Found this interesting!
Wow, I wasn't trying to one up you. I was telling you what my husband is experincing. Not my brother's, sister's, best friend. Please show me where it was ever said ever last combat solider will be out of Iraq. We still have combat troops in Korea.
While you may believe they are coming home in 2 months, I have a family with young children who would beg to differ.
Umm, than while are so many of my friends excited that their husbands are coming home? We are talking about two different bases, and two different battalions, clearly.
I do know he is still considered combat.
I'd still like to know his MOS if you are able to find out. TIA
I think you are correct about the combat nature of troops in Iraq. Effective September 1, combat operations (not ALL troops) under Operation Iraqi Freedom are officially over. Those who were combat troops then will become participants in advice/assist operations called Operation New Dawn.
So while just a few days earlier some troops were considered "combat," they will now be considered "advisors." Supposedly, no independent (US-only) combat operations will take place.
Basically they are giving them a different name to try and pretend that there are no more combat troops there.
There are currently 56,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, down from about 140,000 when Obama took office in January 2009.
About 6,000 combat forces remain in Iraq temporarily, but they are not currently organized to carry out combat operations, NBC News reported.
A senior military official told NBC that the so-called advise-and-assist brigades will be combat capable, despite not having a formal combat mission. Some of those forces, which will be embedded with Iraqi forces, could be drawn into combat, NBC said.
About 4,500 American Special Operations forces will also continue to conduct counter-terrorism operations, hunting down and capturing or killing al-Qaida members, NBC reported. These operations are not considered combat missions, but they often involve the use of combat tactics.
Iraq's military commander, Lt. Gen. Babakir Zebari, caused consternation last week when he said his troops would not be ready to protect the country until 2020, and that the United States should keep its forces there until then.
The Obama administration says only that it plans to set up an "office of security cooperation" at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. Its staff will help train Iraqi military personnel and coordinate weapons purchases but will number no more than a few dozen, or "maybe in the hundreds."
"We still have tens of thousands of men and women on the ground that will support the Iraqi forces and we know they will continue to face serious threats on a daily basis," Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid said in a statement.
"For a very long period of time, we're going to be on the ground, even if it's solely in support of its (Iraq's) U.S. weapons systems," Ryan Crocker, former U.S. ambassador to Iraq, told The New York Times.
That is what I was pointing out - in reverse. In my son's case, he wasn't a "combat" troop, yet he was attached to an infantry combat unit during the 2007 surge. He was considered "combat" when he was with that unit. He is back to his old support function now - no longer "combat." The reverse can be said for troops who were considered "combat" a week ago, but will no longer be considered combat on September 1. If the function to which a troop is assigned changes from combat to support, then the troop would be considered support.