Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Force Structure Problem
Stratfor ^ | Jan. 6, 2005 | George Friedman

Posted on 01/08/2005 7:23:20 AM PST by COUNTrecount

January 6, 2005

"Rumsfeld should have hit the panic button on Army force structure when the insurgency picked up steam."

The Force Structure Problem

By George Friedman

A memo written by Lt. Gen. James R. Helmly, head of the U.S. Army Reserve, was leaked to The Baltimore Sun. Addressed to the chief of staff of the Army, the memo stated that the Army Reserve was in danger of becoming a "broken force," due to personnel policies adopted by the Army and the Department of Defense. Helmly wrote, "The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you of the Army Reserve's inability . . . to meet mission requirements associated with Iraq and Afghanistan and to reset and regenerate its forces for follow-on and future missions."

When a three-star general writes a memo containing these words to the chief of staff, and then leaks the memo to the press (it did not arrive at the Sun through telepathy), what you have is a major revolt by senior Army commanders. Helmly may have been more incautious than others, but he is far from alone in his view that the force in general is broken. More directly, if the Army Reserve is unable to carry out its mission, the same can likely be said for National Guard units. This means that the Army in general, which is heavily dependent on both to carry out its mission, won't be able to do so. What the generals are saying is that the Army itself is unable to carry out its mission.

Part of this is a discussion of several procedures governing call-ups and other issues that have not changed since the Sept. 11 attacks. Some of it has to do with the extreme stress that reserve components are experiencing. All of it has to do with a revolt against Donald Rumsfeld and his policies toward the Army, policies that go back to Rumsfeld's view of warfare.

Rumsfeld believes that there is a revolution in warfare under way. As the author of The Future of War, I completely agree with him. However, as I stated in that book, the revolution is just getting under way and will not be mature for generations. It is not ready to carry the warfighting burden of the United States, although it can certainly support it. Until that revolution matures, traditional forces, particularly the Army, will need to be maintained and, in time of war, expanded.

Rumsfeld's view is that the revolution is more mature than that and that warfare can now be carried out with minimal Army forces. In some ways, Rumsfeld was right when he focused on the conventional invasion of Iraq. A relatively small force was able to defeat the main Iraqi force. Where he made his mistake, in my opinion, was in not recognizing that the occupation of Iraq required substantial manpower and that much of that manpower was in the reserves.

He compounded that mistake enormously when he failed to recognize that an organized insurgency was under way in Iraq. Counterinsurgency operations is one area in which the revolution in warfare has made little progress, and Rumsfeld should have hit the panic button on Army force structure when the insurgency picked up steam. In Iraq, Rumsfeld was going to fight a guerrilla war, and he was going to need a lot of infantry and armor to do it. If, in addition to fighting the guerrilla war, Rumsfeld planned to carry out other operations in the region and maintain a strategic reserve, he needed to expand the Army dramatically.

Rumsfeld made three mistakes. First, he overestimated the breadth and depth of the revolution in warfare. Second, he underestimated the challenges posed by counterinsurgency operations, particularly in urban areas. Mistakes are inevitable, but his third mistake was amazing: he could not recognize that he had made the first two mistakes. That meant that he never corrected any of the mistakes.

There is another way to look at this. The United States is in a global war. Personnel policies have not been radically restructured to take into account either that the U.S. needs a wartime force structure or that that force structure must be congruent with the type and tempo of operations that will be undertaken. Not only doesn't the force stretch, but the force is not built to stretch. Hence, Helmly's memo.

Essentially, this memo is an open challenge by Army generals to Rumsfeld, with the chief of staff caught in the middle. The situation is now officially out of hand. If the commander of the Army Reserve says that his command is not capable of carrying out its mission, and says it publicly, there is no way to cover that up. He is either going to be relieved of his command, or he is going to be given the tools to fix the problem. If he is going to be given those tools, then Rumsfeld's view is being repudiated and Rumsfeld has to go.

There is something more than politics at work here. It's called reality. Helmly is right. It seems to me that the handwriting is on the wall. Once the elections in Iraq are completed, dramatic changes will take place. Bush will call for an expansion of the Army and the reserves. In Iraq, U.S. forces will be shifted out of security responsibilities, where they are not effective anyway. And, incidentally, Rumsfeld will retire. Or, Rumsfeld will purge the senior ranks of the Army. Since that is not a viable option, we expect Bush will be forced to act on their recommendations.

You have been sent this weekly brief as you elected to receive periodical updates from Stratfor. If you do not wish to receive the Free Intelligence Brief every week, please reply to: sfib-unsubscribe@yorktown.stratfor.com

© Copyright 2005 - Strategic Forecasting, Inc.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: army; govwatch; iraq; military; rumsfeld; stratsfor; war; warfare; warlist

1 posted on 01/08/2005 7:23:20 AM PST by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Opinions are like noses, everybody has one.


2 posted on 01/08/2005 7:33:21 AM PST by sd-joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
I am know nothing about the military, and I know there are a lot of problems which need to be resolved, but...

I was wondering, earlier this morning, if the US military hasn't become even more formidable on the world stage over the past 3 years, since our fighting and supporting forces have gained a lot of experience.

3 posted on 01/08/2005 7:34:44 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan murdered because she could have testified about the oil for food corruption?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
A couple of things about this.
If this memo was not meant to be leaked it could have been done 1:1 with Rumsfeld. If our top people can't communicate without the newspapers printing the memos we're in deep doo doo. Unless of course the leak was intentional.
We really do need more forces. It's a question of more regulars or reserves/NG. I would have chosen reserves and NG in the past as they are less of a drain on the budget and provide a flexible force. If we double the number of reserves, then they would have 1/2 the tours. (give or take). But it looks like we may need a presence in the ME for quite a while if we get serious about Syria and Iran.
4 posted on 01/08/2005 7:39:52 AM PST by ProudVet77 (If it's Saturday, I'm sailing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Absolutely.

The NCO's are what makes things happen on the ground and they need to understand things that cannot be tought but must be experienced.


5 posted on 01/08/2005 7:41:08 AM PST by math=power
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Rumsfeld is Wrong ... maybe General Luck can convince him of that ... these 'wonder weapons' really aren't so wonderful and can be easily neutralized. It's time to quit wasting time, mobilize and fight this war as a war ... wait I forgot .... we did not declare war .... /sarcasm


6 posted on 01/08/2005 7:45:00 AM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
There is another way to look at this. The United States is in a global war. Personnel policies have not been radically restructured to take into account either that the U.S. needs a wartime force structure or that that force structure must be congruent with the type and tempo of operations that will be undertaken

I agree with every word in this article, especially those quoted above.

The conquest, reconstruction, and reformation of Arabia and Islamic SW Asia is required to win this world war. The force to do this job has not been created and is not being created.

The enemy masses will not enlist in the effort after they are occupied. Perhaps their children will, after 30 years of occupation.

7 posted on 01/08/2005 7:52:23 AM PST by Jim Noble (Colgate '72)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

This is interesting, and disturbing. When the head of the Reserves sends a memo like this, it's pretty certain that there is, indeed, a problem.

I don't see how we're going to be able to carry out this mission if we're going to rely so heavily on reserve and NG troops. For a year or two, that will work but, at some point, it will stop working.

I'm not sure what the solution is going to be, but one is going to have to appear pretty soon. A lot will depend on what happens after the elections in Iraq.


8 posted on 01/08/2005 7:59:18 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Panic button? If you want panicky leaders, you need a brain adjustment. I'll stick with Rummy, thanks.


9 posted on 01/08/2005 8:05:59 AM PST by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
This prose has floated around the military forever:

We The Willing


We the Willing
Led by the Unknowing
Are doing the Impossible
For the Ungrateful.

We have done So Much
With So Little
For So Long
We are now Qualified
To do Anything
With Nothing.

Author unknown.
10 posted on 01/08/2005 8:07:14 AM PST by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

Fabulous !


11 posted on 01/08/2005 8:08:34 AM PST by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
These idiots never stop whining.

Had we gone into WWII with the same men we have today, we'd have been destroyed inside of two weeks. The level of testicle free rebellion within the US Army's officer corps is terribly, terribly embarrassing.
12 posted on 01/08/2005 8:56:59 AM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yasotay

HaterAde

You and the other negadits are wrong. The overall mission is well in hand and going very smoothly. Yours is the kind of misinformed sentiment that lost the Vietnam war.

Stop drinking the media cool-aid. Soldiers die in battle....that is what they do. Try not to lose courage over it.


13 posted on 01/08/2005 9:02:31 AM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AmericanChef

Agreed.


14 posted on 01/08/2005 9:03:47 AM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4

I am not a negadit and I do not drink the Bushade either .... On 9-11 we were given a choice ... convert or die ... we have to give our enemies the same choice. Bush chose 'convert light'. Rumsfeld is trying to make a losing choice work. That is not an easy task. Our force structure cannot handle it. The 'partial' mobilization will now go beyond the 5 years set in 2001. What do we do then? Put on more band-aids? Bush said his plan will take a generation to work ... ok 20+ years .... what's Rumsfeld 20 year plan? Rumsfeld's 'whiz-kids' will lose this war despite the best effects of the military!


15 posted on 01/08/2005 9:18:03 AM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Yasotay
we did not declare war

We don't seem to do that much these days (post 1941), do we?

It seems a dilemma - if we declare war, the importance of and commitment to our objectives in Afghanistan and Iraq would be less in doubt, but on the other hand, who or what would we declare war against?

Declaring war on "Terrorism" is right out, as it cannot be party to negotiations nor sign surrender documents.

Declaring war on Al Qaeda and it's affiliates and supporters is more the mark, but then we have the thorny issues of what organizations go on the list, what to do if said organizations re-organize & re-name, what specifically constitutes support, and how to carry out any threats of action against citizens or members of governments of our nominal allies who can't or won't cease providing financial aid to our declared enemies.

In short, some sons of bitches need killin', but since they're not organized or acting along traditional lines, we need to codify some new procedures, so it's all nice and legal-like, as befits a nation like ours wed to the concept of the rule of law, and will still be acceptable should the political pendulum swing back to the left in our own government. ("In the news today, the Democrat controlled Congress has identified the RNC as an organization affiliated with Al Qaeda...")

I suppose I should just be happy knowing that our best and brightest are wrestling with these very issues right now in Washington, making the hard choices which will allow us to attack our enemies wherever they may be rather than opting for continuing to work with a dysfunctional paradigm in the name of political expediency, and as a result of their deliberations and work even peripheral mopes like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Omar Janjalani shall soon be either sporting stylish new orange jumpsuits or pushing up daisies.

Feh.

16 posted on 01/08/2005 9:18:50 AM PST by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Yasotay
Brother grow up and let go of your 70s era, Washington Post groomed, arrested development where defense secretaries are concerned.

It is the force structure itself along with the weapon systems and overall doctrine that are changing. While you were wasting your time whining you missed the reality that the current force structure [that you claim is incapable of handling current responsibilities] just fought two wars in regions that made their bones chewing up smash mouth militaries.

The Military is just fine. Rumsfeld is doing exactly what the President wants...who is himself doing exactly what is needed.

Sorry but put in the position to choose, I'll default to conservative civilian leadership 100 times out of 100. Many of the porcelain brass is simply to close to the forest [and purse strings] to be making overall judgments [especially those from the Army].
17 posted on 01/08/2005 9:46:48 AM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hoplite

Good Points, I can't argument with you there.


18 posted on 01/08/2005 10:10:43 AM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
I was wondering, earlier this morning, if the US military hasn't become even more formidable on the world stage over the past 3 years, since our fighting and supporting forces have gained a lot of experience.

It has. Not only have individual soldiers and units gotten experience in dealing with urban and conventional fighting, but the officers have gotten time to evaluate what works and what doesn't, and training programs have been able to incorporate what has been learned.

That said, the militarys size should have been increased significantly more than it has, and if 130,000 troops are needed in Iraq, the Reserve should have only been used during the training period, with more soldiers being allowed to join the Regulars. The Reserves and NG are not designed for being kept in the field.

19 posted on 01/08/2005 10:20:34 AM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

STRATFor....hmmm, I wonder what their agenda is?

Let's try and do a review:
Rumsfeld is pushing to change the military and doctrine.

He inherited a military bereft of women in many areas, combat and support, that is an effective drain on overall tactics and efficiency.

He beat up the Taliban and Iraq with the inherited force using new tactics (SpecOps and Surveillance).

He assumed (big word) that the Iraqis would join in a new army and police force, repudiate Saddam, and begin to rebuild their country. This insurgency was beyond his (or anyone's forecast).

He still assumes that when the Iraqis develop a capable police and national guard force, the U.S. military will return home. The "when" is the Key! If we suppose 1 year, then that would be insufficient time to recruit, train and deploy a new army. Therefore, he must rely on the Iraqis to develop and grow.

So now we have this Lt. General is defiance. 1st the CYA memo. Then the leak. The CYA is required. The leak is insubordination - deserves termination, immediately.

One does not reach the 3/4 Star level without Senate support. It requires Senate approval and sponsorship.
Who vouches for this Lt. General? Is he, like Zinni and Clark allied with a political cause? Clearly, an agenda at work.

Watching and reading - see the tagline!


20 posted on 01/08/2005 10:21:25 AM PST by Prost1 (I get my news at Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
It is the force structure itself along with the weapon systems and overall doctrine that are changing.

This is where Rumsfeld is horribly wrong .... Goggle "Bradley Stingray" and see an incredible weapon system that threatens all of the Rumsfeld Doctrine.

Rumsfeld is doing exactly what the President wants...

I agree that Rumsfeld is playing his cards well, but he has a losing hand and the deck is stacked against him.

Many of the porcelain brass is simply to close to the forest [and purse strings] to be making overall judgments [especially those from the Army].

From my view point the AF and Navy are far more guilty of this then the Army ... and Rumsfeld chose to publicly insult the Army ... that was really sad especially since the Army was and is right.

21 posted on 01/08/2005 10:21:32 AM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
I forgot to mention I probably should learn more about the military since my daughter is engaged to a young man who has recently signed up with the reserves. (6 years, I think)

He was in the army several years ago, but was injured, and has spent a good part of the past few years attempting to get into shape (doctors, physical therapy, etc.) to join the military again.

22 posted on 01/08/2005 10:39:32 AM PST by syriacus (Was Margaret Hassan murdered because she could have testified about the oil for food corruption?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Yasotay
"This is where Rumsfeld is horribly wrong .... Goggle "Bradley Stingray" and see an incredible weapon system that threatens all of the Rumsfeld Doctrine."

Oi...well, I tell ya what. When some other Nation with the financial bankroll, logistical capabilities and technology we have decides to field a force organized comparable [and as lethal] as those of Bradley Stingray, gimme a call.

There are a million-&-1 theories out there that shine bright in the hands of the "What about this phantom" crew. Nevertheless, the path the President has set and the SecDef is moving the DoD down is the correct one.

Lighter, Faster more lethal capabilities that cross conventional boundaries and are laid out in compartments or cells of personnel. Interchangeable within their traditional units as well as capable of cross pollinating with other centers of gravity.

Brutally lethal and extremely adaptable. Like a hunta virus capable of entering it's host [AOR] and quickly breaking it down and destroying it.

It is what it is and it is only gonna get worse [for any potential enemy] as time & technology advance.

"I agree that Rumsfeld is playing his cards well, but he has a losing hand and the deck is stacked against him."

Maybe if you're a liberal, a 90s holdover or some Army flunky pushed out in the wake of the 2000 election. But the competent scoff at such a nonsensical statement.

"From my view point the AF and Navy are far more guilty of this then the Army ... and Rumsfeld chose to publicly insult the Army ... that was really sad especially since the Army was and is right."

The Army set itself up. I know it can get lost in all of the vanity of the 90s but we still reap what we sow. That works for individuals as well as corporations.

The Army surrendered to the Clinton administration and became partners with them in their endeavor to use the military as an incubator for their EUtopian social engineering.

They more than anyone else were bound to get rebuked once sanity returned to the executive branch. They grew fat & lazy as well as insubordinate during the 90s. Someone was gonna confront them...that job falls to the SecDef....that Man is Rumsfeld. Dont get it twisted and confuse the office with the Man.

This reservist three star will be disappeared in due time. Just as many of the other Clinton holdovers have been over the past four years.

Neither the Navy or Air Force have been anywhere near as insubordinate as the Army has. The Army is getting it's just desserts...and in typical prideful fashion...whining about it all the way. They lost Crusader and they lost the Comanche...WHA!

I support The President and his SecDef Rumsfeld 110%.

23 posted on 01/08/2005 2:32:06 PM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Ring .... Ring .... Ring ....

The Stingray was developed in the late 1980s! You don't need a BFV just the AN/VLQ-7! You are attacking the optics and sensors. Throw in a few GPS jammers and let's start with about 20+ countries that can already defeat our technology.

I'm an Ann Coulter fan and she was right. We should have invaded their lands ...killed their leaders .... and converted them. Actually we should have just killed them! But Bush chose 'convert light'.

You might like Rumsfeld for protecting cowards and their service for flying our spyplane to an enemy.... oh I forgot .... Rumsfeld's Navy....

You might like Rumsfeld for replacing a Special Forces Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff with a Fighter Jock to fight a special forces war .... (Concept Error)....

You might like Rumsfeld if you still think looting is the sound of "liberation"....

You might like Rumsfeld if you think commanders have to "consult" for months to get the needed troops levels to fight in Iraq ....

You might like Rumsfeld if you are a micro-manager...

You might like Rumsfeld if you don't know what you are doing ....

You might like Rumsfeld if you still think we only need 30,000 troops in Iraq now .....

You might like Rumsfeld if you want a CPA running the occupation rather then the military ....

You might Rumsfeld like Rumsfeld if you reject the most professional advice on a subject and then act like a baby cry about being wrong....

You might like Rumsfeld if you like 500 casualties a month ...

You might like Rumsfeld because you are wrong also!

Replace Rumsfeld with Downing!

24 posted on 01/08/2005 3:17:40 PM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Yasotay
"I'm an Ann Coulter fan and she was right. We should have invaded their lands ...killed their leaders .... and converted them. Actually we should have just killed them! But Bush chose 'convert light'."

I already mentioned growing up. What we would like to do and what is realistically acceptable to the majority of American people are two different things.

"You might like Rumsfeld for protecting cowards and their service for flying our spyplane to an enemy.... oh I forgot .... Rumsfeld's Navy...."

The Bliss of ignorance has grabbed you around the throat and seemingly refuses to loose you.

"You might like Rumsfeld for replacing a Special Forces Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff with a Fighter Jock to fight a special forces war .... (Concept Error)...."

Hugh Shelton? Are you kidding me? Did you not read my previous statement? There was absolutely no way [and still is] that an Army officer will take that post under GW. Do you honestly think the appointment is the SecDefs call? Brother wake up. Get this through your head, the Army is in the dog house....period. Not because the SecDef says so... but because the President of the United States saw what they did under Clinton.

"You might like Rumsfeld if you still think looting is the sound of "liberation"...."

What? Haha...

"You might like Rumsfeld if you think commanders have to "consult" for months to get the needed troops levels to fight in Iraq"

What I know is that a lazy officers kneejerk reaction to any problem is to think less and draft [recruit] more. Manpower is not the silver bullet, get over it.

"You might like Rumsfeld if you are a micro-manager..."

I'd prolly need an example of his micromanagement.

"You might like Rumsfeld if you don't know what you are doing..."

Yawn. You cannot approach my service. Take another tac.

"You might like Rumsfeld if you still think we only need 30,000 troops in Iraq now..."

Nah, I like our manpower as it sits right now...

Unit Home Station Current Location Remarks
1st BN. 3rd Infantry Regiment Washington, DC Washington, DC  
I Corps Fort Lewis, WA Iraq Forward Elements Deployied in Iraq.
III Corps Fort Hood, TX Iraq  
3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment Fort Carson, CO Fort Carson, CO Deploys to Iraq in Spring 2005?
1st Cavalry Division Fort Hood, TX Iraq Redeploys in January 2005
1st Brigade Fort Hood, TX Iraq
2nd Brigade Fort Hood, TX Iraq
3rd Brigade Fort Hood, TX Iraq
4th Brigade Fort Hood, TX Iraq
4th Infantry Division (Mech) Fort Hood, TX Fort Hood, TX  
1st Brigade Fort Hood, TX Fort Hood, TX  
2nd Brigade Fort Hood, TX Fort Hood, TX  
3rd Brigade Fort Carson, CO Fort Carson, CO  
4th Brigade Fort Hood, TX Fort Hood, TX  
7th Infantry Division (Light) Fort Carson, CO Fort Carson  
39th Separate Infantry Brigade* Little Rock, AR Iraq  
41st Separate Infantry Brigade* Tigard, OR Tigard, OR Elements in Iraq with the 39th Brigade.
45th Separate Infantry Brigade* Oklahoma City, OK Oklahoma City, OK  
24th Infantry Division (Mech) Fort Riley, KS Fort Riley KS  
30th Heavy Separate Brigade* Clinton, NC Iraq  
48th Separate Infantry Brigade* Macon, GA Macon, GA  
218th Separate Infantry Brigade* Newberry, SC Elements in Iraq  
17th Field Artillery Brigade Fort Sill, OK Iraq  
75th Field Artillery Brigade Fort Sill, OK Fort Sill, OK  
212th Field Artillery Brigade Fort Sill, OK Fort Sill, OK  
214th Field Artillery Brigade Fort Sill, OK Fort Sill, OK  
21st Cavalry Brigade Fort Hood, TX Fort Hood, TX  
31st Air Defense Artillery Brigade Fort Bliss, TX Fort Bliss, TX  
V Corps Heidelberg, Germany Heidelberg, Germany  
173rd Airborne Brigade Vicenza, Italy Vicenza, Italy Alerted for Afghanistan?
1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) Wurzburg, Germany Iraq  
1st Brigade Fort Riley, KS Fort Riley  
2nd Brigade Schweinfurt, Germany Iraq  
3rd Brigade Vilseck, Germany Iraq  
4th Brigade Katterbach, Germany Iraq  
1st Armored Division Wiesbaden, Germany Wiesbaden, Germany  
1st Brigade Friedburg, Germany Friedburg, Germany  
2nd Brigade Baumholder, Germany Baumholder, Germany  
3rd Brigade Fort Riley, KS Fort Riley, KS Alerted for deployment with 3rd ID?
4th Brigade Hanau, Germany Hanau, Germany  
41st Field Artillery Brigade Babenhausen, Germany Babenhausen, FRG?  
11th Aviation Regiment Illesheim, Germany Illesheim, Germany  
12th Aviation Brigade Giebelstadt, Germany Giebelstadt, Germany  
69th Air Defense Artillery Brigade Giebelstadt, Germany Giebelstadt, Germany  
XVIII Airborne Corps Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC HQ Will Deploy to Iraq in Fall 2004.
1st Battalion, 509th Airborne Infantry Battalion Fort Polk, LA Iraq Elements in Iraq
2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment Fort Polk, LA Fort Polk, LA Scheduled to Fort Lewis, WA and convert to the Stryker.
11th Armored Cavalry Regiment (-) Fort Irwin, CA Elements in Iraq.  
3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized) Fort Stewart, GA Fort Stewart, GA Will control 256th Brigade, and 3BDE1AD.
1st Brigade Combat Team Fort Stewart, GA Fort Stewart, GA  
2nd Brigade Combat Team Fort Stewart, GA Fort Stewart, GA  
3rd Brigade Combat Team Fort Benning, GA Fort Benning, GA  
4th Brigade Combat Team Fort Stewart, GA Fort Stewart, GA  
Aviation Brigade Fort Stewart, GA Fort Stewart, GA  
10th Infantry Division (Light) (-) Fort Drum, NY Afghanistan  
1st Brigade Fort Drum, NY Fort Drum, NY  
2nd Brigade Fort Drum, NY Iraq  
4th Brigade Fort Polk, LA Fort Polk, LA Forming in 2005.
10th Aviation Brigade Fort Drum, NY Iraq  
82nd Airborne Division Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
1st Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
2nd Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC Alerted for Afghanistan?
3rd Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
Aviation Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
101st Airborne Division Fort Campbell, KY Fort Campbell, KY Converting to new BCT Organization
1st Brigade Fort Campbell, KY Fort Campbell, KY
2nd Brigade Fort Campbell, KY Fort Campbell, KY
3rd Brigade Fort Campbell, KY Fort Campbell, KY
101st Aviation Brigade (Attack) Fort Campbell, KY Fort Campbell, KY
159th Aviation Brigade (Air Assault) Fort Campbell, KY Fort Campbell, KY
18th Artillery Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC Elements in Afghanistan
18th Aviation Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC Alerted for Iraq
229th Aviation Brigade Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
108th Air Defense Artillery Brigade Fort Bliss, TX Fort Bliss, TX  
32nd Army Air and Missile Defense Command Fort Bliss, TX Fort Bliss, TX  
11th Air Defense Artillery Brigade Fort Bliss, TX Fort Bliss, TX  
35th Air Defense Artillery Brigade Fort Bliss, TX Fort Bliss, TX  
8th US Army Seoul, South Korea Seoul, South Korea  
2nd Infantry Division Camp Red Cloud, SK Camp Red Cloud, SK  
1st Brigade Camp Casey, SK Camp Casey, SK  
2nd Brigade Camp Hovey, SK Iraq  
3rd Brigade Fort Lewis, WA Fort Lewis, WA  
Aviation Brigade Camp Stanely, SK Camp Stanely, SK  
6th Cavalry Brigade (Air Combat) Pyongtaek, South Korea Pyongtaek, South Korea  
17th Aviation Brigade      
US Army Pacific Fort Shafter, HI Fort Shafter, HI  
172nd Separate Infantry Brigade (Light) Fort Wainwright, AK Fort Wainwright, AK  
196th Infantry Brigade Fort Shafter, HI Fort Shafter, HI  
25th Infantry Division (Light) Schofield Barracks, HI Afghanistan  
1st Brigade Fort Lewis, WA Iraq  
2nd Brigade Schofield Barracks, HI Iraq Will convert to Stryker upon return from Iraq
3rd Brigade Schofield Barracks, HI Afghanistan  
Aviation Brigade Wheeler Army Airfield, HI Afghanistan  
Army Special Operations Command Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
1st Special Forces Group (Airborne) Fort Lewis, WA Fort Lewis, WA  
3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne) Fort Bragg, NC Elements in Afghanistan  
5th Special Forces Group (Airborne) Fort Campbell, KY Elements in Iraq/Horn of Africa/Afghanistan  
7th Special Forces Group (Airborne) Fort Bragg, NC Fort Bragg, NC  
10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) Fort Carson, CO Fort Carson, CO  
19th Special Forces Group (Airborne) Draper, UT Elements in Iraq/Afghanistan  
20th Special Forces Group (Airborne) Birmingham, AL Elements in SWA  
75th Ranger Regiment Fort Benning, GA Fort Benning, GA  
1st BN, 75th Rangers Hunter Army Airfield, GA Hunter Army Airfield, GA  
2nd BN, 75th Rangers Fort Lewis, WA Afghanistan  
3rd BN, 75th Rangers Fort Benning, GA Fort Benning, GA  
National Guard Units      
27th Separate Infantry Brigade (Light)* Syracuse, NY Syracuse, NY  
29th Separate Infantry Brigade (Light)* Honolulu, HI Honolulu, HI Alerted, Deploys to Iraq in FEB 2005, relieving 81st BDE
31st Separate Armored Brigade Northport, AL Northport, AL  
32nd Infantry Brigade Madison, WI Madison, WI Will become an enhanced Brigade in 2006.
53rd Separate Infantry Brigade (Light) Tampa, FL Tampa, FL Alerted for Afghanistan in 2005?
76th Separate Infantry Brigade (Light) Indianapolis, IND Afghanistan Will train elements of the Afghanistan Army.
81st Separate Infantry Brigade (Mechanized)* Seattle, WA Iraq Departs in Feb 2005, relieved by 29th BDE
92nd Separate Infantry Brigade (Light) Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico  
116th Cavalry Brigade* Boise, ID Deploying, Elements in Iraq?  
155th Separate Armored Brigade* Tupelo, MS Tupelo, MS Alerted
207th Infantry Group (Scout) Fort Richardson, AK Fort Richardson, AK Elements Alerted for Iraq
256th Separate Infantry Brigade (Mechanized)* Lafayette, LA Iraq  
278th Armored Cavalry Regiment* Knoxville, TN Deploying Iraq  
28th Infantry Division Harrisburg, PA Harrisburg, PA  
2nd Brigade Washington, PA Washington, PA  
55th Armored Brigade Scranton, PA Scranton, PA  
56th Infantry Brigade Philadelphia, PA Philadelphia, PA  
28th Aviation Brigade Annville, PA Annville, PA  
29th Infantry Division (Light) Fort Belvoir, VA Fort Belvoir, VA  
1st Brigade Staunton, VA Staunton, VA  
3rd Infantry Brigade Pikesville Military Reservation, Md Pikesville Military Reservation, Md  
26th Infantry Brigade Springfield, MA Springfield, MA  
29th Aviation Brigade Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD  
34th Infantry Division (-) Rosemont, MN Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan Detachments all over the place.
1st Armored Brigade Stillwater, MN Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan
2nd Infantry Brigade Boone, Iowa Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan
34th AVN Brigade ST Paul, MN Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan
35th Infantry Division (-) Fort Leavenworth, KS Fort Leaveworth, KS  
66th Infantry Brigade Decatur, IL Decatur, IL  
149th Armor Brigade Louisville, KY Louisville, KY  
35th AVN Brigade Warrensburg, MO Warrensburg, MO  
38th Infantry Division Indianapolis, IN Bosnia, Kosovo, Sinai Elements of the Division taking control of KFOR.
2nd Brigade Kokomo, IN Kokomo, IN
37th Armored Brigade Akron-Canton, OH KFOR
46th Infantry Brigade Wyoming, MICH Wyoming, MICH
38th AVN Brigade Shelbyville, IN Shelbyville, IN
40th Infantry Division (Mech) Los Alamitos, CA Los Alamitos, CA  
1st Infantry Brigade Long Beach, CA Long Beach, CA  
2nd Armored Brigade San Diego, CA San Diego, CA  
3rd Armored Brigade Modesto, CA Modesto, CA  
40th AVN Brigade Fresno, CA Fresno, CA  
42nd Infantry Division Troy, NY Troy, NY Division HQ, will control 2 Brigades of the 3rd ID, the 116th Brigade, and the 278th "ACR.
3rd Armored Brigade Buffalo, NY Buffalo, NY  
50th Infantry Brigade Fort Dix, NJ Fort Dix, NJ  
86th Armored Brigade Montpelier, VT Montpelier, VT  
42nd AVN Brigade Patchogue, NY Patchogue, NY  
36th Infantry Division Austin, TX Austin, TX  
2nd Armored Brigade Fort Worth, TX Fort Worth, TX  
3rd Armored Brigade Dallas, TX Dallas, TX  
36th Infantry Brigade Houston, TX Houston, TX  
36th Aviation Brigade Austin, TX Austin, TX  
45th Field Artillery Brigade Enid, OK Enid, OK  
54th Field Artillery Brigade Virginia Beach, VA Virginia Beach, VA  
57th Field Artillery Brigade Milwaukee, WI Milwaukee, WI  
103rd Field Artillery Brigade Providence, RI Providence, RI  
113th Field Artillery Brigade Greensboro, NC Greensboro, NC  
115th Field Artillery Brigade Cheyenne, WY Cheyenne, WY  
130th Field Artillery Brigade Topeka, KS Iraq?  
125th Field Artillery Brigade Sedalia, MO Sedalia, MO  
138th Field Artillery Brigade Lexington, KY Lexington, KY  
142nd Field Artillery Brigade Sioux Falls, SD Sioux Falls, SD  
151st Field Artillery Brigade Sumter, SC Sumter, SC  
153rd Field Artillery Brigade Phoenix, AZ Phoenix, AZ  
169th Field Artillery Brigade Aurora, CO Aurora, CO  
196th Field Artillery Brigade Chattanooga, TN Chattanooga, TN  
197th Field Artillery Brigade Manchester, NH Manchester, NH  
631st Field Artillery Brigade Grenada, MS Grenada, MS  
32nd Air Defense Artillery Command Orlando, FL Orlando, FL  
111th Air Defense Artillery Brigade Albuquerque, NM Albuquerque, NM Training as Light Infantry and alerted for overseas duty?
263rd Air Defense Artillery Command Anderson, SC Anderson, SC  
66th Aviation Brigade Fort Lewis, WA Fort Lewis, WA  
63rd Aviation Group (Lift) Frankfort, KY Frankfort, KY  
185th Aviation Group (Lift) Jackson, MS Iraq  
211th Aviation Group (Attack) West Jordan, UT Afghanistan?  
385th Aviation Group (Attack) Phoenix, AZ Phoenix, AZ  
449th Aviation Group (Lift) Kinston, NC Kinston, NC  
Army Reserve Divisions      
75th Divisin (Trainng Support) Houston, TX Houston, TX  
78th Divisin (Training Support) Edison, NJ Edison, NJ  
80th Division (Institutional Training) Richmond, VA Richmond, VA  
84th Division (Institutional Training) Milwaukee, WI Milwaukee, WI  
85th Division (Training Support) Fort Sheridan, IL Fort Sheridan, IL  
87th Division (Training Support) Birmingham, AL Birmingham, AL  
91st Division (Training Support) Camp Roberts, CA Camp Roberts, CA  
95th Division (Institutional Training) Oklahoma City, OK Oklahoma City, OK  
98th Division (Institutional Training) Rochester, NY Rochester, NY Elements Alerted for Iraq
100th Divisin (Institutional Training) Richmond, VA Richmond, VA  
104th Divisin (Institutional Training) Vancouver Barracks, WA Vancouver Barracks, WA  
108th Division (Institutional Training) Charlotte, NC Charlotte, NC  

___________________________________________

"You might like Rumsfeld if you want a CPA running the occupation rather then the military..."

A CPA is fine with me...though I was unaware that the current SecDef was an accountant. However, as long as he is a civilian, conservative, neocon I would be alright with his vocation.

"You might Rumsfeld like Rumsfeld if you reject the most professional advice on a subject and then act like a baby cry about being wrong...."

It would appear that this thread was started as a result of the Army crying...not the SecDef or the President.

"You might like Rumsfeld if you like 500 casualties a month ..."

I did not know we had achieved that level. Regardless, soldiers die. It is their burden. You wont find me doing alot of handwringing over it....even if it were 5,000 a month. That's war bro.

"Youmight like Rumsfeld because you are wrong also!"

I'd venture a guess that there are 1000 posters over at DU & LP that would agree with you. Replace Rumsfeld with Downing!

25 posted on 01/08/2005 5:34:53 PM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ProudVet77
If this memo was not meant to be leaked it could have been done 1:1 with Rumsfeld. If our top people can't communicate without the newspapers printing the memos we're in deep doo doo. Unless of course the leak was intentional.

I have a feeling that the general probably made Rumsfeld aware of the situation verbally, was rebuffed, and decided to go public.

26 posted on 01/08/2005 5:52:37 PM PST by SauronOfMordor (We are going to fight until hell freezes over and then we are going to fight on the ice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
What we would like to do and what is realistically acceptable to the majority of American people are two different things.

On 9-12, President Bush could have done or asked for anything and got it. He chose not much, the partial mobilization orders for the Guard and Reserves expire next year, what's your plan hero? Mobilize the guard for another 5 years and hope for the best? Pray that our 20 year old equipment holds up? Pray to Mecca?

I guess you give Rumsfeld a pass on letting the navy give away secrets?

You cannot approach my service.

I somehow doubt that ....

A CPA is fine with me...

Civilian Provisional Authority that reported directly to Rumsfeld ...another concept error

Manpower is not the silver bullet, get over it.

You sure are generous with other people's lives.

I did not know we had achieved that level. Regardless, soldiers die. It is their burden. You wont find me doing alot of handwringing over it....even if it were 5,000 a month. That's war bro.

Learn to read. 10,000+ you do the math .... I hope you don't lead any American soldiers .... I'd relieve you in a second.

There was absolutely no way [and still is] that an Army officer will take that post under GW. Do you honestly think the appointment is the SecDefs call? Brother wake up. Get this through your head, the Army is in the dog house....period. Not because the SecDef says so... but because the President of the United States saw what they did under Clinton.

Boy you really are clueless.

I'd prolly need an example of his micromanagement.

We can start with his refusal to sign deployment orders to Operation Iraqi Freedom without reading them all ....

Nah, I like our manpower as it sits right now...

Rumsfeld only missed the mark by a factor of 4 which is better then you.

27 posted on 01/08/2005 8:54:58 PM PST by Yasotay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Yasotay
"On 9-12, President Bush could have done or asked for anything and got it."

Yeah! He could have invaded every square inch of the middle east with magic soldiers baring bibles and all would have been right with the World.

"The partial mobilization orders for the Guard and Reserves expire next year"

Uhh yeah. I'm sure that has the President boxed in.

"Pray that our 20 year old equipment holds up?"

The Sky is falling. /smirk

"I guess you give Rumsfeld a pass on letting the navy give away secrets?"

Yeah, I approved of his secret plan to export nuclear and missile technology to Chin...err...wait a minute, that happened under the previous SecDef. My bad.

"Civilian Provisional Authority that reported directly to Rumsfeld ...another concept error"

Forgive me for not following your meandering negascreed.

"You sure are generous with other people's lives."

It is what it is. Reality sucks when your perspective does not line up with it.

"Learn to read. 10,000+ you do the math .... I hope you don't lead any American soldiers .... I'd relieve you in a second."

I'll keep that in mind.

"We can start with his refusal to sign deployment orders to Operation Iraqi Freedom without reading them all."

God forbid! The Man did his job. Well, that just aint gonna work. :o)

"Rumsfeld only missed the mark by a factor of 4 which is better then you."

Cool.

28 posted on 01/08/2005 9:33:15 PM PST by VaBthang4 ("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson