Thursday, June 21, 2007

Army Considering Longer Tours

I find it interesting that in the following article, that only the Democrats are against extending combat tours and reducing a soldier's time at home.

Suggesting that Republicans on the whole want our soldier's tours extended and their time at home limited.

the military has over the course of the war, lengthened tours and shortened the time at home. Again we're told that Republicans have been for this, while Democrats are against it.

Is there a point where Republicans will say that enough is enough? Or will we come to a point where we are debating whether to allow our soldiers to come home at all?

Is there anyone who doubts that their tours won't be extended?

Perhaps they'll go to 16/10?

Army considers longer combat tours again

"Acting Army Secretary Pete Geren testified Tuesday that the service is reviewing other options, including relying more heavily on Army reservists or Navy and Air Force personnel, so as not to put more pressure on a stretched active-duty force.

Most soldiers spend 15 months in combat with a guaranteed 12 months home, a rotation plan that has infuriated Democrats because it exceeds the service's goal of giving troops equal time home as in combat. In coming weeks, the Senate will vote on a proposal by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., that would restrict deployments."


At 4:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, the joys of an "all volunteer" military.

The mentality of TPTB seems to have evolved into something along the lines of "well, since they volunteered, we can shit on them and they can't complain." Plus, it keeps the pain of the conflict much more insulated to a smaller group (the same folks are now serving 2nd and even 3rd tours).

If the US had mandatory 2-year conscription (like many nations, from the former Soviet republics to Israel), this war would already be over.

At 4:48 PM, Blogger Meh said...

Interesting blog. Found you through C&R. Will definitely be back.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home