John K. Mahon and Romana Danysh

Summary

John K. Mahon and Romana Danysh CMH 60-3: Infantry, Part I: Regular Army…

The Pentomic Concept and the Combat Arms Regimental System
The armistice in Korea did not bring about the rapid demobilization of infantry units that traditionally followed the cessation of hostilities in American military history. President Dwight D. Eisenhower gave the reason for this departure from the usual pattern when he said: "We have won an armistice on a single battleground-not peace in the world. We may not now relax our guard nor cease our quest." There was, nevertheless, a gradual reduction of both personnel and units throughout the mid-1950's.
Source: Wikisource

John K. Mahon and Romana Danysh CMH 60-3: Infantry, Part I: Regular Army…

In order to be successful in a nuclear war, U.S. infantry units had to be small and lean, more powerful and harder hitting, self-sufficient, and geared for long periods of independent action on a wide and fluid battlefield. They had to be capable of rapid and effective concentration in the attack as well as equally rapid dispersal for defense. The Pentomic system attempted to give the infantry all of these capabilities.
Source: Wikisource

John K. Mahon and Romana Danysh CMH 60-3: Infantry, Part I: Regular Army…

In both cases, therefore, the Pentomic reorganization caused a significant reduction in infantry personnel. By eliminating the traditional regiment, it also raised the question of what the new infantry units were to be called, how they were to be numbered, and what their relationship to former organizations was to be. If some means of perpetuating the history of infantry and other combat regiments had not been combined with the tactical reorganization, hundreds of independent units would have been created with no historical affiliation.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature