15,000 More U.S. Troops Told to Prepare for Iraq

Reuters ^ | 09-26-03

[Brian S]

Fri September 26, 2003 09:13 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military, faced with reluctance by other nations to send forces to Iraq, on Friday night activated 10,000 Army National Guard troops to go there and put 5,000 more Army Guard soldiers on alert for likely service in Iraq.

The mobilization order for the 30th Infantry Brigade from North Carolina and the 39th Infantry Brigade from Arkansas, each with 5,000 troops, to mobilize over the next two weeks had been expected. They were earlier alerted for replacement rotation into Iraq, where the United States now has about 130,000 troops.

The Army also announced on Friday night it was alerting the 81st National Guard Brigade from Washington state, also with 5,000 troops, to be prepared for a likely call to active duty in Iraq.

[Pharmboy]

Even the New York Times reported today that a poll among Iraqis showed about 70% are happy that the Yanks threw Saddam out. Let's get the job finished.

I would hope that the additional troops will make it safer for all of our men and women over there.

[ARCADIA]

At least we will have effective troops and there will be no strings attached by the UN.

[tsmith130]

These are replacement troops, not additional, correct? Or am I reading the story wrong?

[Pharmboy]

It's hard to say for sure. Either they had been activated for rotation and are now going there just for that, or they were originally activated for rotation but are now going to be additional troops.

[Rome2000]

NPR is doing weekly reports about how spouses of our fighting men feel betrayed by Bush and the GOP over the "long" deployments" in the WAR ZONE.

Of course, the liberal media ignores the sacrifice of the guard during peace time, but goes looking for malcontents the minute they are called to active duty.

The leftist media is actualy a bigger threat to our nation than the enemy.

At least we can kill the enemy.

[tsmith130]

I have a feeling that this was previously planned and the troops are replacements. Reuters, in it's continuing effort to skew all stories to make the US look bad, purposely wrote it this way to confuse people.

[demlosers]

I'd say they are replacement troops who will replace a division in a few months probably 6 months. That's the 1 year mark for many U.S. troops in Iraq. Giving them plenty of lead time to prepare.

[GraniteStateConservative]

There is a risk of a political loss from the families of these guardsmen/women since the expectation is that Guard and reserve members would be pulled from their jobs, homes and children only for emergencies, and even then only for as long as they are urgently needed. Most of these guardmembers signed up based on that assumption.

You also risk a drop in new sign-ups if they discover that they are not really going to be helpers in the effort, but more like the core.

The problem is that we need the civil affairs expertise of these troops-- but lawyers and doctors and such from other countries would serve our needs equally well.

This makes it more critical that Bush repeat to the public why the war was/is noble.

[OldFriend]

The military has announced that they have met or exceeded ALL recruitment goals.

[demlosers]

NPR is doing weekly reports about how spouses of our fighting men feel betrayed by Bush and the GOP over the "long" deployments" in the WAR ZONE.

Good ole NPR, those wimps sure like to put-out crappy whine news.

[mystery-ak]

Yes, they are replacement troops...as soon as they get there and are operational, my hubby can come home.

[tsmith130]

I hope that is soon, for your sake...and HIS! BTW....tell him THANK YOU AND WELL DONE!

[mystery-ak]

Soon.....between Feb and April...no exact date yet...he's been gone since last Feb.....he does get a 2 week leave in Nov though!!!

[tsmith130]

In time for turkey with all the trimmings!?

[mystery-ak]

...you betcha!

[GraniteStateConservative]

I'm talking about reserves-- part-timers. They are just now being asked to bear a heavier load with extended stays and larger call-ups. That hasn't filtered, yet. It may not hurt recruiting for that. I hope not, but I may be wrong. These people are civilians who serve. They have more traditional lives and have a different expectation about their commitment. The wives, particularly, may run away from Bush next year.