Defense News Megan Epstein
Gen. Smith is the Assistant Commandant and Acting Commandant, you obviously have a very busy schedule as the Assistant Commandant and there’s a number of boards you participate on and You’re also filling in for the number one Marine as well and I would just love some insight as to what that schedule is like and what are you able to accomplish filling in for two jobs and what are you having to deleagate to other people.
Gen. Smith: What I would say it is not sustainable, um, to do that. 'cause it's not actually two full-time jobs. It's actually three. 'cause if you remember, the Service chief of any service has two full-time jobs already. One is the Service Chief, the other is a member of the Joint Chiefs. Those are two very distinct and equally important, uh, duties. And as I've heard before, uh, from, from, uh, senior officers, you, you cannot get the joint chief's part wrong 'cause that is to provide advice up to the Secretary of Defense to the president. So those two full-time jobs are busy enough. The assistant command on job in the case of the Marine Corps is the lead for safety, for the budget, for personnel and readiness. It is actually one hearing that the assistant, the Vice Service Chiefs testified to United Readiness. So those are four very, very important elements of the assistant comment on job. And trying to do both jobs simultaneously is not sustainable. What that tends to do is you send the individual to each of the things like the charter requirements, oversight counsel, the deputies, workforce counsel, deputies management action group, et cetera. And because it's an individual who already has a full-time job covered down on those additional jobs, there will usually be some dissonance in messaging. 'cause each individual uses certain terminologies or, uh, different word here and there. It's, uh, it's, I mean, it's just human nature that then causes me to have another job, which is to go and do a little bit of cleanup to pull everything back together. 'cause it used to be me that attended all. So you had consistency. So I just kind of, in where I started, it's not sustainable.
Defense News Megan Epstein :
Are any things, Any decisions, any meetings having to be postponed? Obviously, you know, just a a function of time. You can't be everywhere that you need to be. Are there any decisions that are being delayed? Any budget actionsBeing postponed?
Gen. Smith: No. And that's, I think one of the challenges is, uh, what doesn't stop is the clock. Uh, the adversary doesn't take a pause. You know, China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, violent extremists, they're, I would say mildly interested in our internal processes. Um, they continue a pace. And so because the clock doesn't stop, you send who you can. And these are highly qualified individuals, but they're not the most qualified. If they were, they'd be in the billet. Um, so they don't have any experience. They might be 2, 3, 4, 5 years. Uh, difference. Uh, and as an example in our, our largest map in the Marine Expeditionary Force in Camp Ton One map, it's about 48,000 Marines. That is not an insignificant formation. Um, there is currently no Senate confirmed individual leading that. I appointed a two star to run that. Uh, and that did not require any kind of oversight 'cause it's, uh, a two star. The same is true with our Director of operations, PPO Plans, policies, and operations. That is a three star bill. I assigned a two star, which required an oversight. Uh, I simply assign an officer, and that's the case for all these three star positions, which, um, will go unfilled as people retire. And I'll continue to fill them with two stars. 'cause that's within my authority. And that does not require oversight/
Defense News Megan Epstein
Um, the Navy's in a similar position as you, Admiral Lisa Franchetti is also the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, the number two for the Navy, uh, filling in as the acting chief of Naval Operations. Um, you and she have an interesting situation that we haven't seen for the past several commandants and CNOs, where you've actually worked together and you've served on all of these boards together. You've worked with safety issues, requirements issues, uh, for the past year and a half or so that you've both overlapped and as the Vice Service Chiefs. And I wonder if you could just tell me a little bit about your working relationship with, in any areas where you two feel you can, um, build on Naval integration together by, you know, pursuing common, um, priorities that you two may have.
Gen. Smith
Yeah, sure. Uh, first what I'll offer to you is, uh, Lisa is a war fighter. Um, she's a surface warfare officer, uh, extraordinaire. Uh, she's also a personal friend of mine. Um, and I trust her. Um, we are not gonna agree to everything. I don't agree with anybody on everything except for my wife. And I'm only saying that because she watching this. So, uh, she said she's watching. I dunno if she or not. Um, she said she would. We'll see. Um, we don't agree on everything, but what we, what we focus on is where we do agree. Um, she and I have a relationship built on trust and I got a policy. I won't see anything about somebody unless I've said it to their face first. So she and I pick up the phone and talk constantly. Um, same with the nominated, uh, vice chief of the operation.I just talked to Jim Kilby last night. Um, we were talking about fishing. Um, but he, he, 'cause he's the guy that put me in the set of size nine boots. When he went fly fishing, even though I told him I had size 10 feet, he said, this is gonna work. Um, and I reminded him that for an engineer, he did not really understand physics well because that was a, that was a rough day. But Lisa and I, um, have a very, uh, candid relationship. And I think the areas that we work on, to your point about Naval integration at what I would say S two, echelon two and below, what the fleets in the Fleet Marine Force, the integration already happened. Every time that there's, uh, less integration, that's service business. Uh, when there's $1 left, there's two people that want the same dollar. Sure, there's gonna be a disagreement about where to spend, but it's not personal. Um, our belief is that if you have a personal relationship, then nothing is personal. Um, but candor and honesty is good. Um, and we're, she and I are in a good place, but we both agree, uh, is that a, a robust lethal, uh, ready fleet is in the nation's best interest. And that's all elements from submarines to, to end through the ships. A robust, lethal and ready or, uh, fleet is vital for America.
Defense News Megan Epstein
Absolutely. Um, this time of year, the services would typically be going through their next, next fiscal year budget submission. Um, in this case, fiscal 25 budget. Um, the Marine Corps will be refining their proposal. The Navy would be refining their proposal. Uh, at some point this fall, the two would come together and get sent on up to the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Um, I wonder if you could update us where you are in that process and how the fact that there's so many acting leaders is, um, influencing that process this year.
Gen. Smith
Yeah. Well, the process, again, the process remains the same. 'cause what you can't stop is the clock. It is due to Congress on a certain day that backs up to the Secretary of Defense and, and so on. So we're, we're very close, uh, to to, to wrapping that up. Um, but what I think the, the challenge is, again, when I cannot be somewhere to say that the Marine court position is exactly this, and then to argue a point when it was, well, we, we at the department of the Navy Department of Defense have a question. We, we think it might be better to spend dollars here instead of here. What's your position? I'm not there to offer that. And as the, as the most Senior Marine, um, when I can't do that. And I send very qualified people, but they're not me. And, uh, it's not that I am the end all, be all. 'cause that is far from the truth. But I am responsible and accountable for the entirety of the Marine Corps to the taxpayers to Congress. Um, more important to the parents of Marines. And I'm not there. I send someone to do that for me and then get a report back and, and it didn't quite work out. Then I have to go back and, and at that point, sorry, the day has passed because that clock didn't stop. So to me that is the unsustainable, um, part of having actings. 'cause everyone has a full-time job. So when I, the, the budget topic may be information, some kind of a command control, that's Lieutenant John, Jerry Gravy. Jerry's got a full-time job building joint, all the command, command control, protecting our networks and would have to send him over to a budget meeting. He's not doing that. So he pushes that down to a one star s e s, who's awesome, but they're not him. And so the trickle down effect actually goes down to Lieutenant Colonels who also have full-time jobs, lower, they get, my kids are grown down the house that lieutenant colonel, his, his kids, her kids, uh, high school. And now it starts to have an effect on families. And to say that it doesn't is factually accurate.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
Can you give us a sense, I know you can't get too into the details of the FY 25 proposal. What Well, please go ahead, <laugh>. Um, could you give us a sense of, uh, what issues, uh, the Marine Corps is most interested in tackling in the FY 25 budget? Um, are you preparing for more or less money than recent years? Just kind of, how are you looking at the budget environment for 25?
Gen. Smith
Always prepared for a flatter, declining, uh, defense budget. Because if you don't prepare for that, then you're gonna be caught short. So you have to, that is, that is prudent planning. Um, that there's, there's two things that I'm, three things that I'm focused on. Number one is the Marines, the individual Marine, their quality of life. And again, this is not a, uh, when I say quality of life, what I'm talking about is our ability to recruit and retain a force that's willing to fight for this country. It's, they don't have the barracks, the chow halls, the gyms, uh, the child development centers, uh, that are required as they, uh, drop their kids, uh, off before they, they go to training. Um, they're not as ready to fight, just fact. So for me, we always talk about our most lethal weapon on the battlefield. As a marine, we have to fund that.
So you'll see my priorities being funding the Marines, the individual Marines and their, their living conditions, um, simultaneous. And it's not all of this. And then, 'cause you can never say, this is my first priority, so we're gonna fund that to the max. And then whatever's left will, it doesn't work that way, as y'all know. Um, simultaneous is funding mobility and mentality. Uh, the ability for us to be mobile on the battlefield. And when we arrive underneath organic mobility along with joint or, uh, or interservice mobility to be able to strike and prevent present a a credible conventional deterrence, that means long range fires. Um, that is absolutely critical. So those three areas are what you'll see me focused on, I think you'll see reflected in the budget.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
Uh, one issue that has been kind of sticky for the Marine Corps recently, uh, has to do with amphibious wars. Um, the Navy Marines have done several studies in recent years looking at how many you need. Um, but last year the Office of the Secretary of Defense, uh, did another amphib study, uh, looking at what the ship should be, what size, what capability, that type of thing. Um, we're told that that was supposed to wrap up in June, but haven't heard much about it since. And I wondered if you could update us on where we are with the Amphi study, any, um, decisions that came out of it and kind of how that informs the budgets going forward?
Gen Smith:
Yeah, a couple of points. Um, did any, any differences I think are kind of put to bed because, uh, Congress was pretty clear in the law. Um, minimum 31. So, um, we, we can debate that, but I, I'm not in a position to debate the law. I as follow it. Um, and it's 10 big decks and 21 L P D class ships. So 31 is, is the answer. That's the minimum number. Um, I think there's, I think there's a broad agreement on that. Again, it's the law we've done in the last 14 years. There's been 11 different things warfare study, right through these warfare shift studies. Um, the current one, I, I cannot speak to you, it's not my study, if you will. We certainly participate, but I won't, uh, certainly won't get ahead of, of, uh, O S D for when they will, will wrap and release, et cetera. I think the biggest thing is, you know, is the costing. Nobody wants to pay more for anything than they have to. But in terms of, of <inaudible>, especially L P D, um, the cost is, has been steady. Um, if you go 22 year dollars, the cost is held steady, about 1.72 billion. Um, and you think, well, that's a lot of money. Uh, when you amortize that out over 40 years, which is a life of shift, that's about $48 million a year, um, give or take. And that's the cheapest insurance policy you're gonna have. And I can tell you right now, we just had, uh, we just had the 31st new down into a thousand saber. And she, uh, after wrapping up a very successful exercise and partners diverted, uh, one of the over to Papa to be able to assist there, we got the 26th new special operations capable doing disaggregated or distributed operations, two ships down in the sitcom area of responsibility and one ship up in the high north, uh, with our Norwegian allies. Um, so, uh, it is a $1.72 billion proposition for 40 years. But it's also, uh, you get what you pay for that is a floating airfield floating hospital floating power projection platform that requires no access, basing and overflow. It can stay at sea for months on end. Um, and when you have to evacuate an embassy or when you have to respond to a crisis or you have to deliver credible vehicle capabilities, there's nothing to do that like an it's in fact Ford F150 pickup truck and it costs what it costs.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
I was gonna ask you about those two, our new teams that had recently been out the 26th Neo and the 31st view. Um, obviously the combatant commanders are very interested in having this capability in their theaters. And I just wondered if you could drill down a little bit, what specifically are the COCOMs asking of you and how does that shape you know, what missions you train the ARGMEU teams for, um, what weapons you're investing in, just how you're generally preparing them to go meet new and changing missions?
Gen. Smith:
The each generally has 10 specific missions. Okay. Will be required to conduct and be certified to the n commander certifies that green expeditionary unit before they go out the door. And that's a collaboration in the training days between the fleet commander and the new commander. So what's required, you know, for that ready fleet is to have those ships available to train with. Uh, I I say it all the time that, um, you, what you do not want is crisis to happen. And then you send ships with pilots who have to conduct their, their first deck landing qualification on the way to the fight that's, that's unsafe. Um, and it's, it's not good. Uh, the same is true for a wet well operation. Um, when you're gonna launch your amphibious combat vehicle out of a wet well and two or three foot pitching rolling seas, you do not want to do that the first time on your way to the fight. So you need those ships available to train with to be ready as we owe them rents. I've spoken to most of the commanders and getting on the schedule, trying to speak to them at least quarterly, ideally much more often. I've spoken down Locklan twice. General Richardson at Southcom. I spoke to, uh, general Fenton and to General Carrillo and then working together on general cab schedule. Although, as you can imagine, uh, Chris was a classmate of mine from Capstone. He's, he's got stands for right now in Yukon. What they're asking for is mobile lethal, low signature, credible deterrent forces. That's what they're asking for. And what they ask for is to have that capability ready to go. And the way you do that is you, in my my military judgment, you put that on NFIs and you leave it off the coast because it, it depressurizes the decision making process and it physically demonstrates and partners that here we're here and an opportunity rises to train with a a new partner, you are right there. You don't, you don't need access basically over flight. You don't have to worry about airfields and you don't have to worry about the safety of a, of a different airfield. You, you brought your own airfield, your own hospital, your own water purification, your own food. Um, it, it makes you much more likely to be able to accept an offer of training with new ally or new partner partner. Um, that's, that's what, uh, the, the COCOMs will share. We'll get into the numbers, obviously, but they like that capability that has lethality, mobility, low signature and organic capability to move as things without worried about access pacing over flight.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
Um, lethality, mobility, low signature, uh, very much ties into the force design 2030 modernization you're going through. Um, marine leaders have made very clear over time that, you know, 2030s in the name, but you're not waiting until 2030 to do it. How much of those modernization efforts are actually being fielded today? How much, you know, when you talk about Marine news going to Ucomm and to Paycom, how much of that is actually being implemented and operationalized today?
Gen. Smith:
All of it. Uh, what we, what we seek now, and we talk about acceleration, we seek to accelerate the capacity. So nemesis enable expeditionary ship interdiction system. Now we just have to feel that we have to procure the systems. The remote operational Expeditionary and the Naval Strike Missile, um, uh, Gator Radar, ground Air Task radar fielded, uh, common Air command and control system fielded now just fielding more, uh, task Force 61 2, which is a very low signature, small, uh, force that comes out of secondary expeditionary force that does sensing and making sense, um, in the Yukon Theater. They're doing it right now in a Brig Gen. MQ 9 alpha extended range there. Uh, we used it throughout the Philippines during the Exercise Valley Catan and they're in Hawaii, the second KC one 30 squadron building in Hawaii time now. Um, all that's actually happening now. So it's just a matter of capacity. And that that does take time because the industrial base does have to have time to produce.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
You Told me earlier this summer, uh, when you took command from General Berger that you even in your acting capacity could begin some of that acceleration. What is within your authority and within the budget, uh, right now to begin to accelerate some of these
Efforts?
Gen. Smith:
Yeah, all within my authority. Um, the budget, as I said, the three priorities, you know, Marines, organic mobility and lethality, um, assuming a flat or declining defense budget, that that acceleration of capacity will take longer. Um, and it simply does, it just takes longer. 'cause we, you know, we work off of a non violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act 'cause that is a bad thing to do. So it takes as long as it takes to cure. And the key is putting it into the priority theater. Um, that's something that, uh, that I know and I have discussed is how to, how to get it quickest into theater. Um, there's, there's multiple other programs obviously that, that are classified that we won't talk about, that, that also, um, require funding and trying to balance that without losing sight of the strategic. In my view, the strategic, uh, issue is the people that, you know, we, we, we, one day I'll be long gone, we one day may have an army of drones, but that's not today and that's not any time in the foreseeable future, we'll continue to add drone technology, autonomous systems, ai, um, but there's nothing unmanned about unmanned.
If you look at the M two nine, that system requires people, people to maintain it, people to harm it, people to fly. Um, so there's, uh, people are still the absolute bedrock most important thing. And they're getting more expensive both to recruit, to retain everything from healthcare to pay. Um, so stay focused on people and then balance the rest of your budget across those priorities, which will likely cause a, uh, capacity, a slowdown in how fast I would like to build capacity. And if you ask me, I want capacity right now. But again, this goes back to the conundrum of modernization and readiness today. And, and as a, as an active service chief and member of the Joint Chief, I have to balance those two. It's not either or. It's just a constant tension and it's a health tension.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
Um, I wanna turn the audience questions in just a moment, so please get your questions ready. Um, but in the early days of Force Design 2030, you, you were there, you helped create it as, um, the deputy commandant for combat development and integration, uh, from, you know, the 2020 timeframe when this was all coming together through. Now, um, have you fielded some of these early initiatives as quickly as you thought? I mean, how has this played out compared to the early expectations?
Gen Smith:
Yeah, things like the long range fires, uh, every bit is fast or faster than I thought we would. Uh, and here's what I would offer, uh, and this is unclassified now. Uh, there's a guy named AJ de General Ian retired now used to be our systems Command Commander command, along with help from, uh, people like Adam, uh, and, and, and a true naval uh, team in less than two years, we took a naval strike assault previously only fired off of, uh, a US War, put it on the back of a joint light tactical vehicle, and fired it remotely off of a robotic vehicle. We then took a full size Tom Hawk previously fired, loaded vertically, and put that on the back of a joint light tactical vehicle and shot it remotely. Um, and two years, it was a little two years long time, five years ago that would've taken seven years. And we, so we're moving, um, our gator radar is now, it's moving. Um, the MQ nines boom in the Pacific, they said they're gonna put in the Pacific. They're there. They're also in CENTCOM doing some pretty robust work in CENTCOM for Gorilla. Um, the infantry battalion reorganization, you know, done, I mean it's, we're still experimenting. We could, we could further change it, but we did that very, very rapidly. Some of our command and control suites, uh, especially on the classified side done and being fielded. So it was really the work to prove a concept. And then you just simply have to go into, you know, we have to still comply by the DOD instruction 5,000 series that says, here's how you spend tax money. You have to validate it, you gotta put, uh, money down, you have to budget for it. That, that does take time.
And, uh, while frustrating, uh, that's the law and we're gonna keep complying with it. But we've done some pretty hercule work in two years. Let's remember it's 2023 and we said 30 now, I don't wanna be ready by 30, I'll be ready by, you know, 29, 28, 27, however fast. And at the same time, the constant, uh, tension, the health, a tension with modernization versus readiness, that daily readiness, those are, that are out there deployed the forces from three one that they're deployed that provides that credible deterrence, which causes an adversary to say not today. And so every day that they slide to the right, or every week or every month, or perhaps a full year, every time they slide to the right, that makes 2030 become 20 31, 20 32 or 2033. And that's, that's the healthy tension between, I wanna be ready today for a pure competitor, but every day that my ready forces cause the adversary to slide a little bit to the right and say, you know, we don't know exactly where he's, we don't know exactly what he's capable of doing. So we're gonna hold for the week or month. That's deterrent, that's conventional deterrence and general cotton takes care of the, the nuclear deterrent part. And, and we're part of the crisis response force that, uh, that gives you credible conventional deterrent. So I'm not really worried about a year. I want be ready today, tonight. Very good. Well,
Defense News Megan Eckstein:
Let's turn to the audience for some questions. Um, if, when you receive the microphone, please uh, state your name and where you work and then please ask one question in form of a question. Um, and if we could go right over here to the gentleman White,
I'm not sure about that. Ask a question. Question. I, I appreciate that as questions or more questions.
Thank you John Harper with Defense Scoop, um, weekend.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
Hey John, I can see you but I can kind of see where, okay,
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Sorry. I here, uh, John Harper with Defense Scoop. Uh, last week, deputy Secretary Hicks announced a new replicator initiative, uh, field a couple thousand autonomous systems out here in the next two years or so. A minute ago you said that you don't anticipate the Marine Corps having, uh, you know, an army of drones anytime soon. So I was wondering how many of those autonomous systems that, uh, are part of that replicator initiative do you think will be going to the Marine Corps? Do you think it's mostly gonna be going to be other services? I guess what's your, you know, share of, uh, of those systems?
Gen. Smith:
Yeah, great question. So, so for Secretary Hicks, uh, replicator initiative, um, you know, full, full steam ahead 'cause she's exactly correct. The, the, it's not who owns it, it's what's the capability? Who employs the capability? Depends on the position. Um, if you were in positional advantage to employ send in capability, then it, I think it's irrelevant which service uses it. It's a, it's a capability for a, for a war fighter, for a combating commander. Um, we are working very hard on autonomous systems now at a, I can say that in a different classification level. You talk about specifically what specifically what it's, what they're, so, um, we are absolutely doing that. What I'm talking about is, um, some of your larger platforms, which are already semi-autonomous like in the Q nine, they still require a lot of people. But the ability to do autonomous, uh, surface craft, for example, long range surface vessel for us L S V, we've been working on that and improving it as far back as 2019. Um, now it's just a matter of making it a reality. But I do believe, and I don't wanna speak for Secretary Hicks, but what she's talking about and replicator is capabilities and who, who owns them, who uses them. That's not relevant to me. I don't, I don't care where my fire support comes from. Uh, I would say my son's a Marine, he just wants to win. He actually doesn't know where that, uh, ordinance came from. If it came off the wings of a, you know, of this platform, that platform. He just knows he needs the capability and support. So, so I think that replicator is just about how do we go faster and faster using our tools that we already had within the law to just break down some barriers and get those autonomous systems faster. 'cause I do know this about autonomous systems. Um, commanders will use a unmanned system much more aggressively than a man system. And I often tell people how many MQ nines were lost in Iraq? Afghani goes, yeah, nobody knows because nobody cares. Um, crashed. Okay, next, build another, how many, you know, this kind of helicopter crashed. I know the executive because there's rings in above that. So when you give tools, I mean we we're always gonna have people on the battlefield. You have to do that. But if I can allow a commander to be more assertive, more aggressive, an because they have an unmanned system, I'm huge favor for that.
Defense News Megan Eckstein
Okay, great. Do we have any other audience questions? Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 4:
Morning and gentlemen Smith, uh, Dr. Clark.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Hey Drew.
Speaker 4 (28:29):
Morning sir. Thanks for being here. Um, the Marine Corps, I'm with the class government, the Marine Corps's made a lot of effort in ros. So where do you see the Marine Corps currently with its maritime capabilities? And then how do you see your soft component marsoc in helping with that effort?
Gen Smith: Great question. Uh, former commander of, uh, MARSOC, a great question and a great one. Um, I just talked to Matt Inger probably two weeks ago, and of course I talked to Roger Fenton, um, face to face less than a month ago. Um, marsoc for us is about somewhere between 25, 3 6 hundreds fluctuates every day. They're punching outside of their weight class. That is a huge investment for the Marine Corps. And we're not, we're not cutting them one bit, not one individual. They're gonna continue what they're doing globally. They're focused, they have, they have a focus area in the Pacific, but they're also doing some pretty spectacular work globally. I think what they do in terms of loosely people call an operational preparation environment that really amounts to knowing the environment in Littorals. And remember the Littoral piece, how far inland does the Littorals go? Two oh miles. Oh miles. I mean, that's the constant debate, right? When we say littorals, that doesn't mean that we're not able to fight inland. It simply means from the, the areas near to shore, near to shore is also, uh, a flexible turn. 'cause as long range fires push out from 10 to 12 to 50 to 200 miles, that is all in the la tos. There's a physical aspect, but there's also a capability aspect of LA tos. So we have to be able to operate within the weapons cage zone near to shore and then inland for a respectable distance. But we've been able to push that through M 22 Osprey. If we can go far inland, that's still Littoral operations because it's things that start and end from the sea. For me that is la. Um, but I think what they've done for us is they've been incubator, uh, general Challenger has been very open to, and these MARSOC operators, um, have been very good about experimenting while executing missions with new technologies, some communications pieces, um, some ability to find, fix and track targets, which gets us to the ability to, to hold targets at risk globally. Mar So's been doing that, I would say, in phases for, for a couple of years. And, and again, I have zero intention of of touching to Maroc because they're working really, really well punch out. I hope that answers Clark.
Defense News Megan Eckstein:
Yes. Um, unfortunately we appear to be out of time. Uh, this has gone very quickly, but thank you so much for your time and, and for addressing so many topics today. <inaudible>, thank General Smith.
Gen. Smith;
Thanks for coming. Letting me kind of warm up and I know I'm kind of beating on the drum, but I, I would, uh, I would offer to you, uh, kind of ending where I started, um, as a, as a, in a Gary, Gary Thomas vernacular, um, fade away jump shot. Is it, it is about Marines and being able to recruit them and retain them. And so you'll see a lot of that, but we have to be able to recruit them and um, that is a, I've heard Randy George say, I wish I'd come up with this term and I'm a Steeler for Randy, but I'm giving him credit. Um, you know, that, that the military, um, is a life accelerator. If you're 18 or 19, you think four years is forever. And as everybody knows, four years is nothing. Um, so we, we appreciate y'all, um, telling the story about what's really happening out there, uh, with the, with the youngsters who choose to make this a, a four year career or four year career. Um, 'cause it really is all about the people. And uh, that's who, that's, that's the focus because they're the most important thing.