Stints may get longer for U.S. troops

---

Wednesday, June 20th 2007, 4:00 AM

---

WASHINGTON - The new 15-month tours for Army personnel in Iraq could get even longer if the current Baghdad troop surge has to be extended, the Army’s top civilian said yesterday.

Acting Army Secretary Pete Geren told the Senate he was concerned that “you can destroy an army by burning the soldier out or burning the family out,” but longer tours have to be considered if President Bush orders the surge to last into next year.

Other options for filling out the ranks would be to rely on the National Guard and reserves, who also are pressed thin, or to put more Navy and Air Force personnel into ground service, Geren said.

“It’s too early to look into the next year, but for the Army we have to begin to plan,” Geren said at his Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing.
read more …

First of all, this comes as no surprise. There simply are not enough troops to go around. There are a bunch of Navy, Coast Guard and Air Force folks in for a rude awakening, I fear.

Perhaps, Bush should consider paying the troops as much as Black Hawk guys make. As long as he is determined to blow money on this conflict those who carry the burden should benefit.

However, far more likely will be an old wartime policy as yet not initiated. That would be that all personnel are frozen for the duration. Nobody gets out. Deployments would be permanent. All enlistments would be for “the duration”. Of course, there would be no set time for that duration.

Consequently, we would not have as many enlistments. If left unchecked, Bush is likely to set us up so that his successor will have no option but to implement a draft just to get enough people together to cover our retreat.

It, of course, would be Bush’s mess, but guess who would be stuck with the cleanup bill.

Guess who would get the blame?

Powered by ScribeFire.