Comments on: State Department to Order Diplomats to Iraq

By: Consul-At-Arms

Consul-At-Arms — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:20:19 +0000

By: davod

davod — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:52:28 +0000

I was just reading a post by Michael Yon concerning the high regard with which some of the LTCOLs are held by tribal chiefs.

Do we really want to send in pissed off State Department officers, some of whom may have a Colonialist' attitude to the natives.

Surely, it might be better to keep using the DOD civil affairs teams and friendly Iraqis to do the work.

By: SFC SKI

SFC SKI — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:42:10 +0000

I say good on the State Dept. for doing this; its employees mission is to support the US government wherever the mission may be. IF it forces out some desk jockeys, all to the better.

I am retiring from 20 years of military service, I speak Arabic, I wonder if State needs my skills.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 02:52:41 +0000

Bottom line is to make not having done a tour in Iraq mean you are only considered for any promotion if no one else who has been ther applies.

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 21:31:10 +0000

There are a few SES billets in Iraq and the theater like Qatar. Most likely people (GS-15s) are promoted into those positions and then come back stateside for their cushy regular jobs once the tour is over.

By: RM

RM — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 20:54:42 +0000

Its kinda like the Senior Executive Service (SES). SES are supposed to be assignable where needed. I'm not sure that I've ever heard of an SES being transferred to someplace they really didn't want to go.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:44:51 +0000

James, all those measures you cite are already in place. They're insufficient, however.

This is a matter of enforcing assignment discipline. To be an FSO, one has to agree to 'worldwide availability' (with some exceptions such as medical limitations). That's not always been enforced in the past.

By: SWJ Blog

SWJ Blog — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:19:14 +0000

"Prime Candidates for Iraq"...

Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, reports on a new US State Department intitiative; nay, order; that will see additional diplomats taking posts in Iraq next year because of expected shortfalls in filling openings, the first such large-scale forced assign...

By: DC Loser

DC Loser — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 14:19:32 +0000

They are already getting a 70% pay differential for Iraq and another 10% hardship incentive. That's a big chunk of change. DoD is also offering the 70% difference for civilians, and some are getting almost $10k as a bonus on top.

By: just me

just me — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 13:20:23 +0000

Higher pay, enhanced chances for career advancement, priority assignment choices, and the like.

I am surprised they haven't already tried some of these things-some of them wouldn't be that difficult, others might require the department go through more channels before implementing them, but either way you would think they would have already been tried.

I don't have problems though with telling some people they have to go, if the slots aren't filled.