New Division HQs Coming to Fort Lewis
http://www.army.mil/article/78769/Se...Lewis_McChord/
What is the reason(s) for this? The article claims the need for an intermediate HQs between the BCTs and I Corps and not due to the incidents in Afghanistan. Maybe so, but could the change in leadership in North Korea have something to do with this change? Along with the shift of 9,000 Marines from Okinawa to Guam and the addition of 2,500 Marines to Australia - maybe this is just part of the new Pacific focused Air-Sea Battle concept.
I agree with both of you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
What's the point of having a division structure at all?
The US Army has fought at Brigade level in every war except the North African desert in WW II, Desert Storm and aspects of the initial move into Iraq -- again in the desert; only terrain where a Division makes any sense at all...
However, keeping the Division around is the only way to justify a slew of Major Generals. :rolleyes:
Might help with the independence aspect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
reed11b
How do you feel about MacGregors proposal to have brigades commnded by a BG? Would this help them have greater independence and less need for the old division structure?
Though a good part of the actual need for the Division is the CSS package and other support concerns, old habits die hard. That aspect of organizing and equipping hasn't been addressed, partly, I believe, to justify retaining the Division for those two button spaces... :rolleyes:
The Army has too many General Officers and yet it wants more for several reasons, good and bad. It would be better off IMO with fewer but that would be bureaucratically harmful and the bureaucracy, rightly or wrongly, is here to stay. :wry:
All things considered, the competence of the Bde Cdr should be the issue, not his rank. :o
development and streaming
Which of these statements and command structures is better arranged to provide a path that requires relevant experience and confirmed ability before promotion into either a command or a staff stream ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
reed11b
How do you feel about MacGregors proposal to have brigades commnded by a BG? Would this help them have greater independence and less need for the old division structure?
(Sub)Unit: OIC/CO, deputy/SNCO plus other
Platoon: LT, SGT
Company: MAJ, CAPT plus CSM and CQMSGT
Battalion: LTCOL, MAJ plus Adjudant (CAPT or MAJ), RSM, QM (CAPT) & IO (LT or CAPT)
Battalion group: COL, LTCOL plus etc
Brigade: BRIG, COL plus etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
I've also heard calls for majors as Coy leaders. I don't get it - where are those future majors supposed to reach the experience majors have now if they didn't serve as Coy leaders during their time as Captain?
(Sub)Unit: OIC/CO, XO plus/or SNCO
Platoon: LT, SGT
Company: CAPT, LT plus CSM and CQMSGT
Battalion: LTCOL, plus XO (MAJ or CAPT), RSM, QM (CAPT?) and IO (LT?)
Battalion group: as for battalion
Brigade: COL, LTCOL plus etc
chieftain types and circumstances
The knowledge, skills and traits of a military officer are the main determinants of how well such a ‘chieftain’ manages to command and direct a military unit and improve and conserve the resources of that unit and its personnel. A few seem to achieve well in most conflict and ‘peacetime’ circumstances. Many do less well but perform to a standard that is acceptable to whomever determines an officer’s fitness to continue in a given role. Still others may be better removed especially when the nature of a role undergoes substantial or rapid change.
It is difficult for any person to do well in all situations. History provides numerous instances in which charisma has been an exemplifier of successful leadership during an emergency or time of change. And probably just as many instances where a charismatic has overreached or otherwise failed during a more pedestrian period. The same applies for many other qualities and descriptors. Excluding dismissal due to failure, the corporate world provides everyday instances where the CEO or chair of a board is changed in preparation for or following a substantial change of policy or direction.
In the current era the military is routinely employed in non-military activities such as domestic and external emergency relief and humanitarian assistance. Put that together with man-management, training and exercise for conflict and the role of an officer is varied and complex. But a different set of complexities or at least changes in emphasis can develop rapidly. That applies especially when ‘peacetime’ activities change to involvement in a small or large armed conflict. And complexity can anyway increase substantially when superiors use modern communications technology to inject specific views and requirements in almost real-time.
Using gridiron as a model, the typical military establishment might obtain some benefit by developing a special teams or special players response to satisfy change of emphasis and change of role. But such deliberate preparation for contingencies would possibly be too testing and also corrosive of morale.
However, there are several distinctly different types of officer who may need to be otherwise juxtaposed or relegated during changing or challenging times. It might seem easy to briefly describe each of those officer types by using the richly nuanced nouns and adjectives available in English. For example, using the term ‘consensus seeker’ rather than the terse and more critical ‘equivocator’. Nonetheless there are too many shades of grey. So to avoid equivocation it seems preferable that each decriptor consist of a single word.
The spectrum for officers - as commanders/decision-makers rather than as a staff functionary - might be reduced to several types such as ‘ taskmaster, leader, politican, tutor, equivocator ’.
Using those or other single word descriptors, what is the main chiefly attribute needed by a Lieutenant, and separately by a Captain, and separately again by a Major in conflict circumstances ? And what single word descriptor would be appropriate for each of the other ranks up to Lieutenant General ?
Similarly what is the main chiefly attribute needed for each rank from Lieutenant to Lieutenant General in ‘peacetime‘ circumstances ?