Bet we’d hear all about it if they needed an extra battalion, though

Families send off fewer soldiers this spring

The 82nd Airborne Division’s 1st brigade has been told to leave the 3rd battalion behind when it deploys to Afghanistan. They won’t be needed.

This is obviously good news, because it means fewer American soldiers will be in harm’s way and that things in Afghanistan are looking up.

A search of Google News turns up zip on the orders to leave one battalion behind.

If these troops are needed in Iraq, though, you can bet we’ll hear all about it. Or even if, for some reason, they’re needed in Afghanistan after all. (via ACE)

Comments

  1. things is Afghanistan also started to look good a few months after the invasion, but a resurgance of the Taliban requiured attention to be focused there again, didn’t it. Your ‘bet we would’ve heard about it if they set off a 50 nukes….’ line is getting a bit old. The exact same statement could be used against your blog, and others like it, where Iraq is simply a place where freedom is spewing forth, gushing like newly drilled oil wells, where every Iraqi is ‘standing thier ground’ in spite of daily Iraqi deaths (obviously they are standing their ground, do you expect the entire country to just pack up and leave for thier ‘summer country’ till conditions improve???) These deaths are ignored, since they are seen as acceptable consequences by your type. Perhaps you should ask an Iraqi who has lost someone if they like the present conditions, or if things really are looking up, or if the marching sound of freedom is louder than the sound of explosives, or if they really are grateful to the Americans? To you, it does not matter that there never was a tie between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. It does not matter that the world is really not a safer place than before the invasion of Iraq. To you, it does not matter that the ‘regime change’ was supposedly only being considered because Saddam was an imminent threat to world security. That basis for invoking ‘regime change’ was found to be false. Can Chins now say it wants ‘regime change’ in the US, because it sees it as a threat to world security? Or does it need some kind of basis for this statement? And please do not insult, well, intellegence by saying this was just about helping the Iraqi people. ‘Iraqi Freedom’ was not a charitable act, funded by the American Red Cross. If you believe this, then I have a bridge I would love to sell you. Even your own government did not claim it was a purely charitable act (to be repaid by Iraqi Oil Money), it just happened to fall back more and more on this argument as its other arguments fell apart (WMDs, Saddm = Al Qaeda, imminent threat, etc).

  2. Jeff: ‘To you, it does not matter that there never was a tie between Al-Qaeda and Saddam.’ About that you are 100% correct. I never said there was a direct connection, and my support for regime change was not based *at all* upon Saddam-AQ ties or ‘revenge’ for 9/11. Beyond that, though, you make a lot of generalities about my site and people like me when it seems pretty apparent that you either haven’t read much of my site or, if you have, you haven’t understood much of it.

  3. Since the new BCTUAs (Brigade Combat Team Unit of Action) stood up, the functional number of battalions in a brigade is not 3, but 6, with Field Artillery, Engineer, and support units rolled into the mix. So leaving behind one infantry battalion isn’t all that traumatizing. And under the new setup, the 3rd BN of every light brigade is a RSTA (Reconnaissance, Surveillance, Target Acquisition … basically CAV) with half the personnel of the other battalions and entirely vehicle-mounted. My guess is that they thought about the kind of terrain they were going to (more than likely severely mountainous) and thought about the virtue of bringing along 3rd BN to supply the role of six weak dismounted companies who could (maybe) pull off static site security and decided to leave them behind. And just because 3rd BN isn’t deploying means all the soldiers are staying behind. More than likely, there are a number of leftover 11B’s or 19K’s on ‘loan’ to the other two BNs to make up for personnel shortfalls (i.e. AWOL soldiers they can’t remove from the books) in MTOE for this deployment. But this is all just conjecture since I haven’t asked any of my friends in/from Bragg what is going on. As for ‘jeff’ … ‘Perhaps you should ask an Iraqi who has lost someone if they like the present conditions, or if things really are looking up, or if the marching sound of freedom is louder than the sound of explosives, or if they really are grateful to the Americans?’ I did ask the Iraqis and worked besides them. They don’t like the present conditions either, but they like the possibility of a better future, one that wouldn’t have existed had we not arrived. I’m sure I would have heard that from everyone, but there were a good number of people with their tongues cut out by the local thuggery for speaking ill of Saddam walking around wherever I went. As for the sound of ‘explosives’ and gunfire, that happens every Thursday as Muslims traditionally wed on that day (Friday being their holy day) and their means of celebration is unleashing small-arms fire into the sky. That happens every other day as tribes, clans, and gangs duke it out in public with automatic weapons. I have seen (and busted) teenagers with a multitude of knives, knuckledusters, chains, spikes, and one assault weapon (AKM or RPK) wandering the streets picking fights with each other. That’s the sort of country it was before we arrived. ‘To you, it does not matter that there never was a tie between Al-Qaeda and Saddam. It does not matter that the world is really not a safer place than before the invasion of Iraq.’ From your limited perspective and limited sources of intelligence, I am sure that you are comfortable with this view of yours, which is by the way protected by all democratic governments through force of arms. Of course, that there has been no successful attack on American soil since 9/11, or that in Iraq we have engaged from the earliest days hardened fighters from Algeria to Pakistan, does not impact your consciousness. You also seem to think that Saddam had complete control over his nation, which was not the case either. Perhaps you would do better to look at the seditious career of Uday, that of various Iranian-backed movements active in Iraq, or read, say, analyses from STRATFOR. ‘And please do not insult, well, intellegence by saying this was just about helping the Iraqi people.’ This, however seems to be beyond you because the rhetorical devices you use are both commonplace and disguise a singular lack of relevance on your part to the issues at hand. Perhaps you would care to regale us with your firsthand experience working with Iraqi refugees or your charity work in the Middle East. When you demonstrate professional competence and a higher understanding of the issues, I am certain your voice will sound much more like informed opinion and less like the background noise from a kennel.