Army, USMC to request increase in size

[Guest]

WP: Army, Marines to seek more troops

Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan cut into global readiness

By Ann Scott Tyson

The Washington Post

Updated: 5:54 a.m. ET Dec 13, 2006

The Army and Marine Corps are planning to ask incoming Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Congress to approve permanent increases in personnel, as senior officials in both services assert that the nation's global military strategy has outstripped their resources.

In addition, the Army will press hard for "full access" to the 346,000-strong Army National Guard and the 196,000-strong Army Reserves by asking Gates to take the politically sensitive step of easing the Pentagon restrictions on the frequency and duration of involuntary call-ups for reservists, according to two senior Army officials.

The push for more ground troops comes as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have sharply decreased the readiness of Army and Marine Corps units rotating back to the United States, compromising the ability of U.S. ground forces to respond to other potential conflicts around the world.

"The Army has configured itself to sustain the effort in Iraq and, to a lesser degree, in Afghanistan. Beyond that, you've got some problems," said one of the senior Army officials. "Right now, the strategy exceeds the capability of the Army and Marines."

This official and others interviewed for this report spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly about the matter.

The Army, which has 507,000 active-duty soldiers, wants Congress to permanently fund an "end strength," or manpower, of at least 512,000 soldiers, the Army officials said.

The Army wants the additional soldiers to be paid for not through wartime supplemental spending bills but in the defense budget, which now covers only 482,000 soldiers.

The Marine Corps, with 180,000 active-duty Marines, seeks to grow by several thousand, including the likely addition of three new infantry battalions. "We need to be bigger. The question is how big do we need to be and how do we get there," a senior Marine Corps official said.

At least two-thirds of Army units in the United States today are rated as not ready to deploy, as well as lacking in manpower, training and -- most critically -- equipment, according to senior U.S. officials and the Iraq Study Group report.

The two ground services estimate that they will need $18 billion a year to repair, replace and upgrade destroyed and worn-out equipment.

If another crisis were to erupt requiring a large number of U.S. ground troops, the Army's plan would be to freeze its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and divert to the new conflict the U.S.-based combat brigade that is first in line to deploy.

Beyond that, however, the Army would have to cobble together war-depleted units to form complete ones to dispatch to the new conflict -- at the risk of lost time, unit cohesion and preparedness, senior Army officials said.

Moreover, the number of Army and Marine combat units available for an emergency would be limited to about half that of four years ago, experts said, unless the difficult decision to pull forces out of Iraq were made.

‘Equipment and personnel shortfalls’

"We are concerned about gross readiness . . . and ending equipment and personnel shortfalls," said a senior Marine Corps official.

The official added that Marine readiness has dropped and that the Corps is unable to fulfill many planned missions for the fight against terrorism.

Senior Pentagon officials stress that the U.S. military has ample air and naval power that could respond immediately to possible contingencies in North Korea, Iran or the Taiwan Strait.

But if the conflict were to require a significant number of ground troops -- as in some scenarios such as the disintegration of Pakistan -- Army and Marine Corps officials made clear that they would have to scramble to provide them. "Is it the way we'd want to do it? No. Would it be ugly as hell? Yes," said one of the senior Army officials. "But," he added, "we could get it done."

The U.S. military has more than 140,000 troops in Iraq and 20,000 in Afghanistan, including 17 of the Army's 36 available active-duty combat brigades.

When Army and Marine Corps combat units return from the war zone, they immediately lose large numbers of experienced troops and leaders who either leave the force, go to school or other assignments, or switch to different units.

The depletion of returning units is so severe that the Marines refer to this phase as the "post-deployment death spiral."

Army officials describe it as a process of breaking apart units and rebuilding them "just in time" to deploy again.

Cuts in training time

Training time for active-duty Army and Marine combat units is only half what it should be because they are spending about the same amount of time in war zones as at home -- in contrast to the desired ratio of spending twice as much time at home as on deployment.

The U.S. military today could cobble together two or three divisions in an emergency -- compared with as many as six in 2001 -- not enough to carry out major operations such as overthrowing the Iranian government.

Unable to count on a significant troop withdrawal from Iraq, the Army seeks to ease the manpower strain by accelerating plans to have 70 active-duty and National Guard combat brigades available for rotations by 2011.

Next year, for example, the Army intends to bring two brigades on a training mission back into rotation. It is investing $36 billion in Guard equipment in anticipation of heavier use of the Guard.

[Guest nickcabral]

Increase the numbers? When was the last time somone tried to join the Army and was told, "Sorry but we're full". When I was in, the National Guard was the closest to making their yearly recruiting goals. The other services were way behind. The "push for more ground troops" should come in the form of better and more recruiting.

[Fex404 0]

These guys are so short staffed over there. and its really starting to show. From a statement from the pentagon - the navy is actually training a few groups to go releive and help the army and marines - looks like they need to send lots more and get this over with quicker, but then again - thats a decision for the people who have the intelligence - not me.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Fex404

[Guest]

sounds like the draft will be instituted again.

[Guest]

That article hits it pretty much on the head. We have soldiers and Marines going to the sandbox for the fourth and fifth time. A very important factor they left out is the catastrophic effect deployments have on families. One of the reasons they have so many people not renew their contract after a deployment is because of the loved ones at home. The deployment cycle used to be 6 there and 12 at home but now its almost down to 6 and 6, with some units deploying as long as 8 months (all from Navy/Marine Corps perspective). I believe the army does year long deployments (Can any one back that up?) So needless to say, the divorce rate is up over the last couple years. Our equipment and more importantly our personnel can barely keep up the OpTempo.

As for recruiting and drafts, its going to take a lot more desperate situation (i.e. another major front in one of the scenarios mentioned) to reinstitute the draft. People just need to sack up and do some time. Aristotle was a hoplite in his time. Volunteers for infantry usually isnt a problem (they tend to be the smartest and most motivated members of the service) but we need more support personnel. There is a niche for everyone inside the service. Instead of having our recruiters standing around high school cafeterias we should force them into classrooms to talk directly to the students about the opportunities available.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

The Marine Corps has been nearly over stretched for years. Being the smallest of all the branches and being majority offensive in nature, the deployment cycles are being to show their strain. An increase in size will allow better replacement of personnel in units. In past conflicts the marine corps operated with a 5th and 6th Marine Division. Currently they are still operating with the 3 active duty divisions and the 4th Marine Division that is the reserves.

[Guest]

Interesting article. P.S. there will not be another draft....you can get that thought out of your head. Never was in the service, but i know at least from the USMC standpoint (and ALS can correct me) is that the Corps simply isnt designed as an "occupying" force. Basically, they go in and kill the bad guys and turn it over to the Army and such to handle the tasks of occupation or nation building etc. Seeing that its being called on to occupy, secure and help build a nation its ability to react as a rapid reaction force is being strained - or so the Commandant had commented in the past few weeks. Hopefully this will all get hashed out with little political backlash.

[Guest]

66ALPHA, thats pretty much what the corps infantry does best....

[TimesUp 148]

Interesting article. P.S. there will not be another draft....you can get that thought out of your head. Never was in the service, but i know at least from the USMC standpoint (and ALS can correct me) is that the Corps simply isnt designed as an "occupying" force. Basically, they go in and kill the bad guys and turn it over to the Army and such to handle the tasks of occupation or nation building etc. Seeing that its being called on to occupy, secure and help build a nation its ability to react as a rapid reaction force is being strained - or so the Commandant had commented in the past few weeks. Hopefully this will all get hashed out with little political backlash.

←

They go in and kill bad guys and turn it over to the Army? What war have you been watching?

[Guest]

I'm just saying that the overall mission of the Corps is to be a decisive and destructive offensive force. It hasn't, at least traditionally, been tasked with occupying large portions of territory. During WW2 the Corps would "island hop" from island outpost to outpost, go in and wipe out the majority of the enemy and then they would be replaced by army units which would "clean up" and secure the island as a whole. Like i said, i never served, my father served 2 tours in Vietnam with the Corps and i had an uncle who fought in Korea....thats what i was always told.

[Fex404 0]

I know nobody is bashing or speaking bad about any branch, but it is never good to stereotype. Bottom line is we need to back these guys up out there -- and any talk about a draft is crazy.

[TimesUp 148]

I'm just saying that the overall mission of the Corps is to be a decisive and destructive offensive force. It hasn't, at least traditionally, been tasked with occupying large portions of territory. During WW2 the Corps would "island hop" from island outpost to outpost, go in and wipe out the majority of the enemy and then they would be replaced by army units which would "clean up" and secure the island as a whole. Like i said, i never served, my father served 2 tours in Vietnam with the Corps and i had an uncle who fought in Korea....thats what i was always told.

←

So you've been watching John Wayne movies lately. They are pretty good. CNN has had good coverage of the war in Iraq since day one of the ground war. I must of missed the part of where the Marines went in and killed all the bad guys and the the Army occupied.

As far as being a decisive and destructive force . Don't tell that to the guys of the 1st Infantry div. that there not. They might disagree with you.

[Guest]

I'm not knocking anyone, i think you misinterpreted my comments...just commenting to the situation in iraq and how its altered the USMCs general mission. Sorry if i offended you, it was completely and utterly unintentional.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Let's all relax. Each branch has their role and in recent conflicts they have taken part for the most part simultaneous. Some branches are just more efficient then others. The Marine Corps Expeditionary Units consistantly beat the Army Airborne divisions by 24-72 hours on deployment. Desert Storm, Marines and equipment were on the ground and dug in 48 hrs. prior to the 82nd Airborne's Advanced Party that was suppose to be first into Saud.

Just remember one thing "first to fight" and that has still held true. I may be biased, but I could go on all day. The funny hats have their job and we have our mission.

Fact is by doctrine 66alpha1 is correct. The army by numbers is an occupying force. Doesn't mean they aren't offensive, however their job is to also sit on the land once taken. Numbers that the Marine Corps doesn't have to be able to do. An army infantry division was assigned to hold any islands once taken by the Marine Corps in WW II.

To put it simply, the entire Marine Corps is special operations capable. That capability is being strained. When units were sent into Fallujah, who did they send? The Marines. Who is operating in the Sunni Triangle aka the triangle of death? The Marines. Who gets a nickname just about everywhere we fight? The Marines.

What did Iraqi military personnel call us from desert storm on? The angels of death. Anyone else have a nickname? Who commands tactical respect by just sitting offshore waiting to be sent in...Marines. Unless of course your the President and you part of the 1st MarDiv sitting there while our guys are pinned down after 2 helicopters crash. That is still a sore spot that many want retribution for. We don't leave any brothers behind, Marine, Soldier, Sailor or Airmen.

The Marine Corps may be coming up short on its recruiting mission, but that has always been a challenge, thank god we have been resistant to lowering standards that many other branches have. They have some but won't cost us in image or skill in later years. The Marine Corps often recruits itself, through honor, pride, toughness and the sharpest fu(king uniform known to man.

ALSFirefighter, MOS 2531, F/O, FAC, Enlisted Instructor Command and Control Systems School. Born on November 20th, 1992. Plt. 3105, I Co, 3rd Bn. Parris Island, SC.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

As far as anything else..this is often the Marines view of the world....

[Guest]

Thats a great picture!

[TimesUp 148]

Let's all relax.  Each branch has their role and in recent conflicts they have taken part for the most part simultaneous.  Some branches are just more efficient then others.    The Marine Corps Expeditionary Units consistantly beat the Army Airborne divisions by 24-72 hours on deployment.  Desert Storm, Marines and equipment were on the ground and dug in 48 hrs. prior to the 82nd Airborne's Advanced Party that was suppose to be first into Saud.

Just remember one thing "first to fight" and that has still held true.  I may be biased, but I could go on all day.  The funny hats have their job and we have our mission.

Fact is by doctrine 66alpha1 is correct.  The army by numbers is an occupying force.  Doesn't mean they aren't offensive, however their job is to also sit on the land once taken.  Numbers that the Marine Corps doesn't have to be able to do.  An army infantry division was assigned to hold any islands once taken by the Marine Corps in WW II. 

To put it simply, the entire Marine Corps is special operations capable.  That capability is being strained.  When units were sent into Fallujah, who did they send?  The Marines.  Who is operating in the Sunni Triangle aka the triangle of death? The Marines.  Who gets a nickname just about everywhere we fight?  The Marines.

What did Iraqi military personnel call us from desert storm on?  The angels of death.  Anyone else have a nickname?  Who commands tactical respect by just sitting offshore waiting to be sent in...Marines.  Unless of course your the President and you part of the 1st MarDiv sitting there while our guys are pinned down after 2 helicopters crash.  That is still a sore spot that many want retribution for.  We don't leave any brothers behind, Marine, Soldier, Sailor or Airmen.

The Marine Corps may be coming up short on its recruiting mission, but that has always been a challenge, thank god we have been resistant to lowering standards that many other branches have.  They have some but won't cost us in image or skill in later years.  The Marine Corps often recruits itself, through honor, pride, toughness and the sharpest fu(king uniform known to man.

ALSFirefighter, MOS 2531, F/O, FAC, Enlisted Instructor Command and Control Systems School.  Born on November 20th, 1992.  Plt. 3105, I Co, 3rd Bn.  Parris Island, SC.

←

No need for me to go on a rant...But your veiw is askew. Very impressive dd-214, why would you ever get out.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Askew? Of course my view is askew brother, lol. Everyone is putting in their sweat, blood and tears. We both know we could go back and forth, all in good fun. Fact is we all wear and fight for each other no matter what emblem is on our collars.

As far as staying in... wasn't a lifer. Knew I wasn't going to be about a 1/2 way through my enlistment. Got great experience for life and the confidence to be the instructor I am today. It was a great experience, I followed a family tradition on my own choice and I love being a Marine.

[Guest]

Speaking of draft.....

December 22, 2006

Selective Service to Test Draft Machinery

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 4:30 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Selective Service System is making plans to test its draft machinery in case Congress and President Bush need it, even though the White House says it doesn't want to bring back the draft.

The agency is planning a comprehensive test -- not run since 1998 -- of its military draft systems, a Selective Service official said. The test itself would not likely occur until 2009.

Scott Campbell, the service's director for operations and chief information officer, cautioned that the ''readiness exercise'' does not mean the agency is gearing up to resume the draft.

''We're kind of like a fire extinguisher. We sit on a shelf,'' Campbell told The Associated Press. ''Unless the president and Congress get together and say, 'Turn the machine on' ... we're still on the shelf.''

Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson prompted speculation about the draft Thursday when he told reporters in New York that ''society would benefit'' if the U.S. were to bring back the draft. Later he issued a statement saying he does not support reinstituting a draft.

The administration has for years forcefully opposed bringing back the draft, and the White House said Thursday that policy has not changed and no proposal to reinstate the draft is being considered.

The ''readiness exercise'' would test the system that randomly chooses draftees by birth date and its network of appeal boards that decide how to deal with conscientious objectors and others who want to delay reporting for duty, Campbell said.

The Selective Service will start planning for the 2009 tests next June or July, although budget cuts could force the agency to cancel them, Campbell said.

President Bush said this week he is considering sending more troops to Iraq and has asked Defense Secretary Robert Gates to look into adding more troops to the nearly 1.4 million uniformed personnel on active duty.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, increasing the Army by 40,000 troops would cost as much as $2.6 billion the first year and $4 billion after that. Military officials have said the Army and Marine Corps want to add as many as 35,000 more troops.

Recruiting new forces and retaining current troops is more complicated because of the unpopular war in Iraq. In recent years, the Army has accepted recruits with lower aptitude test scores.

In remarks to reporters, Nicholson recalled his own experience as a company commander in an infantry unit that brought together soldiers of different backgrounds and education levels ''in the common purpose of serving.''

Hearst Newspapers first reported the planned test for a story sent to its subscribers for weekend use.

The military drafted people during the Civil War and both world wars and between 1948 and 1973. Reincorporated in 1980, the Selective Service System maintains a registry of 18-year-old men, but call-ups have not occurred since the Vietnam War.