Also see below:
Governors Warn of Troop Buildup's Impact on Guard •
Go to Original
Two Army Units Will Forgo Desert Training
By Robert Burns
The Associated Press
Tuesday 27 February 2007
Rushed by President Bush's decision to reinforce Baghdad with thousands
more U.S. troops, two Army combat brigades are skipping their usual
session at the Army's premier training range in California and instead
are making final preparations at their home bases.
Some in Congress and others outside the Army are beginning to question
the switch, which is not widely known. They wonder whether it means the
Army is cutting corners in preparing soldiers for combat, since they are
forgoing training in a desert setting that was designed specially to
prepare them for the challenges of Iraq.
Army officials say the two brigades will be as ready as any others that
deploy to Iraq, even though they will not have the benefit of training
in counterinsurgency tactics at the National Training Center at Fort
Irwin, Calif., which has been outfitted to simulate conditions in Iraq
for units that are heading there on yearlong tours.
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said Monday she is concerned about the
"less-than-ideal training situation" for the 4th Stryker Brigade of
the
2nd Infantry Division, which is based in her state and is one of the two
brigades that did its final training at home. That brigade is to go to
Iraq in April, one month earlier than planned.
The other is the 2nd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division, based at Fort
Stewart, Ga., which is due to go in May for its third combat tour since
the war began in 2003. Instead of going to the National Training Center
first, it imported personnel and equipment - even Toyota pickups like
those used by Iraqi insurgents - from the training center at Fort Irwin
for two weeks of final rehearsals that begin Wednesday.
A spokesman for the brigade, Lt. Col. Randy Martin, said the soldiers
lose nothing by the switch, while shaving about two weeks off their
pre-deployment training schedule.
"It's realistic training," he said. "I don't think that anyone
would say
readiness is affected" negatively. He noted that another brigade from
his division underwent similar home-station training before it deployed
in January.
"The preferred method is to have them come here," a spokesman at
the
National Training Center, John Wagstaffe, said in a telephone interview
Monday. The main things that cannot be replicated in a home station
exercise are the vast spaces of the National Training Center, which is
located in the Mojave Desert, and the weather and other environmental
conditions that so closely resemble much of Iraq, Wagstaffe said.
"Your weapon won't jam from sand at Fort Stewart," he said.
Murray said she does not doubt the ability of soldiers to adapt.
"They have done everything we have asked of them," she said. "However,
I
am deeply troubled by the president's escalation plan and am committed
to questioning the new demands it places on service members."
On a visit to the brigade's home station at Fort Lewis last week, Murray
asked the top commander there, Lt. Gen. James Dubik, whether the
soldiers' preparation for Iraq was adequate without going to the
National Training Center, according to a Fort Lewis spokesman, Lt. Col.
Dan Williams, who said he attended Dubik's meeting with Murray.
Dubik assured her it was, William said. The general told her he was
confident "that they were ready to go" to Iraq even if they had not
had
1,300 soldiers imported from the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort
Polk to play the role of Iraqi insurgents and civilians and to observe
and control the mission rehearsal exercise.
"They went through all the things they know they're going to do in
Iraq," Williams said.
Some outside observers say it was inevitable that, in a pinch, the Army
would tinker with training.
"It tracks with what we should expect when we hurry the units up in
their last three months" before a deployment, said Kevin Ryan, a retired
brigadier general and former Army planner who is now at Harvard
University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Army
commanders are compelled to make "economies," he added, when an
accelerated deployment plan forces them to compress some aspects of
training.
Ryan said he doubts this approach will significantly detract from the
soldiers' degree of preparation for Iraq.
"'Adequate' is probably a good description of what that training is,"
he
said. "It's not the premier kind of situation that commanders would
prefer, but it is adequate." Daniel Goure, a military analyst at the
Lexington Institute, a think tank, said, "This shouldn't have a decisive
impact, although it carries a modicum of risk."
The two units that are skipping their National Training Center sessions
are among five Army brigades that are being dispatched to Baghdad on an
sped-up schedule as the centerpiece of Bush's new approach to
stabilizing Iraq.
The first to go, in January, was an 82nd Airborne brigade specially
designated for short-notice deployments; it did no full-scale final
exercise before deploying to Kuwait and then into Iraq.
The next two, from Fort Benning, Ga., and Fort Riley, Kan., did their
final training sessions at the National Training Center. The unit from
Fort Riley is entering Iraq now and the other is due to arrive in March.
Go to Original
Governors Warn of Troop Buildup's Impact on Guard
By Molly Hennessy-Fiske
The Los Angeles Times
Sunday 25 February 2007
Both Republicans and Democrats say Bush's
Iraq plan
will tax already strained units.
Washington - Republican and Democratic governors meeting here Saturday
warned that President Bush's "surge" of additional troops to Iraq
would
put added pressure on National Guard units already stretched to their
limits.
"We the governors rely on the Guard to respond to natural disasters, a
pandemic or terrorist attack," said North Carolina Gov. Michael F.
Easley, a Democrat. "Currently, we don't have the manpower or the
equipment to perform that dual role" of responding to both state and
federal needs.
The Pentagon last week announced plans to send 14,000 National Guard
members to Iraq next year as support for the 21,500 troops to be
deployed under Bush's plan. The announcement came on the heels of a
change in Pentagon policy to deploy Guard troops more frequently but to
limit tours to a year; the average now is 18 months.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, said the federal government
must follow through on its pledge to replace equipment taken by Guard
troops to Iraq.
"Those promises need to be kept," Pawlenty said. "We'll be able
to test
that, because we have a significant number coming back this summer.
We'll be able to see if the equipment comes back."
The governors' willingness to challenge the buildup reflects overall
impatience with Washington, which has inspired a slew of state
initiatives to tackle such issues as global warming, energy efficiency
and healthcare.
Eighty-eight percent of stateside Army National Guard units are "very
poorly equipped," with less than half of what they need to respond to a
domestic crisis, Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum testified a few weeks ago to
the independent Commission on the National Guard and Reserves.
Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, coordinates between the states
and the Pentagon.
He said 45% of Air National Guard units lacked the necessary equipment
to deploy.
Last month, National Guard officials notified commanders in Arkansas,
Indiana, Oklahoma and Ohio that their combat brigades - each about 3,500
strong - might be the first to return to Iraq under the new guidelines,
redeploying between January and July of next year. All four states sent
troops to Afghanistan and Iraq in 2004. Under the old rules, Oklahoma
was not scheduled to be called on again until 2010; the other three
states, 2009.
In interviews, National Guard officials in Arkansas, Indiana and
Oklahoma said their units were short on rifles and other basic equipment.
"We are hurting in equipment nationally, Guard-wide," said Lt. Col.
Deedra Thombleson of the Indiana National Guard.
Governors, in town for a National Governors Assn. meeting, plan to raise
the issue Monday at a White House session with Bush. Guard officials
plan to talk to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates about it Tuesday.
"We will do all that we can to support the effort, but getting the
equipment to do that will be a challenge," said Maj. Gen. Roger Lempke,
head of the Nebraska National Guard and president of the Adjutants
General Assn. of the United States.
Equipping the Guard is of particular concern in states such as
California and Florida, where troops are routinely called to respond to
natural disasters like hurricanes and forest fires.
"We want to protect our troops and make sure they have what they need
to
deal with natural disasters," said Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a
Republican.
Gov. Easley of North Carolina called National Guard equipment levels
across the country "putridly inadequate."
And without adequate equipment, he said, the National Guard's role in
the buildup would amount to "a squandered mobilization."
With plans to increase the frequency of Guard deployments - now once
every six years - North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven, a Republican, said that
getting enough troops for a second rotation in Iraq was "a concern."
The governors association president, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, a
Democrat who has advocated sending National Guard troops to secure the
U.S.-Mexico border, said the Guard was "being stretched" to respond
to
the buildup.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, is reviewing the
plans with his National Guard leadership to assess the impact on the
state. He has advocated doing what's necessary to ensure success in Iraq
but said he would not support a policy jeopardizing California's safety.
-------
Jump to today's Truthout Features:
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
Print This Story
E-mail This Story