Army readiness at 'historically low levels'

2015-03-12T09:49:45-04:00

From: Army Times

The Army faces "increased risks" and readiness that has reached "historically low levels," senior Army leaders warned Wednesday as they took the fight against further budget cuts to Capitol Hill.

"We need predictability, not politics," Army Secretary John McHugh said to the Senate Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on defense. "As we face uncertainty around the world, we must have certainty here at home."

In the last three years, the Army has cut the active component by 80,000 soldiers, inactivated 13 brigade combat teams and is in the process of cutting three combat aviation brigades, said Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, who testified alongside McHugh.

The Army also has cut 18,000 soldiers from the Army National Guard and Army Reserve, and it is reducing its total aviation force by 800 aircraft, with almost 700 of them coming from the active force, Odierno said.

"Today, only 33 percent of our brigades are ready, when our sustained readiness levels should be closer to 70 percent," he said. "We have fewer soldiers, the majority of whom are in units that are not ready, and they are manning aging equipment at a time when the demand for Army forces is much higher than anticipated."

The president's 2016 budget represents "the bare minimum" needed for the Army to carry out its missions and meet the requirements of the national defense strategy, Odierno said.

If sequestration returns in 2016, the Army could lose 10 to 12 additional brigade combat teams, "modernization would come to a standstill, training would go unfunded, and readiness rates, both unit and individual, would fall to very low levels," Odierno said.

During the hearing, most of the senators on the subcommittee pushed McHugh and Odierno to protect the installations in their home states.

"The cuts are not something we chose to do but an inescapable outcome," McHugh said.

Odierno assured the senators that any cuts made will be based on what the Army needs to meet its missions and maintaining the right mix of capabilities.

"That's part of the assessment we will do," he said. "It's based on strategy and need."

In its search for savings, the Army on Wednesday again pushed for a new round of Base Realignment and Closure.

"Without the authority to take out excess infrastructure, we have to distribute the cuts," McHugh said, acknowledging that BRAC is "unpopular" among the lawmakers. "Right now, we're paying about $500 million a year just to maintain empty infrastructure, unused infrastructure. That's half a billion dollars we'd like to put into training, into family programs, into any number of good areas."

Army leaders believe "BRAC would help us to alleviate some of the cuts we're looking at," McHugh said.

In addition, the Army also has:

• Used its wartime reset program to reduce depot maintenance by $3.2 billion.

• Reduced its reliance on contractors for logistics support, saving nearly $2 billion.

• Identified and will save more than $12 billion through its aviation restructuring initiative.

• Eliminated 12,000 positions by reducing all of its two-star and higher headquarters by 25 percent.

• Reorganized its brigade combat teams to eliminate overhead and maximize combat capacity.

The Army has soldiers in engaged in Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Kosovo and across Africa, Odierno said.

It also has rotational forces in Europe, Kuwait and throughout the Pacific.

"We owe it to them to ensure they have the right equipment, the best training and the appropriate family programs, health care and compensation packages commensurate with their sacrifices," he said.

In his travels across the force, soldiers continue to inspire him, Odierno said, when he was asked about morale across the Army.

"That said, there's a lot of pressure on our soldiers right now. There's uncertainty," he said. "On top of that, there's a lot of discussion about pay and benefits, there's a lot of discussion about retirement, there's a lot of discussion on many things. We haven't seen that breaking point yet, but I worry when that will occur in the future."

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2015/03/11/army-leaders-testify-budget/70174114/

Response by SFC Don Ward made Mar 12 at 2015 3:21 PM

2015-03-12T15:21:02-04:00

What MOS's can be done away with in our peace time army? Do we really need to train people in an MOS that just anyone can be trained at unit level to do? Why have all these army service schools (AIT) eating up budget money when all that really needs happen is they do OJT?

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Mar 12 at 2015 5:34 PM

2015-03-12T17:34:24-04:00

General Odierno said it best when he said we will not do more with less, we will do less with less!

Response by SPC David S. made Mar 12 at 2015 9:45 PM

2015-03-12T21:45:12-04:00

I see some eerie similarities in what is going on now and the Roman military at the fall of the Roman Empire. Around the end of the Fourth and the beginning of the Fifth Century, the once great and mighty Roman military began to deteriorate. A big contributing factor in the fall of Rome can be attributed to disarray that the military had fallen into. Some problem areas included the army's military tactics and decisions, low funds for the army and problems in recruiting soldiers. Any of this sound familiar? Recruiting illegal aliens, or training of other Armies to fight our battles. Roman's military recruited barbarians which were not to trustworthy. (Iraqi Army that turned tail when ISIS showed up or worse joined them). Rome cut funding yet expected their Generals to be able to recruit, pay, and expand the Roman Empire. Congress saying there is no money yet spends almost a billion on each F-35 lining their pockets from corporations who land cash cow contracts. The last one is tactics which is more or less our strategy. Do you think our current approach to ISIS, Iran, North Korea, or China will be or is in our best interest? It took some time for Rome fall and there were a number of factors that caused it, but the collapse of its military power was a major root cause.

Response by MSG Jay Jackson made Feb 20 at 2017 8:42 PM

2017-02-20T20:42:18-05:00

Why not pull some soldiers from reserve to active for a year at a time to fil gaps until we can grow the Army. Also as for readiness, we have always needed to look at how we measured this. There are some flaws in the system that are known on the equipment side.