1SG Chris Brown 156457 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>As the Army looks at reshaping our force and drawing down, we all talk a lot about what that means to the individual (i.e. recruiting new personnel, early retirements, SERBs, etc). I'm sure many have seen the deactivation of a unit here or there at the same time, whether it be some of the Infantry Battalions that are going away or even the talk about deactivating two Combat Aviation Brigades (CABs).<br /><br />How many have given serious thought to us losing a Division though? If we cut down to the 420K that many think we might, we must consider the possibility of an active duty Army Division disappearing. Of the 10 that are left, which do you think is the right one for deactivation? 2014-06-17T12:48:31-04:00 1SG Chris Brown 156457

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>As the Army looks at reshaping our force and drawing down, we all talk a lot about what that means to the individual (i.e. recruiting new personnel, early retirements, SERBs, etc). I'm sure many have seen the deactivation of a unit here or there at the same time, whether it be some of the Infantry Battalions that are going away or even the talk about deactivating two Combat Aviation Brigades (CABs).<br /><br />How many have given serious thought to us losing a Division though? If we cut down to the 420K that many think we might, we must consider the possibility of an active duty Army Division disappearing. Of the 10 that are left, which do you think is the right one for deactivation?

2014-06-17T12:48:31-04:00 2014-06-17T12:48:31-04:00 LTC Paul Labrador 156462

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Remember in the current system, divisions do not have permanently assigned brigades. The only organic portion of a division is the headquarters element. What the Army is doing now is deactivating brigades within each division to reach that drawdown strength, so there really isn't a "need" to deactivate a division, per se.

2014-06-17T12:52:53-04:00 2014-06-17T12:52:53-04:00 1SG James Wise 156603

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I recently read a study that looked at the number of general level officers compared to the times the Army was cut to this size or smaller...and we currently have way more general officers than back in the 20s-30s for example. Currently I feel the Army is too top heavy for the amount of forces we expect to field, and that some of the HQ&#39;s need shaved down drastically or even cut. Just like we regrow/build units when needed, we can regrow those DIV and higher HQ&#39;s, their staffs, and promote deserving officers into the higher ranks to fill them, or even bring some back from retirement and their Fox News jobs.

2014-06-17T14:39:37-04:00 2014-06-17T14:39:37-04:00 CPT Jacob Swartout 157083

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>The remaining 10 AD Divisions have too much history and a tough choice to choose which one would be deactivated. One would have to look at the strategic importance and what the unit mission capabilities are currently. Location may play a decision part which brings up questions pertaining to logistics. I would say that one of the four Infantry Divisions would go next. If this were to happen, the Army may reorganized the other Divisions a little. Good question but I really don't have an answer for which one would be on the rumor list to be deactivated. I hope we don't lose any of the 10 remaining AD Divisions. Possibly deactivating more separate BDEs or Regiments would be the other option to downsizing.

2014-06-17T22:23:17-04:00 2014-06-17T22:23:17-04:00 SGM Mike Bachini 157907

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>7ID inactivated; 2ID moved to Jblm<br />With the withdrawal of troops there.<br />All provisional units inactivated from<br />Company and higher.<br />Take one side off the pentagon and 1/5th of the service members assigned there and refer to it as the "Quad".<br />(Partial satire here.... Do not get B hurt over this...)

2014-06-18T16:42:25-04:00 2014-06-18T16:42:25-04:00 2014-06-17T12:48:31-04:00