It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Entire 101st Airborne Division Deploying to Iraq

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Story



Around 20,000 soldiers got their final briefing Friday afternoon at Ft. Campbell. It's been two years since the division was last deployed to Iraq.


Must be some serious training of Iraqi policemen going on over there...




posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:18 PM
link   
That's 20k out of the already 135k US troops currently in Iraq. If the 20k did not come from the 101st, they would have come from other units...maybe some from here and there, not an entire division, that seems a little odd.

While I think we should reduce troops strength, another part of me thinks more is better than less.....so the troops are not overworked and spread thin. Im not sure what I think


sporty


[edit on 26/9/2005 by SportyMB]



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   
I wish them all the luck in the World.

I just hope that what they do will be appreciated.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:22 PM
link   
I wish my little brothers in the screaming eagles a safe tour



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Better the 101st go than the National Guard, no offence intended to the guard but the 101 are Proffesional and highly trained. Good luck and gods speed.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Air Assault is highly appropriate for a theater such as the Middle East.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I wish the members of the 101st Airborne Godspeed. I hope that they have success in their mission and that theirs will be the last major deployment necessary. Hopefully, the entire situation in the Iraqi theatre will come to a satisfactory conclusion for everyone concerned.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Wonder what Centcom is up too and if they deployed the 86th Combat Support Hospital too?

# 101st Aviation Brigade— deployed with the mission to support the division.

# 3rd Brigade (187th Infantry Regiment)— deployed with plans to serve in and around Tikrit.

# 1st Brigade (327th Infantry Regiment)— deploying next week. Most of its soldiers will be north of Baghdad.

# 2nd Brigade (502nd Infantry Regiment)— deploying the end of this month with its area of operation to be in southwest Baghdad and supporting elements of 3rd and 4th Infantry Division.

# 159th Aviation Brigade— expected to leave early next month with orders to support the 18th Airborne Corps, which includes the 101st.

# 4th Brigade— Leaving the end of November and expected to go to Baghdad to take over operations from 3rd Infantry Division.

About 5,000 division soldiers have left Fort Campbell, and another 2,400 are expected to return from Iraq this fall who have served nearly a year on other missions.

Rumsfeld Extends Three Units' Tours in Iraq
www.defenselink.mil...

U.S. Ambassador Calls Stakes in Iraq 'Huge,' Warns Syria
www.defenselink.mil...

Blair dashes hopes that UK soldiers may leave Iraq early
news.independent.co.uk...

Seems a bit of an overkill for just police actions.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Seems a bit of an overkill for just police actions.


Exactly. And while I do hope every one of these courageous people returns home unharmed, I can't help but wonder why they're really being sent. Something is up, I think.

I cannot imagine setting out on a job to face what these guys have to face.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 05:43 PM
link   
its a police action? since wen? thought it was operations to protect the new Iraqi govt. to maintain stability. train the new Iraqi forces. its far more than "just a police action" where u tell terrorists to put their hands up and tell their rights.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
its far more than "just a police action" where u tell terrorists to put their hands up and tell their rights.


Maybe you should know the definition before uttering such semantical nonsense. A police action is localized military action undertaken without a formal declaration of war. The United States has launched all of its major armed conflicts since World War II as police actions, that included Viet Nam and the Korean conflict.

www.m-w.com...

[edit on 26-9-2005 by Regenmacher]



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Maybe you should know the definition before uttering such semantical nonsense. A police action is localized military action undertaken without a formal declaration of war. The United States has launched all of its major armed conflicts since World War II as police actions.


no in yer view u say its almost like an overkill to send an airborne unit. if u look at the past conflicts its more than a police action. this is a bad analogy to say local police can handle petty thieves and thugs instead of a military force. we are dealing with well trained, experience, heavily armed guerillas and terrorists, not some people that u can easily arrest them and tell their rights and convict them.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
we are dealing with well trained, experience, heavily armed guerillas and terrorists, not some people that u can easily arrest them and tell their rights and convict them.


You really have no idea what the term "police action" is.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher

Originally posted by deltaboy
we are dealing with well trained, experience, heavily armed guerillas and terrorists, not some people that u can easily arrest them and tell their rights and convict them.


You really have no idea what the term "police action" is.


i know wat "police action" is.. its just a term to differentiate with declaration of war wen the U.S. goes to "war". i would call it military conflict then just some peaceful sound word police with it.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
[ i would call it military conflict then just some peaceful sound word police with it.


Like I said "semantical nonsense", if you know what it means and you can drop the egomaniacal bs. Maybe you should add something relevant to the thread besides idiom trolling.

My premise is that it's not just for rounding up some Iraqi terrorists, and you don't deploy 20k+ units for the current levels of insurgency.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
deltaboy - The term 'police' in the phrase 'police action' has nothing to do with policemen. The meaning of police in police action is to 'police' and area. Yes, they're using the military to 'police' things over there, but the correct phrase is 'police action', since congress didn't declare war.

It is just semantics, but police action is the correct term. It is a military action. yes. But the official term is police action.


A police action in military/security studies and international relations, is a military action undertaken without a formal declaration of war, often localized in scope. Wikipedia



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

It is just semantics, but police action is the correct term. It is a military action. yes. But the official term is police action.


A police action in military/security studies and international relations, is a military action undertaken without a formal declaration of war, often localized in scope. Wikipedia


well they could just use the word military action instead of police. wonder why they dont use the word military....o yeah its too aggressive and dirty word in a way. its like the U.S. military change the words like Secretary of War to Secretary of Defense. neutralize instead of kill, etc. thats why i still considered it a military instead of police. but i understand wat u trying to do.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher

My premise is that it's not just for rounding up some Iraqi terrorists, and you don't deploy 20k+ units for the current levels of insurgency.


oooo so wat is the military for then? if it should not be used to take on terrorists.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Can anybody shed some light on whether this is a build-up or just a normal rotation type of deployment?

delta - behave ok?
There's a serious issue here about how the war may be going... like why the extra troops...
.



posted on Sep, 26 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gools
Can anybody shed some light on whether this is a build-up or just a normal rotation type of deployment?

delta - behave ok?
There's a serious issue here about how the war may be going... like why the extra troops...
.


must be the recent events that happened that asked for more troops to contain the insurgency maybe? o yeah and that military and politicians have been asking for more troops in Iraq as well in the past.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join