Big Army For Big Wars? Yes! GCV? Probably Not.

[unhappycamper]

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/11/army-regime-change-maybe-gcv-probably-not/



The Army won’t be able to replace its ’80s-vintage M2 Bradleys, like the one shown here in Iraq, for years to come.

Big Army For Big Wars? Yes! GCV? Probably Not.
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.
on November 13, 2013 at 12:00 PM

PENTAGON: Do we still need a big Army that can wage big wars? Hell yes, the Army generals say. Will the Army get a new Ground Combat Vehicle to replace the 1981-vintage Bradley Fighting Vehicle that currently carries foot troops into battle? Probably not for a long, long time.

That’s my assessment based on an exclusive interview with two two-star generals and a senior Army civilian: the director of the Army office supporting the Quadrennial Defense Review, Maj. Gen. John Rossi; the G-8?s director of “force development,” Maj. Gen. Robert Dyess; and the director of the Army’s QDR office, Timothy Muchmore.

“There’s still a requirement out there to defeat a large ground army,” Maj. Gen. Rossi said. “It’s a deterrent. The ground force is going to be the singular force capable of what we term ‘regime change.’”

Wait, “regime change”? I asked. Isn’t that the phrase the now-reviled Don Rumsfeld used to describe the US invasion of Iraq?



unhappycamper comment: Of course the $450K per vehicle cost did not help the GCV.