Why is the USA military telling troops they will have to spend 15 months in Iraq?

Question

Should it be 12 months max?

Answer 1

Too few troops in a war that has been poorly executed and still is and we are just stretched to the max, so they have to stay.

The sad part is battle fatigue and accidents go way up after a year, but this administration couldn't care less.

Answer 2

It seems like what the military says is always different than what they do which really sucks. But it could mean that they want to tell people this now in case that if the 12 months that they have to do gets extended. why are they still there and why is more being sent? it just seems like the military wants to do so much more than is not needed at the expanse of troops lives, to look like they are doing need work. if any one knows the military mission tell me, what would happen if ALL the troop just came home? would we all die, would iraq be distorye? I mean Iraq is already being distroyed by us being there anyway.

Answer 3

It was 12 months before Rumsfeld left and Bush started building up the troops strength the way it should have been in Iraq.

We unfortunately had to go to 15 months because the military has been so cut down in size since the "fall of the wall".

Unfortunately our fearless leaders figured we could operate on half the troops we used to have.

Answer 4

that's worst case scenario... they don't want the morale to go down if they really have to keep them in iraq that long.... which happened before to many units.. i.e. Stryker Brigade from Alaska(army).... everything you hear in the military is never final and they always changing. I was told that we might be in Iraq for 15 months for my first tour but ended up staying for a total of 13months instead.

Answer 5

Saudi Arabia and its massive oil reserves are incredibly stable and our get get right of entry to to is fairly particular. Saddam grew to grow to be a unfastened cannon and could not be depended on for some thing. Iraq grew to grow to be available to guard as a substitute to Arabia for oil thinking the certainty that our very final option, Iran, grew to grow to be not particular and grew to grow to be plenty extra durable to guard. on an analogous time as you're a spoiled and sheltered ivory tower elite you will think of of that's undesirable. yet as quickly as you're extra advantageous rational you will understand what anybody did till a century interior the previous on an analogous time as the spoiling and sheltering of youngsters grew to grow to be a virus indoors the western worldwide. Now optimum persons stay in fairy tale worlds and not understand the harsher desires of life indoors the certainly worldwide.

Answer 6

While a "normal" tour may be 12 months, the Army is always free to adjust as necessary.

Answer 7

All branches but the army said NO to 15 month tours. And the army isalready doing 12 month with an average of 2 month stop loss. Its simply a shortage of people for rotations.

Answer 8

In all fairness, it should be twelve months...but military life is seldom fair.

I have had friends deployed there extend their tours voluntarily in order to help get the job done, but for some others it is a burden.

Answer 9

Ok, Erudite. Here you go again . . .

Where are you getting your info? From the Big Boys restaurant that you claim to frequent and get tons of military information over eggs and bacon?

You are a pain in the ars on this military forum cuz you're fake.

Answer 10

We don't have enough troops to bring them home after 12 months. We also don't have enough troops to allow for adequate training and time back home before redeployment.

Bad planning (actually no planning) by this administration.

Virginia Senator tried to pass legislation giving them adequate down time but Republicans blocked it.