http://www.vermontguardian.com/dailies/0904/0321.shtml
Posted March 21, 2005

Montana governor wants Guard back from Iraq

MISSOULA — Montana’s Democratic governor has touched off a political firestorm with state Republicans after calling for the return of National Guard troops serving in Iraq to help out during what many believe will be a record-setting wildfire season.

Newly elected Gov. Brian Schweitzer infuriated Republican lawmakers who see his request as a back door way to criticize the Bush administration’s policies regarding Iraq.

The governor and his supporters deny those charges in a growing political battle that comes as weather experts say a seven-year drought and a severely reduced snowpack could lead to a devastating summer of wildfires. They also worry that limited resources stretched thinner by National Guardsmen serving overseas could make it difficult to combat the kind of massive blazes that engulfed the state in 2000, when some 2,400 wildfires torched nearly 950,000 acres of mostly public land, according to various news reports.

Schweitzer last week said Montana, which backed Bush’s reelection, would disproportionately suffer the pain of proposed cuts in the federal budget, with money targeted for firefighting slashed in half. Democrats also say the drought plagued, fire-prone Western state, which is about the size of Germany, never has enough resources to fight summer blazes even when all the National Guard troops are home.

“I would be remiss as chief executive of Montana not to look at the cards I’m dealt and not recognize it’s not a good hand and we need new cards,” the governor told Reuters.

About 1,500 of Montana’s 3,500 National Guard troops have been deployed on federal active duty.

Staff Sgt. Joseph A. Yorski, U.S. Army, Baghdad, Iraq

I got out of the Army National Guard in 1994 after being hired by a local City police department. I had been mobilized for Desert Storm and went to Saudi Arabia and my new bride didn't want me to chance getting mobilized again. So, I got out.

Almost 8 years later, on 9/11, a former co-worker of mine was killed at the World Trade Center helping others. This affected me to the extent I felt I had to re-enlist, going back to

my old Military Police unit I'd gone to Desert Storm with. Soon after, I was mobilized again, this time for Iraqi Freedom. After 15 months on active duty, 12 in Iraq, we came home in April, 2004. The personal cost has been devastating, mainly the end of my marriage, but the experience was worth it and I would do it again to defend my home and family. It was a privilege to fight for the freedoms most take for granted. God Bless America and our Commander-in-Chief.



http://www.defendamerica.mil/CallAction/CalltoAction.html

http://www.catholicpeacefellowship.org/nextpage.asp?m=2331


With fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan keeping away potential recruits, the Guard worries it may run out of soldiers

by David Wood and Harry Esteve
June 12, 2005, The Oregonian

Thrown into a fast-paced new era of fighting insurgents abroad and protecting neighbors from terrorists at home, the Army National Guard is hanging on by its fingertips.

It provides half of the Army's combat power and is the United States' primary terrorism response team. But its battalions are struggling to scrape up enough soldiers and hand-me-down equipment to meet overseas deployment orders. Recruiting has fallen behind, and seasoned soldiers are quitting in frustration.

Internal Guard documents tell the story: All 10 of its special forces units, all 147 military police units, 97 of 101 infantry units and 73 of 75 armor units cannot, because of past or current mobilizations, deploy again to a war zone without reinforcements. The Guard needs a staggering $20 billion worth of equipment to sustain its operations, a bill Washington may balk at paying.

Any new crisis -- a bloody escalation overseas or a series of domestic terrorist attacks -- could find the Guard unable to respond and could put the United States at risk.

The Guard is losing soldiers and cannot attract enough recruits to replace them. And the normally dependable flow of soldiers moving from active duty into the National Guard has slowed dramatically.

"One can conclude," said Brig. Gen. Bill Libby, commander of the Maine National Guard, "that we're going to run out of soldiers."

Although the Pentagon puts a positive face on these realities, the nation's senior military commanders are worried.

"My concern is that the National Guard will not be a ready force next time it's needed, whether here at home or abroad," Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, the National Guard's top-ranking officer, said in an interview in his Pentagon office.



[But the crushing personal and family demands of overseas deployments threaten a citizen-soldier tradition enshrined in the Constitution and rooted in more than 350 years of American history.

Despite the expectations of some, the Guard has fought well in Iraq and Afghanistan and has moved smartly to meet terrorist threats at home. Those successes are due largely to soldiers such as Jay Medved, 35, a Pennsylvania National Guard sergeant who volunteered for an 18-month tour that will take him to Iraq although he had already done enough overseas time to stay home.

"My squad is going. I am their squad leader. How could I not go?" asked Medved, who in civilian life is an accountant from Glassport, Pa.

But that esprit is a perishable resource. Senior Guard officers fear an exodus of experienced soldiers this summer as deployments in Iraq end and new ones begin.

Small wonder Blum recently told the Pentagon brass, "It's gonna get worse, guys." ]



[The Army National Guard's 331,019 soldiers -- the most recent count -- are full-time civilians who serve part time in uniform. For many, the Guard was historically a comfortable, sleepy backwater, famous as a dodge from the more dangerous, go-to-war, active duty military.

Guard units typically met one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer, using worn-out gear, such as field telephones from the Korean War, that the Army no longer wanted. Their wartime mission, as reinforcements for a large-scale conflict, seemed remote. ]



[The Guard's more fundamental shortage is people.

To fill demands for troops, the National Guard keeps tabs on a pool of soldiers -- those who are not involved in training, filling staff jobs or already deployed -- who are available for assignment.

The Guard pours newly trained recruits into this pool. Draining out of it is a stream of soldiers who are retiring or quitting. From this pool, the Guard is constantly drawing soldiers for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Fewer recruits are coming in, more soldiers are leaving the Army, and more troops are being drawn out. But the pool is shrinking.

Internal National Guard documents show that in December, 86,455 soldiers were available for duty. As of April 30, the number had shrunk to 74,519 soldiers available for global deployment. The current need for National Guard soldiers in Iraq alone is 32,000, and tens of thousands of others are required for missions in 83 countries worldwide. ]

I'm sure many are wondering why the NG wasn't in Louisiana rather than in Iraq! Is this how our National Security is considered 'much better'? When millions of Americans are in dire needs in the aftermath of a catastrophe, should it take 5 days to help them? Should the Feds only provide maybe 20,000 or 30,000 NG members to try to assist this many ppl in need? That's what this Middle East and Republican GOP has done to America!

Not only that, but many states are without proper protection with it's NG units. What happens id another catastrophe or disaster happens within the next few weeks? Thanks BushCons... good job!

Oh, think the BushCons and Neocons will ramp up recruitment ads to bring more ppl into the NG? Be careful folks... after you serve in the south... guess where your next stop will be?



http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...0,4822443.story

September 1, 2005
latimes.com : National News

KATRINA'S RISING TOLL
Guard Is Doubling Its Deployment

The already strained force will increase the total number of troops in the region to 28,000. Their first priority will be rescue and necessities.

By John Hendren and Mark Mazzetti, Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON — The Army National Guard, already stressed by deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, is doubling the number of troops it plans to send to the Gulf Coast as it shoulders the massive relief burden for Hurricane Katrina, Defense officials said Wednesday.

Defense officials said the Pentagon had enough troops to supply security, food and medicine to victims of Hurricane Katrina, but some retired military commanders and analysts warned that the added duties could further strain a Guard that many argue is near the breaking point.

"The reserve component is nearly half of the deployment in Iraq, and at the same time they are taking on this critical mission," said retired Army Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey. "It's an enormous strain on this dedicated military force."


Pentagon officials scrambled Tuesday to put together one of the largest relief efforts in U.S. history as it became evident that the surging floodwaters would leave a major U.S. city uninhabitable for some time.

"As we see it, the only thing worse could have been a nuclear explosion or a biological weapon," said one Pentagon official working on the Defense Department's relief effort.

Some defense experts pointed out that the National Guard units in Iraq and Afghanistan would be available for the massive relief effort if they were home.

"This is what happens when you take Guardsmen and put them on the conveyor belt into Iraq and Afghanistan," said Thomas Donnelly of the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

"Surprise, surprise: Engineers and logistics people that are essential to support missions in Iraq are important in disaster relief," he said.