Combat fatigue? In some ways Iraq duty helps Army

Maj. Gen. Buford Blount, who commanded the Third Infantry Division as it spearheaded the assault on Baghdad, now has the daunting job of making sure his old unit and the Army as a whole are ready to roll again.

With the US military under greater strain today than it has been for decades, turning around units back from the front is an urgent challenge. Tens of thousands of tanks and other vehicles are encrusted with desert sand and dust, and weary troops are eager for home. Yet the demands of fighting, while exacting a toll, also benefit armed-force preparedness in ways that are often overlooked, senior Army officers and military analysts say.

War-zone deployments hone combat and leadership skills, improve unit cohesion and often boost retention rates, at least initially. At the same time, they test the military's equipment and organization, acting as a catalyst for change.

"The majority of the Army will have a combat patch for the first time since Vietnam," says General Blount, now in charge of Army readiness, at his Pentagon office. "We were already the best army in the world. Now we're the most experienced."

Over the next four months, he notes, eight of 10 active duty Army divisions - with 220,000 troops will be rotating in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan. The 82nd Airborne Division's 1st Brigade, for example, heads to Iraq this month with combat veterans from Afghanistan reportedly making up 75 percent of its 2,000 paratroopers and most of its key commanders.

Real-world missions are nurturing leaders and building postwar peacekeeping skills that are difficult to train for, military officials and experts say. "It's hard to get an unruly mob to train with," says one US official who specializes in ground forces.

Moreover, although the deployments are placing unprecedented demands on the all-volunteer military, recruitment and retention are generally holding up, official statistics show. In the 2003 fiscal year, all four services met their recruiting and retention goals, with the exception of a retention shortfall in the Army reserves.

Indeed, contrary to popular belief, deployments have historically had a positive effect on retention, at least initially.

Some units in Iraq and Afghanistan report high retention rates. For example, mobilized Naval Reservists have a higher rate of retention than those not called up, naval reserve chief Vice Admiral John Totushek told a May 2003 hearing. At the same hearing, the Army National Guard Bureau chief, Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, said he saw no evidence of a long-term recruiting or retention problem, adding, "so far ... it's been quite the opposite."

Page: 1 | 2