Why not simply bring the 2 ID HQ from Korea to Ft Lewis? The fort has three brigades of 2 ID already there......or task the I Corps Deputy to be the "leadership mentor" conduit for the various BDEs on the installation?
Why not simply bring the 2 ID HQ from Korea to Ft Lewis? The fort has three brigades of 2 ID already there......or task the I Corps Deputy to be the "leadership mentor" conduit for the various BDEs on the installation?
Gute,
This is how the Army is transforming to become a flatter and more agile organization.What is the reason(s) for this?
All joking aside, I suspect the Corp HQs at Ft. Lewis (which isn't designed to manage BDEs) was overwhelmed with administrative tasks that was distracting from their mission.
And how is the situation differen then the one in Europe with V Corps and 4 BCTs?
Me thinks its a response to some bad PR regarding/about Lewis Soldiers.
I also think it is perhaps not the best solution...
If the kids are acting up, replacing Hall Monitors with School Resource Officers may give the appearance of an improvement but the real issue is inadequate performance by or power available to those Monitors. A better, long term and cheaper solution is to just make the Monitors do their job -- or, more accurately, allow them to do that...
What's the point of having a division structure at all? It was found to be wanting for motorised forces back in WW2. Makes no sense to fight as a division if you're motorised. Convoy length (duration of pass) alone should prove that.
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.
Bookmarks