The war that keeps taking away..

As is my want, I was looking over the NY Times (sorry for the anti NY Times people out there) homepage for any big stories. Sadly, I came upon this story about how Afghanistan/Iraqi War veterans are committing murders or are being accused of murders after returning home. I am in no way condoning their actions. They should and will be punsihed. However, this isn't like WWII where you knew your enemy and it was clear why you were fighting. There is a lot of uncertainty about this war. I believe that doubt can creep into a man's heart and mind and make him question the killing, fighting, etc. I cannot imagine the emotional and psychological trauma these veterans feel. Many of them are disillusioned about this war and come home scarred beyond their physical wounds. It really is a darn shame..

No one should forget that the same can and does happen on the other side of the gun.

Edit: Just to clarify, I'm referring to both sides of a war, not the person being shot.

I have to commend Mr R P Chip on that sentiment. It's all too easy to ignore, or be ignorant of, the human suffering that takes place on your enemy's side of the fence.




Jeremy

I work with a gent who is an Army reservist in the Chaplain's office. Part of his job is counseling vets just returning from their tours, and helping them re-acclimate to their "normal" lives. In some cases, the evaluations prohibit them from rejoining their families before spending some time in a psychiatric ward. Some of the stories he tells agree with the sort of things in this story, and are extremely chilling and sad.

A friend of mine here has done a lot of PTSD counseling, and here's what he says about it: "You're out there and you have to do certain things to stay alive. Then you get back, and all of a sudden everything you do is wrong. That 'friggin stuff' (softer translation) just doesn't work anymore!"

It's even more difficult because PTSD carries a stigma (you don't want to be seen as "weak"). Add to that the fact that people are being deployed for longer periods of time, being deployed repeatedly with minimal breaks in between, etc., and you get the present situation. I applaud the people who can come back from that and lead relatively normal lives, because I seriously doubt I could make that transition.

My fathers VA disability was set at 100% a couple of years before he passed away. Most of that rating was due to PTSD.
It made life interesting growing up.
I have had a lot of contact with other veterans who suffer from PTSD, it can be worse than the physical injuries at times.


Jim

Veterans of WWII and all other wars have also suffered the same mental disabilities that we are seeing today. The difference now is that those problems are being recognized where in the past they were ignored.

My father started trying to get VA help for his in 1974. He finally got treatment in 2000.


Jim

Evil One said:

My father started trying to get VA help for his in 1974. He finally got treatment in 2000.
Jim

Click to expand...

That is truly shameful, and probably too common.

Norm

_JP_ said:

Veterans of WWII and all other wars have also suffered the same mental disabilities that we are seeing today. The difference now is that those problems are being recognized where in the past they were ignored.

Click to expand...

WWII vets and vets of other past wars had it different than our returning service members today. Veterans of the wars today jump on a plane and are quickly returned state side with hardly any cool down period. The DOD has recognized this problem and tried implementing new classes and other procedures but it doesn't really lengthen the cooling off period. WWII vets fought the entire campaign either in Europe or the Pacific for years at a time. It started with an invasion then a gradual decline (I know this is a huge generalization I am trying my best to make a point) The wars of today are not like that. It's often classified as a "Three Block War Scenario." One block you are in a friendly neighborhood, you keep walking down the street and on this block there is some anti American sentiment then the next block your receiving and returning gun fire. To top it all off the next day you might possibly be headed home on a plane. It's no wonder why a city landscape in the states could be confused with an urban area in country.

Another thing that WWII vets had going for them is the country they were returning to was a totally different country than we have here today. In the NY Times article there were two things that I noticed that were drastically different than how the US was in the 40's. One was the returning veteran couldn't even buy his own beer. Two, he was forced to not only live in an area with gangs but would be harassed by them. I am sure when veterans returned from WWII they were not only allowed to buy beer but it was probably bought for them. I really don't know the answer but in the 40's would there have been a problem with a veteran walking on gang turf? To my limited knowledge I am not aware of gang problems other than the Mafia.

Unfortunately though there's more wrong than just that. Returning WWII vets had a booming economy to come home to. The sad truth today is, and I have seen it from friends who I have served along side and have seen them in a light that no one else will get to see, return home and do nothing. They sit and drink, do drugs, and get into trouble with the law. There were things for them to do when they got home that kept their minds busy. Sure they had flash backs but for the most part they lived normal lives.

Don't get me wrong, I love all veterans and I try to fill their boots everyday I put on my uniform. They have left huge ones to fill. But I really think that they fought for a different country.

I know returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are not scarred and disillusioned.

Most veterans are quietly proud to have performed their duty. This is not to say some aren't highly critical of the wars, or leadership, or things they saw. But soldiers don't sign up to support an individual policy or president. They sign up to serve their country.

It's up to the country to serve the soldiers by giving them effective leadership and support once it chooses to send them to war. For the most part, soldiers have done their jobs extremely well in Iraq and Afghanistan. The failings in these wars, for the most part, have been on the civilian and leadership side. The soldiers for the most part have performed above and beyond and should, and often do, feel proud of their service.

In my opinion, we civilians should be asking how well we are performing our duties as citizens.

As for the PTSD, one should note that Post Traumatic Stress is often a normal and appropriate reaction to the rigors of war. It's tougher to tell when PTS becomes a Disorder. Obviously, all help should be made available to vets with need. But in some cases what they need to hear isn't that they are suffering from a disorder, but that they are experiencing the normal Post Traumatic Stress responses to life in a combat zone.

In my opinion, most of the men and women I know who have served in the recent and ongoing wars haven't been diminished by their service. They are better people. They have proven themselves through courage and sacrifice on a level few people back home will ever understand. This, in my opinion, gives many of them a knowledge of themselves, a confidence and insight into their fellow man that is often lacking in the civilian world.

Again, not to minimize pain, injuries or injustice that any veteran has experienced as a result of serving in these wars, but I feel in our overly-Oprahized and Dr. Philed-to-death culture, we have lost sight of the fact that there once was a time when those who performed well in the crucible of warfare were considered to have passed a test that made them better people, not worse, and certainly not victims.

I personally choose to celebrate veterans I know as heroes and role models, regardless of my opinions of the wars and our political leaders.

What's annoying about a NYTs article that focuses on a few vets losing their marbles is the urge reporters and readers have to read a great deal into these acts. Dentists commit murders, and so do truck drivers, but we don't wind up with long articles suggesting that we have a massive social problem on our hands because of mentally unstable dentists and truck drivers.

With respect to the soldiers, sailors, airmen (and women) and always the Marines of the GWT.

The difference, unlike dentists and truck drivers, a soldier's purpose is to kill and destroy. This does not come naturally to anyone who is not a pyschopath. They have to be broken down and brainwashed in boot camp...by techniques the military have developed and polished over hundreds of years. Their individual identities are suppressed in favor of a group identity...the "unit". The "Corps". They have a "us" and "them" mindset built into them. They lose the sense of individual responsibility. Then back in civilian life, no one to give them orders, no one to assume the responsibility for their actions, they are subconsciously adrift. Then guilt feelings set in for things they did. The Chinese have an old saying, "Good iron does not become a nail and a good man does not become a soldier." I say this, and I am a Vietnam vet. If I knew then what I know now, I would have been chanting "Hell no, I won't go." with all the hippies. I don't want to be a casualty, and I don't want to be a killer either.

Roman414 said:

The difference, unlike dentists and truck drivers, a soldier's purpose is to kill and destroy. This does not come naturally to anyone who is not a pyschopath. They have to be broken down and brainwashed in boot camp...by techniques the military have developed and polished over hundreds of years. Their individual identities are suppressed in favor of a group identity...the "unit". The "Corps". They have a "us" and "them" mindset built into them. They lose the sense of individual responsibility. Then back in civilian life, no one to give them orders, no one to assume the responsibility for their actions, they are subconsciously adrift. Then guilt feelings set in for things they did. The Chinese have an old saying, "Good iron does not become a nail and a good man does not become a soldier." I say this, and I am a Vietnam vet. If I knew then what I know now, I would have been chanting "Hell no, I won't go." with all the hippies. I don't want to be a casualty, and I don't want to be a killer either.

Click to expand...

There are some very good men who happen to be soldiers. However, I honestly can't recall any good iron becoming nails.

Just a little light humor in an otherwise heavy thread..

Of course. But it is a young man's game. Young, naive and gullible and thoughtless. That is a fair description of me and my comrades-in-arms in my military days. But you get older, you see it all for the perverse stupidity it is.

I'm a student of history. I have always loved reading up on "the past". One significant difference that started with Vietnam is that prior to that "police action" was that soldiers were heroes. But beginning with part of the Korean war and including Vietnam and any following "wars", a part of our society did not view our soldiers as "protectors", but as "baby killers", etc. I tip my hat (I'm not worthy to salute since I have not served) to those who volunteer and serve our great country. As "good soldiers", they are following orders. Whether I agree or disagree with the current "politics" of war, they put their lives on the line for me and my fellow patriots. I thank them for this. To our forum members who currently serve in active military duty, or who have served in the past, I say thank you. I've always heard that "war is hell". I don't know. But some of you do. And to those who know, again, thank you!

Randy

tony mack said:

As for the PTSD, one should note that Post Traumatic Stress is often a normal and appropriate reaction to the rigors of war. It's tougher to tell when PTS becomes a Disorder. Obviously, all help should be made available to vets with need. But in some cases what they need to hear isn't that they are suffering from a disorder, but that they are experiencing the normal Post Traumatic Stress responses to life in a combat zone.

Click to expand...

Agreed. However, there is a problem with "normalizing" post traumatic stress: where do you draw the line? As there are increasing numbers of veterans returning home with PTS, how do you identify those for whom it is a chronic condition? This is what the VA is dealing with, and financial considerations are a big part of the equation. You are absolutely right about PTS, but as the criteria for defining PTSD are narrowing, more and more veterans who need help are going to fall through the cracks.

tony mack said:

With respect to the soldiers, sailors, airmen (and women) and always the Marines of the GWT.

Click to expand...

And Coast Guardsmen... With the highest percentage of their active duty service members in theater, please do not forget them. My service may be small, but we have always held up our end of the weight.

Guardsmen (and women), too.

I agree that while Post Traumatic Stress is normal, all vets should have treatment and counselling available on demand in case they are suffering from the "disorder" variety of it.

As to the guy who argues all soldiers are psychopaths. I would argue that the prevalence of Post Traumatic Stress--whether it's the normal kind or the disorder type--is caused by the fact that most soldiers are not psychopaths. The normal, indeed healthy reaction of a non-psychopath is often to feel stress and trauma after being involved in killing or intense suffering.

The point of war is it is Hell. It takes an enormous toll on those who fight it. It physically destroys them--taking limbs, lives and intangibles.

The heroic thing about the vast majority of America's servicemen and women is they know about the above risks, and they sign up anyway. The media would have you believe they all sign up because they are economically oppressed, or they are naive and stupid.

Yes, some soldiers signed up because they wanted college money, or even in one case I know of, needed health insurance for his kids. Many soldiers are naive. They are prone to myths and romanticism of war that the young are susceptible to.

But at the same time, even with the myths and economic necessities partially motivating them, the vast majority of military people I know are also motivated by ideals of service and sacrifice. Young and dumb as they may be, they understand they are potentially making the ultimate sacrifice.

We citizens have a choice, as I see it. Either we declare ourselves absolute pacificists and denounce all militarism, or we accept, horrible as it is, that we need to have the capacity to wage war. In that case, we ought to value those citizens who raise their hands and say they will go into harm's way on behalf of the rest of us.

This is not a political argument about the validity of the current wars. It is an argument that we ought to, in my opinion, value and respect the citizens who commit to defending our society and values by putting their lives on the line.

Ultimately, in my view, we should respect the servicemen and women not because war is this glorious, wonderful undertaking, but because war is so ***-ing horrible. It's a terrible thing to ask of them. But they sign up for it, most of them believing they are doing so on our behalf. If this is all a big mistake and a scam, somebody ought to tell these men and women before they sign up.

Happy Shaving.

tony mack said:

We citizens have a choice, as I see it. Either we declare ourselves absolute pacificists and denounce all militarism, or we accept, horrible as it is, that we need to have the capacity to wage war.

Click to expand...

Nice post. I'd like to point out a third option (and one that many countries around the world are happy to take): a military force solely for self-defense. I am taking your words "wage war" to mean attacking/invading another nation, naturally.

Agree.