Skip to comments.Troops Tours In Iraq Will Be 15 Months
Posted on 04/11/2007 12:15:00 PM PDT by Froufrou
The Pentagon will lengthen tours of duty for all active-duty Army units in Iraq to 15 months from the current 12 months as the military struggles to supply enough troops for the conflict, two defense officials said Wednesday.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates planned to announce the decision Wednesday afternoon, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.
It is the latest move by the Pentagon to cope with the strains of fighting two wars simultaneously and maintaining a higher troop level in Iraq as part of President Bush's revised strategy for stabilizing Baghdad.
Officials on Monday said some 13,000 National Guard troops were receiving orders alerting them to prepare for possible deployment to Iraqmeaning a second tour for several thousand of them. Officials said a final decision to deploy the four infantry combat brigades later this year will be based on conditions on the ground and named specific Guard units based in Arkansas, Indiana, Oklahoma and Ohio.
The Pentagon said the Guard units would serve as replacement forces in the regular troop rotation for the war, and would not be connected to the controversial military buildup that was ordered by President Bush and which officials say is starting to show some success in curbing violence in Baghdad.
Word has also emerged that Defense Department officials were considering a plan to extend by up to four months the tours of duty for as many as 15,000 U.S. troops already in Iraq as a way to maintain the buildup past the summer.
There are currently 145,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, and when the buildup is completed by June, there would be more than 160,000, officials are calculating.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Most of the post-mob training for the NG is the same training AC units get before they deploy. An extra component for the NG is all the new equipment they have never seen before. Another time waster is that the Army has, until recently, refused to certify NG unit’s readiness and training levels so that each unit has to start out at step one post-mob, even if the unit has been training at and passing external evaluations at a higher level for years.
Personnel cost are in the military, as in the civilian world, is a, if not the, major component of cost of maintaining a unit. The problem is that congress and DOD refused to equip NG units at the same level as AC units. Yes they saved a lot of money, then not now.
As to performance in the field, show me a report where NG unit’s performance was markedly inferior to AC units. Even Michael Yon had good thing to say about the guard in Iraq.
N.B.: we count Brigades now, not Divisions.
“I served my time in the military and in combat which I was extended for 6 months but when one makes an extension a big deal they lose focus of the real big deal, winning. I earned my right to be a keyboard commando.
Thank you for your service but 4 extra months in a counterinsurgency war is a huge deal. Soldiers and marines are patrolling on foot and vehicle down streets where they can be blown up in an instant - and they know that - it is a huge deal both psychologically stressful and to overall morale. It’s a shame that we don’t have a bigger military, which would alleviate this situation. Our troops will drive on but it is a big deal.
It could be worse, it could be 18 months.
Speak for yourself, if you’re in the middle of combat operations, you’ve lost friends to IEDs and abushes, perhaps you’d like to take those extra 3 months for them. Just DAMN.
It’s time to quit dumping on those that serve their country VOLUNTARILY.
Come with us to visit wounded soldiers dealing with horrific burns and new prosthetic arms and legs, and please tell them to their face, oh, it’s no big deal...
I know plenty of people who agree that we need the draft back.
Just guessing, but I think 6 month intervals may be better. May be more expensive, but I’m thinking of the troops and their families, that it’d be easier on them.
I was also active under GHWB and I remember that's when the early-outs started. The Air Force had personnel teams traveling the world trying to scare my year group (7-10) to accept early-outs rather than being involuntarily separated. It amazes me how so many FReepers buy into the lie that the drawdown began under Clinton.
My son is in a MP BN outside of Basra....Illinois Guard.
This does pertain to our family with one son for sure and another up in the air.
God Bless you both and thanks to your family members who serve. My precious daughter is on the USS Boxer in the Persian Gulf.
This is a bad new policy.
They could get more voluntary months if the Troops got more breaks from serving over in that sheitehole.
Who the heck is designing this strategy?
You’re talking in macro terms. I’m talking about the individual soldier or marine walking down the street not knowing whether the next car or bump in the road is an IED or not.
To these guys patrolling, this is no small deal.
What worries me the most is not mentioned yet:
We won't forget.
It sucks for some of the small reasons.....but in the bigger picture 90% of the guys know their presence there for additional 3 months is necessary and worth it.
They're embracing the suck.....while changing the world.
How many times does it have to be said, the peace dividend cuts started under GHWB and would have continued under who ever was elected in 92. It’s irrelevant anyway. Clinton has not been the Commander (in chief) for over six years.
Is President Bush not responsible for the last six years?