The Army is considering whether it will have to extend the combat tours of troops in Iraq if President Bush opts to maintain the recent buildup of forces through spring 2008.It is unclear of this means 15-month tours for new units going or tours longer than 15 months. The latter is implied, but that makes no sense to me. It makes far more sense to speak of continuing the extension into next year if we intend to maintain the surge level of troops.
To maintain 20 combat brigades in Iraq and 2 in Afghanistan while making sure troops have a year off between deployments would require 51 brigades (44 x 1.15 to allow for overlap). We have 38 combat brigades in the active Army and 9 active Marine regimental combat teams or equivalents. Subtract one Army brigade in South Korea and subtract 3 Marine regiments to keep a source for rotating 2-3 MEUs for deployment. So we have 43 brigades available.
This isn't enough, which is why the Army extended all tours to 15 months. This gives us the equivalent of 52 brigades (46 Army brigade-yearly-equivalents: 37 Army brigades x 1.25 years of duty, plus 6 Marine regiments). We can barely maintain our current effort with the current extensions. We are adding ten more Army brigades through 2012. And the Marines will get bigger, too. But these won't change the calculations too much in the short term. We could probably add another brigade or two for next year.
The total doesn't include National Guard brigades or reserve Marine regiments. It is not unreasonable to include 4-6 ARNG brigades or reserve Marine regiments each year to help relieve stress on the active component.
Secretary Gates doesn't think this new extension will happen, calling it simply a "worst case" scenario. And DOD minimizes the chances, as well.
The only way we'd need to revise this is if we are involved in combat with Iran or North Korea.
Of course, if the general who made these comments was assuming this ...
