When I was in the Army( early 70's) I heard there were around 20-24 active(not N.G./Reserve) Divisions. Even though the Cold War ended, and we didn't need such a large force, I now hear that we have only 10 divisions left.  How did this happen? That doesn't seem to be enough for these troubled times, with all the commitments that we have. What were the number of Divisions before Pearl Harbor, Korea, and Viet Nam?? How large should the Army, and Marine Corps be these days?

We have 10 divisions, but only seven are available

Light Divisions:

10th Mountain (partially deployed in Middle East)
25th Infantry Division
82d Airborne Division
101st Air Assault Division

Heavy Divisions:
1st Infantry Division
3d Infantry Division
4th Infantry Division
1st Armored Division
1st Cavalry Division (Cav in name only, really an armored division

Other:
2d Infantry Division (hybrid light/mech/armored).

We have one division equivalent, taken from the above heavy units, in Bosnia and unavailable. The 2d Infantry Division is in Korea and unavailable. The 10th is deployed in SW Asia and unavailable (and who knows what other units are out there). So we really only have Seven Divisions available, and the readiness and deployability of some of the remaining units is questionable.

I don't know about the number of Divisions we had before other wars. We were already mobilizing for WWII when Pearl Harbor was attacked. At the beginning of Vietnam, we had about 20 Divisions on active duty. Korea I don't know. We got to our current sorry state because of the Clinton administration.

Last I looked we were down to 1 Armored division, the 1st, and 11 Infantry divisions, 1 Air Assault, 1 Airborne, 4 Light, 5 Heavy, but some of the heavy are scheduled to become "Medium" divisons that are more easily transported by air.

Given the current world situation its not a bad idea to sit down some of the Armor and Heavy Infantry divisions in favor of Light Infantry. But do we have enough divisons? I dont know. Right now we seem to have a hard time transporting even the light forces we have anywhere in the world without months of preperation. Nearly all the US Army's forces are sitting IDLE right now, even those on assignement to places like Kosovo or Bosnia, so on the face its hard to say we have a shortage of troops.

We also have 3 Marine Divisions active and one Reserve and they are pretty much organized the same as always. In their case the Marines dont need more men as much as the Navy needs more ships and aircraft to transport them.

Two of the "Divisions," the 7th Light and 24th Mech, are shell divisions, with no active duty troops except for the headquarters and Division Staff elements. Their combat Brigades will come from National Guard Units, and their support elements will come from the Guard and Reserves.

We have two Armored DIvisions, The 1st Armored, and the 1st Cav.

We do have a shortage of trained organized combat units. We do not have a large enough army to re-fight Desert Storm, let alone multiple conflicts, like we seem to be facing. We had an 18-division Army in 1991. We have a weak 10 Division Army today. The "obsolete" heavy divisons, which were unbeatable by any other army in the world, were relegated to history books, their equipment placed in storage and their colors struck.

The Marine Corps are tough and professional, but they lack the organic capability, logistical and support elements to conduct sustained high-intensity ground campaigns. The Marine "Corps" does not match the combat capability of an Army heavy armored corps (of which we only have one, down from three).

It would take a couple of years to rebuild these units. The force we have now, which is heavy in Special Ops and Light forces, is good for the kind of conflict we face in Afghanistan, but is insufficient to deal with the real threats, which are countries like Iraq, Iran and Syria.

Thanks for the "Peace Dividend," Bill.

Well said guys.  Clinton really did screw up.  I think that we need at least two more Army divisions rights away, just to deal with the Afganistan war.  We are going to have to establish bases there, capable of defending large all-weather airfields, with lots of artillery and armor to back it up.  We need a lot more helicopter units, and more Air Force tactical and strategic air squadrons too!  We need our 1990 military back.

GunLvr

Clinto/Gore two fckin liberal bs liberal pieces of scum,,if I ever run into either or both I will verbally disrepect them as I've not done before,,without looking like a ass. The silent majority better wake up and smell the roses,,VOTE! Speak out! Take back America

Yeah but the REALLY bad thing is that the Air Force and Navy were slashed too, and that is far costlier and more time consuming to rebuild. Untill there is a drastic increase in both sealift and airlift a significantly bigger army wouldnt benefit us much. The soldiers themselves would benifit from having more units available to take rotations on foreign stations.  But as far as helping us as a deterrant to acts like Sept 11 or allowing us to respond better than we have, with the transport situation as it is, I don't think so.

well I do work for the army and do not have the info in front of me so I suspect your info is good.
at fort carson I believe we used to be the 4th inf. division and just changed over to the 7th inf. div a little over a year ago. we also have the 3rd acr and 10th sf and all of the above are active duty . we do have one of the largest guard training sights and have started to have guard units rotate in and out all during the year as we also have become a permament training home for alot of the guard units.
the base is on a building kick and we have greatly improved the base to help expand and up grade everything. I drive by a whole lot of armor everyday and it is impressive and we are not really even a armored division other than the 3acr.
you can hear the night fireing a couple of times a week and it sounds great. I hope the taliban can get to hear it soon also.  go army