Small Wars Journal

Pentagon’s Proposed Cuts to Ground Forces

Fri, 03/07/2014 - 12:20pm

Pentagon’s Proposed Cuts to Ground Forces: Not as Bad as You Might Think (For Now)… By Janine Davidson, Council on Foreign Relations

… I am sympathetic to the critics’ arguments that we cannot wish away the need for robust and ready ground forces. But considering the numbers in historical and strategic perspective, and assuming the Army is not forced to cut more soldiers due to sequestration (a big gamble), this round of cuts does not seem quite as dramatic…

Read on.

Comments

Hammer999

Wed, 03/19/2014 - 12:09am

We were then and are now too small. Anyone remember when the Infantry had 4 MOS's? Then we made it two. Why? Because we couldn't keep the back of those Bradley's full. So we took light guys (who liked being light) and made them fill them. Manning is SO screwed up it isn't even funny. Special duties eat into personnel. If they are needed why not add those seats?

If we stopped spending 5 billion on a barely functional uniform, stopped spending 100 mil on assault rifles we were never going to get etc. etc. and spent our defense dollars better we could keep all our troops and add to fill those slots. But we don't and it has become a way to ensure that the senior brass and their lackey's get over paid jobs when they retire.

Luddite4Change

Fri, 03/07/2014 - 9:10pm

The SOF is included in each services end strength numbers. Also, the top line SOF number is inclusive of both active duty and reserve personnel, so your confusion is justified.

TheCurmudgeon

Fri, 03/07/2014 - 2:01pm

OK, I have been confused by this for the last few days. Here is the way MS Davidson states the facts:

"Cutting the army by about 19 percent seems severe; until one considers that the Army has actually grown by about 14 percent in the last ten years. There were 490,000 soldiers serving on active duty at the start of the Iraq “surge” in 2006, about the same in 2001. Reducing to 450,000 after over a decade of fighting is a net reduction of 40,000. This 8 percent cut will still bite, but it is quite small compared to the 35-50 percent drops that took place after other big wars.

Considering SOF and the Marine Corps: While the regular army will have at least 40,000 fewer troops compared to 2001 levels, some of this will be offset by the dramatic growth in Special Operations Forces (SOF), which will have grown by more than 35,000 since 2001 (from 33,000 to 69,700)."

So, are the 69,000 SOF forces included in the 450,000 active Army numbers or will the active duty Army (which I assume includes SOF elements like Green Berets) be something more than 450K?