On Sunday, the New York Times ran a lengthy article chronicling a series of homicides committed by Iraq and Afghanistan veterans over the last several years-more than 120 killings here in the United States. Now, the Times is under fire, according to some articles and bloggers, for perpetuating "The Killer Vet lie" and "Vet-Bashing."
Not surprisingly, the culture warriors who are still intent on perpetuating the Vietnam era hawk vs. dove debate have jumped in feet first, specially after the Weekly Standard ran an analysis by John J. Dilulio which attempts to debunk the conclusions of the times by pointing out that the murder rate among same-age Americans is much higher than among returning veterans. The terms of the debate are the usual:
· The article is "presumably an attempt at making another case for ending the war, if we know anything about the Times's editors."
· Mike Burleson writes: Just throw out a few unverified facts and let the "blame America first" crowd, as well as the radicals overseas gather their talking points.
· At "The Two Malcontents", they write, "The Times has committed a gross slander." This, of course, is on the same blog which has categories titled "Americans who Hate America," "Commie Pinkos" and "Blame America"
Unfortunately, all of these articles miss the real point raised by the Times article. Are we doing enough to help war veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan? And the answer to that question is a resounding no.
It makes me angry that a legitimate issue that should be of concern to all of us has to be tied up in the pro-war/anti-war political debate. Let's get that out front. To those on the left who would use this article as an argument for leaving Iraq, I say: stop using the troops as your political football. To the folks on the right who would use this as an opportunity to bash the left: screw off. Both sides make me sick. Because the people getting left behind in this debate are the people who actually need our help.
I've written in the past about the profound impact killing has on the psyche. Killing sucks. Sometimes its necessary, and war is one of those times. But that doesn't make it any easier to deal with. Frankly, I struggled for years with the remorse, rage, and sometimes-waking nightmares that were a result of killing another human being.
My first novel, written in the three years following my own experience with killing in the Gulf War, goes directly to this issue: the experience of killing in combat, the impact on the soldier, and most importantly in this discussion-the possibility of a violent response to the experience.
The question of whether or not returning veterans are less or more likely to kill than the general population is an important one and needs to be looked at more systematically than has been done in the past. But using the question as yet another manifestation of the left-right culture war is the real disservice to veterans.
