Freethought & Rationalism Archive

jman0904 · 08-13-2003, 10:03 AM

Article in my local paper this morning: 1 More Year

Quote:

BAGHDAD, Iraq � All troops in Iraq should expect to serve for at least a year, with brief rest breaks in the region and possibly a few days at home, the commander of U.S. forces said Tuesday. That came as news to some soldiers.

[...]

But some of the 148,000 soldiers in Iraq said nobody told them how long they would remain in the country, where guerrillas attack Americans daily and high temperatures often top 120 degrees.

[...]

But on the Internet, some soldiers' families criticized the vacations, saying commanders should instead work on getting the soldiers home for good.

"My son-in-law has been in Iraq since March. � He has been given orders that extend his stay until JULY 2004," reads a message signed "Bette" on the Web site of Military Families Speak Out.

"His company just had a two-day vacation(?!) in Qatar. President Bush has just left for his MONTH-LONG vacation on his ranch in Crawford, Texas. Let's send all of the troops to President Bush's ranch and send the President to Iraq."

[...]

Sanchez also spoke of a proposal to give soldiers a "mid-tour break" to see their families.

"The intent would be that between your fifth and 10th month of deployment you'd get 14 days of leave and be able to go home," Sanchez said, adding that he hoped the plan would be approved "within a couple of weeks."

No sight of this AP article on CNN yet.
Is anyone here in contact with troops overseas? I'd love to hear what they think about being jerked around.

Abacus · 08-13-2003, 10:14 AM

I wonder if this situation will have an effect on military recruitment in the near future. How many would be willing to sign up if they know there's a good possibility that they could be sent to some god-forsaken country for perhaps years at a time?

ex-idaho · 08-13-2003, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Abacus
I wonder if this situation will have an effect on military recruitment in the near future. How many would be willing to sign up if they know there's a good possibility that they could be sent to some god-forsaken country for perhaps years at a time?

It seems like there are a lot more ads for the various branches of the armed forces on the TV lately so I think thats a pretty good indicator.

I think its pretty ironic that here in the states we have what may become a crisis if we do not get more people signing up to serve and the current enlisted don't reinlist. While at the same time our actions are a recruiting boon to our enemies.

theyeti · 08-13-2003, 10:28 AM

What's worse about all of this is that 1/3 of our military is tied down in Iraq, and will continue to be for the forseeable future. We've got another 1/3 give or take stationed in other overseas locales, which leaves about 1/3 here at home to train. Current military doctrine calls for no more than 1/3 to be abroad and to rotate them out with the 2/3 back at home, which will train and recouperate. So this not only hurts morale, it also compromises troop training and readiness. If we end up having a serious row with, say, N. Korea, we will simply be unable to address it. Which is probably why the N. Koreans have been so gung-ho of late...

theyeti

Koiyotnik · 08-13-2003, 10:28 AM

The only good I can see coming out of this is the possibility of this whole fiasco putting a dent in Bush's image and approval. But I think that a dent is hoping for a bit too much, sadly.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-13-2003, 10:14 AM	#2
Abacus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Dakota Posts: 2,214	I wonder if this situation will have an effect on military recruitment in the near future. How many would be willing to sign up if they know there's a good possibility that they could be sent to some god-forsaken country for perhaps years at a time?

08-13-2003, 10:28 AM	#4
theyeti Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Denver, CO, USA Posts: 9,747	What's worse about all of this is that 1/3 of our military is tied down in Iraq, and will continue to be for the forseeable future. We've got another 1/3 give or take stationed in other overseas locales, which leaves about 1/3 here at home to train. Current military doctrine calls for no more than 1/3 to be abroad and to rotate them out with the 2/3 back at home, which will train and recouperate. So this not only hurts morale, it also compromises troop training and readiness. If we end up having a serious row with, say, N. Korea, we will simply be unable to address it. Which is probably why the N. Koreans have been so gung-ho of late... theyeti

08-13-2003, 10:28 AM	#5
Koiyotnik Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: St Catharines, ON, Canada Posts: 1,920	The only good I can see coming out of this is the possibility of this whole fiasco putting a dent in Bush's image and approval. But I think that a dent is hoping for a bit too much, sadly.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.