What happens to our soldiers when they return

The US military is great at training our military on how to kill somebody, but do they do a good job of helping them recover after they have done that or have seen it occur?

A report came out about a year ago that said that one sixth of the US military that comes back from Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from some type of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Of the 140,000 soldiers that we have in Iraq today that would equate to 23,000 soldiers! But that does not include all of the soldiers that have come back. There are probably closer to 500,000 soldiers that have been there or are there. That means that 83,000 soldiers could be suffering from some type of PTSD!!! But, wait it gets worse.

During Vietnam a third of the soldiers in that conflict suffered from PSTD or combat stress. Because the situation in Iraq has gotten much more violent we can expect much more of the soldiers currently in Iraq to suffer from PTSD.

There is good news though. The military is doing a lot more to address the affects of PTSD, but soldiers are concerned that going for psychological counseling will ruin their careers.
Even 20 year veterans suffer from this for the first time. They are afraid of looking weak.

A three day series by Nightline on ABC has covered this topic. The last part of this series is tonight. Please check it out. After watching this you will realize that many more soldiers are casualties of the war than the approx. 9,000 that have sufferred from a physical wound. Frequently soldiers have psychological damage as well.

•  When they return

  We will find out who really supports the troops.

  by TarheelDem on Fri Dec 17, 2004 at 08:20:28 PM PDT

  •  support the vets

    But most of the veterans are victims of war.  You've probably heard the expression, "winning a war is like winning an earthquake."  

    We all know that there are some sick fucks in the military.  We've seen the pictures.  But the average Joe (or Jo), is simply caught up in events larger than themselves.  They're fighting for themselves and their unit, and that's just life.

    When speaking of the mental and physical health of the veterans, their livlihoods, their families, their survivors, my opinions about foreign policy must be put aside.  The combat vets in particular are going through horrors that none of us in our cushy lives will ever have to confront.

    We can't let Bush toss them aside just because he's done with them.  

    Charitable support for the vets must be a progressive priority.

    Benefits for reservists (and their families) called to active combat duty should be a progressive priority.  If they are on the front line like regular army, they should be compensated like regular army.

    Long term support for the mental health of veterans must be a priority.

    An end to mandatory IRR and stop-loss should be a progressive priority.  These people have done their time.  It's not their fault if BushCheneyRummyWolfie tried to fight this war on the cheap.

    I know I should stay away, but I listen to Rightard Radio at times.  A local Limbaugh clone  claimed the other day that Liberal revel in the casualty list.  It delights us to hear of American wounded and dying.

    We should spend some of our political capital (and actual capital) to demonstrate our true support of the troops.

    by zzmarkzz on Fri Dec 17, 2004 at 09:12:36 PM PDT

    •  Casualty List

      Unlike the folks on rightwing radio, we do pay attention to the casualty list.  Unlike them, we do not take delight in celebrating people in the abstract who are dying for their country.  We respect the fact that they cared about this country enough to put their lives on the line.  We are angry about why they were sent there, how they were sent there, but we are not angry at them.  They are individual people some valiant, some not, some horrified by what they see, some treating it as the greatest glory.  And we want them all to come home.  

      When they die or are wounded, we respond to them as people.  We want to know who they were, where they were from, what their story was, how it happened--all the things we ask about people we care about.  When their body comes home for burial, we expect all Americans to stand with their family, for their family's grief is all the greater because of their youth or their family's misgivings about the war.  As crappy as it is, a flag, a salute, "Taps"--all help families deal with their grief.  When they are wounded we expect no less care of them than we would expect for ourselves.  We are Americans, it is our government that sent them there despite our best efforts.  They deserve the best.  And it is the Limbaughs and O'Reilly's of the world who love to make a buck off of them but don't give a shit what happens to them.

      In one way this is not Vietnam.  We will not stand by and let a nation ignore their return just because they did not win an unwinnable war created by misleadership.  We will not.  We must not.  But we will also not let this leadership off the hook like we did before.  If this means standing with the American Legion and VFW and screaming that these soldiers will be cared for, we must do it.

      by TarheelDem on Sat Dec 18, 2004 at 03:33:12 AM PDT

      •  Amen to that

        by shark on Sat Dec 18, 2004 at 09:36:50 AM PDT

      •  I wonder sometimes if

        the American Veterans, who returned from WWII, had as much PTSD as all the other Veterans from the following wars, Vietnam, Iraq etc.

        Isn't there a reverse relationship between PTSD and the perception of the war as being "a truly necessary war for the defense of the people"?  Could it be that the more truthfully the war is a necessary defensive war the less the PTSD occurrence for the Vets after the war, the more questionable the necessity of the war as being defensive in nature, the more serious the PTSD for the returning Vets?

        Also, if there are inner questions and doubts about the necessity of a war, does not the requested "positive attitude" the soldier is supposed to display a cause for increasing the risk of PTSD later on?

        Why is it that the severely wounded disabled Veterans, who lost limbs and are under constant pain in Walter Reed get dragged in front of the cameras and have to "play the tough, brave and courageous guy"? Isn't that a a bit cruel and serves more the TV viewer than the disabled Vet?

        Can anybody tell me why any soldier who lost both legs and has wounds all over must pretend to feel like "I am alright, happy and proud and would do it all over again any time, Sir"?

        I mean, I saw the report of Chris Matthews with Gen. McCaffrey and of course it's really, really a very brave attitude the wounded show in front of the cameras.

        I just don't believe it's emotionally true and psychologically wise to do this to the wounded and disabled, nor do I think it's necessary to ask from a soldier in such a situation that kind of "bravery" display. I discussed this with my son and he disagrees with me on that and said it's something that can help the Veteran, because it's the only thing they have left, their own bravery and pride.

        I don't think it's decent from reporters to put the wounded in a situation where they HAVE to be brave, because the cameras are running and the American people just couldn't handle to see a broken soldier, spiritually broken. Later on when they find those Vets as "homeless and broken men wandering the streets of the cities" it's simply easier to look the other way and pretend that "they are just alcoholics or mentally disabled".

        May be I miss something, may be it helps the disabled Vets to fight and be brave, but it is soo unlikely to be truly emotionally possible.

        I just can't come to an understanding and a conclusion on this issue. May be someone who has dealt with a lot of wounded Veterans and Veterans suffering under PTSD could help me with it?

        by mimi on Sat Dec 18, 2004 at 07:53:53 PM PDT

•  The good news

  It's nearly impossible for a vet to get a job at the post office because of all the mass shootups.  Bad news: they will be working where you do.

  Sorry for the snark.  I experienced the horrors of what a war can do to you while deployed to Gulf War I.  The realization that we were actively killing as many Iraqis as we could just was too much.  And I was remote from the actual fighting and relatively safe.  

  The dehumanization that our troops are going through is something that many of them will never really recover from.  And all of us will be paying for it for a long, long time.

  by unterhausen on Fri Dec 17, 2004 at 08:59:48 PM PDT

•  Thanks for the post.

  Every combat vet I know has/had some psych damage.  People very close to me suffered nightmares twenty years after their war, and that was WWII.  Wouldn't talk about their experiences, except the occasional "amusing anecdote".  But a part of them was sealed inside, and never opened to anyone except other combat vets.  And those vets came home to ticker-tape parades.

  My generation's war was Viet Nam, and those of us who served in the military [even clerks like me] didn't get what you'd call a warm reception.  Friends who were in combat have that same sealed area.  Thirty-five years later, and still the occasional "amusing anecdote".

  Met a kid back from Gulf I in about '92.  MP, he was close to the barracks that blew in Kuwait, and had the job of helping clean up the mess.  He got two weeks in Egypt, sent home, and discharged with a thank you.  He said the parade was great, but.......

  Again we send our young.  If you know someone who has served, just give 'em time - and be the voice on the other end of the phone when they need it, and NEVER JUDGE.  And if you get a chance, read this:

  My War:  In the Service of the Queen
  http://cbftw.blogspot.com/

  No politics involved.

  by rba on Fri Dec 17, 2004 at 09:05:42 PM PDT

•  Thursday's "Nightline"

  Was devoted to post-traumatic stress disorder. Supposedly, the military is stressing early intervention.

  by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Fri Dec 17, 2004 at 10:06:33 PM PDT

•  My vet friend

  He served in Kosovo and Iraq and is finally home. He lives with his future wife and kid and is in good condition mentally and physically. But one day I was at his house and he said the strangest thing to me. He said some days he feels like hitting his kid because he gets so frustrated by his tantrums but instead he hugs him and kisses him. I have seen him do this when his kid has a tantrum and it is effective at calming the boy. I know he would never hurt the child but I asked him if everything was alright. He seemed to be fine but I worry about what he was exposed to. He does not really talk about anything related to his service and I really don't ask him about it because I am not sure he wants to talk about it or not.

  by nater1979 on Fri Dec 17, 2004 at 11:21:27 PM PDT

  •  He should get help

    As the Nightline series said: A veteran's buddies are the ones who see the problems and they need to reccomend that he get help. If nothing else it would help him deal with situations like this better in his mind.

    by shark on Sat Dec 18, 2004 at 09:40:40 AM PDT