Our troops in Iraq are under an immense amount of psychological pressure. Our troops wear uniforms that clearly designate them as members of the US Armed forces. Anyone in Iraq desiring to attack or kill members of the American military do not have to guess about their targets. Our troops, however, do not have the same ease in identifying friend from foe. US Service People on patrol in Iraq are like sitting ducks with bull's-eyes not just painted on their front, or back, but on every surface and edge. Bullets can come at anytime and from any angle. Improvised Explosive Devices or IEDs can be hidden under any car, in any garbage can, in any store-front and exploded by remote control when our troops come near.
Our troops have seen bullets and shrapnel kill and eviscerate hundreds and thousands of their friends. They have had to work under the constant pressure that this same fate could befall them at any time. Many of our GIs have served two or more six month tours in Iraq under these conditions. A large percentage are mentally collapsing under the strain.
A UPI article "10% at Army Hospital had Mental Problems" quotes Colonel Rhonda Cornum, commander of Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany as saying (at the time of the article, February 18, 2004) 'Between 8 and 10 percent of the nearly 12,000 soldiers from the war on terror, mostly from Iraq, treated at [the hospital] had "psychiatric or behavioral health issues"', http://www.upi.com/archive/view.php?archive=1&StoryID=20040218-020757-3188r
That was after one year of the war. After nearly four years, how much more has the cumulative effect of the conflict torn at the fabric of our troops' mental health?
We see three clear indications that there is a serious problem:
1. A growing number of our troops are going violently insane and attacking Iraqi civilians and prisoners of war: - Dec 21, 2006, eight Marines accused of killing or refusing to report the killing of up to 24 Iraqi civilians. - June 22, 2006, seven Marines and a Navy Corpsman charged with murder, conspiracy and other charges involving the murder of at least one Iraqi civilian - Nov 19, 2005, several Marines go berserk and kill 19 Iraqis including at least one in a wheelchair. These incidents along with Abu Graib and other detention center incidents show that terrible conditions and long deployments are causing our troops to come apart at the seams.
2. The above report from the Army Colonel that shows how many troops are breaking down and needing to be evacuated to hospitals in Europe for mental issues.
3. Over one in six of the 589,000 Iraq War veterans who have returned home have been diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress disorder according to this article http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=534866 in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. The article goes on to say that the number is expected to grow and exceed the rates of PTSD for Vietnam because the disease can take several months to manifest itself and diagnosis can take even longer. A recent 60 minutes segment on the problems faced by Iraq war vets coming home and reintegrating with their families and society was heartbreaking.
I can come to only one conclusion when examining the situation concerning the conditions our troops are faced with and the overwhelming evidence of what it is doing to their mental health. Those of our troops accused of crimes in the Iraq war should be pardoned. The formality of a trial should still be afforded so that all the facts can be ascertained, but once the trial is complete, should any US Service Member be found guilty, they should be pardoned and sent to the best facilities available to assist with their mental health issues.
It is our fault that this happened to them. When I say 'our' I mean everyone who is a citizen of the United States. It is in our name that they are there fighting. I know that certain segments of our nation deserve more of a share of the blame, namely those who were in favor of this war from the beginning, but it does not mean that the rest of us do not still share some of it.
We all need to come together to support the Iraq war veterans who come home and their families in every way. That includes understanding that we put them in a terrible situation and that it is completely understandable for anyone to break and commit crimes in that situation.
Steven Leser specializes in Politics, Science & Health, and Entertainment topics. He has held positions within the Democratic Party including District Chair and Public Relations Chair within county organizations.
Steven Leser writes for www.opednews.com, an internet only media site that has grown to become one of the highest traffic news sites in America, reaching more traffic, according to alexa.com, than all but the thirty largest daily newspapers in the US. Mr. Leser is one of the 500+ liberal pundits who, each month, are published in what has become one of the top five Liberal/progressive media sites in the US.
when the best way is to state what you stand for. I am absolutely opposed to the point of view expressed in the article above. I do not want to disuss, dispute and/or debate this. It goes against everything what I am. That is all.
by
Mark Sashine (44 articles, 19 quicklinks, 228 diaries, 3254 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 12:41:20 PM
I thought about it for about two weeks before firmly deciding where I stood and committing 'pen to paper'. The one thing I would say is that different people 'break' differently. We already know that 17% of Iraq war vets who have returned home have been diagnosed with PTSD and than number is expected to rise since it takes a while for the disease to manifest itself and for the diagnoses to be made.
Some troops are committing suicide. Suicide rates among the troops are climbing alarmingly. Like I said, different GIs are breaking in different ways, but breaking they are.
by
Steven Leser (188 articles, 34 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 12:48:52 PM
You are correct in your expectation, but I think you are confounding two separate and easily distinguishable categories of soldier.
Men who are afraid, depressed, angry, disillusioned, whatever, will do awful and injurious things.
A local couple have a tragic story of their son's return from Iraq and his subsequent suicide by hanging himself in their family garage.
All evidence indicates that he killed himself from shame over his or his unit's actions on the streets of Baghdad during the occupation.
I truly have compassion for soldiers who suffer from mental disability brought on by the cognitive dissonance between their oaths and the reality of combat.
These sufferers should be treated compassionately and as gently as their condition of distress warrants.
Nevertheless, such people should not be confused with men who commit war crimes.
There are people in our armed forces who are capable of criminality.
The power of weaponry and unit cohesion may give these men a sense of omnipotence that destroys their inhibitions, or maybe they are just bent.
It is impossible to think of how to predict an individual or unit's actions when exposed to the stress of combat.
But combat is always complex, stressful and morally ambiguous.
That is why discipline is so vital.
We entrust young men with our most potent weaponry and training in the expectation that they will honor their oaths and protect the weak.
When they conscientiously fail to do their duty we must impose the consequences: the discipline and punishment set forth in the US Code of Military Justice.
Caring for the sick and punishing criminals are two separate and distinct issues.
We imperil our safety and discredit our honorable and dutiful soldiers when we confound the two.
Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY
by
Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 557 comments)
on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 2:34:39 PM
Firstly, while I am sure these people are under enormous strain, that does not excuse patently anti-social behavior. Secondly, murder is murder. While I am sure there are a large amount of people who were sucked into the war machine just because they were trying to get ahead via the military, there are also many who went to war to feel that rush of testosterone. Those people made a choice, and should not be excused when they get their way via murder.
I know I will never know what it's like to be shot at and have a target painted on myself, that's no excuse for murder. Right or wrong, our forces in Iraq constitute an all volunteer force. They wanted to be in the military, for what ever reason.
I feel nothing but empathy for those who got caught up in DUBYA's war of choice. But, when they cross the line into murder, there can be no excuse offered. When they cross that line, they become as bad as the War Pigs.
Blessed be!
Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 1:00:24 PM
Pappy, I have to ask what to me is the relevant question...
... do you believe in prosecuting people who commit crimes as a result of PTSD? Who have other psychiatric disorders? Do you believe in executing them?
It seems to me that most people here at OpEd News do not believe in prosecuting the insane. There is an argument to be made as to whether any or specific troops who have committed crimes are insane, but civilians who have committed horrific crimes have been acquitted on the basis of PTSD. Why do we not feel this should be extended to soldiers?
by
Steven Leser (188 articles, 34 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 1:44:21 PM
... do you believe in prosecuting people who commit crimes as a result of PTSD?
The short answer is, "Yes."
The long answer is there is, as has been said by others, a difference between humans damaged by shell shock (the not so PC term for PTSD) and those who commit crimes. Criminal behavior should be punished, PERIOD. Even with the insanity defense, the offender is put away in an institution of some sort.
Frankly, if one choses to go to war, one also choses the consequences of that action. Each one of our soldiers could have taken conscientious objector status. True, they might have ended up in jail, but sometimes there is no way to come out of the fray smelling like a rose. Had it been me, I'd be in prison right now as a conscientious objector. I don't object to war if there is real provocation. I do object to wars of convenience and choice. Obviously, the Iraq War is a war of choice.
Who have other psychiatric disorders? Do you believe in executing them?
Executing? Yes, if they have killed! War is about killing. Once we get into this area, it's quibbling over points of style. War is insane for the most part anyway. While there exist reasons why I'd support one, they are few.
I most definitely don't accept that just because someone claims insanity that they are, in fact, insane. Even so, perhaps it's for the betterment of society if violent people are removed from it, permanently. Maybe we could remove violent tendencies from our gene pool.
A point you seem to miss and others haven't is the number of returning soldiers whose shell shock forces them into suicide. There's the real tragedy: being so damaged by the reality they see that the only reasonable answer is death by their own hands.
Don't mistake me for being heartless on this issue. If a returning Iraq War soldier is suffering from shell shock, or any other mental disorder, I think they should receive FREE TREATMENT FOR LIFE from the Veteran's Administration! They should also receive said treatment without being lead down the same merry path they took my mother and father for their service connected disabilities.
Many wonderful men and women have been severely damaged by this war. Truly, for the magnitude of their damage, and because this war was started for no other reason than to prove how big DUBYA's balls are, and how small his brain is, those men and women should be compensated well for their actions.
However, if they are criminals, they must be prosecuted. I feel the same way about DUBYA. He is a criminal. He must be prosecuted. I don't care whether his crimes were committed because of his megalomania (a form of insanity), his pathological bend for lying (another form of insanity), or because he's a size fifteen asshole (not a form of insanity, but a good reason to punish), he must face prosecution for his crimes, great and small.
In this Dr. Feelgood, mamby-pamby society in which we live, it's way too easy for someone to have the look of contrition, yet have no real regret for their actions, whatever they are. In that kind of environment, pardoning people for their crimes because they were "driven to them" is just patently wrong...no matter who the criminal, or what the circumstance. I feel nothing but empathy for the damaged of the Iraq War, however, if they have committed crimes, they MUST be punished.
It seems to me that most people here at OpEd News do not believe in prosecuting the insane. There is an argument to be made as to whether any or specific troops who have committed crimes are insane, but civilians who have committed horrific crimes have been acquitted on the basis of PTSD. Why do we not feel this should be extended to soldiers?
I am not most people here. I am Bob Raitz, AKA Pappy McFae. If someone is truly and VIOLENTLY insane, they must be kept away from society at large by all means. While they may not be seen as culpable because of a disconnect with reality, that does not, nor should it, excuse their actions. They also should DEFINITELY not be pardoned if they committed murder. No way! No how! Not on your life!
I feel sorry for the damaged. I feel bad for their pain, the pain felt by their families, and the pain felt by society at large. However, if they committed crimes, they are criminals. If they are victims of shell shock, they should be treated in mental institutions. Maybe they can be cured and re-integrated into society.
However, to pardon them is not, in my opinion, a good idea for anyone. It's not good for them, their families, or society as a whole.
I understand your feelings. I don't agree with them at all.
Blessed be!
Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Thursday, December 28, 2006 at 2:47:03 PM
In Vietnam there were no frontlines, you could not tell friend from foe, the people were against the war. The number of executions then were nothing like we see now. We had draftees back then this is a volunteer force. You really need to re-think where you set your moral principles. This is coming from a person that wore a military uniform for almost 21 years. I can understand and have a degree of empathy for them, but it doesn't condone what they did. There must be a moral line that isn't crossed. That is what is suppossed to make us better than our enemies.
by
Timothy V. Gatto (348 articles, 177 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 575 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 3:16:51 PM
Sorry, guy. To pardon the troops accused of going beyond the already loose boundaries that exist in war is wrong. The men accused should stand trial for their crimes and if they are guilty, they should do time. In addition, so should their commanders--all the way up to the White House and the Pentagon. We are all culpable to some extent for the crime(s) of the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. Those men and women who are doing the actual killing are expected to follow some kind of rules. If they don't they should face the music. If their commanders know they aren't, they should also have to face the music. One of the biggest mistakes of the Vietnam war was that no one higher than Lt. Calley was convicted for the war crimes at My Lai. If a couple colonels and maybe even a general had been charged and convicted, maybe things would be different. American soldiers are capable of committing war crimes and they should have to face trial if they are accused of committing them. Our job as civilians is not to pardon them but to do everything possible to get them out of there NOW!!!
by
Ron Jacobs (56 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 16 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 3:43:31 PM
I believe Bush, Cheney and the cabinet are the ones who...
... should be on trial. I also agree that all of us bear some culpability and I think I said as much in my article. Our troops should never, ever be in the types of situations they are in now. Once the situation began to degenerate into multi-factional/warlord/insurgent/guerilla type of fighting, they should have been withdrawn.
Better yet, they should never have been sent, particularly after the Weapons Inspector Reports of March 6-7 2003 when we knew with relative certainty there were no WMD in Iraq.
Discussions on the topic on Democratic Underground and Daily KOs have changed my mind SOMEWHAT on the idea of a blanket pardon. I am a bit more inclined now to suggest that each case be examined on its merits to determine to what extent PTSD and other mental illnesses arising from prolonged exposure to conditions in Iraq may have contributed to what happened.
We all have a responsibility to the troops. We are responsible for electing leaders who do not send them into these sorts of conditions.
by
Steven Leser (188 articles, 34 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 1256 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 5:21:04 PM
Yes we do have a responsibility to the troops--to get them home. However, if they step over the line and commit war crimes, they need to stand trial. Just like they shouldn't all be condemned, they shouldn't all get off. That's what any trial would hopefully resolve.
by
Ron Jacobs (56 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 16 comments)
on Sunday, December 24, 2006 at 6:50:44 PM
It may seem paradoxical, but I think we should be able to support the courage, patriotism and devotion to duty of our young people while simultaneously opposing the war and the decision to go to war.
I am continually disappointed by the Veterans organizations who unreflectively support every war proposal and weapons boondoggle that comes along.
Vets should be the sage judges of the merits of each conflict, not administration cheerleaders.
As a country, we should be proud and thankful that we have young men willing to make the sacrifice of going to dangerous foreign places to fight for us.
But simultaneously we should have the sagacity, moral courage and political will not to ask them to sacrifice needlessly.
Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld were too eager to fight and too morally supine to take the high road of exhausting diplomatic and peaceful means of dealing with Saddam.
As a result we have sent the troops to fight a futile, immoral and fruitless war.
The Bush Administration has exposed us to serious consequences without a prospect of benefit through the invasion of Iraq. This committment has robbed us of the ability to act effectively against the terrorists.
Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY
by
Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 557 comments)
on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 2:49:57 PM
to be used as one would and discarded when unneeded. It is absurd to take such a stand, and to what purpose I can only conjecture. Would you pardon the Nazi soldier who gassed, shot, hung and tortured millions? He was, after all, only following orders......just like our boys and girls in Iraq.
This makes mockery of those thousands who did their duty in honorable and honest fashion.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Monday, December 25, 2006 at 11:24:46 AM
Pardoning troops who have committed war crimes is an unthinkably barbaric and evil thing.
Soldiers are trained to fight, if they break down, they should be removed as they are threat to themselves, their comrades and the people they are sworn to defend.
If on the other hand, soldiers conspire together to persecute civilians, to torture prisoners or to mutilate the bodies of fallen enemies, they deserve court martial.
The soldiers and officers currently facing courts martial for war crimes did not commit these acts as the result of psychological illness or unfitness.
The officers and men facing war crimes prosecutions consciously violated their orders, exceeded the bounds of their known and lawful duty and conspired together to commit war crimes, to cover up the evidence and disguise the culpable nature of their actions.
Hundreds of thousands of other men and women have faced the same circumstances and behaved honorably. They have been able to do so because of the demands of discipline and concern for their comrades and the civilians they are protecting.
The honorable and courageous service of all these people is called into question the moment one of the brutes who commited war crimes is treated leniently.
The military cannot function unless honor and discipline are maintained.
No one could come home and hold his head high if the government allowed war crimes to go unpunished.
Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY
by
Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 557 comments)
on Tuesday, December 26, 2006 at 2:15:54 PM
