This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Heroes
Heroes
Courtesy of Bruce Krasting
I know a man. Call him Eddie. He’s African American, going on about 63. When he was a boy he had no real home or much education, so when he was eighteen he took the only option available to him. He joined the military. That was 1967.
He must have been a hell of a soldier. He ended up in the Army’s 1st Cavalry Division. (One of the toughest outfits around.)
In February of 1968 he fought in the battle of Hue during the Tet offensive. He was in non-stop firefights for three weeks. He said half his platoon were killed or wounded. He told me about the time he held onto a fellow soldier, while he bled to death from a sniper round through the throat.
After the Tet Offensive his tour was up, but for some stupid reason (probably a few thousand dollars) he did a second tour. In April of 1968 he went back “up country” with the 1st Cav. This time he fought in the A Shau Valley. (This was referred to at the “Valley of Death". The fighting was as bad as any combat in history). He once talked of the time that he spent a night in a bomb crater with two dead comrades while the Viet Cong were shooting AK47s with green tracers over his head. He also talked about killing his enemy in hand-to-hand combat. His buddies did the same. For some reason, Eddie walked away from it.
But he was a broken man. He has Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). He has never been able to function properly. He is afraid of everything. On the Fourth of July he has to be sedated. He’s terrified by the noise of the fireworks.
The Army never questioned that he was damaged goods, and that it was his time in battle that was responsible. They gave him antidepressants; after a while he got a half disability pension. Life was just a struggle. Eight years ago I banged on a bunch of doors and helped him get a full disability pension. He’s okay these days, sort of.
I bring up Eddie’s story in connection with a new report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
The wars we fight today are no different than those of 1968, or any other war. Almost one in four (21%) of our soldiers are coming home with PTSD.
The CBO attempts to come up with a price on this. By its calculation, it costs an average of $10,000 per year for each soldier with PTSD. Given that 2.3mm troops have cycled through our wars the past ten years we can expect a bill for at least $5 billion a year for just those with PTSD. For how long? The CBO reports that 80+% of those with PTSD were still in need of treatment after four years. For Eddie, it’s been forty plus years now.
Of course the CBO numbers don’t measure the real cost. What is the cost of a busted life? You can’t put a number on it.
We have some very big debts to pay to the soldiers that have come home recently. (Don’t blame them for wars – they just fight them.) I’m concerned that we will renege on those promises. I think the CBO is too, that’s probably why it wrote the report.
I’m writing about this because the CBO report reminded me of Eddie. And that got me to thinking how fucking stupid these wars have been.
Note: PTSD is just a fraction of the total costs of taking care of our Vets.
»
- advertisements -
When all share the same "perspective"...is it still perspective or is it obligatory dogma?
I've spent just about the entirety of my adult life working in film production. I know what it takes to try to get a project made and I can tell you from first hand experience that if you stray from the "generally accepted story"...your film does NOT get made. And in those rarefied occasions when something that strays from the party line does get made, you can bet your ass you'll be working with a shoe string budget and will not get wide distribution.
This is not something I've "read about". This is something I've been through...more than once.
Hollywood has nothing to do with "Art". Make no mistake about that.
Kissinger shared the Nobel Peace Prize with North Vietnam's Le Duc Tho, not Cambodia's Pol Pot, for the Paris Peace Accords.
You are correct. Please excuse my error. It wasn't intentional.
Further to that, Le Duc declined the prize. Kissinger accepted it.
You are excused, after all Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Benito Mussolini are all amongst those who have been nominated for the said prize at some time in history.
It's not a far stretch at all assuming Pol Pot to be amongst a large group of scumbag recipients.
It kind of puts the meaning of the Nobel Peace Prize into perspective, doesn't it.
jimmy carter, yassir arafat, and barack obama all accepted said prize.
See any problems here?
- Ned
At least Carter is still working for it.
Why did you leave out our favourite terrorist, Menachem Begin from your list?
thanks for the insight, I remember in HS a teacher that served in Vietnam and saw his buddies head taken off his body, this teacher could not have gum chewed in class and had a flashback when a car backfired, while he was walking on the street, also, my dad is on full disability from the Vietnam war and Agent Orange.
Don't forget the depleted uranium that GW has posted on here.
If you haven't seen "Year Zero", take the time to give it a look. It's short, only about an hour, but it is the must gut wrenching depiction of the aftermath of war I have ever seen.
I promise, if you see it, you will never forget it.
Pilger was the first journalist to enter Cambodia with a camera crew after the war. The images he captures are unforgettable. Some of it is almost too painful to watch.
For some insight into how the government really views soldiers, it may be instructive to look back at a quote by Henry Kissinger:
“Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.”
The caring about the military men is left to the people of the country. To politicians, they are but pawns.
"War is the insane death dance of a paranoid society. Would you join the dance?"
Wulf Zendik
The one good thing about the draft was it put middle and upper middleclass kids in harms way. Democrtized any fighting this country did. Even with student deferments the draft could still get you after college. Of course their are practical reasons why ending the draft made sense. 2 year hitches made for high turnover and training costs and a draftee was a reluctant warrior but the all volunteer force has its drawbacks as well. I think we need conscription on a limited basis with NO deferments whatsoever just to keep our leaders very hesitant about engaging in combat operations with American ground forces.
sangell: you have no idea what the demographics are actually about. Don't listen to Chahlie Rangell (Dem-tax cheat-NY) on this subject.
But it might be worth your time to look up Thomas Mac Owens and see the true demographics. Blows your argument away.
You think conscription?
- Ned
Sure, student and other deferments were possible and lots of people took every advantage of them as they could (see Dick Cheney) but sangell is correct: The draft did democritize the fighting force compared to what it'd been prior to the draft.
When every Congressman/woman and Senator and lobbyist and aide in Washington has someone they care about in harm's way, maybe more of them will see the sense of what Ron Paul is trying to say. There is no reason for us to be the armed force and police of the world. It has real cost in human harm and life, not to mention the massive destruction we do to others around the world.
And since no one else has done it yet, it seems appropriate to post CCR's 'Fortunate Son':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl1xATrGMtg
Some folks are born made to wave the flag
Ooo, they're red, white and blue.
And when the band plays hail to the chief
Ooo, they point the cannon at you, y'all!
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, Son.
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, one. No.
Some folks are born, silver spoon in hand,
Lord, don't they help themselves, y'all!
But when the taxman comes to the door, Lord,
the house looks like a rummage sale.
It ain't me, it ain't me, I aon't no millionaire's son. No, no.
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one. No.
Some folks inherit star spangle eyes, Ooo,
they send you down to war, y'all.
And when you ask them, how much should we give?
Ooo, they only answer more! More! More y'all.
It ain't me, it ain't me, I aon't no millionaire's son. No, no.
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one. No.
I think Bob said (sang?) it best
"Masters of War"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSM9mbnUs88
Come you masters of war
You that build all the guns
You that build the death planes
You that build the big bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks
You that never done nothin’
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it’s your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly
Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain
You fasten the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
When the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion
As young people’s blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud
You’ve thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain’t worth the blood
That runs in your veins
How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I’m young
You might say I’m unlearned
But there’s one thing I know
Though I’m younger than you
Even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do
Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul
And I hope that you die
And your death’ll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I’ll watch while you’re lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I’ll stand o’er your grave
’Til I’m sure that you’re dead
Fuck military slavery.
I actually agree with what you say about Conscription.
If everyone congresspersons kids had at least the possibility of seeing combat, my guess is we would see a lot less of it.
Everyone pays a little more attention when decisions made in Washington directly affect them. Including those in Washington
The other rarely mentioned benefit of conscription is the probability of spending a year or two, when you are a young person, with people who are not like you.
Again when you read stories about Veterns of Vietnam and WW2 they all mention how they would have never know about "so and so's life in a different part of the country, from a different class, from a different backround, if they hadn't served with them".
So you're willing to gamble with the lives of our children in order for political points?
You're engaging in seriously delusional wishful-thinking. These people are criminals!
Just look at your statements! If their kids had the possibility of seeing combat, we would be less of it.
Well, if pigs had wings, they could fly! But do you think that's going to happen, either?
I guess I had you labeled all wrong. You're nothing but another political opportunists using death threats in an attempt to get your way.
Oh, and if I haven't said it lately, politics is evil.
Once again, I wouldn't play these games with your kid's lives, so please stop doing it to mine.
Wow you really twisted my words to fit you own narrative.
I wasn't attempting to gain any political points. I was thinking out loud.
I was also attempting to figure out how to make elected officials more accountable for their actions.
Feel free to label me any way you wish. You seem to have the narrative all figured out.
Really lizzy? I'm surprised to read this from you. I don't think experiencing other cultures is a valid trade-off for being forced at the end of gun to risk life and limb for the State. And, history shows us time after time that the elites always, always get their exemptions. This will not touch politicians in the way that you hope, and they'll have a guaranteed amount of cannon fodder at their disposal any time they wish. This is a very, very bad idea.
You mean like Joe Kennedy? In WW1 the British elite actually died at a higher rate than the Tommies. There is also a thing known as 'citizenship' wherein the people of nation have a obligation to defend it. You ought to read up on it, you seem ignorant of the concept.
Refer to my above comment regarding the elites and politicians. Essentially, if a nobleman's son wanted to serve, no problem, if not, no problem. What you're outlining is simply that it was viewed as a great honor in the particular timeframe you've chosen. Fast forward to Vietnam and, again, the difference can't be ignored. By the way, what exactly were the military slaves in Vietnam defending our nation from?
I'm well aware that as a citizen of the United States, should we be attacked in our homeland, it is my obligation to defend my nation. What I'm arguing is that the government has no right to point a gun at me and say, "defend me." Do you see the difference? Besides, national defense is not even the idea you put forth. You just want to enslave some group of citizens of your choosing, for a time period of your choosing, just because you think it's a good idea. No thanks.
Interesting discussion. Most has been said, but ........ recruiting and paying for a volunteer, professional army is just another way of enslaving the less educated part of the populace and creating a store of cannon fodder. It can be used to combat unemployment in a targeted way.
Indoctrination of a professional army about "who is our enemy' is also easier than that of a diverse bag of reluctant draftees. All strong arguments for war-happy politicians to avoid talking about draft.
Democratizing the staffing process does make for a more thoughtful, diverse military, if not for more cautious politicians when it comes to making war.
I think the Swiss approach has served them well over the ages.
It is absolutley not true that "the elites always, always get their exemptions". Americans across the sociao-economic spectrum served in huge numbers in WWII. If anything, valid subsequent gripes focused around the fact that blacks (who were not well represented in the "elite" of the 1940's) were mostly prevented from serving in combat.
At one time European aristocracy (particularly the British) had a very high regard for physical bravery, personal risk on the battlefield and military service in general. That kind of thing is very much diminished these days but within living memory it wasn't at all.
Compare WWII to Vietnam and you'll see the clear trend that if the child of an elite does not want to be enslaved, a phone call or two is all it takes. Even the lawful exemption for college students clearly benefitted those who, you know, could afford college. Your example of blacks has nothing to do with class rank and I think you know it.
Really, it's shocking to me that on a website that clearly documents the egregious violations of human rights and the rule of law by an increasingly tyrannical State, there is actually a majority of people junking me for saying we absolutely should not force every single citizen to be a slave to that State, even if temporarily. It's a real WTF moment for me here.
I objected to your assertion of "always" and acknowledged that things are different today. I drew the line at WWII for a reason.
Just because the children of elites wanted to serve does not mean exemptions weren't open to them. In an era influenced by a history of what you characterized as very high regard for bravery and risk on the battlefield, we can certainly expect fewer people to seek those exemptions.
So, people of great wealth and high station have options available to them that others do not.
Thanks for the news flash.
Chump has nailed you Mercury. Give it up.
...
You just reiterated my orginal point. You know, the one you've been arguing against? Yet now you arrogantly refer to it as common knowledge. Moving right along...
I like a minnimum year of mandatory service (for males anyway) similar to what they have in Switzerland and some other parts of Europe.
It would, at the very least go a long way towards rebuilding cultural cohesion although in this country the pressure to turn the thing into a non-military, community service program would probably be overwhelming.
There is nothing good about conscription. It is pure, unadulterated evil. Upper class kids have the right to dispose of their lives as they see fit just the same as poor and middle class kids.
I get what you're saying: bring the realities of war home to the policy makers and the "haves," but your prescription is worse than the disease.
Absolutely. The idea of fairly enslaving everyone (yet, not really) in order to fight a war, is not only evil, but it is merely a trap to promote the war effort. Charley Rangel brings this up every now and then, complete with the "fair" rhetoric and it makes me sick at my stomach to listen to it from such a scumbag.
To hear it from otherwise loving people though, well it's too much to even consider.
To put it bluntly, I did not serve six years in the USMC so that evil fuckers could murder my kids or imprison them for refusing to murder others. Honestly Lizzie, did you NOT read Bruce's article? That you would promote this as a solution to anything is sickening. I wouldn't wish that existence upon my worst enemy, let alone an innocent child. Not even one of yours.
I beg of you, please reconsider your position.
how about an age limit-- say 35 to 55 with 12 weeks of boot camp and a direct ticket to the front-- women and men alike-- I garraaanntee you wars will be a thing of the past--
It is estimated that 300-500,000 Iraq and Afghan war Vets, have TBI. TBI and PTSD go hand in hand.
They are the walking dead.
These wars were about the stupidest thing the US federal government has done in my lifetime. And that benchmark is very high.
That would depend on your viewpoint. I'm sure The CEO of Exxon Mobil, Halliburton and other feels that this was a smart thing. The Federal Government and it crones wanted natural resources and it got them, at the expense of a few thousand live and the shattering of a couple hundred thousand more, the other 290+ million people were not effected in any perceivable manner, at least not yet. They have not even had to pay for the cost of the wars. Sounds very smart to me, the Romans would be proud.
The Matrix Mill needs its grist.
That's why the highest price marketing whores on Madison Avenue are hired by the Pentagon and DoD now, and video game making is a government enterprise, today.
Must keep the grist applying, by the glory of highly effective marketing.
Think they'll have the nerve to make an "Ender's Game?"
No way.
Players will always get multiple lives and cheat codes for special weaponry to further the illusion of immortality.
War requires a tremendous cost in lives and resources and involves inconceivable waste. Without the Federal Reserve System, Americans would have to pay cash up-front for their wars. Wars would be infrequent, brief and conclusive. The FED is evil because it generates endless war.
Veteran for Ron Paul.
All true but lets not put the full blame on The Fed, ever heard of the phase "not worth a continental" or greenback. Now both of those wars had meaning but America did not "pay cash up-front" for them even without a central bank.
Right. We'll only hold the Fed responsible for the last 100 years of warmongering destroying Eddies.
Stupid wars will be America's future claim to fame. Can't wait to see the reasoning given to future generations in grade school. So... between that and the corporate circle-jerk I'd say 'Merika's legacy is about complete.
Oh, and, too bad about Eddie. Wish there was something we could do... you know... as a nation.
Gene, "as a nation" is good, but I think a better way is by each of us adopting a vet and his family, and helping out individually. You can't overestimate the value of the personal touch. Love and care can heal things a government program can't touch.
+10.
These long wars have been a serious hardship for our troops. I witness the heart-break every time a family member goes on rotation to yet another pointless deployment. They are proud of their mission but unhappy with the reasons.
What sucks is that there are a large number of folks that will blame the troops for the wars. That is like blaming a knife for a stabbing. The troops are supposed to follow orders of the leadership. It is part of the contract. It is the leadership that is failing us. It is the ignorant voter that is supporting the leadership. In the end, it is what we get. The troopers bear the brunt of it. Yes, some of the brass get promotions and extra commendations pinned to their lapels but the average corporal gets a pat on the back, a ticket home, and if lucky, a small stipend for education or health-care. These troops do need our help.
At the very least donate to USO. Or maybe consider volunteering for local fundraising events/charities to help the troops. Our government is in too much denial and debt to do what is needed. Think about it, do we really want mentally injured aggressive young men running around on hair-trigger alert with no one there to help them come down?
My nephew fell into serious all out drug abuse after returning home from duty (before the tour he never had any such problems). He suffered a spinal injury on tour. He has had multiple surgeries and had to fight...I mean truly all out fight...to get benefits for his very real injured back. He is now (tentatively) on the right track but not without a good deal of suffering for him and everyone around him. I don't know how my sister-in-law has survived it. Anyway, I do agree with you is my point. These guys need our support.
All good, but not good enough. I just wish every last one of our young men and women would say, "I didn't sign up for this shit. I signed up to defend America against real enemies, not to throw my life away installing mobsters like Karzai, carving out new leases for Exxon-Mobil and protecting corporate assets in third-world hellholes."
They can't arrest them all.
I agree but for me this underscores why "bombs from the sky" are often a better way to go than "boots on the ground" once military action has been decided upon.
We don't have these kinds of legacy problems from the Kosovo campaign and we accomplished what we set out to accomplish fairly quickly with minnimum casualties.
Time to get out of the war business or at least switch the emphasis from "winning hearts and minds" to "rubble don't make trouble."
bombs from the sky are often a better way to go than boots on the ground
That sounds like the logic of a flyboy, a fobbit, or non-uniformed disciple of Wesley the Welsher.
There were a ton of boots on the ground in Kosovo both under IFOR & KFOR (because the first half assed attempt to deal with the breakup of Yugoslavia was so successful that NATO & UN needed another go round to demonstrate the their superior ineptitude, and in the process ally themselves with a terrorist group running a concentration camp of its own). There were fewer US involved in the Balkans than in a standard NATO clusterfuck, but enough so that a couple thousand from my intra-Iraq-excursion generation from 1MEF rolling in with M1A1s and the rest Uncle Sam's usual heavy footprint isn't even counted as an official deployment in the history books or even worthy of internet mention.
What did the World get for leaving so much of the lifting to the useless dainty Europeans in the former Yugoslavia- the first genocide on European soil since WW2. Last year the Dutch were finally convicted in their own courts of participating in the Srebrenica genocide (but only because it was just some worthless fiat money that the plaintiffs were seeking), but if the ICC/ICTY is anything more than pathetic attempt at self consolation for, and of, the surrender-monkey European intellectual class, then where is the criminal indictment of those who served in Dutchbat to go along those for the Serbs they assisted? Kosovo certainly isn’t an example of painless pushbutton warfare saving the world from suffering.
Air power alone has never, and will never, win a war.
If you are going to fight a war, then FIGHT it. IDENTIFY the enemy, KILL the enemy, and go HOME, and make NO apologies for it.
I agree politicians’ nation building and hearts and minds pipe dreams do nothing but drive up casualties and suffering needlessly. War is bad enough to begin with, but only a sadist or a traitor CiC ties his own military's hands with restrictive rules of engagement. War in Afghanistan has involved castrating your enemies and making them choke on their own dicks since the forays of Alexander the Great, and continuing through Ronnie Ray-Gun's support for the Mujahedeen against the Soviets, and Hillbilly Bill's support of the Taliban’s murder of President Najibullah. If you don't have the stomach for this level of cruel and otherwise senseless barbarity (like the nintendo flyboys who apparently had to watch it live on their bomb-o-visions and no longer even have to go through lumbar strengthening at Fairchild) then get the fuck out of the way and don't tell those on the ground how to win the war, or pretend that bombs can solve a problem (again), or that the US has done anything other than LOST in both Iraq and Afghanistan after a huge and unjustifiable expenditure of lives and wealth.
If the killing isn't done man-to-man and face-to-face, then you don't know who the fuck you are killing, and what the long term consequences might be. The NWFP of Pakistan used to be great place to visit 20 years ago, but the nintendo generation of jet jockeys and the COWARD-IN-CHIEF have insured that it will be entirely unsafe for Americans to visit for generations to come. The Bush years might seem like an eternity of ineptitude, but before him there was another an eternity of ineptitude during the Clinton years, who was run out Somalia with his tail between his legs, emboldening enemies who launched an escalating series of strikes, which the US responded to with an escalating series of goat-fucker cruise missile strikes (the nintendo solution of the day), all while seeking peaceful co-existence with the Taliban and selling out former US allies to meet short-term and short-sited diplomatic objectives. US FOREIGN POLICY 101, RINSE, REPEAT... If the cycle isn't broken, then its increasing amplitude will eventually ruin the State.
The US hasn’t won a war since it got rid of the Department of War and created the Department of Defense and packed it full of PC bitchez.
DoD bashing aside, public support for veterans in the US is disgraceful, whether it is the perpetual mismanagement and underfunding of the VA, or nazi-jew-in-need-of-gas-chamber Mike Bloomberg, who won’t even allow an official parade for vets from Iraq (even though that war is finally and already over for the US), all the while throwing them freely for fucking useless sports teams. I am lucky and thankful that despite all the men in our family doing their duty- most of us have come back more or less whole. But there are many who serve and sacrifice and return to a family that doesn’t have the capacity to make up for the Washington’s and the VA’s shortfalls, and all the assclowns on TV who have reflexively spewed the “I support out troops” line over the last decade need to put actions to their otherwise meaningless words, or held to account for their betrayal- because otherwise the PTSD cases from Iraq2 and Afganistan will wind up relegated to the same fate as those PTSD cases from Iraq1 and the Balkans.
War is bad.
Bombs from the sky are bad.
Boots on the ground are bad.
BUT you cant win throwing bombs from the sky.
Hmm yes you can but you have to go nuclear.
And that´s bad too ....
Great point. Impersonal murder is definitely the future. That is exactly what we need: unmanned drones and press-the-button kill-a-brown-person-today technology. Kosovo campaign was neat & tidy, no real damage there except I hear teenagers tremble violently at New Years festivities and the slamming of doors from the fond childhood memories.
Yeah, that will never blow back to haunt us...