Iraq Veterans vulnerable to commit suicide

Status
Not open for further replies.
Echo3Romeo said:
Operations in Iraq are all about presence. 99% of the missions we run in-country are presence patrols - walking a given route through a neighborhood to establish a friendly rapport with the locals - rather than deliberate attack missions where we roll out to destroy a particular target. Instead of loading up with extra grenades and boxes of ammo, shooters load up with toys and candy. In this role, it doesn't matter if you're Force Recon or a yeoman...you're both equally qualified and trained to do the same thing and are employed as such.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I think that's fine. But the company clerks and the supply clerks who type up all of the company paperwork does NOT go out on patrol .....and thus is highly unlikely to get zapped. Training has nothing to do with it ...one can be trained to be a fighter, but if he's never out in the fight,...?

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Well, apparently it is ....because there are thousands of people shooting people, and killing, every day somewhere on this Earth. So reality certainly holds up my opinion a lot more than it does yours, don't it? Hell, I'd bet that there was a murder yesterday right there in your own city/town.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

So your conclusio nis the more people do something the easier it is....

And by the way: 'thousands' is a relative small number if you know there are 6billion of us.

Maybe you should reconsider your last quote...

and yes there were maybe even 5 murderers in my town...out of a population of half a million....
 
Baron Max said:
No, the more people who kill other people proves that killing isn't nearly as traumatic as mamby-pamby, doo-gooder, bleeding-heart liberals make it out to be.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

No it just might mean that there are lot of traumatized people running around.
 
Baron Max said:
No, the more people who kill other people proves that killing isn't nearly as traumatic as mamby-pamby, doo-gooder, bleeding-heart liberals make it out to be.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

killing someone for the most part fucks people up mentally it is a minority that it doesn't
 
pjdude1219 said:
killing someone for the most part fucks people up mentally it is a minority that it doesn't
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence for that assertion, or are you just repeating liberal, doo-gooder bullshit opinions that you've read or heard?

Baron Max
 
MaxG said:

The rate of amputees is about twice as high as in WW II through Vietnam and there's also a very high rate of traumatic brain injury.
Click to expand...

Isn't this actually a bit of a mixed blessing inasmuch as many of those would have died in WWII and Vietnam?

• • •​

Spidergoat said:

My friend was mentally ill and suicidal (and autistic) even before he entered the Army. Part of this problem is that the Armed Forces are so desperate to get recruits that they overlook all kinds of character flaws. In my friend's case, the Army recruiters even tried to cover up his outdated drug conviction, which wouldn't have mattered, except that the backround check turned it up. So they had to rewrite the "application" to include it, and he got in.
Click to expand...

The even darker side of this is that the Army, at least, may be abandoning these soldiers in the long run. NPR reported Thursday:

New Pentagon figures released to NPR show that since the United States invaded Iraq, officers have kicked out far more troops for having behavior issues that are potentially linked to post-traumatic stress disorder than they did before the war ....

.... NPR has reported that servicemen and women who come home with serious mental-health problems, such as PTSD, often can't get the medical treatment they need.

And some commanders, in fact, have kicked troubled troops out of the military instead of trying to help them.

Until now, NPR reports have included anecdotal evidence, because the Pentagon has not released detailed statistics ....

.... But an Army chart, which NPR recently received, shows that since the United States invaded Iraq:

— Commanders have discharged almost 20 percent more soldiers for "misconduct" than they did in the same period before the war;

— Commanders have discharged more than twice as many soldiers for "drug abuse" (a subset of the "misconduct" category);

— Commanders have discharged almost 40 percent more soldiers for "personality disorder."

(Zwerdling)
Click to expand...

What is troubling, according to some, is the implication of a conflict of interest. In discharging people for "personality disorders", the Army may simply be abandoning these soldiers in order to not pay disability claims.

Zwerdling's report runs just under five minutes, and is well worth your time. I promise.
 
Last edited:
Baron Max said:
Do you have any evidence for that assertion, or are you just repeating liberal, doo-gooder bullshit opinions that you've read or heard?

Baron Max
Click to expand...

i have talked to people who fought in war and also i perviously provided evidence. instead of being an asshole why don't you read all the posts
 
Baron Max said:
And how long would you like to keep up this little game of "might", "maybe", "could be", "should be", .......? :rolleyes:

Baron Max
Click to expand...

See I use "might" because I don't know the answer. You don't either but still insist you do. I think your game is stupider.

BTW, I could provide evidence to support my statement (e.g., rates of PTSD and depression are higher among combat vets than among the general population or among vets who didn't serve in combat). Won't bother since I know from past experience you won't even bother looking at the research.
 
The sad part is it didn't have to be this way. Iraq descended into chaos because the early planning for an occupation on the part of the State Department was entirely ignored in favor of Rumsfeld's "plan"- secure the Iraqi oil ministry only. Being a part of a successful transition to civil government would have given any soldier a feeling accomplishment. Being a part of what actually happened could rob the strongest person of the will to live.
 
Baron Max said:
Coulda', woulda', shoulda' ....solves nothing, but only brings up more arguments ....that also solve nothing.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

No, it points to the very heart of the problem. Why did the invasion and occupation begin so well, then go so badly? What led to the kind of conditions that now weigh so heavily on our troops? When you start to investigate this, you realize that the most basic aspects of transitioning Iraq to civil rule were ignored. That could be a valuable lesson if we ever decide to do something like this again. The chaos we are now a part of was far from inevitable. If we want to move forward, we must realize what led to the present situation.
 
spidergoat said:
No, it points to the very heart of the problem. Why did the invasion and occupation begin so well, then go so badly? What led to the kind of conditions that now weigh so heavily on our troops?
Click to expand...
Too few Monday morning armchair quarterbacking experts actually signed up at the beginning to show us all how it should be done from the gitgo?

Just saying.
 
Mr. G said:
Too few Monday morning armchair quarterbacking experts actually signed up at the beginning to show us all how it should be done from the gitgo?

Just saying.
Click to expand...

The most disasterous decisions were made by a small group of senior Pentagon civilians with no military or reconstruction experience. Disbanding the Iraqi army was opposed by most military commanders and experts when they learned of it. Their own expert's advice including detailed State Department plans for reconstruction were ignored. Rumsfeld even ridiculed the looting of Iraq's national treasures. How could anyone not forsee the problem of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers unemployed, unable to support their families, armed and under no no one's command, with a knowledge of the location of ammo dumps and explosives no one was guarding?

If one wanted to create the worst possible situation for our troops, they could not have done much better. I think they would rather have a private army anyway.
 
spidergoat said:
... Disbanding the Iraqi army was opposed by most military commanders and experts when they learned of it. ..... How could anyone not forsee the problem of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers unemployed, unable to support their families, armed and under no no one's command, with a knowledge of the location of ammo dumps and explosives no one was guarding?

If one wanted to create the worst possible situation for our troops, they could not have done much better. I think they would rather have a private army anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, that was exactly what we did in Germany and Japan ....and it worked out quite well. Yet here you are, saying that it's a bad thing and won't work?

A little Monday Morning Quarterbacking, huh, Spider? :D

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Well, that was exactly what we did in Germany and Japan ....and it worked out quite well. Yet here you are, saying that it's a bad thing and won't work?

A little Monday Morning Quarterbacking, huh, Spider? :D

Baron Max
Click to expand...

do you try to be a troll or does it just come natruelly
 
Baron Max said:
No, the more people who kill other people proves that killing isn't nearly as traumatic as mamby-pamby, doo-gooder, bleeding-heart liberals make it out to be.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

Are your conclusions perhaps waring the label: made in china?
Cause they realy suck!

The thousands of people that are killing proves that a lot of people have forgotten how to deal with problems not that killing is a traumatic experience.You are focussing on the wrong subject here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top