Thursday, December 10, 2009

WAR AND PEACE

President Obama accepted the Nobel Peace prize yesterday even as he prepares to deploy/redeploy 30,000 troops into Afghanistan.

We, as a nation, have asked much of our service men and women – perhaps too much as the continued lag between new recruits and the number of military personnel required on multiple fronts continues to drain and strain all arms of the military complex.

There is overwhelming evidence, coming from multiple sources, including the usually tightlipped, conservative military hierarchy as reported in Stars & Stripes, that there has been a huge spike of PTSD cases since the war in Iraq began. These wars not only take a toll physically and mentally on our soldiers but also on their families and friends.

Marriages have broken up, children have been placed in foster care, homes have been lost and spouses have suffered emotional and physical abuse and sometimes even death. While the pros and cons of these wars are endlessly debated, the burgeoning collection of studies highlighting the devastating effects of these continued conflicts cannot be ignored or trivialized.

This excerpt is from a document prepared by a joint study done by Walter Reed researchers and those at Texas A&M:

“If the present rate of deploying U.S. forces continues
as it has since the end of the cold war, then
soldiers entering the military today will deploy an
average of 14 times by the time they serve 21 years
in the military (Castro & Adler, 1999). The projected
deployment rate stands in stark contrast to the 4
deployments reported by soldiers who entered the
service more than 20 years ago.”

The length and frequency of deployments is an issue that has been under intense scrutiny since the Vietnam War. Due to findings from that era and bolstered by more recent studies such as the one linked above, the military determined that the maximum time spent in a combat zone should not exceed 6 months which is why we have seen this time frame used since the first Gulf War. What no one anticipated was the depletion of troops that would occur over the last 20 years and the extreme difficulty replenishing those troops if we had to go to war on multiple fronts.

So, here we are in a “perfect storm” of sorts. The number of troops remains in decline while we remain obligated to manning numerous non-combat bases around the world while maintaining a combat force in Iraq and now committed to a troop surge in Afghanistan. All in the name of PEACE, of course.


The vast body of evidence points to a terrible toll that will befall many our service men and women even if they manage to make it home unscathed physically. One cannot make light of the debilitating effects that stress, not only from being in active combat but also in the cycle of seemingly endless deployments will have on a significant number of military members.

While I am not willing to second guess the president and his military advisors on the necessity of continuing one war while escalating another, I believe our government owes all our soldiers, their families, their friends and especially their children an exit strategy and a clear definition of what would be a successful conclusion. Those fighting and dying and those waiting at home deserve at least that.

A little more than a year ago we voted for change, we voted for an end to our involvement in war, we voted for increased tolerance, acceptance and cooperation.

We're still waiting...

9 comments:

  1. Good post.

    We desperately need a concerted effort to take care of these soldiers when they return from combat. If we're going to continue to stick them in these dire situations, we need to make things as easy as possible for them once they return.

    We need a draft again so people would be forced to give a damn.

    ReplyDelete
  2. From the realist perspective -- and here I am talking about the Thomas Barnett view -- Afghanistan is exactly the sort of war we have been, are, and will be fighting for decades to come.

    What needs examination is not just the misuse of the US Army in Iraq or the travesty of Afghanistan, but how the service branch with 90% of the deployed personnel gets less than 25% of the DoD budget. Our most consistently useful branch is the most underfunded.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very good phrase

    ReplyDelete
  4. My memory tells me that during the election, Obama said more than once, that he would reengage in Afghanistan. I don't think this surge is a surprise.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am a bit ashamed of Obama accepting the Nobel Prize frankly. Especially fighting not one, but two wars. Am I the only one who things that is odd??

    I would feel extremely embarrassed and uncomfortable if I was Obama and I would have declined the prize. Perhaps it would be offensive to the committee but there is something to be said for integrity.

    I realize Obama campaigned on continuing in Afghanistan and I was with him until I found out about Karzai's corruption. That and the reality that even Alexander the Great couldn't fully pacify the country has me saying "PULL OUT--NOW!!!"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Terrific post, Rocky. Everything you mention here concerns me too since my oldest cephalopod is a career military officer. Her 4 deployments thus far to the Middle East were excruciatingly painful to endure ... for those of us wringing our hands at home from afar.

    I found TruthOut (http://www.truthout.org/) to be a good source of articles on PTSD and suicide within the military. One of their writers is a former Pentagon staffer who now advocates bringing the troops home.

    Along with Handsome B Wonderful (see comment above) and others, I am coming around to this viewpoint. Time to concentrate our attention on problems at home.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Look, you can't haz an Eternal War On Terrarism, lessen you got eternal warriors!

    I think that "Starship Troopers" and "Soldier" (the one with Kurt Russell) are propaganda pieces that examine the eventuality of nations/planets being at war as a default state.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Brian - as much as I loathe the idea of a draft it would certainly guarantee that more people had some skin in the game.
    And while Afghanistan has always been on the table, I don't completely trust old promises about getting in there and getting the job done. It certainly didn't happen with Iraq.
    I have had ambivelent feelings about the Nobel prize since its announcement. I think the only fitting thing to do with the prize money is give it to an organization working with wounded soldiers or children in the war zone.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Rockync said,

    "I think the only fitting thing to do with the prize money is give it to an organization working with wounded soldiers or children in the war zone."

    Great idea!

    After the Vietnam protests, the military saw the convenience of an all volunteer service. A force made of those who want to fight makes a better fighting force, and helps eliminate protests of the wars those volunteers fight in.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.