US Troops Frustrated, Wives Revolt As Iraq Stay Prolonged, Dangers Mount

["David Quarter" <davidquarter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From:           	Rick Rozoff <R_ROZOFF@xxxxxxxxx>

---------------------------
1) US Soldiers' Wives Revolt: "We Want Our Husbands
Back"
2) "I Just Want To Leave This Country; It's Too Hot
And The People Here Don't Like Us"
3) 9,000 US Troops Given 'Indefinite' Extended Duty In
Iraq
4) No Light At The End Of The Iraq Tunnel, US Forces
To Stay Put
5) Commentary: Truth, The Iraq War's First Casualty


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-746935,00.html

The Times (London)
July 16, 2003

US soldiers? wives revolt as leave is cancelled for
third time in a year

?We want our husbands back now?
by Tim Reid





US army wives were in revolt yesterday after a
promised withdrawal from Iraq for thousands of
soldiers was postponed for a third time.
Wives at the US army base in Fort Stewart, Georgia,
home of the US 3rd Infantry Division, which has been
in the Gulf since September, said that they were
planning to organise a protest march near the base and
run a mass letter-writing campaign to Capitol Hill.
The division has suffered 36 deaths in the war and its
aftermath, more than any other unit.

The protest from the families, told only last week by
Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, that their
husbands would be home by September, elicited a
confused response from the Pentagon and added to the
perception that continued attacks on US troops have
left post-war plans in disarray.

The delayed withdrawal came as India, Pakistan and
France refused to send troops to Iraq, despite
requests from the Bush Administration for military
support. The countries said that they balked at
sending soldiers without a UN mandate, dealing a
significant blow to US hopes of reducing its troop
numbers in Iraq.

As recently as May the Bush Administration said that
it wanted to cut the US military presence there by
about 30,000 to 40,000 troops.

Washington had hoped that India would send a full
division of at least 17,000 troops, making its
contingent the second largest behind the US deployment
of 146,000. The Indian Foreign Ministry said: ?Were
there to be an explicit UN mandate . . . the
Government of India could consider the deployment of
our troops to Iraq.?

Even before that announcement, 3rd Division
headquarters sent an e-mail to wives on Monday night
telling them that ?due to the current level of violent
acts . . . and the potential for violent acts in Iraq?
two thirds of the division, or more than 10,000
troops, would stay indefinitely.

The e-mail was followed 30 minutes later by another
from the base?s rear detachment commander. It warned
wives not to write to politicians ?or speak to the
media in a negative manner? about the postponement,
otherwise they risked ?tarnishing the image? of their
husbands.

Mr Rumsfeld and General Tommy Franks, the recently
retired coalition commander, told the Senate Armed
Services Committee on Wednesday that the entire
division would be home by the end of next month. On
July 7 MajorGeneral Buford Blount, the division
commander, told his troops that they could expect to
start returning home at the beginning of August.

Denise Gonsales, whose husband is one of the
division?s Black Hawk helicopter pilots, said: ?Enough
is enough. As angry as it?s made us feel, it?s my
husband I really feel for. He and his colleagues are
feeling betrayed and lied to. He believes that if they
have been given a date, they should stand by that
date. It?s causing morale to really suffer. There is a
tremendous amount of anger here and a tremendous
amount of anger among the soldiers also.?

Mrs Gonsales said that she and fellow wives planned to
march in the shopping district of nearby Savannah.
Hundreds have written to their senators and
congressman. ?We have to have a voice and we have to
be heard, and we have to have a voice for the soldiers
that are there. They?re exhausted. Some are suicidal.?


Kim Wallihan, also the wife of a pilot, said: ?We were
initially told they would all be home by July 4
(Independence Day), then we were told they would be
out by August. We just want them to set a date and
stick by it, or not set one. It is shocking that they
have broken their promise again.?

Another wife, who asked not to be named, said: ?The
Army cannot bamboozle families anymore. We get e-mails
every day from our husbands. These men are emotionally
and physically spent. Blount says morale is high, but
we know this is balderdash.?

In an attempt to soften the news a Pentagon official
said that Mr Rumsfeld was ?committed to the intent? of
having the division out by the autumn. But he added:
?We don?t want to nail it down to a month.?


British troops are also in Iraq for the long haul,
with some units on their second deployment in six
months (Michael Evans writes). Some reservists,
especially NHS consultants and surgeons called up for
the war, have had to stay for longer than their
expected six-month tours to fill in while regular Army
colleagues went home for a rest.
Units on a second tour include a squadron from the 2nd
Battalion Royal Tank Regiment. Among the first into
Iraq in March, it was sent back after six weeks?
leave.
-------------------------------------------------------http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/07/16/wirq216.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/07/16/ixnewstop.html

Daily Telegraph (Britain)
July 16, 2003

Frustrated soldiers just want to head for home
By David Blair



The soldier from 1st US Armoured Division took off his
helmet, mopped sweat from his brow and vented the
frustrations of countless American troops in Baghdad.

"I just want to leave this country," he said. "It's
too hot and the people here don't like us. I want to
go home." His hopes, expressed during a brief off-duty
moment in the Iraqi capital, have now been dashed.

All American units have been told that they will stay
in Iraq until their mission is complete, however long
that may take. Some 150,000 troops from five divisions
are deployed across the country, with about 50,000 in
Baghdad.

The first to be affected by this decision are 9,000
soldiers from 3rd Infantry Division. They had been due
to leave Iraq in September.

Most soldiers remain stoical in the face of the
discomforts and dangers, including the daily round of
attacks that have claimed the lives of 32 American and
six British soldiers since the war ended on May 1. Yet
none hides their feelings about a prolonged stay in
Iraq.

"It's going to suck," said Specialist Jeremy McBride,
21. "But we've got to do our jobs. This is what we're
here to do but it sucks being away from our families."

Specialist McBride, from 2nd Brigade, 1st Armoured
Division, was enduring the summer heat while guarding
a bank in the Arasat area of Baghdad.

The absence of a departure date to look forward to
makes things worse. "A lot of people feel that as
infantry, as combat soldiers, this isn't what we're
for," said Staff Sgt Travis Loest, 27. "But with the
state of the world now, this is what we do."
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.abc.net.au/ra/newstories/RANewsStories_903052.htm

Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Radio Australia
July 16, 2003

Extended Iraq duty for 9,000 US troops

About 9,000 American troops due to return home from
Iraq have been ordered by the Bush administration to
remain there indefinitely.

Our Middle East correspondent Mark Willacy reports the
US Third Infantry Division has been in the country
since the war started four months ago.

The commander of the division, General Buford Blount,
announced last week two brigade combat teams of about
9,000 troops would be heading home in September.

However, in a recent email to spouses of the troops
General Blount said the soldiers would be staying in
Iraq indefinitely, because of the uncertain situation
and a recent increase in guerilla attacks on coalition
forces.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=27663

Indian Express
Agencies
July 16, 2003




No light in Iraq tunnel: Troops to stay put

BAGHDAD/ NEW YORK, July 15: The US Military announced
thousands of key soldiers would be staying in Iraq
indefinitely even as the number of American combat
deaths neared the 1991 Gulf War total.
In an abrupt about-turn, the US Military said on
Monday thousands of troops from the 3rd Infantry
Division (Mechanised) would stay in Iraq until further
notice instead of returning by September in line with
an announcement only last week. The US Military is
braced for attacks this week to coincide with
anniversaries linked to Saddam, his Baath Party and
Iraqi nationalism.

Key Army division shocked at extended Iraq duty
FALLUJA: Under fire and unwanted by Iraqis, the US 3rd
Infantry Division in the volatile town of Falluja was
bitterly disappointed on Tuesday by a decision to keep
them in Iraq indefinitely. ??It?s a big shock,?? said
Sergeant Josh Holt of Montgomery, Alabama. ??We were
told three times we would be going home in a couple of
months. It is not a good time to announce this. We are
demotivated,?? said Sergeant Chris Grisham, a military
intelligence officer. The Third Infantry shoulders a
heavy burden in efforts to stabilise Iraq, controlling
restive towns like Falluja, where anti-American
sentiment is boiling over and US troops are attacked
nearly everyday. (Reuters)



In Washington, Bush defended the quality of CIA
intelligence as he tried to calm the growing storm.
??I think the intelligence I get is darn good
intelligence. And the speeches I have given were
backed by good intelligence,?? he said.

Former UN arms inspectors Scott Ritter and Hans Blix,
meanwhile, continued to dispute Bush?s version of
events. ??The entire case the Bush administration made
against Iraqis a lie,?? Ritter told reporters at UN
headquarters, while Blix told Denmark?s Politiken
daily that Washington, London and their allies had
ignored his advice on Iraq?s banned weapons.

Two previously unknown Iraqi groups on Tuesday warned
countries against sending troops to the occupied
country. ??We will resist with weapons any military
intervention under the umbrella of the UN, the
Security Council, NATO, or Islamic and Arab
countries,?? a group calling itself the Iraq
Liberation Army said in a statement shown on the
Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television.

In another development, Iraq?s new US-backed Governing
Council agreed on Tuesday to set up a war crimes
tribunal that would try ousted Saddam and his top
associates, a spokesman for a key party in the Council
said.

?The US has not declared until now what it?s going to
do with the 55. The Governing Council will take it
upon itself to try them and to punish them according
to law. That includes Saddam,?? said Entifadh Qanbar,
spokesman for the Iraqi National Congress.

Qanbar said the Council formed a commission to lay
down laws that would allow it to put suspected war
criminals on trial, including for mass killings,
executions, and chemical attacks against Kurds in the
1980s.

He said the Council had also decided to create a
commission to look into ways to ?uproot?? Saddam?s
once all-powerful Baath Party from Iraqi society.

Meanwhile, ABC television said today that a low-paid
African diplomat working in the Niger Embassy in Rome
forged documents claiming that Saddam had sought
uranium from Africa and fooled US and UK intelligence
agencies into believing they were genuine.

ABC said the Italians officially deny they bought fake
documents, but quotes intelligence sources as saying
that these were produced in late 2001 in Rome in a
building that houses the Niger Embassy.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/newyork/columnists/nyc-henn0716,0,4979.column?coll=ny-ny-columnists

Newsday
July 15, 2003

Truth, The Iraq War's First Casualty
Ellis Henican




So what can we still believe about the war in Iraq?

That's a tough one. So many of the claims and
assertions of the Bush administration are turning out
to be wrong.

The duration, the cost, the reaction of the Iraqi
people, the ease of the post-war recovery, the reason
we attacked in the first place, even the story of our
plucky poster girl: Every day we learn that more and
more of it was built on lies, exaggeration,
miscalculation or deceit.

Let's take 'em one by one, all the things we thought
we knew about Iraq's "liberation." Maybe we'll find
something in here that still remains true.

Mission Accomplished? Those two words ? minus the
question mark ? were printed on a banner hanging
behind President Bush, as he stood in a snappy flight
suit aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1,
declaring the end of "major fighting" in Iraq. It made
for stirring video. Unfortunately, in the almost seven
weeks since, we've been losing at least a soldier a
day. Millions of Iraqis still have no reliable water
or electricity. Their economy barely functions at all.
Anti-American sentiment is clearly rising. Saddam
Hussein can't be found. No one knows what he is
plotting. Looters and snipers still run unchecked.
Many Iraqi religious leaders rail against the "foreign
occupation." Our attempts at political organization
keep failing. The peace, it turns out, is a whole lot
tougher than the war.

Home Soon? We have 147,000 American troops in Iraq
right now. That number won't shrink for the
"foreseeable future," Gen. Tommy Franks admitted last
week. Even the exhausted members of the Army's 3rd
Infantry Division, who spearheaded the Iraqi campaign,
have now been told they probably won't be home by
September, as Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
promised just last week. No fresh troops are available
to replace them. Maj. Gen. Buford Blount broke the
"disappointing news" in an e-mail to the soldiers'
families Sunday night. Their return is delayed
indefinitely "due to the uncertainty of the situation
in Iraq and the recent increase in attacks on the
coalition forces."

War May Be Hell, but It Sure Ain't Cheap: The price
tag could reach $100 billion through next year, far
more than the administration officials predicted. The
current "burn rate," $3.4 billion a month, is almost
as high as the $4 billion the actual fighting cost,
even though most of the Navy and the Air Force have
been sent home.

Coalition? What Coalition? Call them the "coalition of
the absent." Post-war Iraq is still an overwhelmingly
American affair, just like war-time Iraq was.
Yesterday, France's president followed the lead of
India and Germany, saying sending troops "cannot be
imagined in the current context."

They Love Us, They Love Us Not: "The United States and
the British were hoodwinked when they were told that
the Iraqi people would receive them with flowers and
hugs," Mohammed al-Douri, the Iraqi ambassador to the
United Nations, warned one testy day in March. U.S.
Ambassador John Negroponte was so outraged at that, he
stormed out of the Security Council. But hugs and
flowers have been few and far between. They've been
mixed, quite frighteningly, with ambushes,
denunciations, frustration and resentment.

Tell Me Again, Why Did We Go? Of the five big reasons
advanced by President Bush, four have largely been
discredited. 1. No weapons of mass destruction have
been found. 2. No connection between al-Qaida and
Saddam Hussein has been discovered. 3. Even President
Bush now admits the claims about an Iraqi nuclear
program can't be confirmed, including Niger's
purported deal to sell uranium to Iraq. 4. There's no
evidence that attacking Iraq has reduced the threat of
international terrorism, not yet anyway. If anything,
it's inflamed our enemies. Only reason No. 5 is
holding up. Saddam Hussein, a dreadful tyrant, is
gone. Not captured, but at least he is gone. And that
is clearly a good thing. Was that reason enough to go
to war? If so, we'd be attacking half the nations on
earth. Sadly, despots are easy to find.

Jessica, on Second Thought: Pvt. Jessica Lynch, whose
dramatic capture and rescue was the single most
gripping story of the war, is expected home this week
in Palestine, W.Va. The only problem? The story that
brought her to national attention was mostly made up.
It now turns out Lynch was hurt in a vehicle accident,
not in a firefight with Iraqi troops. She was treated
well, not harshly, by Iraqi doctors. And when a
Special Forces commando unit went to rescue her, they
were met with no resistance at all. The Iraqi soldiers
had already left the hospital. Good for her. Not so
good for the Pentagon, which let the pleasing
deceptions dangle in the media for weeks and weeks.