Posted: Saturday, September 30, 2006 7:00 pm
For the second time since August the Army last week extended combat tours of soldiers in Iraq.
The U.S. military is being stretched thin. It’s time for the Bush administration to come to grip with the reality that it must add troops to live up to military commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The latest unit to have its tour extended was the 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division. Earlier the 172nd Stryker Brigade was ordered to extend its tour, even though hundreds in the unit already had returned to the brigade’s home base in Alaska.
Remember back at the start of the year when the administration was talking about reducing the number of troops in Iraq to 100,000 by the end of the year?
It’s not happening. And the Army is losing ground on its goal of providing two years between combat tours. Units now are returning to Iraq in almost half that time.
After the fall of communism, the Army was cut from 750,000 to under 500,000. Congress recently approved adding 30,000 troops to bring the total to 512,000. Army officials say they now have about 504,000 soldiers.
Many outside analysts, ranging from conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute and more liberal oragnizations like the Brookings Institution and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, think the currently approved level is still too small.
Military equipment also is needs replacement. Nearly 1,500 worn-out fighting vehicles are setting at the Red River Army Depot in Texas, and 500 useless tanks at the Anniston Depot in Alabama, McClatchy news service’s military correspondent Joe Galloway reported last week.
In a low-grade confrontation over resources, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, Army Chief of Staff has refused to submit the budget demanded by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Schoomaker referred to Rumsfeld’s proposal as a “broken budget.”
Rumsfeld and his inner circle of advisers consistently have underestimated the number of troops needed for success in Iraq, and have consistently been wrong on how rapidly order would be restored. In fact the lowest number of active military troops in Iraq was recorded in 2004.
As Nebraskans well know, for a time the military made heavy use of National Guard and reserve troops. Since then the military has scaled back on that usage, which of course just meant more reliance on the active military.
The Army, Marines and other military branches have performed well under difficult conditions in Iraq, fighting under conditions and confronting challenges that were not envisoned by their civilian leaders. They need more reinforcements and better support.