Chuck Grassley: “I would like to respond to General Krulak's letter. This is the main point in his letter, and I quote General Krulak's…”

“I would like to respond to General Krulak's letter. This is the main point in his letter, and I quote General Krulak's own words: The main thrust of your letter is that the number of general officers should be reduced consistent with force structure reductions. This is General Krulak talking: The reduction in end strength does not necessarily have a one-to-one correlation with command billet reduction. He goes on to say: This point is key: While the Marine Corps has reduced its end strength by 24,000 personnel, its three division, three wing structure has remained essentially unchanged. Those familiar with the military know that the requirement for general/flag officers is tied directly to the number of combat divisions and air wings--and that number has not been changed. Mr. President, I would like to respond to General Krulak. First, the suggestion that the number of generals should be reduced consistent with force structure reductions is not a rule dreamed up by the Senator from Iowa. The rule was first put forward by the Senate Armed Services Committee years ago. It has been expressed by the House Armed Services Committee. It was the guiding principle used in formulating current law. It is still in current law--section 526 of title 10, United States Code. That law places a ceiling on the number of generals and admirals allowed on active duty.…”