Replies

...they could use the Marine Corps as a perfect model.

Actually I think this is exactly what Rummy had in mind, but it won't work. The Army is not just the Marine Corps writ large. The Marines were always intended for expeditionary warfare in support of the Navy. Now they have adapted to a variety of mission quite well, but their TO&E still reflects that expeditionary nature. The Army has to meet a variety of roles as challenges change: right now there is no force on force threat, but in 10 years we might be up against China and we'll need experienced armor troops and those can't be made overnight.

I think you raise several excellent points, and I can't disagree with any of them. Having said that, it was interesting to watch the parallel advances of the 1 MEF and the V Corps toward Baghdad. Both were essentially engaging in a role traditionally handled and trained for by the Army. But clearly, the 1 MEF was up to the task, and accomplished its half of the mission with great efficiency, despite a tradition of being an expeditionary force. Of the two, they seem to have the ability to flex to a greater extent, despite (or maybe as a result of) being traditionally underfunded, "undermanned" and under equipped.