[lbo-talk] "Only Two Active-Duty Divisions Available to Fight in Other Parts of the World"

Yoshie Furuhashi furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Sat Dec 6 09:30:10 PST 2003


***** Army Will Face Dip in Readiness 4 Divisions Need to Regroup After Iraq

By Vernon Loeb Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 6, 2003; Page A01

Four Army divisions -- 40 percent of the active-duty force -- will not be fully combat-ready for up to six months next year, leaving the nation with relatively few ready troops in the event of a major conflict in North Korea or elsewhere, a senior Army official said yesterday.

The four divisions -- the 82nd Airborne, the 101st Airborne, the 1st Armored and the 4th Infantry -- are to return from Iraq next spring, to be replaced by three others, with a fourth rotating into Afghanistan. That would leave only two active-duty divisions available to fight in other parts of the world.

Briefing reporters at the Pentagon, the official said the four returning divisions will be rated either C-3 or C-4, the Army's two lowest readiness categories, for 120 to 180 days after they return as vehicles and helicopters are overhauled and troops are rested and retrained.

C-3 means a division is capable of performing only some of its combat missions, and C-4 means a division needs additional manpower, training or equipment to fight a major regional war.

A fifth division, the 3rd Infantry, which returned from Iraq in August, is still not fully ready to return to combat, the official said.

While the Army had been using 120 days as its standard for "resetting" divisions returning from overseas deployments, overhauling the divisions returning from Iraq could take as long as 180 days because of the extreme weather in Iraq and the unprecedented magnitude of the planned troop rotation.

The four returning divisions will bring 650 helicopters, 5,700 tanks and other tracked vehicles and 46,000 wheeled vehicles with them, the official said. "This is not Hertz rent-a-car, where you drive [vehicles] for two years and you get rid of the fleet," he said. "We have to take good care of our tanks . . . and all the other equipment. Because we don't get to buy new." . . .

Earlier this week, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that they, along with Rumsfeld's staff, are still trying to determine whether the requirement for Iraq, which now stands at 130,000 soldiers, is a "spike" that will soon come down, or an ongoing commitment.

If it is a spike, they said, increasing the size of the Army may not be necessary.

Critics of the administration respond that even the most optimistic military commanders believe 50,000 or more U.S. troops will be needed in Iraq for three to five more years.

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40059-2003Dec5.html> & <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40059-2003Dec5_2.html>

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A40059-2003Dec5?language=printer> ***** -- Yoshie

* Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list