• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Tours may be extended

Disagreeable

Well-known member
This is wrong. Those of you who were in Vietnam remember how you circled a day on the calendar. The day you would be leaving. Remember the short timer sticks? Everyone in a combat zone has the date of his rotation engraved in his mind. Now the Bush Administation is considering extending the tours of some troops. That's wrong. It violates the trust our military has with their commanders. It shows that every claim the Bush Bunch has made about progress in Iraq is a lie. Link below; my emphasis.

"Military commanders in Iraq are considering extending the deployment of an Army brigade as part of the plan to increase forces in Baghdad to quell the violence.
According to a senior Defense Department official, portions of the 172nd Brigade Combat Team, based at Fort Wainwright, Alaska, could see their return home delayed. But the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions are not final, said the proposal has not been presented to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Rumsfeld must approve any deployments that exceed 365 days. He has approved such extensions in the past, including several last fall when U.S. forces were increased to deal with violence at the time of the Iraqi elections.

The official also said that planned troop deployments to Iraq next month will go on as scheduled.

The decision to maintain about 15 combat brigades in Iraq, coupled with the new commitment to shore up Baghdad, shows how difficult it is to control the sectarian fighting in Iraq.

It also calls into question whether the Pentagon, under growing pressure from Congress and the American public, will be able to significantly reduce the number of U.S. troops in Iraq by the end of the year. Military commanders had expressed hope that troop levels could go below 100,000."


http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_national_government/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19861_4874119,00.html
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
What? No takers here? Where are those who "support the troops?" This is a terrible thing to do to these guys. They've signed up to spend a year in the hellhole of Iraq and now our incompetent Administration plans to extend them for possibly six more months and nothing from you "I support the troops" bunch? Do you think they're excited about the change of scenery? Do you think this will affect morale? Do you think being exhausted, stressed and worn out might make them careless. Do you think sending guys who have already been in Iraq for a year into the most dangerous region of the country (Baghdad) is a good thing? You all support the troops. :roll: Right.
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
What? No takers here? Where are those who "support the troops?" This is a terrible thing to do to these guys. They've signed up to spend a year in the hellhole of Iraq and now our incompetent Administration plans to extend them for possibly six more months and nothing from you "I support the troops" bunch? Do you think they're excited about the change of scenery? Do you think this will affect morale? Do you think being exhausted, stressed and worn out might make them careless. Do you think sending guys who have already been in Iraq for a year into the most dangerous region of the country (Baghdad) is a good thing? You all support the troops. :roll: Right.

Usually I don't read your stuff, Disagreeable, but could tell by the title that I needed to answer this one. Here is an article that tells the other side of the story. The Sgt. John McCrory mentioned is my wife's brother, and we are very proud of him.

Jessica Coomes
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 24, 2006 12:00 AM

Four generations of Sgt. Paul Mehaffie's family have served in the military, from his great-grandfather in the Civil War to Mehaffie's own deployment Sunday to the war in Iraq.

He said he is doing his part to end the war so that his own sons, ages 11 and 6, would not have to continue the tradition.

Mehaffie's unit, the 258th Rear Area Operations Center, is the first Arizona Army National Guard unit to be deployed a second time to Iraq since the war began in 2003.

The unit first went to Iraq in 2003, though none of the 27 individuals who departed Sunday were deployed that time.

The unit will go to Fort Bliss, Texas, and then travel to Iraq, where it will maintain the infrastructure and security at a military base.

"I'm hoping my kids never have to do this," said Mehaffie, who recently moved to California but stayed with the Arizona unit because he wanted to go to war. "If I can go over, and my kids never have to do this, I'm doing my part."

The military is also a family tradition for Sgt. John McCrory of Tonopah. But he's following his children to Iraq.

His children, Spc. Amber McCrory and Sgt. Brian McCrory, went to Iraq two years ago as part of the Nebraska Army National Guard and returned home safely, said their mother, Rhonda McCrory. Her son is training to return in August.

John McCrory served in the Nebraska Army National Guard for 20 years and never was activated. When he moved to Arizona, he joined the local National Guard because he wanted to be deployed.

"I need to help out where I can," he said. "I've been supportive of the conflict over there. Figure I better put my boots where my mouth is."

Facing up to 545 days without her husband, Rhonda McCrory on Sunday morning was calm at the Glendale Armory, where a bus picked up the soldiers. They'll be apart on their 30th anniversary.

"It's something he's wanted to do since we've been married," she said. "He's wanted to be activated. That makes it much easier."

The military is a different kind of family tradition for Capt. Jason Wolff. His wife, Michelle, is in the Air Force.

Wolff seemed relaxed about his deployment, promising to come home with a new look.

"You'll see me nice and tan," he said. "I'll have a nice little beard, if they allow it. Lose a few pounds."

Wolff, who retired from the Marine Corps, is headed to Iraq for the second time. The military couple have been separated many times before.

"It has to be done," Tech Sgt. Michelle Wolff said, "and I'm very proud of him."

War is a new family tradition for newlyweds Sgt. Kyle Schuldt and Jill Schuldt of Prescott. They have been married for two weeks.

Jill Schuldt said she was "sad and scared" and clung to her husband and cried until he boarded the bus.

Their courthouse wedding was planned in one week, and they look forward to a larger reception when Schuldt returns.
 

Hanta Yo

Well-known member
Thank YOU Soapweed for posting this.

A big Thank You to your Brother-In-Law and his kids for serving for us.

GOD BLESS AMERICA AND GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS



-Hanta Yo-
 

memanpa

Well-known member
thanks soapweed

this is not the only war where tours of duty have been extended.
had my home coming put off a couple of time so i can relate to being extended.
doesn't make it any easier but poo poo happens. all the crying and moaning does not negate need that it be done.

no matter what or where, things do not always happen in an way we want it to happen, and it is upsetting! this does not always have to be on the battle field either, i wanted to be able to ignore IT but for IT to question the support of the troops is a blatent attack on many of the board members most of who support the troops and our elected officials.

when my nephew was killed he was on his second tour,

Yes DIS i do support the troups!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
You can't make up your mind, can you dis? You bitch and moan all the time about the President not listening to commanders on the ground. Now, you post an article that clearly states:

"Military commanders in Iraq are considering extending the deployment of an Army brigade..."

But you still want to bitch and moan and blame the President? :???:
 

Turkey Track Bar

Well-known member
Soapweed said:
Disagreeable said:
What? No takers here? Where are those who "support the troops?" This is a terrible thing to do to these guys. They've signed up to spend a year in the hellhole of Iraq and now our incompetent Administration plans to extend them for possibly six more months and nothing from you "I support the troops" bunch? Do you think they're excited about the change of scenery? Do you think this will affect morale? Do you think being exhausted, stressed and worn out might make them careless. Do you think sending guys who have already been in Iraq for a year into the most dangerous region of the country (Baghdad) is a good thing? You all support the troops. :roll: Right.

Usually I don't read your stuff, Disagreeable, but could tell by the title that I needed to answer this one. Here is an article that tells the other side of the story. The Sgt. John McCrory mentioned is my wife's brother, and we are very proud of him.

Jessica Coomes
The Arizona Republic
Jul. 24, 2006 12:00 AM

Four generations of Sgt. Paul Mehaffie's family have served in the military, from his great-grandfather in the Civil War to Mehaffie's own deployment Sunday to the war in Iraq.

He said he is doing his part to end the war so that his own sons, ages 11 and 6, would not have to continue the tradition.

Mehaffie's unit, the 258th Rear Area Operations Center, is the first Arizona Army National Guard unit to be deployed a second time to Iraq since the war began in 2003.

The unit first went to Iraq in 2003, though none of the 27 individuals who departed Sunday were deployed that time.

The unit will go to Fort Bliss, Texas, and then travel to Iraq, where it will maintain the infrastructure and security at a military base.

"I'm hoping my kids never have to do this," said Mehaffie, who recently moved to California but stayed with the Arizona unit because he wanted to go to war. "If I can go over, and my kids never have to do this, I'm doing my part."

The military is also a family tradition for Sgt. John McCrory of Tonopah. But he's following his children to Iraq.

His children, Spc. Amber McCrory and Sgt. Brian McCrory, went to Iraq two years ago as part of the Nebraska Army National Guard and returned home safely, said their mother, Rhonda McCrory. Her son is training to return in August.

John McCrory served in the Nebraska Army National Guard for 20 years and never was activated. When he moved to Arizona, he joined the local National Guard because he wanted to be deployed.

"I need to help out where I can," he said. "I've been supportive of the conflict over there. Figure I better put my boots where my mouth is."

Facing up to 545 days without her husband, Rhonda McCrory on Sunday morning was calm at the Glendale Armory, where a bus picked up the soldiers. They'll be apart on their 30th anniversary.

"It's something he's wanted to do since we've been married," she said. "He's wanted to be activated. That makes it much easier."

The military is a different kind of family tradition for Capt. Jason Wolff. His wife, Michelle, is in the Air Force.

Wolff seemed relaxed about his deployment, promising to come home with a new look.

"You'll see me nice and tan," he said. "I'll have a nice little beard, if they allow it. Lose a few pounds."

Wolff, who retired from the Marine Corps, is headed to Iraq for the second time. The military couple have been separated many times before.

"It has to be done," Tech Sgt. Michelle Wolff said, "and I'm very proud of him."

War is a new family tradition for newlyweds Sgt. Kyle Schuldt and Jill Schuldt of Prescott. They have been married for two weeks.

Jill Schuldt said she was "sad and scared" and clung to her husband and cried until he boarded the bus.

Their courthouse wedding was planned in one week, and they look forward to a larger reception when Schuldt returns.

Soapweed...please relay my thanks to Peachy's brother and his family for defending our country and our precious freedom's. Heck ol' Dis should also be thanking them, because without troops to defend our freedoms, Dis likely wouldn't be able to spew his/her crap.

And, yes, I totally and completely support our troops and our President, President George W. Bush. Hate me for it, but it is my RIGHT and FREEDOM to do so. Thanks to the troops for protecting those rights and freedoms.

Cheers---

TTB :wink:
 

memanpa

Well-known member
the point you refer to is at the TOP OF YOUR HEAD commonly referred to as PINHEAD!

which in turn indicates a rather small area in which to think on your own which is proven by your cut and paste posts.

better be asking for help from your employer! the LIFD

gotta feed the puppies

here puppy here puppy
 

passin thru

Well-known member
A question for the libs............... so you think the conservatives are defending Bush and this is bad in your eyes, so does that mean the libs want Bush to fail?
 

Steve

Well-known member
That's wrong. It violates the trust our military has with their commanders

so when I was first extended for six months under Bush SR, for operational commitments, I should have lost trust in him?

then when Clinton signed the order cutting forces, which "forced me to be extended an additional year (which ended up being over 19 months, past my enlistment) I should have trusted the commander even less.....???? Nope it was his cutting the forces that lost my "trust" of him...not him making me stay and serve.....

extensions in tours, is and has been a regular part of military life. while they are difficult most of us who have served understand they are needed....had you ever served, you would also understand the need of operations...and operation commitments..
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Steve said:
That's wrong. It violates the trust our military has with their commanders

so when I was first extended for six months under Bush SR, for operational commitments, I should have lost trust in him?

then when Clinton signed the order cutting forces, which "forced me to be extended an additional year (which ended up being over 19 months, past my enlistment) I should have trusted the commander even less.....???? Nope it was his cutting the forces that lost my "trust" of him...not him making me stay and serve.....

extensions in tours, is and has been a regular part of military life. while they are difficult most of us who have served understand they are needed....had you ever served, you would also understand the need of operations...and operation commitments..

And exactly what war zone were you in? Who was shooting at you every day, blowing up roadside bombs and ambushing your convey? Were you pulled out of one hot spot and sent to probably the most dangerous area in the world for an American solider. Oops, sorry, I forgot you weren't a solider! You were probably setting safe and comfortable on a ship somewhere. There is a difference.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
passin thru said:
A question for the libs............... so you think the conservatives are defending Bush and this is bad in your eyes, so does that mean the libs want Bush to fail?

I want Bush to bring our troops home from Iraq. If you consider that failure, then yes. We never had a chance for succes in Iraq because the Bush Bunch refused to listen to professional soliders who told them they needed more troops, heavier equipment. The State Department had a set of plans, one for each ministry in Iraq, how to get it up and running. But Colin Powell, Sec of State, wasn't one of the "boys" and Bush left running Iraq to Rumsfeld. They're not trained to run a country; they're trained to take a country. After Rice became Sec State, they tried to turn it over to her, but it was too late. The insurgency had taken hold. The US War College put out a paper saying we had a year to make the lives of Iraqi citizens better than before we invaded before they turned on us. Bush let that year slip away and they turned on us.

Actually the War College has since put out a paper agreeing with me. They say even if we sent more troops, heavier equipment, etc., we would have failed. The paper (and I posted a link to it once) said using a military invasion to build a nation is destined to fail.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
X said:
You can't make up your mind, can you dis? You bitch and moan all the time about the President not listening to commanders on the ground. Now, you post an article that clearly states:

"Military commanders in Iraq are considering extending the deployment of an Army brigade..."

But you still want to bitch and moan and blame the President? :???:

Of course he made the decision. He's the Commander In Chief. Link below, but you can find this story all over the net.

"The tours of 4,000 American soldiers who had been scheduled to leave Iraq in the coming weeks have been extended for up to four months, signaling that there would almost certainly be no significant troop pullout before the year’s end, military officials and analysts said Saturday.
The extension is part of the new security plan that President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki announced last week in Washington, D.C. The plan entails sending thousands of American and Iraqi troops to the capital from elsewhere in Iraq to bolster the forces here. Since the new Iraqi government was installed in May, sectarian violence has spiraled out of control in many parts of Baghdad.

Of the 4,000 troops ordered to stay beyond their standard one-year tour, 3,500 are from the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, currently based in the northern city of Mosul, said Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a military spokesman. The other 500 come from other units.

A separate military statement on Saturday used slightly different numbers. It said 3,700 members of the 172nd Brigade were being sent to Baghdad. The eight-wheel Stryker vehicles the brigade uses are smaller and more maneuverable than the Bradley fighting vehicles and M1 Abrams tanks, making them better suited for urban combat.

The new security plan allows almost no room for significant troop withdrawals by the end of 2006, Anthony H. Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said in an interview on Saturday."



http://freeinternetpress.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7820&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
memanpa said:
the point you refer to is at the TOP OF YOUR HEAD commonly referred to as PINHEAD!

which in turn indicates a rather small area in which to think on your own which is proven by your cut and paste posts.

better be asking for help from your employer! the LIFD

gotta feed the puppies

here puppy here puppy

And that dynamic debater is heard from again. She makes so many points with her comments, it makes one's head spin! :roll:
 

memanpa

Well-known member
in your case DIS making your head spin is easy :D :D

you are on a merry go round all of the time :D :D

call LIFD they have another cut and paste for you to use


time to feed the puppies

and like MOST of your post being so far off the wall once again you refer to me as a "SHE" wrong as usual :D :D :D :D
 

Steve

Well-known member
Were you pulled out of one hot spot and sent to probably the most dangerous area in the world for an American solider.

no I wasn't a soldier, I was on a mine hunter and transfered to a mine sweep, ..

a hunter finds the mine area.......a sweep eliminates the mine threat....
I earned my VA benifits the hard way.....
 

Steve

Well-known member
And exactly what war zone were you in? Who was shooting at you every day,

The minesweepers USS Adroit (MSO 509), USS Impervious (MSO 449), and USS Leader (MSO 490) along with the newly commissioned mine countermeasures ship USS Avenger (MCM 1 ) arrived in the Gulf aboard the heavy-lift ship Super Servant III. More than 20 Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) teams were also deployed to support the mine countermeasures force. Allied minesweepers from Saudi Arabia, Great Britain and Kuwait, and the MH-53 Super Stallions of Mine Countermeasures Helicopter Squadron 14 joined the MCM effort.

After months of training off Dubai, United Arab Emirates, USMCMG staff embarked in USS Tripoli (LPH 10) on 20 January, and proceeded to the northern Gulf waters to perform their mission. As flagship for the combined operation, Tripoli's flight deck was the base for the mine-sweeping helicopters. Six British minesweepers joined their U.S. counterparts, with British and U.S. warships providing air defense.

USMCMG began its work 60 miles east of the Kuwaiti coastline, working initially to clear a 15-mile long, 1,000-yard wide path. The mine-clearing task force spent the flrst few weeks of DESERT STORM pushing 24 miles to "Point FOXTROT," a 10-mile by 3.5-mile box which became the battleship gunfire support area south of Faylaka Island.

While sweeping further toward shore, the task group was targeted by Iraqi fire control radars associated with Silkworm missile sites inside Kuwait. Task force ships moved out of Silkworm range and worked to locate the radar site. During those maneuvers on 18 February, Iraqi mines found their mark. Within three hours of each other, Tripoli and USS Princeton (CG 59) were rocked by exploding mines. As damage control teams successfully overcame flres and flooding aboard Tripoli and Princeton, Impervious, Leader and Avenger searched for additional mines in the area. Adroit led the salvage tug USS Beaufort (ATS 2) toward Princeton to tow her to safety.

Tripoli was able to continue her mission for several days before she was relieved by USS La Salle (AGF 3) and USS New Orleans (LPH 11) and proceeded to Bahrain for repairs. New Orleans provided the helicopter deck while the mine group staff moved aboard La Salle to coordinate the operation. Princeton restored her TLAM strike and AEGIS anti-air warfare defense capabilities within fifteen minutes of the mine strike, whereupon she reassumed duties as local anti-air warfare coordinator and remained on station, providing defense for the mine countermeasures group for an additional 30 hours, until relieved.

Charts and intelligence captured from Iraq showed the mine field where Tripoli and Princeton were hit was one of six laid in a 150-mile arc from Faylaka Island to the Saudi-Kuwaiti border. Within that arc, there were four additional mine-lines --a total of more than 1,000 mines --laid over a five month period.

The mine-clearing effort continued unabated. By the time the cease-fire was called, the job of reaching the Kuwaiti port of Al Shuaibah was nearly complete. Minesweepers and EOD teams from the U.S., Britain, Holland and Belgium continued to clear the path to Kuwait's main port.
http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/dstorm/ds5.htm


I served, recieved medals, citations, enough to cover a few walls, and even made it into the history books, ...how about you?
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Steve said:
And exactly what war zone were you in? Who was shooting at you every day,

The minesweepers USS Adroit (MSO 509), USS Impervious (MSO 449), and USS Leader (MSO 490) along with the newly commissioned mine countermeasures ship USS Avenger (MCM 1 ) arrived in the Gulf aboard the heavy-lift ship Super Servant III. More than 20 Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) teams were also deployed to support the mine countermeasures force. Allied minesweepers from Saudi Arabia, Great Britain and Kuwait, and the MH-53 Super Stallions of Mine Countermeasures Helicopter Squadron 14 joined the MCM effort.

After months of training off Dubai, United Arab Emirates, USMCMG staff embarked in USS Tripoli (LPH 10) on 20 January, and proceeded to the northern Gulf waters to perform their mission. As flagship for the combined operation, Tripoli's flight deck was the base for the mine-sweeping helicopters. Six British minesweepers joined their U.S. counterparts, with British and U.S. warships providing air defense.

USMCMG began its work 60 miles east of the Kuwaiti coastline, working initially to clear a 15-mile long, 1,000-yard wide path. The mine-clearing task force spent the flrst few weeks of DESERT STORM pushing 24 miles to "Point FOXTROT," a 10-mile by 3.5-mile box which became the battleship gunfire support area south of Faylaka Island.

While sweeping further toward shore, the task group was targeted by Iraqi fire control radars associated with Silkworm missile sites inside Kuwait. Task force ships moved out of Silkworm range and worked to locate the radar site. During those maneuvers on 18 February, Iraqi mines found their mark. Within three hours of each other, Tripoli and USS Princeton (CG 59) were rocked by exploding mines. As damage control teams successfully overcame flres and flooding aboard Tripoli and Princeton, Impervious, Leader and Avenger searched for additional mines in the area. Adroit led the salvage tug USS Beaufort (ATS 2) toward Princeton to tow her to safety.

Tripoli was able to continue her mission for several days before she was relieved by USS La Salle (AGF 3) and USS New Orleans (LPH 11) and proceeded to Bahrain for repairs. New Orleans provided the helicopter deck while the mine group staff moved aboard La Salle to coordinate the operation. Princeton restored her TLAM strike and AEGIS anti-air warfare defense capabilities within fifteen minutes of the mine strike, whereupon she reassumed duties as local anti-air warfare coordinator and remained on station, providing defense for the mine countermeasures group for an additional 30 hours, until relieved.

Charts and intelligence captured from Iraq showed the mine field where Tripoli and Princeton were hit was one of six laid in a 150-mile arc from Faylaka Island to the Saudi-Kuwaiti border. Within that arc, there were four additional mine-lines --a total of more than 1,000 mines --laid over a five month period.

The mine-clearing effort continued unabated. By the time the cease-fire was called, the job of reaching the Kuwaiti port of Al Shuaibah was nearly complete. Minesweepers and EOD teams from the U.S., Britain, Holland and Belgium continued to clear the path to Kuwait's main port.
http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/dstorm/ds5.htm


I served, recieved medals, citations, enough to cover a few walls, and even made it into the history books, ...how about you?
Steve, thanks for serving. I appreciate it very much.
 
Top