scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) (02/07/90)
From: scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron)
Rumors are flying here in the Northwest that DOD is contemplating the
following scenario as part of the so-called "peace dividend" defense cuts:
-Demobilization of the remaining two active brigades of the 9th ID
(Ft. Lewis WA)
-Relocation of the 7th LID from Ft. Ord, CA to Ft. Lewis
-Closing Ft. Ord
Does anyone in netland have any information about whether this proposal is
or is not actually in the works? If so:
- Is the 7th to be upgraded to a heavy division?
- What changes in mission are contemplated for the 7th Div?
- What organizations will provide training support for Camps Roberts and
Hunter-Liggett (CA-Arng training sites)
(Personally, this strikes me as a strange idea, since the two places in the
world where tensions arent even pretending to lessen are Korea (9th ID primary
mission region) and Latin America (from which the 7th is now returning). But
then I'm not a Pentagon policymaker so what do I know? )
--
S.D. Cameron | "...the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear | AOPA | 50 yrs
Univ. of Wash. | arms shall not be infringed." -- U.S. Const. | -+-
Seattle WA | "I know I promised, but ... " -- Geo. Bush | _____(*)_____
scameron@toby.acs.washington.edu | My opinions, not theirs | WingNutschweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) (02/09/90)
From: schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) In article <13782@cbnews.ATT.COM> scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) writes: > >From: scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) > >Rumors are flying here in the Northwest that DOD is contemplating the >following scenario as part of the so-called "peace dividend" defense cuts: > -Demobilization of the remaining two active brigades of the 9th ID > (Ft. Lewis WA) > -Relocation of the 7th LID from Ft. Ord, CA to Ft. Lewis > -Closing Ft. Ord > >Does anyone in netland have any information about whether this proposal is >or is not actually in the works? If so: > - Is the 7th to be upgraded to a heavy division? > - What changes in mission are contemplated for the 7th Div? [...] This was indeed included as a potential realignment in the proposed FY91 budget submitted to Congress (though even if approved, it would not take place immediately). The 7th would remain a light infantry division, with no change in mission announced. The major rationale for the move is the collocation of McChord AFB with Ft. Lewis, making it easier for the division to deploy on short notice. Currently, much of the division would have to travel by ground transportation to Travis AFB, a couple of hours away, to deploy. Another reason, is increased opportunity for live fire training at Ft. Lewis, as opposed to Ft. Ord. Jeff Schweiger -- ******************************************************************************* Jeff Schweiger CompuServe: 74236,1645 Standard Disclaimer ARPAnet (Defense Data Network): schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil *******************************************************************************
dritchey@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (Don Ritchey) (02/10/90)
From: dritchey@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (Don Ritchey) in article <13809@cbnews.ATT.COM>, schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) says: > In article <13782@cbnews.ATT.COM> scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) writes: [ portions deleted ] >>Rumors are flying here in the Northwest that DOD is contemplating the >>following scenario as part of the so-called "peace dividend" defense cuts: >> -Relocation of the 7th LID from Ft. Ord, CA to Ft. Lewis >> -Closing Ft. Ord [ portions deleted ] > The major rationale for the move is the collocation of McChord AFB with > Ft. Lewis, making it easier for the division to deploy on short notice. > Currently, much of the division would have to travel by ground transportation > to Travis AFB, a couple of hours away, to deploy. Another reason, is > increased opportunity for live fire training at Ft. Lewis, as opposed to > Ft. Ord. Another rationale, from the standpoint of both the soldiers involved and the budget planners of the Pentagon, might include the drastic difference in the cost of living in rural Washington state versus the Montery area of California. I remember friends who contemplated leaving the military, taking unacompanied tours overseas, or taking the Fort Ord, CA assignment as without-dependants (living in a cheap appartment or the BOQ) due to the extremely high cost of living and housing in that area. It was alleged that if you could not get on base housing, you could not afford to get a decent house close to the base. Now, I cannot answer the question of whether all the concern was realistic or not, but the perception of not being able to afford a decent standard of living was very depressing. This was especially true if you were a home-owner in some low cost area, like central Texas (Fort Hood) where a house could be purchased in 1977 for $20,000, and the same house in the Fort Ord area being double or triple the price. I don't know the prices today, but the disparity is probably relatively constant. When I was on active duty, most military people feared an assignment to a high cost area if they already had a home or were facing return from overseas with the deadline from the IRS staring them in the face. Taking a large step backwards in expectations for a house and standard of living makes for poor morale. #include <std/disclaimer.h> Don Ritchey dritchey@ihlpb.att.com or don.ritchey@att.com AT&T Bell Labs, Room IH 1D-409, Naperville, IL 60566, (312) 979-6179
major@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Mike Schmitt) (02/12/90)
From: ssc-vax!shuksan!major@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Mike Schmitt) In article <13782@cbnews.ATT.COM>, scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) writes: > > > From: scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) > > Rumors are flying here in the Northwest that DOD is contemplating the > following scenario as part of the so-called "peace dividend" defense cuts: > -Demobilization of the remaining two active brigades of the 9th ID > (Ft. Lewis WA) > -Relocation of the 7th LID from Ft. Ord, CA to Ft. Lewis > -Closing Ft. Ord > > Does anyone in netland have any information about whether this proposal is > or is not actually in the works? If so: > - Is the 7th to be upgraded to a heavy division? > - What changes in mission are contemplated for the 7th Div? > - What organizations will provide training support for Camps Roberts and > Hunter-Liggett (CA-Arng training sites) > > (Personally, this strikes me as a strange idea, since the two places in the > world where tensions arent even pretending to lessen are Korea (9th ID primary > mission region) and Latin America (from which the 7th is now returning). But > then I'm not a Pentagon policymaker so what do I know? ) I think this might be a good move. First, the 7th Infantry Division (Light) ("Bayonet") is a 'full division'. The current need for a mixed force with light infantry has been validated by past and recent deployments. It is more advantageous and easier to 'keep' the 7th Inf Div (Lt) active and deactivate the 9th. The 9th Infantry Division (Motorized) is not a full-strength division and has always been sort of a 'bastard child' in the Army. It first owes its existence and stationing at Fort Lewis to the late Senator Jackson. During Vietnam, Ft Lewis became a Basic Training Post. After, there were studies being made to use Ft Lewis for various activities. At the time, I was assigned to the US Army Intelligence Center and School at Fort Holabird, Maryland, already designated for closing. One plan I worked on was moving the entire Intelligence Center and School to Fort Lewis (there was another part of the School at Fort Devens, Mass, another part in Florida, and the aviation part in Fort Huachuca, AZ). Jackson said he didn't care as long as something was stationed at Lewis. Westmoreland wanted the 9th Infantry Division ("Old Reliables") reactivated and stationed there. Westmoreland won out - over the objections of the Army Staff. The Intel Center & School moved to Arizona - the 9th to Ft Lewis. Then the 9th became in succession, 'Hi-Tech', 'Light', 'Motorized', 'Test Bed', etc - without really settling down to a specific strategic mission. I Corps ('Eye Corps') was moved from Korea to Ft Lewis - and staffed at about 50% manning. So, the loss of the 9th is no biggy - keeping the 7th active is a good decision. Now, as to moving from Ft Ord (disaffectionatly called 'Planet Ord') to Ft Lewis is also a good move. Ft Lewis has more training area space and the Yakima Training area for brigade-size manuever. Ft Ord has almost none - you can barely manuever a battalion around Ft Ord. The terrain at Hunter-Ligget is terrible for manuevering. Why do you think California lets the Army/Marines 'own' it and train there? It's no good for anything else. Additionally, the 7th deploys to a lot of places for training and other deployments (Panama?). When stationed with the 7th ID ('82-'83) as XO of the division's MI Battalion, we deployed to Korea (twice), Alaska (twice), conducted an amphibious assault in Florida, and training in Panama. The most frightening aspect was watching C-141s trying to land then lift off of tiny Monterey Airport - one at a time! For major deployments we had to convoy all the way to Travis AFB. Ft Lewis, on the other hand, sits side by side with McChord AFB and it's Troop Lift Wing of C-141s. Just like Ft Bragg-Pope AFB. This will dramatically increase the 7th's readiness and rapid deployment. Fort Ord itself - though a beautiful place to live (with two of the best golf courses in the country (Bayonet and Blackhorse) is not very well suited to garrison a division. It was fine as a Basic Training Post in the 60s (I underwent Basic Training there in Aug-Sep '61) but the troop housing, motor pools, facilities et al are just not layed out for a combat division. Highway 101 runs right through the post - separating troop areas from rifle ranges (the beach ranges). There's been very little troop housing and facility construction - and the divison headquarters itself is in an old wooden structure. The 7th ('Crushed Beercan Division') (Surfside Seven) over the past few years has successfully defended the freedom of California Beaches (yeah, dude!). Time to move up to Slug Country where we don't tan - we rust! mike schmitt
schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) (02/12/90)
From: schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) In article <13850@cbnews.ATT.COM> dritchey@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (Don Ritchey) writes: >in article <13809@cbnews.ATT.COM>, schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) says: >> In article <13782@cbnews.ATT.COM> scameron@blake.acs.washington.edu (Scott Cameron) writes: >[ portions deleted ] >>>Rumors are flying here in the Northwest that DOD is contemplating the >>>following scenario as part of the so-called "peace dividend" defense cuts: >>> -Relocation of the 7th LID from Ft. Ord, CA to Ft. Lewis >>> -Closing Ft. Ord >[ portions deleted ] >> The major rationale for the move is the collocation of McChord AFB with >> Ft. Lewis, making it easier for the division to deploy on short notice. >> Currently, much of the division would have to travel by ground transportation >> to Travis AFB, a couple of hours away, to deploy. Another reason, is >> increased opportunity for live fire training at Ft. Lewis, as opposed to >> Ft. Ord. > >Another rationale, from the standpoint of both the soldiers involved and >the budget planners of the Pentagon, might include the drastic >difference in the cost of living in rural Washington state versus the >Montery area of California. > [portions deleted] This was indeed another of the rationales given, but didn't rank as high as the two I mentionned before. Housing is extremely expensive in this area, and that is of concern to those stationned here, but probably isn't as important to the budgeteers/bean counters back in the Pentagon, especially since the recent completion of a large increase in family housing units at Fort Ord. (Doesn't do much for those without families, though :-( ). But, to get back to the comment, the cost of living in the Tacoma, Washington area versus the cost of living in the Monterey, California area was one of the reasons given out to the local press for the proposed move of the 7th to Fort Lewis. IMHO, however, the access to air transportation, and availability of live fire training areas, would have caused the move to be proposed regardless of the cost of living situation. Jeff Schweiger -- ******************************************************************************* Jeff Schweiger CompuServe: 74236,1645 Standard Disclaimer ARPAnet (Defense Data Network): schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil *******************************************************************************