The Army Division's Structure -- What is Right for the Army of 1995 and Beyond?
ARMY WAR COLL CARLISLE BARRACKS PA
Pagination or Media Count:
This paper challenges whether the current division structure can remain as the base of maneuver considering the impacts force reductions and the revision of the current Airland Operations doctrine will have on our Army. The structure of our Table of Organization TOE army has been centered on the division since World War I. As we look towards the requirements to downsize our total force, as a result of the victory of Cold War I, we must not be comfortable with a business as usual approach. I intend to challenge this paradigm and will offer my thoughts regarding the size and makeup of our tactical structure of the future. My methodology will be to review the process that Col. ret Art Lykke describes as the ends, ways, and means needed to accomplish our mission. I will review our national security interests and objectives as established by the President, from this will flow a national military strategy to provide he concepts for accomplishing the mission. Next must come a doctrinally-based structure to meet the anticipated needs of the Airland Operations of the future. I have offered three alternatives that are changes from our current divisional structure. After comparing advantages and disadvantages of each I have concluded that a fine tuning of our current structure is all that is required and major alterations are unnecessary.
- Military Forces and Organizations
- Military Operations, Strategy and Tactics