Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Paramilitary Forces and Reserves Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: National Guard going to Iraq for occupation duty?
Shaka of Carthage    6/29/2003 6:35:46 PM
I’m posting this in the Iraq and Paramilitary categories, since I’m not sure how many of you check both sections. Also, let me briefly explain the Marine terms so you are not confused. MEF is the Marine Expeditionary Force. It’s a Marine division, Marine Air Wing and support units. MEB is a Marine Expeditionary Brigade, being a Marine Regiment, equivalent air and support units. MEU is a Marine Expeditionary Unit, being a Marine Battalion, equivalent air and support units. The US has a problem in Iraq, that hasn’t really been talked about. We have run out of troops and this is going to cause some problems for occupation duty. US Army has 10 active divisions, 2 Armored Cavalry Regiments and 2 Independent Brigades (11.3 divisions). US Marines have 3 active divisions in 3 MEFs. Btw, I am not sure about the 1st ID and I can’t find where the 3rd Brig of the 25th ID is, so if you have that information, I would appreciate the update. We sure could use some “Shaka Dragoons” to chase the Taliban across the Pakistan border right about now (hint, hint). WHERE ARE THEY NOW? United States (4 divs) 1st Cav, 10th Mtn (2 Brigs), 25th ID (2 Brigs), 1 Brig 82nd AB, 172nd (Alaska) 3 Stryker Brigades: 1 from 2nd ID, 1 from 25th ID, 1 from 10th Mtn. The 4th Stryker Brigade (2nd ACR) is stuck in Iraq and the 5th Stryker Brigade is Nat’l Guard. Peacekeeping in Yugo? (1 div) 1st ID Afghanistan (.3 div) 1 Brig of 82nd AB Korea (.6 div) 2nd ID (2 Brigs) Iraq (5.3 divs) 3rd ID, 4th ID, 1 Brig of 82nd AB, 101st AA, 1st AD, 2nd ACR, 3rd ACR, 173rd AB Brig. British have about a division in Iraq as well. Marines (we are, after all, in the era of “jointness”) Less than a division left in the I MEF that is still in Iraq. II MEF has a couple of MEUs afloat in the Atlantic. The II MEB I think has been stood down (used to be in Iraq). III MEF is in the Pacific, backup for Korea, as well as providing the Pacifc MEUs. We have 7.3 Army divisions deployed. Where are the replacements for rotation coming from? One of the 10th Mtn Brigades will replace the 82nd Brig in Afghanistan soon. 1st Cav is getting “digitized” and along with the 172nd Brig is the backup for Korea if there are problems there. I’m not sure, but I think the 2 brigades of the 25th are the rotation units for the 2nd ID brigades. That leaves 5 brigades, 1 from 82nd, 1 from 10th Mtn, and the 3 Stryker Brigades for Iraq. Ignoring the Stryker Brigade already scheduled for Iraq, that’s 1.6 divisions available for rotation. Also the 2nd Marine Division in the II MEF could be used. Poland is sending a Division to arrive in Iraq in July. I would assume that would relieve the 3rd ID, which have been there the longest (and where supposed to go home when the 1st AD arrived). Ukraine is sending 2000 troops, Spain ? and India a division? That would allow another div or so to go home. That leaves me with 3.3 divisions in Iraq that the US needs to rotate and replace. Some unlucky unit among those 3.3 is going be in Iraq almost 2 years before being relieved unless some changes are made soon. Not to mention, the good ole “individual replacement system” will start having to send green weenies directly to Iraq once they get done with their training. What kind of changes can we make? There is the usual, like building up the Iraq police force. Want to get real creative, you could almost overnight, reconstitute the Iraq Army divisions. The equipment and manpower is already there, and we are paying them anyway. It would also counter the “Army” approach offered below. The “Army” Solution The 24th and 7th Infantry Divisions (National Guard) are going to be activated for occupation duty in Iraq. There are eight (8) other NG divisions, but some of those HQ units are already doing peacekeeping duties, as well as some of the personnel from the units. The 24th and 7th are the ones that have active Army headquarters. It doesn’t have combat support and service support units, but worse case you could scratch them together from existing ad hoc units. It will take about three (3) to six (6) months to get them ready. But if you just concentrate on the “peacekeeping” aspects of the mission, three (3) months is not out of the question. You could even send company and battalion sized units overseas sooner if you had to. But talk about a political cost. Especially, since this would validate the “Army” viewpoint that it doesn’t have enough manpower, making the Rumsfield viewpoint “wrong”. I welcome your comments.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3   NEXT
AlbanyRifles    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... AlbanyRifles   7/1/2003 12:17:36 PM
Roger. And I know where you are going with this and I do not disagree with you. BTW, on a another thread, you thanked me for "passionately defending your position." or words to that effect. You said you thought you were a raging a$$hole or something. I didn't say I didn't also think you are a raging a$$hole! :-)
 
Quote    Reply

Shaka of Carthage    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... AlbanyRifles   7/1/2003 12:39:33 PM
ROFLOL! That would be "arrogant a$$hole". And you're right, you never did say I wasn't one! :)
 
Quote    Reply

Shaka of Carthage    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   7/1/2003 12:50:20 PM
Statements where made (6/30) by the DoD that there could be third international division sized unit in Iraq in the future. One is Polish, the second one is British led. I guess that must be where the Spanish and Ukraine forces are going. I would also assume it would relive the British forces in Iraq currently. Want to bet that third division will be the Indian one? US has been talking to more than 20 nations, since March. The "official" rotation plan will be available in mid-July. While there are no pending requests for additional troops (ie no NG), it was very carefully worded, and future requests were not excluded. Over the next few weeks, I'm sure there will be "unconfirmed" sources who will explain what the statements really mean. Not to mention "leaks" to show how the DefSec is wrong. Gotta love those politicians, even the ones wearing uniforms. DefSec Rumsfield is also not please with references to Iraq being another Vietnam, nor is Iraq a "guerrilla war". If you watch him on C-Span, he seems a bit touchy about it. Someone should ask him the conditions in Iraq today don't justify retired Gen Shinski's position about the number of troops required. Of course, whoever asks that, won't get invited back.
 
Quote    Reply

macawman    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   8/4/2003 9:09:57 PM
"The two brigades are the 30th Infantry Brigade from North Carolina and the 39th Infantry Brigade from Arkansas. The 30th Infantry Brigade will be augmented with an infantry battalion from the 27th Infantry Brigade of New York. The 39th Infantry Brigade will be augmented with an infantry battalion from the 41st Infantry Brigade of Oregon. The two brigades are expected to arrive in Iraq some time between February and April of 2004. The brigades will spend six months in Iraq, and before that will have six months to get ready (lots of training.) Thus the total active duty will be one year. The National Guard Enhanced Separate Brigades were originally organized so they would be ready for combat within 90 days of activation. " Source: HTMW.
 
Quote    Reply

Shaka of Carthage    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   8/5/2003 3:59:39 PM
I've actually got the presentation the DoD gave. The Power Point displays look very nice. No wonder they can't get any real work done there. :) The interesting thing, is that the NG "enhanced" brigades, based on the training time, are not being used for a combat role, rather they are being used for a peacekeeping role. On other topics here, we talked about how the NG would be the best at the peacekeeping role. But the thinking was more in a "composite" type unit that was put together from volunteers. The fact that they are going to use "enhanced" brigades was something I didn't even consider. But its obvious. Should have thought of it. I also find it very interesting that they feel the need to attach a battalion to each brigade. I wonder if they need the extra battalion as a maneuver element, or are they just using it as a holding placed for personnel. Sorta like a brigade "training" battalion.
 
Quote    Reply

bayonetbrant    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   10/2/2003 9:27:56 AM
>>The 24th and 7th are the ones that have active Army headquarters. It doesn’t have combat support and service support units, but worse case you could scratch them together from existing ad hoc units.<< the eSB's in the 7th and 24th are more robust that the typically Active Duty BDE. In a division, the DISCOM keeps the FSBs, which are parcelled out when the war starts, ditto with DIVARTY and the DS ARTY BNs. The ENG BDE used to keep the ENG BNs, but that's been phased out so that the ENG BNs belong to the BDEs now (or is in progress...) The typical eHSB has: 3 line BNs (mix of tank/mech, or all light in light BDEs) 1 FSB 1 ENG BN 1 DS ARTY BN 1 MI CO 1 CAV TRP 1 MP PLT at BDE HQ about the only DIV slice they don't have is the AVN, b/c most states keep the AVN centralized to support state-wide missions. In short, if the 24th put everything together, they'd only have to come up with: 1 GS SPT BN 1 GS ARTY BN (usually MLRS) 2 AirCav TRPs 2 AVN BNs and some signal/ADA support They would need to somehow establish a DIVARTY and DISCOM HQ, but that would probably come from whatever ARNG BDE they raided for the GS ARTY BN and GS SPT BN. party on!
 
Quote    Reply

ChdNorm    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   10/23/2003 3:47:40 AM
Why werent they just organized originally to have all the service and support troops needed to fufill an actual deployment?
 
Quote    Reply

bayonetbrant    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   10/24/2003 5:25:50 AM
>>Why werent they just organized originally to have all the service and support troops needed to fufill an actual deployment<< There were built out of existing brigades into e-Brigades, and then later grouped into "divisions" because someone thought we needed a few ewxtra headquarters full of senior officers commanding absolutely nothing but paper. The 24th ID HQ is in Kansas, while the BDEs they nominally command are in NC, SC, and GA. There's no shortage of bases in those states where the 24th could go, but putting the 24ID in KS gave them some supervision over the 2 orphan BDEs at Ft Riley whose parent HQs are in Germany. It's a horse- paper drill, but it is what it is... The levels of organization that the e-BDEs are missing are those that aren't normally parcelled out to line BDEs in a division, such as the MSB and signal BN. Some of the pieces that aren't parcelled out have been split and divvied because the BDE would need those kind of assets if they ever deployed as a self-contained unit (CAV/MP). These BDEs deploy intact to NTC and train out there, and usually get their MSB and corps-level maint support from divisional units in the national guards of other states...
 
Quote    Reply

ChdNorm    RE:NG going to Iraq for occupation duty? ... Update   10/24/2003 5:51:06 AM
I understand why there isnt divisional service and support units in the brigades. Why isnt there specific divisional units though? Why take a MSB from another division to assign it to this unit? What happens when that other division needs its support troops? Also, Do they have any aviation assets at all?
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    Missions of eSBs & How They Get Support   10/24/2003 7:48:23 AM
eSBs were intended to be separate brigades assigned to corps to increase the amount of maneuver forces avaialable to a corps. For instance, a heavy separate brigade and an separate infantry brigade assigned to V Corps in Iraq could have given the corps commander another heavy brigade to reinforce the 101 ABN DIV or the 1 MAR DIV. It also would alllow the commander to use the SIB to either get more boots on the ground in the 3rd ID or else give some teeth to fight the battles to clear the MSRs after the heavy forces pass through. As for support, the organic support battalion of a separate brigade (heavy or light) normally will receive DS support from a corps support battalion from the COSCOM (just like an ACR does). It can receive it from an MSB but the MSB needs to be reinforced from the COSCOM. The reason an MSB from an NG division will go to NTC/JRTC with a separate brigade is to provide training to the MSB since NG divisional brigades don't get a chance to go to NTC as often as the SIBs/HSBs. And even then, the units prefer to get an NG or AR Corps Support Battalion since that is more their mission. Aviation is not organic. They receive it from an NG division or corps aviaiton unit for the same reasons. As for the 24 ID & 7 ID, they are admin HQ, not a real division HQ which assist with training of the 3 each NG brigades. Mainly it allows FT Riley & FT Carson to keep a MG as post commander. If they didn't have a "division" they could only justify a 1 star.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics