Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: Should you merge Advisors with PRT's?

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #9
    Council Member TROUFION's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    212

    Default A new look

    Ok,

    I really appreciate the discussion. In particular the organizational theory vs. reality.

    Now I'll alter the question just a bit. Again referring to the Bing's article. Relook this idea as a means to get the most from the least. If by FY2009 we have to be drawn down to 50% of the forces say around 80k as the Bing's discuss would a level of 'desperation' allow for stranger bedfellows?

    In my proposal I was not placing the forces all in one fortress compound. It would be an administrative idea bent on keeping forces flexible, and perhaps it would be better to have liaison officers for advisor groups with the PRT's.

    That said what structure would allow us to achieve maximum flexibility (suspend what you know of PRT and MTT/Advisor right now) with a reduced footprint of 80k on the ground. This could be a reality and the idea of brigades, regt combat teams and full battalions operating alone and unafraid will become a rarity. Advisors and PRT will have the preponderance of force on the ground for all SSTR components. In other words there may not be much choice other than to make it fit. Either by design or by accident.
    Last edited by TROUFION; 05-30-2007 at 01:50 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •