Fatigue Cripples US Army in Iraq

[Reincarnated]

Fatigue Cripples US Army in Iraq

By Peter Beaumont

The Observer UK

Exhaustion and combat stress are besieging US troops in Iraq as they battle with a new type of warfare. Some even rely on Red Bull to get through the day. As desertions and absences increase, the military is struggling to cope with the crisis.

Lieutenant Clay Hanna looks sick and white. Like his colleagues he does not seem to sleep. Hanna says he catches up by napping on a cot between operations in the command centre, amid the noise of radio. He is up at 6am and tries to go to sleep by 2am or 3am. But there are operations to go on, planning to be done and after-action reports that need to be written. And war interposes its own deadly agenda that requires his attention and wakes him up.

When he emerges from his naps there is something old and paper-thin about his skin, something sketchy about his movements as the days go by.

The Americans he commands, like the other men at Sullivan - a combat outpost in Zafraniya, south east Baghdad - hit their cots when they get in from operations. But even when they wake up there is something tired and groggy about them. They are on duty for five days at a time and off for two days. When they get back to the forward operating base, they do their laundry and sleep and count the days until they will get home. It is an exhaustion that accumulates over the patrols and the rotations, over the multiple deployments, until it all joins up, wiping out any memory of leave or time at home. Until life is nothing but Iraq.

Hanna and his men are not alone in being tired most of the time. A whole army is exhausted and worn out. You see the young soldiers washed up like driftwood at Baghdad's international airport, waiting to go on leave or returning to their units, sleeping on their body armour on floors and in the dust.

Source

It's time to end this illegal occuption and bring these men & woman home.

[questionmark]

So, should we start taking bets on how this is going to end?

[+joc]

It's time to end this illegal occuption and bring these men & woman home.

No...it's time to stop sniveling and start supporting them and their mission!

[Lord Umbarger]

I've heard it both ways. Exhausted and exilierated to be there. Personally, no one has yet shown me why this couldn't have been won and over by now. The only thing that I can think of is that the U.S. is trying to bleed the enemy dry of manpower and resources. It is a stratagy that worked quite well in the War of Northern Aggression as well as WWII against the Japanese. I don't know if it could work here and now though.

[Reincarnated]

No...it's time to stop sniveling and start supporting them and their mission!

I'm not sure which skewed & twisted dimension you are currently in but here in reality, simply wishing them well is not going to help.

[__Kratos__]

It's time to end this illegal occuption and bring these men & woman home.

If you don't support the war... Why do you have a pro-war avatar?

[questionmark]

If you don't support the war... Why do you have a pro-war avatar?

Does satire sound like something you know?

[Reincarnated]

It's funny (but still very disturbing) taking a peak into the alternate reality of neo-conservatives. They think some how if everyone in the US favored the war, we are going to magically win and that the only support our troops need are 'good lucks'.

[questionmark]

It's funny (but still very disturbing) taking a peak into the alternate reality of neo-conservatives. They think some how if everyone in the US favored the war, we are going to magically win and that the only support our troops need are 'good lucks'.

Which is, at the end of the day, all they get from anyone.

[__Kratos__]

Does satire sound like something you know?

I know it. Just funny how someone with a pro-war avatar can be so against the war. Unless he doesn't know what the avatar means behind the message but rather just focused on the words themselves... Which I have seen him do in the past... Just didn't think to bring it up till I saw it in his avatar rather then just a picture on the forum...

Representative James Moran (D-Va), a liberal Democrat opposed to the Bush administration. As such, strongly disliked by Bush supporters. One Bush supporter disliked him so much that he made a sign saying "Get a brain, Morans!" obviously with the intent to imply that Representative James Moran is a moron.

Representative James Moran: "I believe that the war in Iraq is the most pressing issue facing our country today. An early and outspoken opponent of the war, I voted against authorizing the President to go to war, co-authoring the Democratic alternative resolution which required President Bush to fully exhaust all diplomatic options before taking military action. I was also the original author of legislation that required the Defense Department, for the first time, to begin providing Congress with regular reports detailing how military operations were progressing in Iraq."

Sign guy: "Get a brain, Moran! Go USA!"

It's funny (but still very disturbing) taking a peak into the alternate reality of neo-conservatives. They think some how if everyone in the US favored the war, we are going to magically win and that the only support our troops need are 'good lucks'.

They think that? The military has been working and doing their jobs for the last few years despite an unfavorable opinion in the US and attacks on them and their jobs from elected people.

I do agree that troop deployments are too long and it's creating problems. Though what are they (the government) to do about it? Nearly everybody trained for those jobs have been over there a few times. You say to get out of Iraq... But you don't think Iraq needs us after we blew their country to hell? Then you also don't think that terrorist cells in Iraq won't grow and become a future problem for our national later on? Terrorists are there now even if they weren't before Saddam.

Edited August 12, 2007 by __Kratos__

[Oxymoron]

You know what our soldiers are tired of they are tired of you neohipies and peacnicks being depressing and defeatist. No news is good news , according to you our soliders are the SS, our president is Hitler, you are a traitor and you give comfort to our enemies. If you dont support the war then vote for a change stop making us look like b****es, we will win with you or without you but you will make it 10 time harder, you people would be a great loyalist during the revolutionary war just lke Benedict Arnold.

[Reincarnated]

You know what our soldiers are tired of they are tired of you neohipies and peacnicks being depressing and defeatist. No news is good news , according to you our soliders are the SS, our president is Hitler, you are a traitor and you give comfort to our enemies. If you dont support the war then vote for a change stop making us look like b****es, we will win with you or without you but you will make it 10 time harder, you people would be a great loyalist during the revolutionary war just lke Benedict Arnold.

You should change your name to Oxymoran.

[Oxymoron]

You should change your name to Oxymoran.

Real clever of you.

[Lord Umbarger]

So, is there any reason that the far left can't support the troops? Am I the only one that heard that one Dem saying that if the September Report was positive that it would not bode well for the Dem party? Why are they so dead set on seeing the U.S. lose? Why do they try to vote down every bill that would help the troops win?

[Reincarnated]

Am I the only one that heard that one Dem saying that if the September Report was positive that it would not bode well for the Dem party?

There are greedy b******* on both sides.

So, is there any reason that the far left can't support the troops? Why are they so dead set on seeing the U.S. lose? Why do they try to vote down every bill that would help the troops win?

Can you be more specific on what bills you are referring to? Also, our good friend Bob posted this a few days ago: Bush Fights Dem Plan to Boost School Aid for Veterans. To many; bringing them home would be a victory. Especially under the current circumstances. Your spin about the left not supporting our troops and wanting them to lose is extremely immature and irrational.

[Oxymoron]

So, is there any reason that the far left can't support the troops? Am I the only one that heard that one Dem saying that if the September Report was positive that it would not bode well for the Dem party? Why are they so dead set on seeing the U.S. lose? Why do they try to vote down every bill that would help the troops win?

Both parties have misplaced their balls, there is no leadership at any level of goverment. We need leaders who will do what is in the best interest of this country popular or not Bush had the initiative but not the capability. That is why we who support the troops and our mission must step up and be heard over the screaming yellow NEOHippies.

[questionmark]

So, is there any reason that the far left can't support the troops? Am I the only one that heard that one Dem saying that if the September Report was positive that it would not bode well for the Dem party? Why are they so dead set on seeing the U.S. lose? Why do they try to vote down every bill that would help the troops win?

The left, no matter how far, supports the troops. What they don't support is a bunch of brainless idiots that send them, unnecessarily, in harms way.

No matter how you turn Iraq, that is thing is over. The only decision left is if it will cost the American taxpayer 10 or 20 billion and 4000 dead soldiers or 8000.

Why do I say that?

Because Iraq is beyond any stage where it could have been controlled by military means. It is not the military who lost this one. Except counted deviants they did their job as well as they could and the incompetent planners let them.

Oh yes, we could tell soldiers to shoot at everything that moves, in fact we could organize a permanent occupation. But is it worth it? Look at Israel, 40 years after winning a war ... the problems are bigger that in '67.

The hearts and minds are lost. Now all that is left is to cut the losses. And that is a far greater support for the troops than bragging speeches of nationalism and All American Values. Those are the kinds of things people do when they know to have lost. If you don't believe me listen to the Nazi speeches from '44 on. They sound exactly the same.

[Lord Umbarger]

QUOTE(Lord Umbarger @ Aug 12 2007, 07:14 PM)

Am I the only one that heard that one Dem saying that if the September Report was positive that it would not bode well for the Dem party?

There are greedy b******* on both sides.

O.K., now I can agree with your responce there, 100%. I would replace "There" with the word "They" but, other than that, I think that we are probably on the same page here.

The left, no matter how far, supports the troops. What they don't support is a bunch of brainless idiots that send them, unnecessarily, in harms way.

When the troops were first sent into Iraq, there was a belief that it WAS necessary. It is widly seen as a bad call now though. My major Kvetch is that we do not seem to be trying to win. We are fighting with one hand behind our back. A well placed nuke would scare the devil out of them and make them think twice about continueing inthe face of such firepower. Unfortunately, there are those on both sides of the isle that are scared to death of showing Americas true power. They seem to be trying to balance the fight and keep it fair.

We are NOT boxers. We should not have any interest in keepig it "Fair". We should be interested only in winning as quickly as possible and coming home. To do anything else is to allow them to bleed us dry and is a recipe for loss. It's what the Soviets did in Afganistan, and it is what we did in Viet Nam. The British were afraid to send troop to North America in the late 1700 and lost the colonies. It seems that instead of trying to win quickly, we are trying to lose it as slowly as possible.

[Oxymoron]

O.K., now I can agree with your responce there, 100%. I would replace "There" with the word "They" but, other than that, I think that we are probably on the same page here.

When the troops were first sent into Iraq, there was a belief that it WAS necessary. It is widly seen as a bad call now though. My major Kvetch is that we do not seem to be trying to win. We are fighting with one hand behind our back. A well placed nuke would scare the devil out of them and make them think twice about continueing inthe face of such firepower. Unfortunately, there are those on both sides of the isle that are scared to death of showing Americas true power. They seem to be trying to balance the fight and keep it fair.

We are NOT boxers. We should not have any interest in keepig it "Fair". We should be interested only in winning as quickly as possible and coming home. To do anything else is to allow them to bleed us dry and is a recipe for loss. It's what the Soviets did in Afganistan, and it is what we did in Viet Nam. The British were afraid to send troop to North America in the late 1700 and lost the colonies. It seems that instead of trying to win quickly, we are trying to lose it as slowly as possible.

I Agree we need to learn to untie the Militarys hands ounce we have them commited.

[Essene]

I did two tours years ago in that region and each was suppose to be six months and ended up being eleven months each. As for this fiasco, bone head Bush didn't listen to his head military man when he stated we needed three times the soldiers to occupy Iraq after the war was complete, Bush fired him and put someone else in charge that was to do and say as Bush wanted. In reality all we did was set off a religious war between the Shiites and the Sunnis and it will get worse, we need to either get the job done or leave but to get the job done maybe a mission impossible as these sects have been fighting for centuries. It wont end till one sect wins, period. Either that or partition the country into three separate countries which would include the Kurds having their state, that is the ONLY way the war MAY end but good ol boy Bush refuses this.

The left, no matter how far, supports the troops. What they don't support is a bunch of brainless idiots that send them, unnecessarily, in harms way.

No matter how you turn Iraq, that is thing is over. The only decision left is if it will cost the American taxpayer 10 or 20 billion and 4000 dead soldiers or 8000.

Why do I say that?

Because Iraq is beyond any stage where it could have been controlled by military means. It is not the military who lost this one. Except counted deviants they did their job as well as they could and the incompetent planners let them.

Oh yes, we could tell soldiers to shoot at everything that moves, in fact we could organize a permanent occupation. But is it worth it? Look at Israel, 40 years after winning a war ... the problems are bigger that in '67.

The hearts and minds are lost. Now all that is left is to cut the losses. And that is a far greater support for the troops than bragging speeches of nationalism and All American Values. Those are the kinds of things people do when they know to have lost. If you don't believe me listen to the Nazi speeches from '44 on. They sound exactly the same.

[Oxymoron]

I did two tours years ago in that region and each was suppose to be six months and ended up being eleven months each. As for this fiasco, bone head Bush didn't listen to his head military man when he stated we needed three times the soldiers to occupy Iraq after the war was complete, Bush fired him and put someone else in charge that was to do and say as Bush wanted. In reality all we did was set off a religious war between the Shiites and the Sunnis and it will get worse, we need to either get the job done or leave but to get the job done maybe a mission impossible as these sects have been fighting for centuries. It wont end till one sect wins, period. Either that or partition the country into three separate countries which would include the Kurds having their state, that is the ONLY way the war MAY end but good ol boy Bush refuses this.

Thank you for your service. I agree Bush should of put in at least 400,000 troops to do the job right in the first place, and we wouldnt have this power struggle today. i think Bush really dropped the ball, but that does not mean we should give up, lets finish our mission the right way not repeat the withdrawl of vietnam.

Edited August 12, 2007 by Oxymoron

[Reincarnated]

I did two tours years ago in that region and each was suppose to be six months and ended up being eleven months each. As for this fiasco, bone head Bush didn't listen to his head military man when he stated we needed three times the soldiers to occupy Iraq after the war was complete, Bush fired him and put someone else in charge that was to do and say as Bush wanted. In reality all we did was set off a religious war between the Shiites and the Sunnis and it will get worse, we need to either get the job done or leave but to get the job done maybe a mission impossible as these sects have been fighting for centuries. It wont end till one sect wins, period. Either that or partition the country into three separate countries which would include the Kurds having their state, that is the ONLY way the war MAY end but good ol boy Bush refuses this.

Thanks for your service. I have been trying to stress what you are saying for some time now. I have close friends in the military that are serving double and even triple the amount of time they were told. Not only that but there is a lack of proper supplies and armor. Then there was the Walter Reed hospital scandal. It makes you wonder where all these billions upon billions of dollars went to. Then when the Americans are sick of this and want our soldiers home... we get spit in the face by ignorant false patriots who say we don't support the troops.

[Fluffybunny]

No...it's time to stop sniveling and start supporting them and their mission!

Unfortunately right now the best support they could get for their mission is to give them enough soldiers to give the ones on their 3rd tour time to come home and recoup for a while. All of the well wishes and such are wonderful, but the bottom line is that the guy that has been in a combat zone for 2 or 3 years needs a break more than he needs a cheerleader.

Too many people speak of supporting the troops without actually doing anything tangible to do so.

The best support would be for folsk to head down to their recruiters office and sign up for a couple of years and give the men and women on the front lines some time off. There will be plenty of time for them to rotate back in in the following years but for right now every single one of the guys that I served with are exhausted beyond words; their home life is falling apart, they are financialy destroyed and just looking for the next chance to come home and get a break.

[Bob26003]

No...it's time to stop sniveling and start supporting them and their mission!

Sorry, I dont support our brave soldiers dying over a pack of lies. Thats not Patriotic.

[+joc]

Unfortunately right now the best support they could get for their mission is to give them enough soldiers to give the ones on their 3rd tour time to come home and recoup for a while. All of the well wishes and such are wonderful, but the bottom line is that the guy that has been in a combat zone for 2 or 3 years needs a break more than he needs a cheerleader.

Too many people speak of supporting the troops without actually doing anything tangible to do so.

The best support would be for folsk to head down to their recruiters office and sign up for a couple of years and give the men and women on the front lines some time off. There will be plenty of time for them to rotate back in in the following years but for right now every single one of the guys that I served with are exhausted beyond words; their home life is falling apart, they are financialy destroyed and just looking for the next chance to come home and get a break.

Listen up Bob, Reincarnated, QuestionMark....The best support would be for folsk to head down to their recruiters office and sign up for a couple of years and give the men and women on the front lines some time off.

That about says it all I reckon...thanks FluffyBunny...if you have been over there and come back and say...'you know what guys..to hell with that war, lets get the hell out of there!'....then you have something to say that I would listen to...but to just whine and snivel while guys are getting shot at and getting blown up...while you just sit there at your comp and whaaa, whaaa, whaaa....and ya'll think THAT is patriotic?!

Edit: It occurs to me that Fluffs post was probably more directed at those who say they support the war...and he's right!! THAT GOES FOR ALL OF YOU!!! Soooo easy to say you support the troops and sit at your comp while guys are getting shot at and getting blown up! If you support them...go join them so some of them can take a break!

Edited August 13, 2007 by joc