101st Airborne bad guys?

Italian Guy

Milforum Hitman
Excerpt from an article by a stupid journalist (my translation, sorry):

The 101st Airborne Division has been deployed in Iraq again. 20,000 assault men, who left Fort Campbell after the last briefing last Sat.
"It is a type of troop that is not used", as the official statement says, "To train policemen and Iraqi security forces": It is a war troop. Is the attck on Iran imminent? Or on Syria, a targeted country, and an easier enemy, given its weakness? What is sure is that the 101st was withdrawn from Iraq 2 yrs ago. And it's only the fifth time in history (including 2 world wars) that it is deployed at the maximum of its capacity.


I'm perfectly aware of the absurdity of terms like "war troop". And also of idiocies such as "imminent attack on Iran", with 20K troops...my God I mean everybody knows it takes hundreds of troops to do that and it's not a matter of snap your finger and make a war. These people live on the clouds. Please guys gimme your comment on this, I'm going to expose this guy asap. Thank you.
 
i know the 82th airborne is involved in peacekeeping missions (seen on the military channel)....i do not know about if the 101st ever was involved in peace keeping missions or not, but hey atleast more troops where they are needed. Maybe it has to do with the administrations redirecting national guard and reserve to distater areas and so they deployed the 101st. to Iraq instead of the national guard.
 
Thank you StarS. Yeah I know about the 82nd, you know I often post stuff here and ask the guys to help me debunk it so that I can learn things from people who are actually personally acquainted or involved. They have helped me lots through these past months and yrs.
 
Be careful what you read.

The 101st is a division. Divisions are about 15000 soldiers. 20000? Thats a high number. What else is untrue?
 
82ndMechanic said:
Be careful what you read.

The 101st is a division. Divisions are about 15000 soldiers. 20000? Thats a high number. What else is untrue?

I noticed that. I just trust you guys more than I trust myself on these technical issues. Some journalists are just complete idiots. I'll check the 101st size.

Update: Yes it has 20 K soldiers (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/coalition/deployment/army/101st.airborne.html) - oh well at least according to the CNN :?
 
Plus - the 101st will deploy with MPs and other assets - but all infantry units are "war troops". A lot of it might be lost in the translation - but it seems retarded.
 
82ndMechanic said:
Be careful what you read.

The 101st is a division. Divisions are about 15000 soldiers. 20000? Thats a high number. What else is untrue?

that number is more like 26,000 including all troops at the base. We have fattened up in the last couple of years ;)

Due to OPSEC, I cannot comment too much on this. the 101st will be doing nothing more than what is already being done over in Iraq. Remember, up until AUG< I was with 1st BCT and my wife is over there right now.
 
Is that right that it takes one man to prepare another man for a war?

15000 Combat troops need 15000 supply personnel!
 
to italian Guy, i am used to have to guess, but now the real guys involved are around i guess i do not need to guess anymore... :p
 
By war troops, is he trying to say invasion forces? When you sign up, you're a war troop. Even cooks and support personnel go through some basic training. Tell him the 101st or 82nd won't signal an invasion, they'll let the enemy know when they get there. :m16shoot:
 
Missileer said:
By war troops, is he trying to say invasion forces? When you sign up, you're a war troop. Even cooks and support personnel go through some basic training. Tell him the 101st or 82nd won't signal an invasion, they'll let the enemy know when they get there. :m16shoot:

That is too hard for a liberal journalist to realize.
 
Italian Guy said:
Missileer said:
By war troops, is he trying to say invasion forces? When you sign up, you're a war troop. Even cooks and support personnel go through some basic training. Tell him the 101st or 82nd won't signal an invasion, they'll let the enemy know when they get there. :m16shoot:

That is too hard for a liberal journalist to realize.

Aha! Now I see the problem. It's the Clinton News Network.
 
In no way did I see anything that would lead me to believe the 101st was going anywhere but Iraq. All those cultural pamphlets all read Iraq.

To counter what was written by the journalist, I will say this. Yes, the 101st is normally used when all hell breaks loose. These are trying times. The Reserves and National Guard are being destroyed by multiple deployments in as little as one year apart. It only makes sense to use troops who are active duty and are soldiers by trade. Everyone in the military is going to have to step up until the Iraq mission winds down. Ultimately, we will lose some soldiers because the strain is too much. Who said being a soldier was a walk in the park. By studying history, I know soldiers have more comforts today than ever before. Only the stong will endure. In a few years time, that journalist will realize he may want to think twice before making such a strong statement on such little merit. I believe Thomas Jefferson said to let anyone speak on their radical ideas. Public opinion will ultimately be the judge and prove them wrong.

OK I am done with my statement.

Doody
 
There's no hidden agenda to the 101st being deployed again. It's just our turn to go again. I've been in the 101st for 4 1/2 years, and am getting ready to deploy with them for the second time.
 
uncle charlie said:
There's no hidden agenda to the 101st being deployed again. It's just our turn to go again. I've been in the 101st for 4 1/2 years, and am getting ready to deploy with them for the second time.

Thank you Uncle Charlie.
 
One of my ROTC cadet buddies was with the 101st on their first iraq deployment. hey says he kinda misses the screaming eagles.
 
Back
Top