The Cost of War; The Meaning of Memorial Day
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
On Memorial Day, Americans honor the fallen. Soldiers whose faces will never appear before us again are remembered for their service. Only the few, friends and family, will recall the life of those young men and women who passed from this world into another. In a country grateful for the protection troops provide, people will shop on this holy day. A President will place a wreath on the grave of an unknown soldier. Beautiful speeches will be made in the spirit of homage. Americans will bow their heads in respect. Reverence will be offered, and statistics that document the effects of war will not be shared. Yet, the numbers cry out for attention, just as the pained servicemen and women do.
- The suicide rate of veterans is at least three times the national suicide rate. In 2005, the suicide rate for veterans 18- to 24-years-old was three to four times higher than non-veterans.
- About 126 veterans per week commit suicide.
- About 154,000 veterans nationwide are homeless on any given night. One-fourth of the homeless population is veterans.
- There are more homeless Vietnam veterans than the number of soldiers who were killed during that war.
- It takes at least 5.5 years, on average, to resolve a benefit claim with the Veteran's Administration.
- More than 600,000 unresolved claims are backlogged with the Veteran's Administration.
- Approximately 18.5 percent of service members who have returned from Afghanistan and Iraq currently have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or depression.
- 19.5 percent of these veterans report experiencing traumatic brain injury.
- Roughly half of those who need treatment seek it, but only slightly more than half of those who receive treatment receive at least minimally adequate care, according to an April 2008 Rand Report.
The research reveals a sorrowful reality. In an affluent nation, too many veterans suffer from more than a physical wound. Yet, citizens act as though they do not care. Undeniably, the American people offer words of support. However, these statements are empty. Expressions of sensitivity do not heal physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual lesions. Congressional Bills may provide some solace, that is if they ever pass. Fearful Americans accept what politicians proclaim, a preference to protect and defend a nation adrift.
The White House and the Pentagon said they feared that the bill would encourage men and women to leave the armed forces and enroll in college with federal aid, at a time when the military already has difficulty retaining troops to fight abroad.
Conservation of the Corps, an accretion in the Armed Forces, this is America's mission. The United States must be prepared to defend its shores. The conventional wisdom reminds us, war will always be with us.. Conflict will continue to exist in perpetuity.
Therefore, greenbacks must be devoted to defense. A soldier's depression or injuries cannot be considered a priority. Servicemen and women are trained to "suck it up," as are the American people.
The public is convinced there is no need to ponder the benefits of peace, for in their minds tranquility will never come . Nor do we reflect on the personal or financial costs of war. Millions spent need not make sense. Military might is marvelous. Memorials are evidence that we are proud.
Many are intent; America must win the fight. Mavericks, such as former prisoner of war and Presidential aspirant John McCain remind us. We must remain stalwart. Victory is at hand.
The battle against a perceived human enemy takes precedence for a pompous public. In the United States. the struggle for sanity amongst those who served, while lost, is of little significance to the individuals safe in their cocooned world of wonderment. Few Americans can count the cents spent on treatment for the troops who return to the homeland with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome or traumatic brain injury. In April 2008, the Rand Corporation, presented the research in a report.
The Rand study estimates the societal costs of PTSD and major depression for two years after deployment range from about $6,000 to more than $25,000 per case. Depending whether the economic cost of suicide is included, the RAND study estimates the total society costs of the conditions for two years range from $4 billion to $6.2 billion.The RAND study also estimates that about 320,000 service members may have experienced a traumatic brain injury during deployment — the term used to describe a range of injuries from mild concussions to severe penetrating head wounds. Just 43 percent reported ever being evaluated by a physician for that injury.
While most civilian traumatic brain injuries are mild and do not lead to long-term impairments, the extent of impairments that service members experience and whether they require treatment is largely unknown, researchers said. In the absence of a medical examination and prognosis, however, service members may believe that their post-deployment difficulties are due to head injuries even when they are not.
One-year estimates of the societal cost associated with treated cases of mild traumatic brain injury range up to $32,000 per case, while estimates for treated moderate to severe cases range from $268,000 to more than $408,000. Estimates of the total one-year societal cost of the roughly 2,700 cases of traumatic brain injury identified to date range from $591 million to $910 million.
Yet, a month after these revelations were released, few Americans mourn the toll war takes on the living. Instead, citizens "celebrate" Memorial Day. Members of Congress muse, and mull over how to best serve those who serve us. Yet, nothing truly changes. Time marches on as do the memories that haunt those who were in Iraq and Afghanistan. No one notices, or at least those in power do not rush to alter reality. Presidential candidates posit in remembrance,
Memorial Day Draws Two Messages on Iraq
By Jeff Zeleny and Michael Falcone
The New York Times
May 26, 2008Las Cruces, N.M. — Senator John McCain stood before hundreds of flag-waving veterans and their families on Monday and vowed not to waver in his support of the Iraq war. “Even,” he said, “if I must stand athwart popular opinion.”
Senator Barack Obama addressed a separate audience of veterans and received vigorous applause when he declared, “As many of you know, my intention is to bring this war in Iraq to a close and to start bringing home our troops in an orderly fashion.”
If Labor Day is the traditional opener to the fall presidential race, this Memorial Day offered at least a preview into the summertime duel between Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama . . . .
As Mr. McCain spoke about the costs and sacrifices of the Iraq war at the Veterans Memorial in Albuquerque, Mr. Obama praised the patriotism of America’s soldiers before taking voters’ questions — and hearing their frustrations about Iraq and a host of other concerns . . .
Will the Iraq war and the nation’s security once again be the chief concern to voters in the general election? In a 20-minute speech, with the flags of all branches of the armed forces at his back, Mr. McCain made 14 references to Iraq. Later, he invited Mr. Obama to join him on a tour of Iraq. (Mr. Obama did not immediately say whether he would accept.)
“As long as there is a reasonable prospect for succeeding in this war,” Mr. McCain said, “then we must not choose to lose it.”
Or will economic anxieties at home and a fierce disapproval over the direction of the country be of higher concern to voters?
If the past and the present predict the future, money will matter. Most of the dollars doled out will go to protect and defend, not to save soldiers from the sanctity (insanity) of war.
The public barely ponders the seriousness of what combat causes or effects, that is, unless the conflict pinches the pocketbook. Even then, on this solemn occasion, as on most others, the discussion is purely political. People feel powerless. Perchance that is why Americans avoid the conversation; how might we serve those who serve us.
Wars kill warriors, frequently from the inside out. The few people who care for the troops, provide for those who sacrificed their lives and lived, those who feel the pain of loved ones lost to depression and injury, listen to the rhetoric and ponder. If we are to truly memorialize the fallen, why not venerate veterans who suffer emotionally, just as we do the soldiers who were physically destroyed in battle.
Might we learn what history attempts to teach us. Combat cannot create peace of mind; nor does warfare yield to global harmony. The physical, emotional, and spiritual cost of conflict is too great. If we are to authentically pay tribute to out troops, let us no longer engage violently. Let us discuss the actual tax of war. Might we show our soldiers the highest regard and adequately care for all those maimed and mutilated. Perchance, it is time to redefine the mission and what it means to offer a memorial.
Cut Funds for Combat. Costs are Too High . . .
- On Memorial Day, Broken promises to our veterans. By Michael Blecker. San Francisco Chronicle. Monday, May 26, 2008
- One In Five Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans Suffer from PTSD or Major Depression. Rand Corporation. April 17, 2008
- Invisible Wounds of War, Psychological and Cognitive Injuries, Their Consequences, and Services to Assist Recovery. Edited by Terri Tanielian and Lisa H. Jaycox. Rand Corporation.
- Bush Pays Tribute to Troops at Arlington. Associated Press. The New York Times. May 26, 2008
- Veterans’ Benefits Bill Wins Approval in Senate, By Robert Pear. The New York Times. May 23, 2008
- Cost of War. American Friends Service Committee
- McCain: U.S. can win Iraq war within 4 years, Associated Press. MSNBC. May 15, 2008
David L. Giaimo 24. © copyright 2008 CappyBoy
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on May 26, 2008 at 11:00 AM in Active-Duty Troops , Afghanistan, American Patriotism, Iraq War, Memorial Day , Soldiers | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Six Months. Six Years. Six Centuries. Perpetual War
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Many Americans may wish to believe that if Arizona Senator John McCain were elected, he would ensure that this nation remains engaged in battle for eons. The conventional wisdom is Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton will "bring the troops home." Citizens, mostly Independents and Democrats, may blame the Republicans for conflicts that seem endless by design. Of course, when war is in question, countless Americans contemplate the current conflicts. Nearly everyone with some exceptions, places the onus on President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, or any of the other Neoconservatives in the Cabinet. Yet, these individuals and groups are not the only creators of combat. Any man or woman who believes, at times, war is the best, last, or the only option is culpable. Citizens throughout the globe have accepted the notion wars will always be. Hence fighting is, forever.
The Hundred Years War lasted from 1337 through 1453. The Eighty Years War [1588 – 1648] filled most of the next century. The Thirty Year Conflict [1618 – 1648] began before the latter hostilities were resolved. The Crusades [1095 – 1291], a series of related military clashes filled more than another century. The Northern Crusades, also known as the Baltic Battles began in 1193 and remained uninterrupted through the 16th century. Native Americans recognize that in the 19th Century the United States was perpetually at war. History that is more recent is no less explosive.
Since V-J Day 1945 ("Victory over Japan" and the end of World War II), we have been engaged in what the historian Charles A. Beard called "perpetual war for perpetual peace." I [Gore Vidal] have occasionally referred to our "enemy of the month club": each month we are confronted by a new horrendous enemy at whom we must strike before he destroys us. The Federation of American Scientists has catalogued nearly two hundred such military incursions since 1945 initiated by the U.S.
Nonetheless, Americans are repeatedly asked to believe that in six months all will be well. Citizens in this country [and that] have trusted their leaders. We, the less powerful, apathetic, anxious persons, are patient and perhaps hopeful. Populations do not acknowledge, that even when weapons are not wielded, the public is split. Man battles those he perceives as foe.
Political Parties bicker; however, the blood spilled is less visible. The battles are slightly less volatile. Nonetheless, within this nation, just as outside our borders, we are at war. In April 2008, individuals, Independents, persons who identify themselves with the Grand Old Party, and John McCain, may think themselves traditionalists. These persons may accept that often humans to do as was done. Democrats, the self-proclaimed do-gooders, who clamor for change, may tell us when they are in office peace will be restored. Yet, in truth, the plans the Progressives submit are no more tranquil than the ones Conservatives put forth. Troops may be reduced, but . . .
“So, let me be clear,” Clinton said today. “Under my plan, withdrawing from Iraq will not mean retreating from fighting terrorism in Iraq. That’s why I will order small, elite strike forces to engage in targeted operations against al Qaeda in Iraq. This will protect Iraqi citizens, our allies, and our families right here at home.”On a conference call with reporters this afternoon, a Clinton staff member went into further detail on her statement.
“In terms of the exact size of the small force that would be there to deal with these residual missions, that’s something that would really need to be determined at the time on the basis of consultation with the field commanders and the senior military leadership,” said Clinton campaign national security director Lee Feinstein. “In terms of the schedule again, Senator Clinton has talked about a rate of one to two combat brigades a month. She said that she would hope she could have nearly all of our combat troops out within a year’s time.”
When pressed to clarify how small the strike force would be, Feinstein maintained that it would be left to military commanders to decide, but that “small is small.”
When we see our soldiers as only statistics, or civilians affected by combative actions as little more than collateral damage, size is negligible. Four thousand plus American deaths, four million Iraqi refugees, the words do not speak to the scope of death and destruction. Numbers are but a note.
A hundred years is only a century. A brigade is but one. A battalion, comprised of three or more companies, although large might be defined as the same. After all, a division is but a single group. A thousand troops may seem significant; however, if the number is well framed, or hidden in confidential reports the public may accept a continued deployment. While those who want an end to the war in Iraq focus on the future as presented by Presidential aspirant John McCain, we cannot forget the hopeful Commanders, Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama.
Is this more proof that no matter who is elected, some troops won't be leaving Iraq anytime soon. The New York Sun: "A key adviser to Senator Obama’s campaign is recommending in a confidential paper that America keep between 60,000 and 80,000 troops in Iraq as of late 2010, a plan at odds with the public pledge of the Illinois senator to withdraw combat forces from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.”“The paper, obtained by The New York Sun, was written by Colin Kahl for the center-left Center for a New American Security. In ‘Stay on Success: A Policy of Conditional Engagement,’ Mr. Kahl writes that through negotiations with the Iraqi government ‘the U.S. should aim to transition to a sustainable over-watch posture (of perhaps 60,000–80,000 forces) by the end of 2010 (although the specific timelines should be the byproduct of negotiations and conditions on the ground).’”
Might we consider diplomatic dialogues, be they with John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Republicans, or Democrats, based on history, may be no better than they were in the past. It seems for ages humans have been dedicated to deliberate destructive dissensions without end.
Americans who claim to love peace may wish to condemn a Presidential aspirant who admits, we will be at war for six more months, six more years, six more decades, or six centuries. However, Progressives need only look at the past and the pronouncements proposed by Democratic hopefuls. We, the people may wish to realize war will likely remain in the wind regardless of who is in office. Perhaps, if each individual, in every nation decided to reject warfare as an option, we would not battle through eternity.
Living life in peace . . .
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
~ John Lennon [Singer, Songwriter]
Words and War . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on April 9, 2008 at 11:00 PM in Afghanistan, Bush 43 Administration, Hillary Clinton, Iraq War, Violence, War and Peace, War is in the Wind, War, The Last Option | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Vice President Dick Cheney Defines Fallen Soldiers; Volunteers For Death
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
In a "glowing" statement, perhaps meant to glorify the horrific deaths of the soldiers slain in Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney offered, "I think it's a reminder of the extent to which we are blessed with families who've sacrificed as they have." The man who, in his youth sought five deferments in order to avoid service during the Vietnam War, went on to state, "A lot of men and women sign up because sometimes they will see developments." Richard B. Cheney helps us to recall the terror Americans felt as they witnessed the Twin Towers fall on September 11, 2001. He explains, this event and the thought of a terrorist threat "stimulated a lot of folks to volunteer for the military because they wanted to be involved in defending the country." "The thing that comes through loud and clear is how much they are committed to the cause, to doing what needs to be done to defend the nation," Cheney proclaimed. Yet, citizens cognizant of the reasons for a possible rise in recruitment remember more than a moment that changed the course of life for many young men and women.
Promises made by this Administration were ample. The pledge to protect and defend was the battle cry in the States. Those whose parents sacrificed to secure a life in America believed, to serve in the Armed Forces would be an honor. Jesus Suarez was one of many immigrants who felt a need to fulfill a commitment to his homeland, past and present.
Yo Soy el Army
If you're an immigrant, at least Uncle Sam wants you
By Deborah Davis
Metro Active
September 19, 2007JESUS was an easy mark for the recruiter. He was a boy who fantasized that by joining the powerful, heroic U.S. Marines, he could help his own country fight drug lords. He gave the recruiter his address and phone number in Mexico, and the recruiter called him twice a week for the next two years until he had talked Jesus into convincing his parents to move to California.
Fernando and Rose Suarez sold their home and their laundry business and immigrated with their children. Jesus enrolled at a high school known for academic achievement. But the recruiter wanted him to transfer to a school for problem teenagers, since its requirements for graduation were lower, and Jesus would be able to finish sooner. He was 17 1/2 when he graduated from that school, still too young to enlist on his own, so his father co-signed the enlistment form, as the military requires for underage recruits.
Three years later, at the age of 20, his body was torn apart in Iraq by an American-made fragmentation grenade during the first week of the invasion. In the Pentagon's official Iraq casualty database, his death is number 74. Now Jesus is in a cemetery, and his parents, who blame each other for his death, are painfully and bitterly divorced.
We might inquire, was Jesus a volunteer or a victim of rabid recruiters? Are émigrés dedicated to a cause, devoted to a country, or obligated to enlist. Perhaps, fantasy fashioned Jesus' faith in a military system gone awry.
In the Iraq war, citizenship is being used as a recruiting tool aimed specifically at young immigrants, who are told that by enlisting they will be able to quickly get citizenship for themselves (sometimes true: it depends on what the Immigration and Customs Enforcement branch of the Department of Homeland Security finds) and their entire families (not true: each family member has to go through a separate application process). Nevertheless, with the political pressures on Latino families growing daily under this administration, many young Latinos are unable to resist the offer, which immigrants' rights activists see as blatant exploitation of a vulnerable population.
The number of immigrants who fight or fought for personal freedom is high. The statistics suggests those who were not born in this country do battle for the United States. Some are invited to come to the States, as Jesus Suarez was. Others, with Green Card in hand, realize the rights of citizenship are easily acquired if or when an individual joins the Armed Forces.
About 70,000 foreign-born men and women serve in the U.S. armed forces, or about 5 percent of the total active-duty force, according to the Pentagon. Of those, nearly 30,000 -- or about 43 percent -- are not U.S. citizens.
Aware of the toll the war takes on recruitment, many Americans ponder the possibilities. Might the United States government allow persons in America without papers to join? If people will not volunteer, bribe them. Millions in this country and across the borders are victims of need.
The Bush Administration thought an Army of recruited refugees a fine idea. Thus, they encouraged Congress to pass an immigration Bill that would provide citizenship for those in need. The contingency, people without official papers must serve this country in order to receive vital documents.
Immigration bill offers a military path to US dream
By Bryan Bender
Boston Globe Staff
June 16, 2007Washington -- A little-noticed provision in the proposed immigration bill would grant instant legal status and ultimately full citizenship to illegal immigrants if they enlist in the US military, an idea the Pentagon and military analysts say would boost the Pentagon's flagging efforts to find and recruit qualified soldiers.
The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act, or DREAM Act, is part of the stalled package of proposals that many in Congress are seeking to resurrect. The proposal, applicable to an estimated 750,000 undocumented residents of military age, stipulates that those who arrived in the United States before age 16, graduated from high school, and meet other qualifications could immediately enter the path to citizenship in exchange for at least two years' service in the armed forces.
Though the overall immigration bill was sidetracked earlier this month amid bitter infighting, the prospect of using military service as one pathway to citizenship appeals both to lawmakers who side with immigration rights advocates and those who want tougher immigration laws and tighter borders.
Military service for undocumented did not disturb those in the House or the Senate. Other issues were of great concern. There seems to be agreement; those from abroad could serve this country well. Immigrants want to come to our shores; so let them travel to America, conditionally. If a non-native is killed in battle, so be it. The Administration will say, the fallen foreign-born volunteered. The rationale is all the Armed Forces are free to join, liberated to die. The question is, "Are those who sign up volunteers or people paid to perform at the pleasure of the President and Vice President Cheney?" Immigrants who fight for America may be fatalities of faith.
Children, born and raised in this country, also trust. They are understandably convinced the cost of living in America is great. Education is expensive. Many young lads and lasses are lured by promises of "money for college." In an era when the cost of education accounts for countless debts, any assurance can calm the nerves of those anxious to create a better life for themselves. Consider the plight of the young and poor who know, only a college degree can take them away from a world filled with woe. This was true during the first Persian Gulf War and remains valid today. Many military "sign ups" are casualties of the sum charged to attend college.
GI Blues
Military recruiters promise 'money for college,' but recent veterans find that tuition benefits fall short
By Elizabeth F. Farell
The Chronicle of Higher Education
May 13, 2005Cheyne Worley graduated from high school at age 16 in 1985 and spent about a year and a half pumping gas and bagging groceries before deciding it was time to get on with his life. Signing up for the Army seemed like the best option -- not only would he keep his family's tradition of military service alive (his grandfather, father, and uncle had all served), but a recruiter's promise of money for college made enlistment a no-brainer. . . .
The promise of easing the financial burden of higher education is a recruiter's most effective selling point. According to a 2004 survey conducted by GfK Custom Research, an independent research firm, "money for college" is the leading reason civilians enlist, even as the war in Iraq makes more young people skittish about committing to military service.
The tuition perk offered as part of the Montgomery GI Bill, passed in 1984, has become even more important during the past year, as the military has attempted to reverse declining enlistment numbers by increasing its recruiting staff and its efforts to sign up high-school students. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has also given recruiters more opportunities to reach young people, allowing them access to home phone numbers and addresses of high-school students and the same visiting privileges at secondary schools as college or job recruiters.
And the pitch military representatives make on those campuses sounds good. In exchange for having $1,200 withheld from their first-year military salaries, active-duty soldiers become eligible after completing their enlistment term (three years, on average) for up to $36,144 toward their education expenses. (Those who pay in an additional $600 receive $5,400 more toward their education.)
But the benefit covers only about 60 percent of the average cost of college, according to the College Board's estimates.
If a potential enlistee learns of the promises not kept, there is another appeal to be made. For those adventurous at heart, the military may seem a free ride to travel. The opportunity to flee from a life filled with trouble. For a few, those who volunteer for tour after tour, the trauma evident on the field was not part of their truth initially. When it is, they conclude it is time to return home. Yet, when faced with a reality that is far from the fantasy of wedded bliss, or a better job, they retreat to what is familiar. Please ruminate over the role the military plays in the life of Jake Holland.
Iraq Diary: Why Jake Volunteered for a Third TourSigning back up for Iraq was a way to deal with the boredom, and the pain. Yeah, he had met a woman on Yahoo personals. And things were starting to look serious. But Holland needed to go. “It allowed me to get away from home for a while, kinda wrap my head around sh*t. I know it sounds funny, but that’s the way it was,” he says. “I needed to do this.”
The money was nice, too. “Another factor – I’ m not going to lie to you – as was $50,000 tax-free dollars. Lump sum. Here you go. Have it,” Holland says. For a former Indiana farm boy, whose favorite meal growing up was “fried squirrel and milk gravy,” that was a serious haul. “It took care of all my bills inherited from the divorce. An F-250 pickup, paid for. And quite a bit of savings.”
Plus, a good chunk of Holland’s first tour had been spent behind a desk, playing dispatcher to bomb disposal teams. “I’d take a nine-line [form for describing a bomb site], hand it to the guys, who would go get shot at. That wore on me worse than anything. Worse than going out the gate,” he says, using military slang for the base’s walls.
But there was action waiting for him, back in Baghdad, with the 754th EOD company. Snipers took shots at his head. Bombs went off around his armored vehicle, crushing the windows. One day, he got rid of eight improvised bombs and three unused explosives. On another, a soldier’s head pretty much crumbled in front of him. “They’re blowing stuff up like it’s cool,” he IM’ed me. The worst was the bomb that went off at a West Baghdad power station: a rigged-up dump truck that disintegrated four Humvees, charred the earth, and threw up a blast that could be seen for ten miles around.
It was “overwhelming” enough to make Holland think about giving Iraq a rest.
However, while not committed to the cause Vice President Cheney cited, Jake Holland seems devoted to finding a deliverance from the "evil" that he experiences is his life back home. Holland volunteered to fight for freedom; his own. Jake suffered. Unlike many of the troops who feel the Administration let them down or deceived them, for Jake, a potential peace in his personal life can be more attractive that the supposed tranquility of the streets of America. Jake Holland did not feel a sense of harmony when at home. For him the fight in Iraq was a flight to freedom. In the Armed Forces, he had friends he felt more loyal to than those in the States. Another serviceman may speak for more than the few.
One soldier, speaking under condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals, said, "I don't think that the American public realizes just how many soldiers and service members in general really do have reservations about what is going on over there … "
Tis true. Those who serve this country have much to say of the realities that threaten their lives. The truth is, in the minds of many a soldier, the Bush Administration may be considered a greater menace than the combatants in the Middle East. Poor plans and promises not kept aside, a total disregard for necessary training endangers the troops more so than an improvised explosive device might. A bomb can only do you in once; the lack of instruction can destroy a military man or woman daily.
Schreck, a soldier from CT, January 23, 2005: "If there is one thing that has always stood out in my head during my deployment it was when we were told 'The Army will never put you in a losing situation.' At this point of my deployment, that statement could not be further from the truth. Not only were our vehicles in an unserviceable condition, we were also putting the unit whom we were escorting at risk."Awbalth, a soldier from CA, October 20, 2004: "The thing we needed most in Iraq wasn't bullets, body armor, cash, air conditioning, hot chow, or armored vehicles, although we were short on all of these things; the thing we really needed the most was training and preparation.
We had no or very little training on urban combat tactics, raids to detain or kill targeted individuals, collecting, reporting, analyzing, and using human intelligence, developing sources of information, using interpreters, bomb/unexploded ordinance detection and disposal, handling of detainees, questioning detainees, use of non-lethal force, cordon and search operations, and riot control. This lack of training has caused the deaths of untold numbers of soldiers and Iraqis."
While some servicemen and women may speak of what they needed publicly, most will not voice their deepest concerns. Soldiers share stresses with each other, and on occasion with family. At times, Mom's and Dad's are the voice of volunteers who are no longer in awe of the Armed Forces they willingly joined. Nancy Lessin addresses concerns common among the troops. She mourns for what her stepson Joe, a Marine, did not realize. Joe was deployed in 2002.
"Our loved ones took an oath to defend this country and our Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. But there is a commitment our government makes to our troops in return: that it will not send our young men and women in uniform into reckless misadventures that put them at risk needlessly.This is the part of the bargain that has been broken.
Yes, war is hell; but this is something else, and our loved ones and all our troops have been betrayed. We were all betrayed by this administration when it cited a litany of reasons for invading Iraq that shifted like desert sands and seemed to be based upon quicksand . . .
We were betrayed by a lack of planning—active military and their families are now dealing with back-to-back two-year deployments, announced a few weeks ago. And today National Guard and reservists and their families are reeling from the news about their tours of duty being extended. And yes, there is a problem with troops being short on water, short on food, short on supplies and short on equipment. This morning we received an email from a mother whose son is in Iraq. The email read:
“Our soldiers have been killed because there were not enough Kevlar vests to go around. One of my son’s friends was shot in the back in Fallujah and two of his platoon members were killed in an ambush in May because they only had 30 vests for 120 men. No one at his checkpoint had a vest, thus nine people were injured.”
Sad as all this seems, apparently, what the soldiers and their families experience is nothing in comparison to the weight the President of the United States carries, according to Vice President, Dick Cheney. In the now illustrious interview with Martha Raddatz, Dick Cheney reminded Americans, the truest victim of this fateful war is George W. Bush. The Commander-In-Chief did not volunteer for the onerous path he has been forced to travel.
"The president carries the biggest burden, obviously," Cheney said. "He's the one who has to make the decision to commit young Americans. . . ."
One can only wonder, did George W. Bush act voluntarily or was he too, in truth, a victim of circumstances. Did George W. Bush expect to fulfill a fantasy, as Jesus Suarez did. Might the President have presumed war would be the answer to what ailed him? Could the Chief Officer have been bored as Jake Holland was. What drove the man in the Oval Office to make such a seriously flawed determination. Was a need satisfied when the President sent troops to their death, or was fate the cause for his charitable engagement? Pray tell Dick Cheney. Certainly, your worldview is most definitive.
Volunteer Forces and Resources . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on March 24, 2008 at 11:00 PM in Active-Duty Troops , Afghanistan, Bush 43 Administration, Immigration Politics, Iraq War, Killing Machines, Military Missions, Richard [Dick] Cheney, Vice President , War Crimes, War is in the Wind, War Kills [Mind, Body, Spirit], Wars Bush Commanded | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack