US army stretched to breaking point

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by dan_man, Jan 25, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/01/25/army.study.ap/index.html

    Wow so its not just us Brits..... I do wish one day policticians would listen to military men instead of focusing on bits of paper with numbers on them and think about the realism of the situation.
     
  2. listen to military men?
    about the same time they give out decent kit and enough of it!
     
  3. It all come's down to the old rule.

    Don't confuse ambition with ability.

    As an ex everything I really respect the job that you, the serving Soldier's are doing.

    Toe
     
  4. The Army is certainly going to be spending some time recovering from this one. I would not go as far as to say they're at breaking point, but if another war breaks out anywhere, there are going to be some very unhappy soldiers. If they're in Iraq, they're staying in Iraq, no year-long-tours for the duration.

    The Guard is going to take a bit more time to fix.

    NTM
     
  5. Do you see the war as becoming more unpopular? I see it here in Louisiana all the time. Even those folks most supportive in the beginning are starting to question it.
     
  6. Rumsfeld said he has not read the study , but took issue with it's conclusions....

    :roll:
     
  7. it would appear that people are confusing some things here...there are two components to force numbers/strength; recruitment and retention.

    Recruitment may, in some areas, be off target. That is to say there may be fewer NEW soldiers coming into service then expected and some of it is seasonal and some of it is economical (we do have a unemployement rate of less then 5% in the US currently) and some of it is related to the ongoing conflicts and the risks they carry.

    Retention rate is high. That is to say current serving soldier are extending and staying in the services.

    Since retention is high, recruitment can take it in the shorts (be off it's target slightly) and the forces still remain combat effective.

    The US news media is confusing terms and not reporting the facts accurately....again, but what's new.
     
  8. Dude, I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. "More unpopular" is impossible in a county where some 90% of the voters voted for Kerry and weren't too keen on the invasion in the first place.

    That said, a large portion of the avid supporters on the web I've found seem to be slightly divorced from reality. But that's just the web. Overall, I think support for the mission is the same, just people are questioning whether it's about time the mission ended. After all, we've had the last round of elections, the Iraqi security forces are getting better.. When's that drawdown happening again? I think things will be much more acceptable when they're down to the 80,000 or less mark for the US. It'll really look like we're advancing. The current going from 150,000 to 120,000 isn't that eyecatching an improvement.

    NTM
     
  9. Hmm. Shouldn't start fights you can't finish then!
     
  10. I thought America had a million-man army? How can an army that totals over 1 million soldiers be "overstretched"?
     
  11. About half of that million are Guard and Reserve, that's how.
     
  12. I thought that the US of A had a million-man-army?