PDA

View Full Version : Army announces switch to 9-month deployments



CommunityEditor
08-05-2011, 07:53 PM
By Lance M. Bacon - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Aug 5, 2011 14:37:57 EDT

It is official: Nine-month deployments begin January, and the change will be fully implemented by April. The new policy does not affect soldiers who deploy prior to year’s end.

The new rules, announced Friday by Secretary of the Army John McHugh, apply to units at the division-level and below. Corps-level deployments will stay at 12 months “due to their oversight for the entire operation,” though the goal is to get them to nine months, said Army spokesman Lt. Col. Craig Ratcliff.

Augmentees to a Joint Task Force will remain on a 12-month deployment, due to the nature of those missions. Deployments for high-demand, low-density units and individual deployers will also remain at one year, as cutting their tours would require more people in those skill than currently exist.

The change applies to ... Read the rest of the story here. (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/08/army-nine-month-deployments-080511w/)

---------------------------------------------------
Less time in theater may equate to less time at home, at least at the onset. Is it worth it, in your opinion to have less time in theater if you're going to spend less time at home? How will force react to this, what are your reactions?

craig86
08-05-2011, 08:44 PM
It seems like for most of us the only thing that has changed is less down time and no more non-chargeable leave

Thunderhorse19
08-05-2011, 10:45 PM
Back in the day, serving 12 months in Viet Nam or Korea would constitute completion of a short tour. But it only allowed you to remain in CONUS for 12 months, sometimes shorter...and sometimes longer. For example, when I completed my 3rd tour in Germany, I was assigned to Eustis for 30 months, and then went to Korea. After Korea, I was assigned to Hood for 24 months and then went to Bosnia. I wonder if the Army will allow a 9 month deployment to constitute completion of a short tour?

20MM
08-05-2011, 11:02 PM
Short tour credit doesn't really mean too much these days, I'm glad to see this 9 month gesture.... that obviously doesn't include the two month train up but at least it's a sign of good news. With all the budget issues it may not last too long though but it's still good to see something positive.

JStatus330
08-06-2011, 07:21 AM
So the Army will deploy for 9 months and not get R&R, yet the Air Force will still do their 6 month deployments and get R&R? Sounds fair.

candycane3482
08-06-2011, 03:00 PM
So the Army will deploy for 9 months and not get R&R, yet the Air Force will still do their 6 month deployments and get R&R? Sounds fair.

Well I'd rather do 9 months than 12 or 15 honestly. 9 months makes more sense than 12-15. Who cares what the Air Force does? They have a different operational requirement than the Army does.

It'll be better when it's down to no deployments for the majority of the military. Plus it's supposed to end up with 2 years dwell time. But we'll see what happens by the end of this year with Iraq and after 2014 with Afghanistan. I think we should leave Afghanistan now because we accomplished what we went there for (bin Laden) so don't much see the need to stay. And Iraq we definitely need to stay on track with the withdrawal.

MisterBen
08-06-2011, 04:01 PM
Well I'd rather do 9 months than 12 or 15 honestly. 9 months makes more sense than 12-15. Who cares what the Air Force does? They have a different operational requirement than the Army does.

It'll be better when it's down to no deployments for the majority of the military. Plus it's supposed to end up with 2 years dwell time. But we'll see what happens by the end of this year with Iraq and after 2014 with Afghanistan. I think we should leave Afghanistan now because we accomplished what we went there for (bin Laden) so don't much see the need to stay. And Iraq we definitely need to stay on track with the withdrawal.

It is not like we do not care; it is about equality. And if they are allowed R&R based on 6 months deployment then it should be the same for the Army. We are not talking five-finger sneakers here. But your response, you make it sound that their operational requirement demands more work so they are deserving of R&R and the US Army isnt. I say at least give a 4-day R&R to soldiers. Everyone needs a little time with a LBFM to blow some steam.

I agree with the rest of your post. Take a different posture by pulling back to Kuwait and keep forces sustained in Germany with new units in Turkey because if the shit hits the fan again in the Middle East, we are much closer to react.

CORNELIUSSEON
08-06-2011, 04:49 PM
Back in the day, serving 12 months in Viet Nam or Korea would constitute completion of a short tour. But it only allowed you to remain in CONUS for 12 months, sometimes shorter...and sometimes longer. For example, when I completed my 3rd tour in Germany, I was assigned to Eustis for 30 months, and then went to Korea. After Korea, I was assigned to Hood for 24 months and then went to Bosnia. I wonder if the Army will allow a 9 month deployment to constitute completion of a short tour?

Prior to the time we engaged in the “War in Vietnam” a MAAG Tour was 24 Months, and that was because Vietnam was always an Unaccompanied Tour. Japan was 36 Months Accompanied.

Once the war started, it started as an 18 Month Tour, but the Army quickly shortened it to 12 Months once the Draft was in full swing. It never was a solid 12 Months – there were early DEROS dates if your DEROS coincided with the end of the year in many cases. The Marines kept the 18 Month tour until the end, but that was flexible as well. The Army kept Vietnam at 12 Months until the wind down started, and then stopped sending new troops to prevent turn-around tours where moves to other locations to complete full tours might be required.

The 12 Month dwell time between Nam Tours required a firm “NO” if the attempt was made to send you back before the full dwell had expired. I was back less than 60 days when I was presented with deployment orders to go back to the unit I had just DEROSed from at the end of 1968, and I made that point. The orders were withdrawn, and I went to Okinawa for 90 Days to help prepare the port for the Japanese take over. Once back, I deployed to Germany in 1971, and came home in 1973 because I was unaccompanied. By then, the Drawdown was in full swing, so I transferred to the National Guard for the remainder of my time. I looked at how people – in effect – commuted between CONUS and Germany; CONUS and Korea; CONUS and Japan, and other such cycles.

You did 3 tours in Germany before the commutation cycle was broken. Once the wars are done, the commutation cycle will resume, but the length will most likely lengthen because of the smaller budget.

candycane3482
08-06-2011, 10:49 PM
It is not like we do not care; it is about equality. And if they are allowed R&R based on 6 months deployment then it should be the same for the Army. We are not talking five-finger sneakers here. But your response, you make it sound that their operational requirement demands more work so they are deserving of R&R and the US Army isnt. I say at least give a 4-day R&R to soldiers. Everyone needs a little time with a LBFM to blow some steam.

I agree with the rest of your post. Take a different posture by pulling back to Kuwait and keep forces sustained in Germany with new units in Turkey because if the shit hits the fan again in the Middle East, we are much closer to react.

Seriously? Did I say that I think the AF does more work? I just said they have different missions than we do which is why they usually have shorter deployments. I definitely know that most AF do not do more work or demand more R & R. I don't recall the article saying we won't get R & R with 9 months though. I could have missed it if it does. I don't think we'd get 15 days anymore but there may still be time off.

I say we just get the f* outta there period. "If the shit hits the fan again in the Middle East..." We brought the shit! We went to Afghanistan because they wouldn't give up bin Laden. Well we got him. Let's go. We went to Iraq for who multiple reasons but should not have gone when we went. Basically I think we went so Bush Jr could finish what Daddy started. And eventually I think Saddam would be a threat. Okay he's gone and his sick sadistic sons. We gave them the tools to build a country. Have fun Iraq and time to go at the end of the year.

I don't compare myself to what the AF does. I work with the AF and there are things they do that we don't do. Different services, different things. If they get R & R and we don't - that will suck but there isn't much that can be done except complain about it. But I think there will be something. If it is 4 day where will we go? They stopped the 4 day in Qatar from what I recall reading or are going to.

Chikasaz
08-06-2011, 11:35 PM
Regular AF does not get R&R for 6 month deployments. Any AF that I know or have even heard of doesn't get it.

justin0495
08-07-2011, 06:22 AM
I don't recall the article saying we won't get R & R with 9 months though. I could have missed it if it does. I don't think we'd get 15 days anymore but there may still be time off.

http://www.army.mil/article/63073/Soldiers_to_begin_2012_with_nine_month_deployments/

"Soldiers deploying under the change in policy will not be granted environmental morale leave -- known as R&R;, but commanders will retain the option of granting emergency leave and leave for special circumstances, according to Army regulations and local policy."

I tend to side with Craig86 on this. This seems to be a more smoke and mirrors cost reduction rather than an operational necessity or morale booster for the troops. Pre-mobilization and mobilization training still make this a long-term commitment for Soldiers. Since the government pays for R&R flights, there’s no doubt there will be millions saved by enacting this measure. From day 1 of training to the final welcome home ceremony, the time off is still minimal and even chargeable leave would be welcome.

candycane3482
08-07-2011, 01:53 PM
http://www.army.mil/article/63073/Soldiers_to_begin_2012_with_nine_month_deployments/

"Soldiers deploying under the change in policy will not be granted environmental morale leave -- known as R&R;, but commanders will retain the option of granting emergency leave and leave for special circumstances, according to Army regulations and local policy."

I tend to side with Craig86 on this. This seems to be a more smoke and mirrors cost reduction rather than an operational necessity or morale booster for the troops. Pre-mobilization and mobilization training still make this a long-term commitment for Soldiers. Since the government pays for R&R flights, there’s no doubt there will be millions saved by enacting this measure. From day 1 of training to the final welcome home ceremony, the time off is still minimal and even chargeable leave would be welcome.

Except the intent is to have at least 2 years dwell time between deployments - which could be possible if we actually leave Iraq at the end of the year (which everyone over there is still on the withdrawal schedule in regards to getting rid of equipment, bases, etc) and if we leave Afghanistan by 2014. There will possibly still be small contingents left but not the thousands of troops that have been there.

Depending on your MOS, you could get assigned to a unit that doesn't deploy. They exist. I've been at one for two years almost and I actually would much rather be deployed again then be at it.

I could see with 9 month deployments there not being R & R but a 4 day pass - in Iraq if they still have the "Freedom Rest" places or whatever those are called at Speicher and somewhere else because I heard that Qatar doesn't do or is stopping the 4 day pass. In Afghanistan, I'm not sure where people would go.

I'm sure that when it happens in January more guidance will come out.

craig86
08-07-2011, 07:55 PM
Except the intent is to have at least 2 years dwell time between deployments - which could be possible if we actually leave Iraq at the end of the year (which everyone over there is still on the withdrawal schedule in regards to getting rid of equipment, bases, etc) and if we leave Afghanistan by 2014. There will possibly still be small contingents left but not the thousands of troops that have been there.

The withdrawl schedule seems to be for media purposes only, similar to the "all combat operations in Iraq have ended" press release. My unit is being RIP'd in three months, and with the amount of equipment we're leaving behind for the next unit, there's no way U.S. forces will be out by the end of the year.

I hate to be one of those conspiracy theory people, but from what I can see with my own eyes, the whole "all U.S. forces will be out of Iraq by 31 DEC" was to get the Iraq war budget off the books until after the August 2nd debt crisis debacle had passed.

JStatus330
08-08-2011, 07:38 AM
Regular AF does not get R&R for 6 month deployments. Any AF that I know or have even heard of doesn't get it.

I have a Air Forces Security Forces friend in Qatar doing 6 months who says he's getting 2 weeks of R&R, plus 30 days leave upon redeployment, just like me, who is doing a 12 month deployment. I told him I didn't think it was fair, considering he will be redeploying only a couple weeks after I am, and I was deployed 6 months before he was. Of course, different branches, different missions, but some people need to pull more of their weight instead of the Army/Marines doing most of it and getting the crappy end of the deal. The government is trying to save money and cutting R&R will save a ton, but it should be military wide then, let's not just punish the Army. If the Air Force and Navy want to be treated like they are in the military then they can step up and make some changes too.

Creaminess
08-08-2011, 07:03 PM
I have a Air Forces Security Forces friend in Qatar doing 6 months who says he's getting 2 weeks of R&R, plus 30 days leave upon redeployment, just like me, who is doing a 12 month deployment. I told him I didn't think it was fair, considering he will be redeploying only a couple weeks after I am, and I was deployed 6 months before he was. Of course, different branches, different missions, but some people need to pull more of their weight instead of the Army/Marines doing most of it and getting the crappy end of the deal. The government is trying to save money and cutting R&R will save a ton, but it should be military wide then, let's not just punish the Army. If the Air Force and Navy want to be treated like they are in the military then they can step up and make some changes too.
Army and Marines do what they (or we...I'm Army myself) do because of the way our forces are structured. You won't put Air Force or Navy units on the ground to do Army or Marine missions because they don't have the maneuver forces we do. We don't fly jets like they do either.

Having said that, I DO think that getting 2 weeks of R&R leave during a six-month deployment is not only unfair to those services who deploy longer and don't get R&R, but it's also a waste of money. Our pay and retirement are both under attack, but we spend untold millions sending people on leave for what equates to 1/12th of the time they're downrange. If AF gets 2 weeks for 6 months of deployment, then anybody deployed a year should get 4 weeks, right?

Seriously, why isn't something like that on the table as a budget-cutting measure?

The Cooler
08-09-2011, 06:49 PM
^^ while I appreciate the additional burdens you may be shouldering compared to other branches, you two are both way out of your lane.

candycane3482
08-09-2011, 08:19 PM
The withdrawl schedule seems to be for media purposes only, similar to the "all combat operations in Iraq have ended" press release. My unit is being RIP'd in three months, and with the amount of equipment we're leaving behind for the next unit, there's no way U.S. forces will be out by the end of the year.

I hate to be one of those conspiracy theory people, but from what I can see with my own eyes, the whole "all U.S. forces will be out of Iraq by 31 DEC" was to get the Iraq war budget off the books until after the August 2nd debt crisis debacle had passed.

I think the plan is to leave - somehow - a small contingent of trainers. I can't be sure though.

candycane3482
08-09-2011, 08:21 PM
Army and Marines do what they (or we...I'm Army myself) do because of the way our forces are structured. You won't put Air Force or Navy units on the ground to do Army or Marine missions because they don't have the maneuver forces we do. We don't fly jets like they do either.

Having said that, I DO think that getting 2 weeks of R&R leave during a six-month deployment is not only unfair to those services who deploy longer and don't get R&R, but it's also a waste of money. Our pay and retirement are both under attack, but we spend untold millions sending people on leave for what equates to 1/12th of the time they're downrange. If AF gets 2 weeks for 6 months of deployment, then anybody deployed a year should get 4 weeks, right?

Seriously, why isn't something like that on the table as a budget-cutting measure?

At our most desperate, I do remember hearing about some AF going through Army basic to go over and help out because we needed people. Just something I heard though. But I was trying to get at that in an earlier post - each service has a different way of accomplishing the mission. Since 2001, if someone wanted six month deployments they should've joined the AF. I think 9 months is the right amount of time for a deployment the way we have been deploying.

Creaminess
08-09-2011, 09:51 PM
At our most desperate, I do remember hearing about some AF going through Army basic to go over and help out because we needed people. Just something I heard though. But I was trying to get at that in an earlier post - each service has a different way of accomplishing the mission. Since 2001, if someone wanted six month deployments they should've joined the AF. I think 9 months is the right amount of time for a deployment the way we have been deploying.
Just to be clear, I hope nobody took what I'd written as trying to disparage what the Air Force does. Every branch has unique capabilities that they provide to the fight, and I certainly appreciate what the Air Force provides when it comes to air firepower.

What I'm saying is that if somebody in the military deploys for 9 months but doesn't get R&R leave, somebody in the military who deploys for 6 months shouldn't get it either. Everything else being equal (and we know that's not always the case, but let's say it is for the sake of this conversation), what sense does it make to send somebody home for 2 weeks during a 6 month deployment but not at all for a 9 month deployment? The government is looking at ways to slash the defense budget, and I just found them one.

Creaminess
08-09-2011, 09:53 PM
^^ while I appreciate the additional burdens you may be shouldering compared to other branches, you two are both way out of your lane.
How am I out of my lane? I'm not saying the Army has it harder than the Air Force based simply on the longer deployments (some "deployed" Army folks have it as good as they do at home...even better in some cases). It's a matter of common sense that somebody on a shorter deployment shouldn't get R&R if somebody on a deployment 50% longer doesn't get it. Let's take what branches they are completely out of it. Let's say 2 Army guys deploy, one for 6 months and one for 9 months. Which of them should get the R&R leave? I think it's pretty clear what the answer is to anybody using rational thought.

jshiver15
08-10-2011, 06:57 PM
So the Army will deploy for 9 months and not get R&R, yet the Air Force will still do their 6 month deployments and get R&R? Sounds fair.

Didn't realize someone forced you to join the Army. Sounds like pretty unique circumstances.

jshiver15
08-10-2011, 07:32 PM
How am I out of my lane? I'm not saying the Army has it harder than the Air Force based simply on the longer deployments (some "deployed" Army folks have it as good as they do at home...even better in some cases). It's a matter of common sense that somebody on a shorter deployment shouldn't get R&R if somebody on a deployment 50% longer doesn't get it. Let's take what branches they are completely out of it. Let's say 2 Army guys deploy, one for 6 months and one for 9 months. Which of them should get the R&R leave? I think it's pretty clear what the answer is to anybody using rational thought.

I'm not going to try and speak for the Army, but I do know a few guys who just got back from a 1 year deployment who worked a Panama schedule while they were down range. That means half of the time they were there, they were off. But like I said, I'm not going to speak for the Army as a whole because I don't know what your normal ops tempo is down range. However, in my AFSC (MOS to you), I can deploy for 6 months and work 8-12 hour shifts everyday while I'm there. We don't deploy as a unit, so when we get downrange we're usually on our own or with a 3-4 man team, so time off isn't possible.

I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone, I'm stationed at an Army base and I see a lot of the training you guys go through and I can say I'd prefer not switching places. I chose a different path in life so I'm not going to bitch because someone's job entails different things than mine does. I'm never shy to complain about someone who doesn't do their job, but I'm not going to diminish someone's efforts or worth because they happen to be doing something that I may see as being easier than my job.

JStatus330
08-11-2011, 09:50 AM
I think it's common sense. I'm not in any way attacking the Navy or Air Force. They have a mission and a purpose and they are serving in their respective areas. It's just a question of equality and making sense. If Army personnel can't take leave in a 9 month deployment, then no one else should be able to. Especially if this is a question of saving money. I feel especially bad for combat MOS' who bear most of the burden going 9 months with no leave. A Soldier who is patrolling villages daily, showering once a week (if that), eating small portions of food because there isn't enough to go around, getting shot at daily, and not knowing if they will make it back to their family, well if they can't have leave, then the Airman or Sailor who never leaves the wire, gets days off, showers daily, has hot chow amenities readily available for only a 6 month tour should not get leave. I work in an office MOS (42A) and I don't even get any days off. I guess it depends on chain of command though. Maybe some Army units get days off while others don't.

giggawatt
08-11-2011, 10:39 AM
The AF does not normally get R&R for normal 6 month deployments. Those deployments where we are working with/for an army unit or other hazardous duties such as convoying etc, we are offered 4 days within the AOR (Qatar) IF we have a lot sand in our vag. That security forces dude who said he was getting 2 weeks R&R for a deployment to Al Udeid and 30 days leave upon return is full of shit. Everyone gets 30 days of accrued leave annually. No one gets 30 days of leave for deploying. We get 2 weeks of re-integration/decompression time upon return. Come to think of it, that's probably what he was referring to. During that 2 week time period, we are not aloud to go anywhere that we would normally have to take chargeable leave for and anywhere we do go is at our own expense. But here in Europe, the Army gets 1 four day weekend a month. The AF gets sporadic goal/family days but they are only 3 day weekends.

jshiver15
08-11-2011, 07:31 PM
I think it's common sense. I'm not in any way attacking the Navy or Air Force. They have a mission and a purpose and they are serving in their respective areas. It's just a question of equality and making sense. If Army personnel can't take leave in a 9 month deployment, then no one else should be able to. Especially if this is a question of saving money. I feel especially bad for combat MOS' who bear most of the burden going 9 months with no leave. A Soldier who is patrolling villages daily, showering once a week (if that), eating small portions of food because there isn't enough to go around, getting shot at daily, and not knowing if they will make it back to their family, well if they can't have leave, then the Airman or Sailor who never leaves the wire, gets days off, showers daily, has hot chow amenities readily available for only a 6 month tour should not get leave. I work in an office MOS (42A) and I don't even get any days off. I guess it depends on chain of command though. Maybe some Army units get days off while others don't.

Who is getting to take leave while being deployed? And how do you know Airmen and Sailors don't leave the wire? I think you're basing your opinion off of a lot of assumptions.

jshiver15
08-11-2011, 07:36 PM
The AF does not normally get R&R for normal 6 month deployments. Those deployments where we are working with/for an army unit or other hazardous duties such as convoying etc, we are offered 4 days within the AOR (Qatar) IF we have a lot sand in our vag. That security forces dude who said he was getting 2 weeks R&R for a deployment to Al Udeid and 30 days leave upon return is full of shit. Everyone gets 30 days of accrued leave annually. No one gets 30 days of leave for deploying. We get 2 weeks of re-integration/decompression time upon return. Come to think of it, that's probably what he was referring to. During that 2 week time period, we are not aloud to go anywhere that we would normally have to take chargeable leave for and anywhere we do go is at our own expense. But here in Europe, the Army gets 1 four day weekend a month. The AF gets sporadic goal/family days but they are only 3 day weekends.

In response to the area I put in bold, that's exactly right about the 2 weeks of "R&R". We had some guys come back recently and their "R&R" was spent doing re-integration briefs, ancillary training, suicide prevention briefs, PTSD briefs, etc., etc. And no, they did not get to leave the local area as stated.

We just recently got to start partaking in the 4-day weekends here.

itty1979
08-11-2011, 08:30 PM
So the Army will deploy for 9 months and not get R&R, yet the Air Force will still do their 6 month deployments and get R&R? Sounds fair.

I am Air Force, and I have never had any R&R on a 6 month deloyment. The only R&R I have had was when I deployed out with the army, yes it was a 9 month deployment with 3 month build up at Bragg.

itty1979
08-11-2011, 08:52 PM
From your wording I will call you ignorant. There are airmen, and sailors deploying out with Army units, and unlike the Army, we deploy one or two people from each base to a certain location. You say that we do not leave the wire? I think out of the seven day work week that we had, I stayed inside the wire one or two days, and that was to fix the trucks that were damaged from going outside the wire. So I will ask that you know what and who you are speaking to and about

[QUOTE=JStatus330;463458] I work in an office MOS (42A) and I don't even get any days off. I guess it depends on chain of command though. Maybe some Army units get days off while others don't.

As I stated before, maybe you should know what you are talking about before you speak. Have you ever hear the saying those who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones? Before you talk about people who do not go out of the wire, why dont you step outside and see who is there first?

sfcmom
08-26-2011, 01:58 PM
Thank God! It's still a lonnng 9 months for those of us here. They work harder and longer than anyone outside of forces realize.... They are ALL family

sfcmom
08-26-2011, 02:01 PM
That's a lame answer for someone who is enjoying the freedoms many died protecting. If these kids hadn't stepped up for the country we believe is worth protecting, you'd be alot worse off...

sfcmom
08-26-2011, 02:06 PM
Thank God! It's still a lonnng 9 months for those of us here. They work harder and longer than anyone outside of forces realize.... They are ALL family

JD2780
09-03-2011, 08:22 PM
So the Army will deploy for 9 months andnot get R&R, yet the Air Force will still do their 6 month deployments and get R&R? Sounds fair.

My AF people that end up doing 7-8 month deployments don't actually get R&R. I've done multiple 6 month deployments extending to 7 or 8 and never received R&R. Never even got offered.

Now like most of you joes yes the AF and the 4 month deployments followed by the bitching most did was pathetic.

JD2780
09-03-2011, 08:24 PM
That came out wrong. I wasn't comparing the bitchin of joes and airman. Just saying I agree with got disdain for whiney people coming off of 4 month deployments.

JD2780
09-03-2011, 08:34 PM
Who ever had the AF cop friend who is a moron, he's a liar. We get 2 weeks after our deployments and no R&R. He's a moron and should
STFU.
Why should the AF step up and pull it's weight in a ground fight when 90% of the AF doesn't do ANY fighting. Including the pilots. As a TACP/JTAC I've don't rotations with 2-25/3-2/ 20th SFG and other nondescript deployments to different places. Never got R&R or 30 days of leave. Now if I wanted 30 days I had to take it as regular leave at the end. Some tool in the AF is trying to spin you up.

CORNELIUSSEON
08-04-2013, 02:47 AM
Thank God! It's still a lonnng 9 months for those of us here. They work harder and longer than anyone outside of forces realize.... They are ALL family


It seems that this idea has regained life, this time on a Unit Level rather than an Individual level. See the new article here:

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20130722/NEWS/307220005/Changing-Korean-tour


Rotations at the unit level takes the Army back to its original rotational program from the Spanish-American war period forward, when Combat Arms Regiments deployed as needed on a regular basis. In those days, it was the other types of units that remained in place, with individuals rotating in and out on a two or three year basis. The original rationale was to provide equality of training throughout the Combat Arms, and to get as many troops as possible accustomed to a rotational cycle that would prevent troop stagnation. That should be the reasons for the restoration of a regular unit deployment cycle.

MisterBen
08-04-2013, 05:18 AM
You just revived a nearly two year old thread. Bravo. But not only Korea; also Africa and Australia as well.

ImpliedConsent
08-04-2013, 08:32 AM
It seems that this idea has regained life, this time on a Unit Level rather than an Individual level.

The OP was for "...all named operations, which include Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Noble Guardian in Kosovo and Multi-National Forces Sinai in Egypt." Then it turned into a "It's not fair ... Air Force, Navy" thing (I'm Army BTW) ... now, 2yrs later ... I dunno, Korea Deployments v. Korea Assignment? Can we get more OT than this? I would think so - how about those Braves eh?