something else that will get you panties knotted up. The 4th Marines is in Okinawa yet they don't have battalions. Their three battalions are stationed in CONUS with different regiments. They get their combat power from battalions on UDP.


        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        Except that it doesn't. I've shown at multiple echelons that there aren't really only 3 subordinates at any point except the fireteam and the rifle squad. Above that, it becomes more complicated.
        You have tried injecting your limited knowledge of the Corps into your Army model....it doesn't work. As I said earlier:

        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
        As much as I hate to admit it, the Platoon Sergeant and the other roles that you mentioned are all advisory roles. They are not in command of a unit. Weapons Company Commander, all of his troops are tasked out. You wont see that company assaulting an objective. You will see them supporting the assault.
        Organization should also provide commanders with staffs
        appropriate to the level of command. The staff assists the commander by providing specialized expertise and allowing a division of labor and a distribution of information. The staff is not part of the chain of command and thus has no formal authority in its own right, although commanders may delegate authority to a staff officer if they choose.

        MCDP 6 Command and Control


        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        Where did Boyd develop his theory? Does it continue to work outside that (and similar) instances? The OODA-loop theory falls apart at larger and more complex interactions.
        The OODA loop applies to any two-sided conflict, whether the antagonists are individuals in hand-to-hand combat or large military formations. OODA is an acronym for observation-orientation-decision-action, which describes the basic sequence of the command and control process.

        MCDP 6 Command and Control

        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        You haven't posted a doctrinal manual yet- just some administrative messages about equipment distribution.
        MCDP 6 Command and Control

        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        I know what task organized means, and I've actually used it. I've also shown than, in both peacetime structure and in actual operations, the USMC doesn't follow a "rule of 3", plenty of Marines have handled more subordinates than 3 in both peace and war, without running into OODA issues.
        You have shown a remarkable, yet typical keyboard warrior status. you have managed to google multiple lines of information yet somehow you could not google Marine Corps Doctrine....amazing.

        No, you don't know what task organized means when referencing the Corps. You have given examples that didn't go into the level of command and control that I am discussing. The rule of 3 does fit in those examples.

        Originally posted by 82redleg View Post
        And there you have it- no one can understand the Corps without being a private. That's idiotic.
        No, your posts are idiotic...coming in from the ground level might teach you something..then again maybe not.
        Last edited by Nichols; 25 Jun 17, 13:54.

        Comment

        Latest Topics

        Collapse

        Working...
        X