US News, 1901 H1

[KWorld]

January 19, 1901 - Washington, DC

"The Cuban delegates are working though their new constitution, reports say they will likely finish drafting it within a month or two.  After that, they will have a ratification process, but assuming they don't have a Bill of Rights level problem, they will likely be, at a constitutional level, ready to take the reins of their own government by the end of the summer, or the end of the year at the latest.  The question is, what strings should we keep upon a country so close to our borders, but different enough from our states that, even without legal bars, we would hesitate to annex it.  We do not want a repeat of the Liberia affair so close to our borders, that would be unacceptable."

"Mr. President, the opinion of the Department of the Navy is clear: the base at Guantanamo Bay should be retained.  Additional coaling stations would be nice, but are not strictly necessary."

"Mr. President, the opinion of the Department of War is simple enough: the troops would like to come home, and there's little reason not to do so, provided that the Cubans can successfully manage their own affairs.  This is where I, myself, have more than a few qualms.  Should we not prevail upon the Cuban Constitutional committee to grant the US some special influence, so as to prevent another Liberia or to give us legal reason to intervene should future Cuban politics be as turbulent as those of, say, Haiti?  If their Constitution bars excessive borrowing and allows for intervention, we can ...."


BANG!!!!

The eyes of the room turned to the youngest, and newest, member of the administration.  Vice President Theodore Roosevelt was red in the face, his hand flat on the table as he said.  "NO!  We should do no such thing!  We did not sail across the Straits of Florida to free the Cubans only to put them on a leash and treat them as children.  We must either let them be a state as other states, or we must revoke the Teller amendment and go forward with annexation.  If we do not wish to annex Cuba, and it is widely agreed that we do not, then we must let them stand on their own feet.  Help them, yes, point out possible pitfalls, certainly, but we should not try to enshrine in their Constitution some over-bearing role that makes our Ambassador and the Secretary of State, worthy men though they might be, king-makers or political powers within Cuba.  That is not what the Cubans fought for, it is not what Congress authorized the war for, and it is not what the Volunteers signed up to fight the war for."


Secretary of War Elihu Root frowned at being so interrupted, while President McKinley leaned back in his chair.  The Vice President had been added to the Republican ticket for his popularity, and to get him out of New York politics, not for his ...... agreement with all the thoughts of the Cabinet.

"With all due respect, Mr Vice President," Secretary Root responded, "if we do not have some sort of legal oversight role, how will we keep the Cubans off the dangerous shoals of state?  Their leaders, worthy men though they might be, do not have experience in navigating those waters, and other countries have certainly fallen victim to the dangers of allowing too much influence in."

"The Monroe Doctrine still exists, and I see no bar to using it as necessary to keep forces from outside the hemisphere from expanding their holdings.  Should France, or Italy, or any other country try to bring Cuba under their thumb via debt or force, then we may have to take a stand on the matter.  But that is a protective role, one that is far different from an explicit oversight role within the Cuban Constitution.  Trying to do that will breed resentments and hatreds, when at the moment we are thought of as liberators and teachers."

[KWorld]

January 30 - Washington, DC

Admiral Dewey looked at his fellow members of the General Board and their staffs.  "Gentlemen, the Secretary has asked us to work on new war plans for the possibility, and I emphasize that word, possibility of future wars.  The war plans drawn up at the Naval War College by Captain Mahan and his students proved useful during the Iberian-American war, and the Secretary has entrusted the General Board with first, drawing up new plans for conflicts not yet covered at the College, and second, vetting and approving College plans as they are completed.  The plans will be color-coded, and no reference within the plans themselves shall refer to a particular country or city, to avoid embarrasment should a plan fall into the hands of a foreign government or be published in a newspaper or magazine.  The seeming likelihood of a conflict with the opponent should also be left unconsidered: who would have thought that, after the sterling aid that France gave the American revolutionaries, that the first foe fought by the recreated US Navy was the French Navy, but it was."

War Plan Red - The UK
War Plan Black - Germany
War Plan White - France
War Plan Green - Russia
War Plan Orange- Japan
War Plan Grey- Italy
War Plan Yellow- Iberia
War Plan Purple - the Netherlands
War Plan Gold - South America

[KWorld]

February 5, 1900 - Washington, DC

In the office of the Commandant, the leaders of the Marine Corps were going over their requirements for the following year.

"So, we are agreed that there is little point in changing rifles to use the same cartridge as the Army, when the Army is in the process of changing it's cartridge.  The 6mm, with it's virtues and flaws, will stay at least until the Army settles on a cartridge and rifle.  Then we'll look at it, or we'll go our own way again.  Now, what's the status on artillery?"

"Sir, the 3" Mk 7 steel landing guns are in service and issue has almost completely replaced the 3" Mk 1 bronze guns.  The artillery companies and some sea marine detachments also include the M1895 Colt machineguns, and there are sufficient numbers of those guns for issue."

"So the Army is finally going to catch up with us on field guns, since they just accepted a different Erhardt design for their 3" field gun.  Still don't have a machinegun though.  Anyway.  Pistols, should we look into a change there?"

"No, sir, it seems not, at least judging by the Army report on their testing last fall.  They've ordered some for troop trials, but there's nothing to suggest that they were satisfied with any of the offerings.  The .38 still does the job, though it's not as quick to reload as one of those automatics."


"Sir, as long as the Corps deploys in battalion strength or less, we should not need these, but with the increasing range and rate of fire of field guns, and the increasing use of machine guns, we may need to consider adding light howitzers to the Marine artillery."

"Mmmmm.  Certainly could be useful in the right circumstance.  Something to keep in mind, at the very least.  Right now, given that the Corps deploys as companies and only rarely as a battalion or larger, we can probably manage without them, but something to think about."

"Depending on the circumstances, sir, they could be invaluable.  Landing and towing them would of course be the problem, unless their weight can be kept down to something similar to the landing guns we already have.  But.... maybe a 3" howitzer, using a box trail to achieve the needed elevation?"

"Mmmmmm.  Wouldn't have much effect on trenches or bomb-proofs, but such a weapon would allow the battery to fire over hills or trees.  Let's have a couple of trails built for testing, see how much more they weigh and so on."

[This is the genesis of the Mk 11 3" landing gun.  The Mk 7 landing gun is a field gun, with a maximum elevation of 18 degrees.  The later Mk 11 had a maximum elevation of 50 degrees.]

[KWorld]

Washington, DC, February 2, 1901

In the office of the Commandant, General Heywood was discussing an article with a subordinate, Major Williams.


"I like your article, Dion, but there are a few questions you might consider."

"Such as?"

"Right now, the mobile defence force idea you wrote about is, effectively, 1 battalion of Marines equipped to take and hold an advanced base, with another battalion equipped to protect that base from naval retaliation.  This is fine, as long as the location where the base is is very lightly defended, because a battalion of sea marines with a battery of landing guns will be unlikely to succeed against an enemy which has any fixed defences that they're more willing to defend than the Iberians were in Cuba."

"True enough.  But the point of the article is that the Navy will need bases to coal from, and how to get these."

"Agreed.  But, and this is the question I'd suggest you think about: how should the Corps be structured to act quickly against a DEFENDED locale otherwise suitable as an advanced base?  Assume that the island has a regiment of troops protecting a military port defended by coastal guns, with some level of fortifications protecting not just the guns but also the city."

"Sir, that scenario would require the Army, the Corps lacks the manpower to carry through against such defenses, unless morale or supplies are lacking."

"I know that, and you know that.  But the size of the Corps is fixed only by Congressional mandate and appropriation.  If that is increased, the Corps will grow.  Call this a second scenario to consider, one that cannot be accomplished currently but that would increase the Navy's basing options if the capabilities were available."

"Yes, sir.  I shall look into it, sir."

"Good man."