Quarter of Dead Are National Guard Troops

[callady]

Oct 25, 5:51 PM EDT


Quarter of Dead Are National Guard Troops

By RUSS BYNUM and ELLIOTT MINOR
Associated Press Writers

THOMSON, Ga. (AP) -- During his 18 years in the Georgia National Guard, James Kinlow settled into a peaceful, small-town life focused more on being a citizen than a soldier.

Kinlow had married his high-school sweetheart and rarely missed the Lincoln County Red Devils' home football games. He worked in a lumber yard and drove a freight truck. The citizen-soldiers he trained with every month included family friends and former teachers; he cracked them up with his imitations of the officers.

<snip>

Since the March 2003 invasion, at least 497 National Guard or Reserve troops have died in Iraq, nearly 1 in 4 U.S. casualties. These are not professional soldiers. These are the people who sell us insurance, drive our trucks, fix our cars.

"The Guard is different in the respect that these folks are seen around town every day, driving a deputy sheriff's patrol car or working at the 7-11 or teaching high school," said U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga. "These are everyday folks who have been commanded to go to war."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/2/2000_FALLEN_CITIZEN_SOLDIERS?SITE=TXMCA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Maat]

1. This topic makes me so mad!

How unconscionable and evil is it to send people into battle inadequately trained and without adequate equipment, virtually guaranteeing them being 'cannon-fodder?'

:grr:

[brentspeak]

2. Not to mention

that the National Guard are supposed to be home - protecting the nation.

[Maat]

3. A very good point (n/t).

[Lisa]

7. Bush isn't brave enough to change the name to "International Guard"

Even though that's what they're doing.

And they and their equipment are far from home, while the people they were hoping to serve are struggling with floods, wildfires, and storms.

[Proud2BaLiberalMom]

8. Not true!

"How unconscionable and evil is it to send people into battle inadequately trained and without adequate equipment, virtually guaranteeing them being 'cannon-fodder?"


I beg to differ...
My husband has been in the National Guard
for over 26 years. He has been to the Middle
East at least 4 times. He is NOT inadequately
trained. He is a marksmen when it comes to firing
his weapon. He has become very proficient at putting
his chemical gear on quickly. He knows how to
protect himself and those under his command.
Please don't be fooled that the 'regular' soldier
is better trained than the National Guard soldier.
This is not necessarily the case. It all depends
on the soldier and those he works with. It saddens
me deeply that we have reached the 2,000th death.
My husband has been to Iraq once, and will be going
back again after the 1st of the year. Although I
would be devastated if he didn't make it back home,
I KNOW he is VERY well trained. I DO worry that he
will not have adequate body armor, though.
My son was in the Navy, full-time, and he knew much
less than my husband. nuff said...

[Maat]

9. Thank him for his service. I certainly appreciate it.

I'm glad that he has had good training. I'm not happy to hear that body armor might still be a problem.

Those statistics are telling, however, and I would like an explanation from my government - a plausible explanation.

On edit:
Welcome to DU!

It is very enlightening when people post their own individual experiences.

[MasonJar]

4. Isn't that the reason Stump joined the Texas National Guard so

he could stay home and save the Texas bar crowd from boredom.

[MichiganVote]

5. Does anyone know where the numbers fall for those wounded?

[YDogg]

6. I wonder how many - among these - were on extended tours.

:(

[belle]

10. "W" is for WASTE. of lives, of resources, of everything. and HE is a waste

...of skin.