Posted on 12/05/2007 6:49:41 AM PST by RDTF
The Army's top general Tuesday acknowledged that his soldiers and their families are "stretched" and "stressed" by six years of war and will need a steady commitment of increased funding to keep the Army from sliding into the "hollow" force of the 1970s.
Gen. George Casey said the fight between Congress and the White House over the supplemental funding for Iraq and Afghanistan makes his job more difficult and sends "a terrible signal" to the troops fighting the war.
In a presentation to the Brookings Institution, the Army chief of staff appeared to try to strike a balance by giving a candid description of the problems facing his service and what it needs to recover while denying the more dire warnings from some analysts and critics. But Casey emphasized that the strain on his troops and the wear and destruction of equipment from the current pace of deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan are "unsustainable."
Casey predicted a decision in three or four months on whether the Army troop level in Iraq could be reduced below the current 15 combat brigades.
Even if the commitment to Iraq is reduced and the Army can meet its goal of adding 74,000 soldiers, he said it would take three or four years of effort and increased funding to restore a force that is capable of meeting the full range of military challenges.
Noting the additional $17 billion in Army funding that Congress provided last year to improve readiness, Casey said: "Getting the resources to reset the force is the difference between a hollow force and a force that's ready to do the next thing."
Asked about the ongoing dispute between President Bush and the Democratic leaders in Congress over providing $196.4 billion in additional supplemental war funding, Casey stated the obvious that "not having predictable, timely funding makes it harder for me to do my job." And, he added, "What's going on now sends a terrible signal to my soldiers and their families."
Casey noted that thousands of soldiers are returning from 15-month combat tours while Pentagon officials are warning about ending services at their home bases to divert money from the normal budget to the war.
Bush issued another demand Tuesday that Congress approve the additional war supplemental without the timeline for removing U.S. combat forces from Iraq that Democratic leaders are demanding.
The general, responding to a question, acknowledged that the Army is granting nearly twice as many "moral" waivers for recruits as it did five years ago, but said 80 percent of those are for misdemeanor offenses. "The notion out there that we're enlisting felons is not true," he said.
Casey stressed the need to reduce the pace of deployments so his troops could remain home more than a year. With such a rapid turnaround between combat tours, the Army is unable to train for anything but the current counter insurgency operations, he said.
It would require at least 18 months between deployments for the Army to train a force able to handle "the full spectrum of combat," which would include a conventional conflict against a major adversary, Casey added.
But we, perhaps foolishly, thought if we were called upon to fight the Sov's in Germany (the primary mission my unit trained for) we could get the job done.
I like Gen Casey, I trust Gen Casey, I’m certain Gen Casey is right about the deployment and funding crisin that the army faces.
The right answer is more than just money and optempo, though:
1. First, the force is the wrong size and has been since it was cut from 18 divisions. If we currently had 18 divisions, that would spread the deployments out to once every 3 years. That would be more than sustainable.
2. The current length of deployment is 15 months for active duty. My son-in-law is on one of these deployments, and it isn’t necessary. A deployment need not be for more than 4 months if the Country felt like putting the money behind it. These guys are all so familiar with Iraq by now that they could swap out the people on the same weapons just by flying the personnel in and flying the departing out. They do it with SpecOps all the time.
More like where does he get the troops from? The army is on a 15 months overseas and less than 12 months home rotation right now. The only way to staff the surge and find extra troops for Afganistan is to cut the at-home time even more.
Still and all - you’re appreciated! Thanks for serving our country.
God bless your son and prayers for his safety!
I thank you for your service and all soldiers who have and are sering. I am sick of seeing the soldiers from vietnam being treated like dirt it is long over do to you and others for a proper home coming. So I will say it again thank you
Correct. I mean't "here" as in FR and the great majority of places in the US.
I don't consider "Daily Kos" and "DU" to be real since they are fact-free zones. They're more like comic book porn.
But every generation of Vets is “The Greatest” just for protecting the freedoms of us and ones they don’t even know, all over this World.
[Mr] T
Thank You.
Thinking about it, two weeks from today, he’ll be home, just in time for Christmas.
[Mr] T
[Mr] T
Thank your son for his service and please tell him that we are beginning to see what Michael Yon has been saying for a few months that Iraq is a victory and Afghanistan is fast reaching the point of a “do-over” due to Taliban-Terrorist resurgance.
I personally don’t know what is a good length of time or number of times to be deployed, but you don’t want to replace a knowledgeable soldier with a newbie.
And I do agree with you about needing a bigger standing military, but to be used to show force in other problem areas. I doubt if Iran and North Korea would be antagonistic if we had large forces on their door step.
[Mr] T
Thank you and we’ll relay your message.
[Mr] T
And I will pass along your son’s thoughts to my son who is in the process of deploying for 15 months to Camp Salerno near the Pakistani border in Afghanistan as a Sat-Com specialist.
Its good to know that they want to all pitch in
I completely understand that side of things too — my brother was there for a year. We couldn’t hear from him often enough — even if it was twice a day. We waited on pins and needles when we knew he was moving from one safe location, thru “Indian Country,” to another safe spot until we heard that he’d arrived ok. I guess I’m not really saying that it’s better when we get no news, it’s just that I think in WWII our country was more protected from the everyday bad news, and we were able more easily to focus on Victory. Maybe I’m looking thru rose colored glasses, too. I wasn’t alive then, I’m just going on what I see in the movies from back then. Everyone wanted to WIN.
Whoops — I forgot to ask you to thank your daughter for me — and thank YOU for raising a hero.
And we’ll pray for your son and for his safe return.
[Mr] T
>>The Army’s top general Tuesday acknowledged that his soldiers and their families are “stretched” and “stressed” by six years of war and will need a steady commitment of increased funding to keep the Army from sliding into the “hollow” force of the 1970s.<<
We also need to attract more volunteers by returning to broad policies that treat soldiers and veterans well.
You’re correct about that, Mr.T. HUG
Hey Mr.T — that’s great news!! Please thank him for me!
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.