An Airborne Expeditionary Unit?

[Rifleman]

[QUOTE=Ken White;29872]

I'm not a fan of the Division, any Division, I think they're an anachronism retained to justify GO slots -- of whom we have too many -- but given the current state of the world, I'd be inclined to go with six Separate parachute Bdes answering to an Airborne Corps for most -- which is what we now have. However, I'd up them to three Inf Bns plus the Cav Sqn.

I think that's Col. MacGregor's idea. That's way above the level I knew anything about (the way things worked just got sort of hazy for a young E-5 when you got above battalion level ) but I think he makes a sensible argument. He certainly articulates his position well.

Nor am I a fan of the Ranger Regiment (with all due apologies to denizens thereof, including Jorge and a few other friends... ). In fact, if you took those guys and spread them around...

I think your former Marineness is showing. Wasn't that the reason Raider Battalions were disbanded?

One caveat -- We need a SOCOM or something similar and their direct action capability and they need a significant deployable Intel and backup element. IMO, that should all be a joint operation and removed from the services --

CIA controlled perhaps?

I'm inclined to think the SF Gps should revert to the Army and concentrate on the UW / ID missions but some form of effort with that SOCOM would certainly be necessary -- that needs some thought and study. not by me, I can't affect anything; by the Army and SOCOM..

Again, it occurs to me that not all WWII OSS operatives were Army. Some were civilians. Should the CIA take over/handle all UW?