Soldiers say force level comments no surprise, but could affect re-enlistm

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=31078


Gen. Peter Schoomaker’s comments that troops levels in Iraq could remain unchanged for the next four years didn’t come as much of a surprise to soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But the news could affect decisions to stay in or get out of the Army, the soldiers said after hearing the news Sunday.

“We came here to do a job and then go home, whether that takes 10 years or even 15 years,” said Spc. Allan Annaert, from Headquarters Support Company, of the 94th Engineer Combat Battalion, (Heavy), which is stationed in Mosul, Iraq.

For Annaert, the thought of returning to Iraq would weigh heavy on any decision to stay in the Army.

“I joined the Army after the war in Iraq started and I caught the tail end of ,” he said. “After a year in Germany, I’m back for a year. For me personally, if it could mean coming back here once or even twice more, I would probably get out when my enlistment is up.”

[Son of California]

1. Remember that all peace movement catch phrase:

What if there was a war -but no one showed up?

is that where we are headed right now?

not able to find enough people who actually want to fight in it?

[AndyTiedye]

12. There Was a Poster. I Want to Get it Reprinted

[lebkuchen]

2. He would be going back more than twice

A lot of vets who have 10 years or more in know that the rest of their military careers will center on Middle East tours.

[Bobbieo]

3. Going Back To War

What ever makes you think they will let you out, if you are still alive, once your enlistment is up? You're there for the duration unless the "people" bring your home

[mom cat]

5. Welcome to DU Bobbieo. I guess the "people" had better get busier!

:hi:

[daleo]

4. There is probably about a one percent chance of being killed per year

The chances of being badly wounded are probably a four or five percent, and less seriously wounded about ten percent. That's bound to color your attitude about making it a career.

[ewagner]

6. According to Spc Annaert,

“We came here to do a job and then go home, whether that takes 10 years or even 15 years,”

Exactly what job is that?

[Bobbieo]

7. We c ame here (to Iraq) to do a job!

Know what folks? That job description gets fuzzier by the day. What I really feel for are all of those guys who come back after a stint is this war with their heads so screwed up they won't know reality from the war. Paranoia sets in and they lose it. PTSD will run rampant.

[kiraboo]

8. It's statements liike that one which make it hard for me to

"support the troops" with the enthusiasm many here demand. A "job"? A job. Christ.

[MADem]

9. That is ONE ditzy guy who was WILLING to speak to a reporter

The UCMJ is very clear about disrespect, and they get very shirty indeed when it involves the monkey-in-chief, who IS in charge of our Armed Forces.

The SOP is that when you don't agree, gripe amongst yourselves, but ZIP it when it comes to talking to outsiders. You could end up in a CAPT's Mast/Art 15 hearing otherwise, and forfeit rank, pay, and (rather small) freedoms for opening your mouth. When you live in a hellhole, a few hours in the MWR tent is like paradise....restriction denies you that small luxury. So you STFU, and stew quietly.

In Vietnam, the attitude was different because the source of the servicemember was different. Guys who were drafted felt shanghaied, so they had no loyalty to the organization. The ones in Iraq volunteered, they are professionals, and they made the decision of their own volition, even though the newcomers were lied to in order to get them to sign up.

I certainly hope you would not allow odd opinions that are clearly endorsed by the Public Information/Public Affairs weenies at these hellhole outposts to color your support for these kids--they are taking it up the wazoo, and they are under orders, and have no real options. It's not like you can hop the Greyhound out of Baghdad...and your loyalty to your fellow servicemembers makes it hard to let THEM down.

About the best they can do is write griping letters home--even the bloggers have been shut down by the gubmint...no dissent tolerated, that's the uniformed way.

[kiraboo]

11. I must admit that my ambivalence comes not from this one article

or others like it, but more from personal experience with people in my town. There are a lot of military families who don't appear to be questioning the rationality of their son following in dad's footsteps despite the evidence that the military is just the wrong place to look for a career these days. Morally and in every other respect. But I see your point - and hadn't looked at it that way before. So thanks.

[MADem]

15. You saw the same thing during Vietnam

...where the parents, most of whom served in WW2, initially supported that mess because they figured that their country made good decisions, and was slow to commit troops, thus the cause MUST be just. It took quite a while for the 'silent majority' to turn on Nixon, but when they did, they did it decisively.

A lot of the military families are either just toe-ing the party line (easier to do when YOUR loved one is safe at home stateside, or deployed in, say, Germany or Japan), in abject denial, and failing those options, grossly uninformed. Those not fitting any of those categories are stupid, frankly. And there are plenty of stupid people in the world, why should the military be any different?

There is a shitload of grumbling at the senior levels--most think rummy is a fucking nutcase, that the chimp is not in the loop or does not give a shit about the important details, and that the uniformed services are heading rapidly towards the HOLLOW MILITARY of the 70's...only this time, the problem is not so much cash as it is TALENT. But the bright spot about that shitload of grumbling--in the service, the shit rolls downhill.

If these bozos are serious about trying to keep these kids in rotation to the sandbox for four to ten years, the exodus will become a hemmorhage....and there will be plenty of commentary as these kids forfeit their once-loved careers--and not much of it positive, I will wager. They are being asked to do an impossible task and shoulder an unreasonable load, and it looks like it is only going to get worse.

[wli]

10. any URL's to that Vietnam-era mutiny?

I heard that that was one of the major factors in pulling out or some such.

[Bigmack]

13. Look for...

The collapse of the Armed Forces - Col Robert Heinl in Armed Forces Journal june 1971 (I don't have a URL)

Here's some notes I took regarding that collapse:

"They have separate companies for men who refuse to go into the field. Operations have incredibly rag-tag. American garrisons on the larger bases are virtually disarmed.. In the Americal divisions fragging during 1971 have averaged one a week.."

In 1969 196th lt infantry brigade refused to advance into combat. 520 attacks on officers between 69 & 71, pentagon estimated one in ten reported.

Congress reported the 15% of troops in 1970 using heroin...racial incidents are erupting murderously in all services. desertion rate in the army in 1970 was 22.5 per thousand, over twice the peak rate for Korea but below the highest rate of 63 per thousand in early 1945. The Marines rate for 1970 was actually higher than the army's....24.1 per thousand in 1970

"Sedition, desertion, race, drugs, breakdown of authority, abandonment of discipline, result in the lowest state of military morale in the history of the country."

5 west point grad testified at Cong. Ron Dellums hearing on us war crimes in Vietnam.

[wli]

14. your post was enlightening in and of itself

Thanks, excellent info.