Posted on 09/16/2004 7:07:11 PM PDT by churchillbuff
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) - Soldiers from a combat unit at Fort Carson say they have been told to re-enlist for three more years or be transferred to other units expected to deploy to Iraq, the Rocky Mountain News reported Thursday.
Hundreds of soldiers from the 3rd Brigade Combat Team were presented with that message and a re-enlistment form in a series of assemblies last week, two soldiers who spoke on condition of anonymity told the newspaper.
"They said if you refuse to re-enlist with the 3rd Brigade, we'll send you down to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which is going to Iraq for a year, and you can stay with them, or we'll send you to Korea, or to Fort Riley (in Kansas) where they're going to Iraq," said one of the soldiers, a sergeant.
The second soldier, an enlisted man, echoed that view: "They told us if we don't re-enlist, then we'd have to be reassigned. And where we're most needed is in units that are going back to Iraq in the next couple of months. So if you think you're getting out, you're not."
The sergeant told the News the threat has outraged soldiers who are close to fulfilling their service obligation.
"We have a whole platoon who refuses to sign," he said.
An unidentified Fort Carson spokesman said Wednesday that 3rd Brigade recruitment officers denied threatening the soldiers with more duty in Iraq.
"I can only tell you what the retention officers told us: The soldiers were not being told they will go to Iraq, but they may go to Iraq," said the spokesman, who confirmed the re-enlistment drive is under way.
One of the soldiers provided the form to the News. If signed, it would bind the soldier to the 3rd Brigade until Dec. 31, 2007.
An Army spokesman, Lt. Col. Gerard Healy, said sending soldiers to Iraq with less than one year of their enlistment remaining "would not be taken lightly."
"There's probably a lot of places on post where they could put those folks (who don't re-enlist) until their time expires," he said. "But I don't want to rule out the possibility that they could go to a unit that might deploy."
Extending a soldier's active duty is within Army authority, since the enlistment contract carries an eight-year obligation, even if a soldier signs up for shorter terms. Members of Iraq-bound units can be retained for an entire year in Iraq, even if their active-duty enlistment expires.
"I don't want to go back to Iraq," the sergeant told the News. "I went through a lot of things for the Army that weren't necessary and were risky. Iraq has changed a lot of people."
The enlisted soldier said the recruiters' message left him "filled with dread."
"For me, it wasn't about going back to Iraq. It's just the fact that I'm ready to get out of the Army," he said.
No, they aren't; it's people who put the worst possible spin on every report they can find to make the United States look bad.
Agreed.
They would deny the existence of said nuke until after it was set off, and then likely follow along with the yelping pack dogs screaming "Why wasn't something DONE beforehand?"
"By that definition, anyone who reports a U.S. casualty in Iraq is "doing the work of the terrorists."
If you go back and read the thread, you will see that 'churchillbuff' was not just reporting casualties.
Amen and Amen.
Bullpucky liar boy.
NOW, is a sarin shell a WMD or not?
Perhaps you should quote Howlin correctly.
Howlin said this in REBUTTAL to sheltonmac's short one sentence screed worthy of Burkeman1.
"it's people who put the worst possible spin on every report they can find to make the United States look bad."
U.S. Weapons Inspector: Iraq Had No WMD
U.S. Weapons Inspector to Conclude Iraq Had No WMD, Only Idle Programs Saddam Hoped to Revive
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON Sept. 17, 2004 — Fallen Iraqi President Saddam Hussein did not have stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, but left signs that he had idle programs he someday hoped to revive, the top U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq concludes in a draft report due out soon.
According to people familiar with the 1,500-page report, the head of the Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, will find that Saddam was importing banned materials, working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of U.N. agreements and maintaining a dual-use industrial sector that could produce weapons.
Is a Sarin shell a WMD or not, answer the question.
You were asked a DIRECT question repeatedly.
And here you try dodging it by quoting who exactly?
David Kay and Hans Blix?
The Associated Press who couldn't find their own butts with both hands even if someone CRAZY glued their hands in place for them?
Why didn't you NAME the US weapon inspector.. because it's Scott Ritter?
And you're saying that the Sarin shell that was rigged as an IED is what, a hallucination of the guys who got hit with it?
Stop bugging you?
You LIED and are being dishonest.
You have no gravitas!
You certianly are not being very churchillian about you answer direct questions. you have failed to respond to another of my posts today, and you continue to dodge answering a direct question from other posters here.
And just so we can get you aboard the clue train here.
Sarin is a deadly WMD even is small doses. It is a chemical compound that attacks the central nevrous system. and to claim that Iraq did not have is living in a dream world. Why don't you ask the thousands of Kurds who were killed in the early 90's by "Chemical" Ali who shell kurdish villages with the same type of shells that IED was made with.
Just answer this question for me since you think Iraq was not a real enemy. Who is a real enemy of the U.S.?
I am awaiting your answer. If you fail to answer I will consider it fact then that you conceded the point that Iraq was not a real enemy of the U.S.
Ask the administration's weapons inspector. He says there aren't WMDs in Iraq. If he's wrong, send him -- not me -- an indignant message!
Good job dodging the question.
Answer the question.
WHICH weapon inspector are you referring to?
It's dodge-the-question antics like this that make wish for a TA-312...
Why do you not answer this question. Are you afraid to give a direct answer? and once again you ignored my questions so I assume that you concede the point.
see post 159
Yeah!
Or an 'Angry-39' hooked to a Gunners Display Unit and a howitzer.
"FDC send firing data"
Naw, just wire up the interrogation subject and give it a good crank (c8
He's very afraid to say which weapons inspector he's referring to, and he refuses to give a direct straight non-clinton two stepped answer as to what a WMD is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.