You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
Gates to urge boosting US military by 92,000
2007-01-12
WASHINGTON - US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday he would recommend to President George W. Bush increasing the Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 troops over the next five years for the long-term fight against terrorism. “The emphasis will be on increasing combat capability,” Gates said at a White House news conference to detail Bush’s plan for changing course in the Iraq war.

In unveiling his strategy on Wednesday night to send more than 21,000 more troops to fight in Iraq, Bush said a permanent increase was needed for the two services. Gates proposed increasing the Army by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines.

The Army, which has had modest trouble meeting its recruiting goals in recent years but no longer, already has been authorized to boost the number of active-duty soldiers temporarily from 482,000 to a maximum of 512,000, although it has yet to reach that limit.
I do think we should have increased both services back in 2002, but this is good now.
Posted by:Steve White

#13  Note well that 'expansion' can only be done at a rate which can be handled both by the resources to conduct training [read - cadre and facilities] and the resources to sustain them [read - base facilities with the infrastructure to house, train, and sustain]. Any increase beyond the existing capacity to train means pulling cadre off the line and into the training base [organization, not installation]. You can always fill body bags in 30 days, but to train an effective soldier it takes up to two years. You can inject a certain amount of green troops in with units having good integrity, but there is a point where too many too fast undermines the effectiveness and starts generating casualties and not multiplying or even sustaining the combat effectiveness of those units.

Oh, and some of those base closure actions in the past decade are about to bite. Betcha there was no cost avoidance numbers generated on 'what if we have to expand the force structure again'.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2007-01-12 22:22  

#12  I think that if they reactivate a Marine division, it would be the 5th. (a division that was one of five Marine divisions(!) that assaulted Iwo Jima in February 1945) It would be a historic expansion.
Posted by: djh_usmc   2007-01-12 21:20  

#11  GolfBravoUSMC, I thought that the 4th Marine Division was the Marine Reserves comprised of the 23rd, 24th, and 25th Regiments. You think they might transfer the reserves to active duty?
Posted by: RWV   2007-01-12 15:46  

#10  that should be "He was finally"
Posted by: liberalhawk   2007-01-12 13:56  

#9  rumsfeld increased the number of brigade combat teams, using the same army end strength. We was finally presssured into a "temporary" increase in the army end strength - which the lates QDR envisioned dropping, The Gates proposal would make the temporary increase permanent, and add beyond that.

Its a completely different strategy.

Posted by: liberalhawk   2007-01-12 13:56  

#8  if they will reactivate the 4th Marine Division. Where would they base them? Twenty Nine Palms?

Maui? :>
Posted by: Shipman   2007-01-12 13:28  

#7  27,000 Additional Marines is about a Division plus support including Airwing. I wonder if they will reactivate the 4th Marine Division. Where would they base them? Twenty Nine Palms?

Maybe existing Divisions get much larger and with less frequent rotations of Regiments.
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2007-01-12 12:10  

#6  Well, Rumsfeld headed the Army growing by 2 divisions. Does this include those 2 divisions? or no?

We're looking at what? another 4 for army? and 3 for the Marines?
Posted by: Anon4021   2007-01-12 11:19  

#5  "I do think we should have increased both services back in 2002, but this is good now."

Maybe if we had Bob Gates as SecDef in 2002.

Excalib- One Democratic Senator (well he calls himself an Independent now) has come out foursquare behing the surge. Y'all know who he is.

At least some Dems who arent supporting the surge, are supporting the Army/USMC boost.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2007-01-12 10:23  

#4  After years of listening to Dhimmicrat pissing and moaning about needing "more boots on the ground" the 180 degree about face they have done now the President and his men are considering the idea is more than my stomach can take.

My only consolation is that Lincoln endured worse.
Posted by: Excalibur   2007-01-12 09:44  

#3  My first thought was, "And that the Pentagon will be upgrading to the first release of Windows Vista".
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-01-12 08:57  

#2  Why do I picture a seething Rumsfeld pounding his fists on the kitchen table?
Posted by: Besoeker   2007-01-12 08:40  

#1  Oh my gawd! That's going to make 'em squeal!
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2007-01-12 07:59  

00:00