Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by candycane3482 View Post
    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/So...h_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.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    215
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by justin0495 View Post
    http://www.army.mil/article/63073/So...h_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.

  3. #13
    Junior Member craig86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by candycane3482 View Post
    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.

  4. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by ALAWSON23 View Post
    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.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    At your mom's house
    Posts
    91
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by JStatus330 View Post
    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?

  6. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Private
    Posts
    33
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    ^^ while I appreciate the additional burdens you may be shouldering compared to other branches, you two are both way out of your lane.
    "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience." - Julius Caesar

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    215
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by craig86 View Post
    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.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    215
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by Creaminess View Post
    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.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    At your mom's house
    Posts
    91
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by candycane3482 View Post
    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.

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    At your mom's house
    Posts
    91
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Army announces switch to 9-month deployments

    Quote Originally Posted by The Cooler View Post
    ^^ 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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •