“I hope there is an unintended consequence from this, that Americans put
Iraq in perspective and realize just how few casualties we’ve lost
in comparison to our casualties in the “good war” and how much went
wrong in the most successful war we’ve fought.”
I certainly agree with that.
And, as I commented above in post 16, that WWII metric of men only being
able to take 240 days on the line
(before mental breakdown became a near-certainty)
becomes interesting when in the present-day, we have guys/gals
heading out on some of the most tense “police duty”, some for 12-15 month hitches.
Sure, I suspect the commanders try to spread the risks around the
troops as much as possible. And the risk is IEDs, sniper bullets and
ambushes, not waves of Panzers, 88 mm shells and amphetamine-jazzed
German troops...
but 12 months of wondering “is this my day” sure is a test of intestinal fortitude.
And there’s the REAL Courage factor that hits me (as a naive civilian).
How on world do the US personnel do a tour in Iraq/Afghanistan,
come home, visit the family...
AND THEN pack up and go back on a transport jet and do it again?
Especially as they may have seen more than a couple of buddies
do the ultimate sacrifice on the previous tour.
That’s some intestinal fortitude.
I don’t know if I’d be able to do that.
I think Rummy was very good on the GWOT, but one place I fault him is thinking we could fight this long war and not expand the Army. The cycle of deployments is too much and is too stressful on soldiers and their families, especially when you consider how young many of them are. My wife and I were apart for a year and a half after we had 10 years under our belts and that was very stressful.