Monday, November 25, 2013

US Army heading towards smaller squads, lighter vehicles? Big mistake.

high speed roll on/roll off ship.

via DefenseNews.
During the service’s yearly sen­ior leader seminar Nov. 20, the Army’s top uniformed leadership for the first time called for a look at cutting the size of the squad from nine soldiers to as low as six, while reminding subordinates that the service is shrinking and likely won’t be able to afford new leap­ahead technologies in the near fu­ture.
And briefing slides referenced vehicles half the weight of the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV), which enjoys dwindling support among the brass.
Going smaller while focusing in­vestments on increasing the com­bat punch a small unit can bring to bear will “make us more afford­able, yet as capable” as the service is now, one leading general said. A key point is also to become faster and more expeditionary.
One senior leader said that in coming years, the Army will have to “reduce the size of our forma­tions but increase the capability of our formations. ...If we can be more effective with less people it will make us more expeditionary.”
A handful of reporters were al­lowed to sit in on the briefing un­der the condition that names not be used.
This talk about moving faster comes in response to the fact that the Army will primarily be a do­mestically based force in the com­ing years. The idea that rapid deployability to hot spots around the world will be a key to future conflicts is one that the Army is taking very seriously.
This new push has generated a new Army catchphrase: “Speed that matters.”
The thinking goes that speed can act as a deterrent to adversaries. The idea was also floated during the seminar that having a rapidly deployable force provides civilian leadership with more leverage and “decision space” in which to politi­cally exploit an adversary’s weak­ness.
Read the entire article and marvel at the stupidity, shortsightedness and lack of spine being shown by Army leadership.  The only thing that gives me hope is the knowledge that the Marine Corps isn't the only organization suffering from failed leaders.

Assuming that we are heading into a time period where we will be reacting to moves from bad actors or using Special Ops to shape future battlefields, I wonder why the idea is to replicate a hybrid Armored Airborne/Motorized Infantry.

The issue is and has always been transport.

The issue is and has always been the lack of acceptance by Army officials that transport by air is NOT delivering the benefits long promised.

The answer isn't to make squads smaller.

Not to make smaller, lighter more vulnerable vehicles.

The answer is to work with the US Navy and develop/deploy high speed roll on/roll off ships that can motor from the US to distant area quickly.   

Instead of doing the obvious, they would instead tinker once again with war winning formations just so they can be at the forefront of "change".  Change without purpose is stupid meddling.  Army leadership is meddling.