Bigger Army necessary

During all other wars up to the Vietnam War, when the nation's leaders said "go to war" everyone had to do their part. So how is it with two long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there has not been a massive push to at least get more to enlist if they do not want to start the draft again? If they are waiting for a crisis, they missed it a long time ago. These wars are not the wars of the American people when most have not been paying attention to either one. The risks, the issues, the price being paid, have not been personal to any of us as fewer and fewer news reports come out. The burden is not shared by the rest of us and they have to pay the price for what we ask of them.

Bigger Army necessary

Editorial
Posted : Sunday Jan 17, 2010 8:51:00 EST

The Army on three occasions over the past five years has increased active-duty end-strength to meet ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Lesson learned: The Army was too small to simultaneously fight on two fronts. That took an incredible toll on troops and their families, who endured multiple war tours of up to 15 months at a stretch. Others paid for it by being forced to serve on “stop-loss” beyond their terms of obligated service. Meanwhile, getting the Army closer to the right size cost billions and took years.

The addition of a total of 65,000 soldiers resulted in today’s authorized end-strength of 547,400 in uniform. In July, Congress has authorized yet another temporary increase, of 22,000 troops.
read more here
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/01/army_casey_011710w/