thedrifter
01-30-07, 08:45 AM
Commandant wants limit to Anbar buildup
By Kimberly Johnson - Staff writer
Posted : February 05, 2007
Building up the Marine presence in Iraq’s Anbar province for longer than six months would put a hardship on the Corps, its top commander told lawmakers on Jan. 23.
“Our hope is that it is abbreviated to the degree that it is six or seven months, ideally not more than that,” Commandant Gen. James Conway told members of the House Armed Services Committee.
The Corps currently has six battalions in Anbar and is extending the deployments of about 4,000 Marines up to 90 days to accommodate President Bush’s call for a buildup in that region.
“If that requirement goes to eight battalions on a constant basis — we’re in the process right now of looking at what that means,” Conway said. “I can tell you that it’s simply going to make things more difficult. It is simply going to reduce our dwell time in the other battalions and put us, I believe, even below 1-to-1 because we have other global commitments that eat up the numbers of battalions we have available.”
Conway was referring to the “deployment-to-dwell” ratio of 1:1, which means that for every month a Marine is deployed, he is home for one month before returning to combat. The commandant has said he wants that ratio to become 1:2.
Conway told lawmakers that some combat units are already spending less than five months at home before having to return to a seven-month combat deployment.
While he said he believed the Marine buildup in Anbar would reinforce recent security gains there, he said the Corps faces risk if called into another fight elsewhere.
“We feel like we would be able to respond with those forces that are not committed to Iraq or Afghanistan, but the response would be slower than we might like, would not have all the equipment sets that [would] ordinarily be the case, and there’s certainly risk associated with that,” he said.
Conway said the buildup might not be the last military attempt to secure the country, despite the growing sense in the nation that it will be the last main military push before withdrawal. “I have seen it characterized as a ‘Hail Mary,’ and that’s the last play of the game. I don’t necessarily see it that way. I think this is the latest in a series of operations to attempt to stabilize Baghdad and Al Anbar province. And I’m not sure it will be the last.”
The plan’s potential risk for military readiness prompted sharp criticism from lawmakers.
“A decision to commit more troops and equipment to Iraq has serious consequences that may reduce America’s ability to respond to other contingencies that threaten our national security,” committee chairman Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., said. “As a result, if we have to fight in the future, it may take our forces longer to reach the places they must go and they may risk taking greater casualties than they would have otherwise.”
Ellie
By Kimberly Johnson - Staff writer
Posted : February 05, 2007
Building up the Marine presence in Iraq’s Anbar province for longer than six months would put a hardship on the Corps, its top commander told lawmakers on Jan. 23.
“Our hope is that it is abbreviated to the degree that it is six or seven months, ideally not more than that,” Commandant Gen. James Conway told members of the House Armed Services Committee.
The Corps currently has six battalions in Anbar and is extending the deployments of about 4,000 Marines up to 90 days to accommodate President Bush’s call for a buildup in that region.
“If that requirement goes to eight battalions on a constant basis — we’re in the process right now of looking at what that means,” Conway said. “I can tell you that it’s simply going to make things more difficult. It is simply going to reduce our dwell time in the other battalions and put us, I believe, even below 1-to-1 because we have other global commitments that eat up the numbers of battalions we have available.”
Conway was referring to the “deployment-to-dwell” ratio of 1:1, which means that for every month a Marine is deployed, he is home for one month before returning to combat. The commandant has said he wants that ratio to become 1:2.
Conway told lawmakers that some combat units are already spending less than five months at home before having to return to a seven-month combat deployment.
While he said he believed the Marine buildup in Anbar would reinforce recent security gains there, he said the Corps faces risk if called into another fight elsewhere.
“We feel like we would be able to respond with those forces that are not committed to Iraq or Afghanistan, but the response would be slower than we might like, would not have all the equipment sets that [would] ordinarily be the case, and there’s certainly risk associated with that,” he said.
Conway said the buildup might not be the last military attempt to secure the country, despite the growing sense in the nation that it will be the last main military push before withdrawal. “I have seen it characterized as a ‘Hail Mary,’ and that’s the last play of the game. I don’t necessarily see it that way. I think this is the latest in a series of operations to attempt to stabilize Baghdad and Al Anbar province. And I’m not sure it will be the last.”
The plan’s potential risk for military readiness prompted sharp criticism from lawmakers.
“A decision to commit more troops and equipment to Iraq has serious consequences that may reduce America’s ability to respond to other contingencies that threaten our national security,” committee chairman Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., said. “As a result, if we have to fight in the future, it may take our forces longer to reach the places they must go and they may risk taking greater casualties than they would have otherwise.”
Ellie