U.S. Military vacations in Iraq extended

I doubt that the training $bucks$ will be cut ... atleast not by the Dems. As for the "administration"? Who the hell knows - if they can say it is because of anything the Dems are asking them for? Then, yes, funding will be cut - not because of the Dems, but because the administration thinks they can blame their incompetence on men and women that want peace or a solution to the present quagmire -that want a new direction, and not simply be mouthing words.

Still, Red, I hope we are both wrong about the training bucks$$.

Personally, I see this as our "French Algiers" - you know where the military reached its limit (after losing nam, etc) and pointed its airborne planes towards France because the military felt betrayed by their politico - of course we don't have a DeGaul (unless one considers Powell) for our military to look to for as an alternative for their (the) "between" election President. Seven Days in May, seems almost a practicle solution - Zeus help us.

BS:
btw, did you know that google (which controls this site) allows all info that has key words or has spys to note stuff and ..... oh well .... ignore this Red. You got a career - keep it.

“Personally, I see this as our "French Algiers" - you know where the military reached its limit (after losing nam, etc) and pointed its airborne planes towards France because the military felt betrayed by their politico - of course we don't have a DeGaul (unless one considers Powell) for our military to look to for as an alternative for their (the) "between" election President”:

“Et si devions mourir en vain, que Rome prenne garde à la colère de légionnaires » : Lartéguy in book « Les Centurions ». « If we should die in vain then Rome should be aware of the Legionnaire’s anger ».

I didn’t thought of that parallel.
In 1954, Dien Bien Phu was lost after 54 days of siege, and what will be called the events of Algeria started by the slaughter of a (communists) teacher and his wife. The French army was determined NOT to loose this one, and de facto, didn’t. But, for political reasons (and very good one) de Gaulle decided to go ahead with a referendum on Algerian Independence (excluding the metropolis, Algeria was considered as a French Department –even perhaps two- at the time). In 1963, Algeria became independent.
The frustrations of the army came the Rebels felt betrayed by de Gaulle they (in their opinion) helped to take power the 13 of May 1958.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KafirChobee

BS:
btw, did you know that google (which controls this site) allows all info that has key words or has spys to note stuff and ..... oh well .... ignore this Red. You got a career - keep it.

---

Not to worried about the government right now Kafir I currently work for one of the class 1 railroads.

Just a quick note,

One of the problems in the early days of the war/occupation was : The number of trigger happy soldiers running around, shooting too fast asking questions too late. If you had 600K soldiers most of them would of been of the less experienced, trigger happy types...It takes a lot of experience and local knowledge to learn and know when NOT to shoot, and what not to do in a strange land with strange language and a strange culture...

Does training for soon to be deployed troops now come with culture and language classes? or occupation (policing/ peacekeeping/ anti insugent) training?


This is something that the australian army has been doing for quite some time, before you can be deployed to a war zone, you must have the regional training. i.e customs, language, and even some background training on what religions you might face and how to handle them...it really makes a big difference....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beren Son Of Barahi

This is something that the australian army has been doing for quite some time, before you can be deployed to a war zone, you must have the regional training. i.e customs, language, and even some background training on what religions you might face and how to handle them...it really makes a big difference....

---

Now, now, there's no call for getting all "practical" on your fellow Orgahs.

I'm afraid it eludes me, but where has the Australian Army been deployed in force? Such strict criteria sounds a good way to ensure it rarely happens.

~:smoking:

Well off the top of my head.
Current deployments are:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Solomon Islands
East Timor

I think i am missing some...
But i know for sure that each war zone has a regional training course, which teaches language(s), culture, customs and environmental training (desert, urban,ect) as well as things like peacekeeping and other things like that...


Australia was among the first to announce their commitments to Iraq and Afghanistan. mainly SAS and supporting.

I believe the Aussie army took on East Timor without much help from anybody. And I hear they did as good a job as could be done. Scoff not at our friends down under.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beren Son Of Barahi

Well off the top of my head.
Current deployments are:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Solomon Islands
East Timor

I think i am missing some...
But i know for sure that each war zone has a regional training course, which teaches language(s), culture, customs and environmental training (desert, urban,ect) as well as things like peacekeeping and other things like that...


Australia was among the first to announce their commitments to Iraq and Afghanistan. mainly SAS and supporting.

---

Okay I will play.

What level of troop committments does the Austrialian Army have compared to others in Afghanistan and Iraq.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/as...eut/index.html

I truelly appreciate the efforts of the Austrialian people in supporting thier ally, however I don't think someone fully understands the training that a United States Brigade goes through for deployment. I read your post and from the very beginning I realized that you do not have any knowledge on the training that take place for the United States Army or the Marines.

Frankly I find that not so surprising. And it makes me wonder if you have ever faced a bullet fired in anger.

Give you a small hint though - I trained military units for three years before my separation from service, and my brother who is a 1SG who has been to Middle East twice in the last 3 years and is scheduled for re-deployment. And this is counting either of the previous deployments to hostile environments either of us have been on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

Okay I will play.

What level of troop committments does the Austrialian Army have compared to others in Afghanistan and Iraq.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/as...eut/index.html

I truelly appreciate the efforts of the Austrialian people in supporting thier ally, however I don't think someone fully understands the training that a United States Brigade goes through for deployment. I read your post and from the very beginning I realized that you do not have any knowledge on the training that take place for the United States Army or the Marines.

Frankly I find that not so surprising. And it makes me wonder if you have ever faced a bullet fired in anger.

Give you a small hint though - I trained military units for three years before my separation from service, and my brother who is a 1SG who has been to Middle East twice in the last 3 years and is scheduled for re-deployment. And this is counting either of the previous deployments to hostile environments either of us have been on.

---

which is why i asked in my early post, if that sort fo training is provided for the newish troops to the US army before being deployed... i wasn't having go @ anyone at all, i was saying that, having 600k soldiers on the ground would of mean't that the training would of been hampered, if in fact the army insist that the troops are trained for the regions they are entering...

"Does training for soon to be deployed troops now come with culture and language classes? or occupation (policing/ peacekeeping/ anti insugent) training?"

i worked in east timor, and i was offered work in afghistan and iraq, but i was advised against it at the time by my friend who was a major in the Aus. army, who was responsible for vip protection planning in Iraq at the time. it was his advise that it was too dangerous to work over there at the time as the US army was quite jumpy and trigger happy, and the work i was doing (setting up AM radio stations and training locals to use computers and radio equipment) means that i am out in the regions and would be a good target for kidnapping. ..

i think the aussies are mostly eng. and SAS troops.

Sorry, don't mean to interrupt this discussion on the Aussies - never met one I didn't like. But, I need to make a correction to my initial post.

It seems I was wrong about the troops being allowed a year at home before another 15 months of vacation in Iraq - actually it is 7 1/2 months. The DoD (Gates) in all its wisdom determined that giving soldiers a full year at home visiting their familys' was way to long - it would only confuse them you see; they might get the idea that other Americans aren't making any sacrifices for the war effort. By shortening their visits home they might not notice this and, therefore, remain patriotic drones willing to do what 99.7% of Americans are unwilling to. Hey, who needs to see their kids opening gifts at xmas, b-days, etc? They can get pictures of it, that ought to be enough - right?

If this doesn't break the military, nothing will. I realize why they are doing it - out of despiration and a last ditch effort to attempt some semblance of acheivement there (through military, as opposed to diplomatic or political means) prior to 2008. Why 2008 one might ask, aside from it being an election year? IMO, because if something positive is not forthcoming by then - any Republicanist (devil made me do it) that has supported the war and is up for reelection will suddenly find fault in the execution of the surge and war in general. Bush and his 29% (if that by then) will be standing alone.

Seven and a half months, I can't conceive of a more heartless or just plain stupid plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KafirChobee

Sorry, don't mean to interrupt this discussion on the Aussies - never met one I didn't like. But, I need to make a correction to my initial post.

It seems I was wrong about the troops being allowed a year at home before another 15 months of vacation in Iraq - actually it is 7 1/2 months. The DoD (Gates) in all its wisdom determined that giving soldiers a full year at home visiting their familys' was way to long - it would only confuse them you see; they might get the idea that other Americans aren't making any sacrifices for the war effort. By shortening their visits home they might not notice this and, therefore, remain patriotic drones willing to do what 99.7% of Americans are unwilling to. Hey, who needs to see their kids opening gifts at xmas, b-days, etc? They can get pictures of it, that ought to be enough - right?

If this doesn't break the military, nothing will. I realize why they are doing it - out of despiration and a last ditch effort to attempt some semblance of acheivement there (through military, as opposed to diplomatic or political means) prior to 2008. Why 2008 one might ask, aside from it being an election year? IMO, because if something positive is not forthcoming by then - any Republicanist (devil made me do it) that has supported the war and is up for reelection will suddenly find fault in the execution of the surge and war in general. Bush and his 29% (if that by then) will be standing alone.

Seven and a half months, I can't conceive of a more heartless or just plain stupid plan.

---

The next deployments that I know of right now have the soldiers scheduled to begin training April/May and deploy Nov/Dec. The units returned from Iraq in Dec/Jan. So I would have to see the actual proof from the source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beren Son Of Barahi

"Does training for soon to be deployed troops now come with culture and language classes? or occupation (policing/ peacekeeping/ anti insugent) training?"

---

In the past before 9/11 the training included some culture and region specific training. Very limited on language training.

Current training according to my brother falls in line with the question you ask. THe amount of language training however is still limited.

Quote:

---

i worked in east timor, and i was offered work in afghistan and iraq, but i was advised against it at the time by my friend who was a major in the Aus. army, who was responsible for vip protection planning in Iraq at the time. it was his advise that it was too dangerous to work over there at the time as the US army was quite jumpy and trigger happy, and the work i was doing (setting up AM radio stations and training locals to use computers and radio equipment) means that i am out in the regions and would be a good target for kidnapping. ..

---

Impressions of another does not make for an accurate assessment. Combat operations does different things to different people. From the talks I have had with my brother - jumpy and trigger happy is not a completely accurate statement. In different sectors of Iraq there are more then likely units that are indeed trigger happy and jumpy, just like in many the soldiers act in a more calm manner, most of this depends on the leadership of the individual units.

But ask yourself this question - how would you react to being fired upon, surprised bombings, etc.

Its completely different to be a soldier in a combat zone, then a civilian being protected in a combat zone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

The next deployments that I know of right now have the soldiers scheduled to begin training April/May and deploy Nov/Dec. The units returned from Iraq in Dec/Jan. So I would have to see the actual proof from the source.

---

The new 7 1/2 month rule was posted yesterday by Gates. It was on reported on PBS, and even on the "Daily Show".

It may not be an absolute for units in training, but for veteran units it is. I promise, you will hear of it soon enough. Unfortunately. Unless it has quietly been withdrawn and no one reported it - I mean it can't be a very popular decision amongst the military personell. I'll try to get confirmation from my nephew - he's in Germany, MP SSG, at the moment (after touring in Iraq and Afghanistan), he may know. [he loves it in Europe btw - he's a Roman history buff so it has given him the advantage to see various ruins, etc.]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KafirChobee

The new 7 1/2 month rule was posted yesterday by Gates. It was on reported on PBS, and even on the "Daily Show".

---

Okay I did some quick reading, and this is what I discovered, was that Gates in essence stated in order to prevent troops having to deploy back to Iraq or Afganstan in less then a year at home the rotation deployment has been bumped to 15 monthes. In one of the articles it mentioned that there was a possiblity that it was either extend the tours or only give troops about 7 to 8 monthes at home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gates

Gates said the new policy seeks to ensure that all active-duty Army units get at least 12 months at home between deployments.

---

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070411/...iraq_us_troops

Edit: I think I found the actual source of the statement. One divisions headquarter company is being sent back with less then a year, basically at the 7 to 8 month mark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by article

The 4th Infantry Division headquarters unit from Fort Hood, Texas, will return to Iraq after a little more than seven months at home — the largest departure to date from the Army's goal of giving units at least a year's rest after every year deployed. The 1st Brigade of the 10th Mountain Division, based at Ft. Drum, N.Y., will go back to Iraq after just 10 1/2 months at home.

The only other major unit to spend less than one year at home was the Georgia-based 3rd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division, which returned to Iraq 48 days short of a year and is there now, according to the Army.

Government acknowledges shortage
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman acknowledged that the Texas unit's 81 day shortfall in rest time, "is not insignificant."

"There's only so many division headquarters," he said. "It reflects that this is a military that is in conflict. We're obviously using a significant portion of the combat units of the force. And it's a reflection of the realities that exist right now."

---

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17921553/

Quote:

---

It may not be an absolute for units in training, but for veteran units it is. I promise, you will hear of it soon enough. Unfortunately. Unless it has quietly been withdrawn and no one reported it - I mean it can't be a very popular decision amongst the military personell. I'll try to get confirmation from my nephew - he's in Germany, MP SSG, at the moment (after touring in Iraq and Afghanistan), he may know. [he loves it in Europe btw - he's a Roman history buff so it has given him the advantage to see various ruins, etc.]

---

Let me know what you find out - it seems that the media is either on purpose contradicting Gates - or worse yet Gates has contradicted himself. From what I know of Gates - he doesn't strike me as the type that speaks out of both sides of his face.

If our commitment to Iraq is truly indefinite, we may have to consider other options.

“If the United States is going to have a significant component of its ground forces in Iraq over the next five, 10, 15 or 30 years, then the responsible course is for the president and those supporting this open-ended and escalated presence in Iraq to call for reinstating the draft.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur's article

“For the first time since Vietnam, we are caught with no strategic reserve. We simply do not have a strategic fallback position for the crisis that will come inevitably,” McCaffrey warned.

---

McCaffrey gets negative points (-2)from me for being a network TV on-call consultant, BUT, he doesn't usually spout rubbish, I admit.

I fear the same dilution of our strategic reserve as he cites/predicts. Since we've blunted the bayonet of the Active component (by having combat troops do police and civil affairs duty), and tapped to-the-max the Nat'l Guard and Reserve to flesh out our manning enough to cover both theaters of war and our other commitments - all we have remaining to defend the homeland from natural disasters or invasion is:

-troops recouperating from the combat zone,
-Strategic Air and Navy (nowadays hovering in the Persian Gulf)
-citizen militias

Then, looking at Washington's inability to organize a picnic, much less a national defense... I dispair.

The next terrorist attack on america is gonna depend on the 'average Joe' and "Jill' to step up and sacrifice, and work, and fight.

VOLAR was and is a great concept.

I hated, and still hate the inequities of a draft. No old man in D.C. (or California, for that matter) should be able to compel any 18 to 30 year old man or woman citizen to kill or be killed whether they like it or not. IMO. In this country, they get to chose. On their own. Without fear of jail or hurt or death. Guys have died for this.

I've personally already sent 2 out of 4 kids of mine to the military, and I served my own time as well - all in the interest of fullfilling a sense of duty.

I don't mind telling you all that I get disgusted by the misuse of our forces. Maybe you already figured that out.

OK, probably too many beers after work, and bad news from Iraq (but my PFC is OK, if roughed up a bit), so here's Kukri's bottom line:

-Out of Iraq by August 2007
-Out of Afghanistan by March 2008
-No draft; revamped Reserve and NG plan by June '08
-Win Lotto July '08 & retire
-Write definitive novel on the American experiment Jan '09

If the polls are to believed now, most Americans do not approve of the way the government is handling "the war". If you want to take that a step further, supposedly most Americans do not approve of the current administration. I think that if they tried to reinstate the draft, that would prove a unifying force that would pull most of us together AGAINST it for a number of reasons; the fact that this isn't a real "war", the fact that this "war" is being used largely as an excuse to enforce what's looking more and more like a police state in the US, and that seemingly most of us are getting tired of this and being "world police". Sure that's simplifying it a lot, but I think I've got the sentiments right. In short, an attempt to reinstate the draft would prove a unifying force against the current administration and would meet a stone wall of resistance from the public. If that wouldn't be a call for impeachment, I don't know what would be.

Kukri, I agree with your bottom line, except I've laid claim to the lottery bit. You can have the book part. :grin:

:balloon2:

As a soldier whos served one tour in Afghanistan and serving another in Iraq this fall, I can tell you that the pre-deployment training is not what it should be by a long shot. There are cursory cultural and religious courses given to troops, some limited language training, but no one is expected to become proficient, this is what terps and language specialsts are for. However, there is enough institutional knowledge in the military by now for many folks to have culture experience from their previous 2-3 deployments. THe worrisome thing is that this insurgency warfare is all the military knows these days, there is no training for the 'next' war.