PDA

View Full Version : Man, this would stink


john4
08-15-2006, 04:20 PM
Just-returned troops sent back to Iraq
By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 14, 9:19 PM ET


WASHINGTON - About 300 Alaska-based soldiers sent home from Iraq just before their unit's deployment was extended last month must now go back, the Army said Monday, setting up a wrenching departure for troops and families who thought their service there was finished.
The soldiers — all from the 172nd Stryker Brigade — are among the close to 380 troops who had gotten home to Fort Wainwright and to Fort Richardson when Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld ordered the unit to serve four more months. The remaining 80 will not have to return to Iraq.
Army officials sent a team of personnel and pay experts to Alaska to help sort out all of the soldiers' vacations, school enrollments and other plans torn apart by the decision to return them to Iraq. The unit is now being stationed in Baghdad, one of the most violent parts of the country.
Maj. Gen. Charles Jacoby, commander of U.S. Army Alaska, said 301 soldiers will be returning to Iraq, and most are either infantry troops or cavalry scouts needed for the Baghdad mission.
"From a military standpoint, it makes all the sense in the world," said Jacoby, speaking to Pentagon (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Pentagon) reporters from Alaska, where he was surrounded by a few soldiers and family members affected by the decision. "The brigade needs these soldiers back."
Mary Cheney — no relation to the vice president — was sitting nearby and said she wasn't happy when she learned her husband, Staff Sgt. Anthony Cheney, would be in Iraq for another four months. But she said she knew when she married him that things like this could happen.
"I would never question his dedication to his career," said Cheney, who had a baby just a few weeks ago and has three other children. "His heart is with his family, but his mind and his dedication" are with his extended family of fellow soldiers.
The bulk of the 172nd Brigade was still in Iraq when Rumsfeld extended their deployment as part of a plan to quell the escalating violence in Baghdad. Overall, the brigade has about 3,900 troops.
Another 300 soldiers from the unit had left Iraq and gotten to Kuwait, and were about to board flights home when they were called back.
Before Monday's announcement, the troops who had already returned home to Alaska had been told that decisions on their fates would be made on a case-by-case basis.
Army officials said they recalled just one other time during the three-year-long Iraq war when the Pentagon so quickly recalled soldiers who had served a year on the battlefront and gotten home.
Other units have had their deployments extended anywhere from a week or two to a few months.
The 300 soldiers recalled from Alaska on Monday got to spend between three and five weeks at home, and will head back to Iraq in the next week or so. Most of the brigade is expected to leave Iraq by the end of the year, although Army spokesman Paul Boyce said Monday there are no assurances the unit's stay will not be extended again.
A second extension, however, would be very rare.
For some, the return to Iraq may mean they will miss the holidays or much-anticipated vacations. For others, it means rescheduling military or civilian college classes, or postponing long-planned moves out of state or to different Army units.
Soldiers who serve more than 365 days on the warfront will receive $1,000 more per month — $800 for incentive pay and $200 for additional hazardous duty pay.
Last week eight Army officials went to Alaska to meet with the soldiers and their families to work out scheduling conflicts and other problems brought on by the sudden change. Hotlines also have been set up to assist family members.

About 50 of the approximately 80 soldiers who do not have to return to Iraq were the advance team that headed back to Alaska early to prepare for the unit's return. They will stay in Alaska and plan for the unit's eventual return late this year.
The other 30 or so included soldiers who were not sent back for a variety of reasons, including medical conditions, school requirements or emergency leave.
Sectarian violence has rocked Baghdad, bringing it to what some believe is the brink of civil war. In response, U.S. and Iraqi military leaders have shifted thousands of troops into Baghdad, targeting four critical regions wracked by attacks between Sunni insurgents and Shiite extremists.
The new offensive has driven the number of U.S. troops in Iraq up to 135,000 — reversing a trend of declining personnel levels that had begun earlier this year. And, the increased level dampens hopes of a significant withdrawal of U.S. troops by the end of the year, just as members of Congress returned to their home districts to voters growing increasingly weary of the war. Rumsfeld must approve any deployment that is longer than a year on the ground in Iraq.

gwhilikerz
08-15-2006, 04:53 PM
I remember when Pres. Bush said we were not into "Nation Building", that we were fighting a war against terrorism. Then how come we have lost so many brave young people AFTER Hussein was defeated? I know i'm not gonna be popular with my statements here but I have to say it. We can't, nor should we try to impose democracy on another country. To my way of thinking it isn't a democracy then.
I know some of you say we are confronting the terrorists in Iraq so we won't have to confront them here someday. Sorry. I don't buy that. We are confronting a mixture of all types of ideologies there, a big part of whom think they are fighting FOR Iraq against an invader. Then there is the conflict between Sunni and Sheite (spelling). Iraq is a civil war now and our young soldiers are dying to protect one side from the other, often not knowing from day to day which side is which.
We are told that we can't leave now (cut and run they call it) or no one in the middle east will respect or trust us. To me that is a lame excuse. Who cares if they trust us? Why should we try to win their respect at the cost of our own soldiers? I'll stop now so you can look for stones only saying one more thing. They would respect us a lot more if whenever we found terrorists being supported and protected by a country we leveled that country and walked away. We lose a lot fewer troops in war than in the re-building. My opinion.

schroader
08-15-2006, 05:17 PM
My FRIEND FREEDOM IS NOT FREE. If it wasnt for those soldiers You would not have the freedom to do what you want..such as hunt, fish, go to Church. I dont agree with the US being over there in the first place but We cant walk away now.
Most of the troops that are there now have done been there and volenteered to go back....

My God be with all the Soldiers and there Familys..

gwhilikerz
08-15-2006, 05:32 PM
Shroader i agree with you about Freedom not being Free. And I support our troops. But where does it say we must pay for someone else's freedom, especially when they don't want freedom as we know it? I'm not trying to start anything but whenever our troops are used to bring about freedom in another country's civil war we pay dearly. This war in Iraq is turning into another Vietnam. The politicians play the war for the benefit of their party, while the military goes thru all sorts of gyrations trying to accomplish a mission that changes daily. We are being invaded daily by hordes of illegals crossing out borders, probably terrorists among them. And we do nothing about that but we are in another country trying to impose our ways on them. Sorry if i'm not making myself very clear about this.
As far as our soldiers paying for our freedom, well, been there, done that. And i have much respect and love for those who do it today. God Bless them.

grouser68
08-15-2006, 06:08 PM
Sad story, but Iraq seems to be a revolving door for many troops!

john4
08-15-2006, 11:30 PM
Can you imagine how that phone call went. "Uh PFC Jones this is SGT Hobbs and I got some bad news, are you sitting down? Yeah SGT what is it, well Hobbs hope you haven't unpacked your gear yet cause you'll need to report at 0530 tomorrow the unit has been extended and we have to go back to Iraq in the morning. No, are you Fu*^$& kidding me, Unfortunately I'm not."

I mean the whole idea of being extended sucks big time, but to have actually gotten back to the states and then to have to go back. That really sucks. Psychologically I can't imagine it. You look forward to that day, that 365 man, it's on the calendar and you know it by heart. YOu do your time and look forward to the day when you see your replacements come in, they come in and you train them and then you come off the line, then the day comes when you clear your FOB and actually move out and head to Kuwait. YOu get to Kuwait and Hurry up and wait, then you finally get on the Freedom Bird back to the states. Then you get word that your unit has been extended and you have to go back. Man...... It would be hard to get soldiers to have confidence in what you tell them when actions such as this are taken by the government. Yes, many units are being extended right now, but they get their extensions while still in country. They were never under the illusion that they had made it and where back state side.

It really just stinks and I truely feel sorry for them.

grouser68
08-16-2006, 12:39 AM
Unfortunately, there is a 30 day window upon arrival from a combat zone that you don't have to do any training, srp,or mobilization, you just go! In most cases they ask you to volunteer about 3 weeks prior, then let you come home for 3 weeks before starting another tour. Seems we are to the bare bones and these poor fellows are probably the first of many that will have to endure such hard luck!

gwhilikerz
08-16-2006, 09:15 AM
The whole situation stinks.

grouser68
08-16-2006, 05:21 PM
The whole situation stinks.

TRUE!DITTO!