Why is the pentagon struggling to find fresh troops?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070310/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_troops
2007-03-09 23:20:52 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
theres no such thing as an intelligent republican
2007-03-09 23:23:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Short answer: This is a war of time, not body count and Bush administration preferes a volunteer army, not conscription. They want the troops that are there to be the very best--troops that want to fight. We are running out of the best men and women. Its not that so many are dying. It is that they serve numerous tours and need to go home to raise families.
Long answer:
We have an all volunteer army. Bush refuses to draft and the war has dragged on longer than WW2, and the Civil War.
Probably the longest war an American volunteer army has fought since the Revolution. Its always hard to maintain troop levels in a long war.
General George Washington and the founders of that war and our nation had a horrible time keeping troops in the fight. As many men were freezing to death or suffering fatal diseases as were being killed in battle. Getting new recreits was no easy task.
Washington had order the execution of several of his own men who threatened insurrection. The civil war was the same.
People lose faith in the war--any war. And with the threat that the war may end with the politics of the Democrats, who wants to be the last causalty in a political struggle? The Democrats hold Congress and are invested in the defeat of U.S. forces in Iraq.
Who wants to fight and die for them? Who wants to fight and die to become a statistic for the Democrat's political war against Bush?
Bush wants the men and women of our armed forces to become victors. Democrats want them to become victims.
2007-03-10 12:09:08 · answer #2 · answered by Sean W 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Easily answered.
3 month rotations for Air force.
1 year rotations for most of the rest.
Now factor in that there is more to the contingencies than just Afghanistan, and Iraq as far as support. I.E. the other middle eastern countries.
If you are in the service more than 1 year you have probably been to at least one of these countries.
Once you have been through the rotations you are put on a list to not go again unless you ask or its forced. Hence, only soldiers and sailors that havent been in the past 3 years would be eligible to go.
Basically, they are trying to keep troops out of harms way as much as possible while still keeping the mission going. Wow, someone actually thought that part through huh.... .
Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.
2007-03-10 07:40:56 · answer #3 · answered by jerod_gavel 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You know, insults like these are doing absolutely nothing to bring about any positive conclusions to anything.
The article answers your question. The Pentagon is attempting to cycle the troops in such a way as to have the least possible negative impact.
Please stop trying to stir up trouble. We have enough to deal with without these childish games.
2007-03-10 07:30:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Even the highest ranking generals in the U.S. armed services find it frustrating that the troops aren't more easily deployed. One general said that the U.S. armed services deployment was like a keg of beer, with, the spicket at the top of the barrel.
2007-03-10 07:26:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Given that so little positive news (if any) is being reported and so many Americans are opposed to the war, young potential recruits are not joining the military. It's one thing to think that if one enlists, one will be viewed as a "Hero" protecting his/her country and another to know that if one enlists, so many peers will view the person as a "killer, stupid, Bush Lackey, etc. etc. etc."
Please show honor and appreciation for those wiling to sacrifice.
2007-03-10 07:36:13 · answer #6 · answered by Regor29205 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm dumb and a registered Dem,but yet i supported Bush until i realized i had been duped...but i think it is because the troops were promised 2-years of party for 1-year of combat time,,,plus bonus checks year round...the republicans needed the draft years ago...oh but voluntary force is strong,,,,LIES ALL LIES..freepress
2007-03-10 07:31:21 · answer #7 · answered by decider JR 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because Republicans like wars but only if someone else fights them surly some people that show so much support for the war could inlist and help solve this problem.
2007-03-10 09:30:11 · answer #8 · answered by David R 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because we fail to have compulsory military service like most countries do. Americans, by and large, are candy arses who are filled with all kinds of bravado and hot air when it comes to standing on the line and serving our country. Or did you want a more tactful answer?
2007-03-10 07:52:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
According to the article, because of "5 years of war". I'm a literate Republican, so I can read and comprehend.
2007-03-10 07:25:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋