Could Army Add a New Division?

[flynlead]

It seems obvious to me and almost everyone in the military that more troops are needed to sustain our thinly stretched Army. Little effective change will happen until a new congress can be voted in next January. Wouldn't the most cost effective improvement be to add at least one light infantry division to the Army?

The current military budget for 2010 is 246 billion, of which 83 billion is being used for deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost to maintain one soldier there runs from estimates of $400K to $700K a year. One Pentagon estimate said that it only costs 1.2 billion a year to add 10,000 soldiers---but that seems low.

How hard would it be to add a rather spartan light infanty division, one based on the 10th Mountian Division? For 18,000 troops this might cost 7.2 billion a year, but that seems a worthwhile investment. Over the some 18 months to activate a division would there be enough officers and NCO's availible to run it without hurting the combat effectiveness of current units?

Does this idea hold water? Or should this money be better put to use building more "A-Teams" or different units?

[Green Light]

Here's the problem:


All those soldiers need a place to stay. So do their family members.
They need equipment that doesn't exist right now - weapons, radios, vehicles, etc
The equipment needs people to maintain them
The maintainers need a place to maintain the equipment
Those soldiers have to be trained; the increased load on training posts will require more trainers, more equipment, and facilities


New units' needs are very expensive. I think that was one of the reasons that the Army started looking at brigades vs divisions. There's not all the "overhead" that a division headquarters brings. And that overhead can be put into support for the brigades.

When they cut the Army the last time, that was probably the last time we'll see an Army of that size. You can see the dominoes that have to fall to expand.

Bottom line is always: $$$$$

[MtnGoat]

GreenLight.. Great Points.

With everything new this new brigade or division would need "STUFF" to fill the ranks with.

This is one of the probelms we currently have at the military "post" in OIF and OEF.

To many soldiers sitting on KAF, BAF, JBAD, HAF, ETC with no place to really work. On BAF, KAF, Kubal, Mosul and most "Big Bases" in theater. There are not enough computers, desk, Strikers, MRAPS, MATVs and seat for the people there to work. Then you have that the night shift poeple can't do anything becuase the daytime people are the control people so the night can't answer questions. (Bit off topic)

Standing up a new whatever; brigade or division will take getting the BASIC things that Greenlight pointed out. It's not just about the soldiers, Officers and NCOs to lead people. Its everything from buildings to rifles for each soldier and their families.

All new, Briagdes and new Bns are having this problem currently. The military, all Branches are having problems with replacing rifles, planes, vehciles, tanks, uniforms, body armor, etc. The bigger the items and the more costly it seems to take longer to replace that item.

Does the Army really need another brigade or division??

IMO - Current units are not manned fully. Amry can't fill the ranks so units don't have a fully manned of a Infantary Plt (Company) to the S1 or S4 to support it.

Maybe looking at money going to KBR, Dyncorps, L3 type contracts for stateside and OCONUS positions. Maybe taking that money and putting it to service members in the form of bonuses, larger pay raises, ETC Would cause for these shortages to be better filled. Will they be filled fuly? No. But all this front pocket money and contactor funding hurts units IMO.

Do we need Contactor.. Yes we do. But one other way could be to make contactor positions into the units themselves. I.E. Adding Covillian positions at the S1, S2, S2, S4 and S6 Shops. Some have done this, USASOC and Army MACOMs do. All of those Dyncorps and L3 contactors down range; may the be maintainers within units motor pools or electricians be within the units themselves and not contactors just down range.

Over the some 18 months to activate a division would there be enough officers and NCO's availible to run it without hurting the combat effectiveness of current units?

IMHO - No there wouldn't be enough officers and NCO's availible - not with deployments and recovery going. I don't see an military expansion while we are still deploying over 300K (+) service members a year. Yes, you will have small expansion, but not anything close to a new brigade or division.

Current manning and money will always drive this question(s).

[JJ_BPK]

This is one of the probelms we currently have at the military "post" in OIF and OEF.

To many soldiers sitting on KAF, BAF, JBAD, HAF, ETC with no place to really work. On BAF, KAF, Kubal, Mosul and most "Big Bases" in theater. There are not enough computers, desk, Strikers, MRAPS, MATVs and seat for the people there to work. Then you have that the night shift poeple can't do anything becuase the daytime people are the control people so the night can't answer questions.

(Bit off topic)



Bit Off Topic??

Maybe your point should be:

Bring home 25-50-100 k worth of do-nothing-excess-REMF-bodies in the AO??

:confused::confused::confused::confused:

[Peregrino]

Bit Off Topic??

Maybe your point should be:

Bring home 25-50-100 k worth of do-nothing-excess-REMF-bodies in the AO??

:confused:

There you go using your outside voice again. :rolleyes: Hasn't anybody ever explained to you that if it makes sense, don't get caught doing it?

[flynlead]

Thanks for the info. I just assumed the Army had sufficent equipment and maintenace in theater for the manpower availible. Also assumed current units were fully manned. Things should at least be better than when I was in 25 years ago working with aged Vietnam-era equipment that frequently broke.

My thoughts are that more "boots on the ground" are needed to win and hold ground as opposed to having the latest technology and more stuff. The Pentagon should certainly put more money towards ground troops and less towards projects like the Joint Strike Fighter given that the insurgent's air assests haven't amounted to much.

During the 1980's military build-up, they crammed 300 soldiers into my basic training battery that should have held half as many. I wonder if they are using this cost-saving strategy today.

[Utah Bob]

$$$$$$$$
Not rocket science.

[MtnGoat]

Bit Off Topic??

Maybe your point should be:

Bring home 25-50-100 k worth of do-nothing-excess-REMF-bodies in the AO??

:confused::confused::confused::confused:

Come on BPK, Those do-nothing-excess-REMF-bodies Do so much down range

So would they realy do any better working for a CONUS unit??

Now no outside voice again. LOL Love that - P

[incarcerated]

In 1991, we invaded Iraq with roughly 540,000 troops.

In 1993, we elected a Democrat POTUS who would stay for eight years, during which he conducted a massive “reduction of the Federal workforce.” His “reduction” saw the number of civilian Federal employees soar to record levels, while the entire net reduction was quietly taken out of the military. Carrying Democrat talking points, the MSM pondered what we would do with expensive, obsolete weapons systems like Trident submarines, and obsolete institutions like the CIA. Perhaps they could somehow be put into service to protect the Environment…?

In 2003, we invaded Iraq with roughly 248,000 troops.