Steve Savicki
03-29-2007, 12:55 PM
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,130497,00.html
So we're sending those back who have already been through hell. One way ticket to hell and back.
What happens? LESS time and home and MORE back in hell!
The commander in charge of supplying forces to the services for Iraq and Afghanistan said, March 28, maintaining the current "surge" of nearly 30,000 troops might mean reducing time at home for troops already weary from year-long deployments.
The head of Joint Forces Command, Gen. Lance Smith, said "it would be very difficult" to provide fresh forces to ground commanders in Iraq without shortening the 12-month "dwell time" at home base - a period when new troops can train for counterinsurgency operations and previously deployed troops can rest.
Currently, Army troops serve for about one year in Iraq and are supposed to be home for one year before they deploy again. The Marine Corps sends its units to Iraq for seven months, with seven months intended at home station - though that has been hard to attain for some in-demand units.
"If that's workable for the Marines, then why stay back for a year?" Smith said during a breakfast meeting with defense reporters in Washington.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill recently passed emergency funding legislation that restricts the president from deploying troops to Iraq for more than a year with a stipulation that troops must have at least 12 months home for every year-long deployment.
Smith said if Congress forces the Pentagon into dwell time restrictions it would "have significant impact" on his ability to flow forces to Iraq, forcing him to potentially pull units from other hotspots such as Korea.
"It would be risky," he said.
The Norfolk, Va.-based Joint Forces Command was established as the "force provider" for regional combatant commanders in 2004 and is also responsible for maintaining U.S. troop readiness standards.
Today's military is one of the most experienced and well trained in American history, Smith added, saying less time at home would not affect their performance in combat because so many of the troops are well seasoned in counterinsurgency operations.
So far, the top commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, has requested an additional 6,500 troops above the 21,500 he asked for at the beginning of the surge, including 2,200 additional military required to handle detainees swept up in the surge. Smith said that number could grow beyond 30,000 depending on events on the ground.
The use of Navy and Air Force troops for support jobs such as intelligence staff, convoy security and explosive ordnance disposal to make up for Army and Marine shortfalls would continue, Smith said. His command has already planned to provide forces for deployments through 2010.
If the surge continues, some units could be forced to stay in Iraq up to 18 months. The command has already extended a Minnesota National Guard unit - the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 34th Infantry Division - in Iraq and the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan for six months.
"The challenge is trying to keep them home long enough and to not extend them too long beyond their year in Iraq," Smith explained of his options should the surge continue into next year. "That's how we make room."
Reserve and Guard units won't be ready to deploy until late this year, he said.
Though Pentagon officials are hedging on saying how long the surge will last, Smith is beginning to look at how the U.S. military can sustain it.
"We live in a 'what if' world," he added. "We always do worst case planning."
A year for a year now reduced to 6 months and home and 18 in Iraq. Talk about serious mismanagement!
So we're sending those back who have already been through hell. One way ticket to hell and back.
What happens? LESS time and home and MORE back in hell!
The commander in charge of supplying forces to the services for Iraq and Afghanistan said, March 28, maintaining the current "surge" of nearly 30,000 troops might mean reducing time at home for troops already weary from year-long deployments.
The head of Joint Forces Command, Gen. Lance Smith, said "it would be very difficult" to provide fresh forces to ground commanders in Iraq without shortening the 12-month "dwell time" at home base - a period when new troops can train for counterinsurgency operations and previously deployed troops can rest.
Currently, Army troops serve for about one year in Iraq and are supposed to be home for one year before they deploy again. The Marine Corps sends its units to Iraq for seven months, with seven months intended at home station - though that has been hard to attain for some in-demand units.
"If that's workable for the Marines, then why stay back for a year?" Smith said during a breakfast meeting with defense reporters in Washington.
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill recently passed emergency funding legislation that restricts the president from deploying troops to Iraq for more than a year with a stipulation that troops must have at least 12 months home for every year-long deployment.
Smith said if Congress forces the Pentagon into dwell time restrictions it would "have significant impact" on his ability to flow forces to Iraq, forcing him to potentially pull units from other hotspots such as Korea.
"It would be risky," he said.
The Norfolk, Va.-based Joint Forces Command was established as the "force provider" for regional combatant commanders in 2004 and is also responsible for maintaining U.S. troop readiness standards.
Today's military is one of the most experienced and well trained in American history, Smith added, saying less time at home would not affect their performance in combat because so many of the troops are well seasoned in counterinsurgency operations.
So far, the top commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, has requested an additional 6,500 troops above the 21,500 he asked for at the beginning of the surge, including 2,200 additional military required to handle detainees swept up in the surge. Smith said that number could grow beyond 30,000 depending on events on the ground.
The use of Navy and Air Force troops for support jobs such as intelligence staff, convoy security and explosive ordnance disposal to make up for Army and Marine shortfalls would continue, Smith said. His command has already planned to provide forces for deployments through 2010.
If the surge continues, some units could be forced to stay in Iraq up to 18 months. The command has already extended a Minnesota National Guard unit - the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 34th Infantry Division - in Iraq and the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan for six months.
"The challenge is trying to keep them home long enough and to not extend them too long beyond their year in Iraq," Smith explained of his options should the surge continue into next year. "That's how we make room."
Reserve and Guard units won't be ready to deploy until late this year, he said.
Though Pentagon officials are hedging on saying how long the surge will last, Smith is beginning to look at how the U.S. military can sustain it.
"We live in a 'what if' world," he added. "We always do worst case planning."
A year for a year now reduced to 6 months and home and 18 in Iraq. Talk about serious mismanagement!