Author Topic: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home  (Read 3043 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #15 on: November 19, 2007, 01:31:05 PM »
The soldier protects his platoon, but at the same time, he is also there to protect the young and the defenseless Iraqis.
The problem comes when he kills an innocent Iraqi in order to protect his buddies. This probably looks like exactly ther right thing to do at the moment, but then it turns out that the guy he shot is now dead, and the rifle the soldier saw turns out to have been a broomstick after all, the menacing figure was a gawky teenager or a woman, and then there is nothing he can do because they are dead, deceased, gone, kaputt.

It is easy to shoot the wrong people when you are toting around a submachine gun. My guess is that if we all were toting submachine guns or grenade launchers aropund every day, the population increase in the US would go into a rapid decline, and it would be an excellent time to invest in TV sets. Yappy little dogs would be a thing of the past.

It is a good thing that it is illegal for us to walk about carrying submachine guns and grenade launchers.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2007, 01:38:46 PM »
If the platoon, my "family" as you would have it, rapes and kills a 14-year-old girl, they're not my family any more.  They deserve to be strung up by the balls, let alone turned in.

If my "family" decided to participate in a full-scale deadly assault on somebody else's family on the other side of town, I have the option to disown them before they start out and say "No thanks" to the invitation.

If my "family" travelled thousands of miles to somewhere they didn't belong and killed hundreds of thousands of people when they got there, I'd either bale out or I'd be a part of the problem.

Any way you slice it, these guys are fucking criminals.  Now they're weeping into their beers over all the crimes they committed and wanting me to believe they're no worse than I am?  That's moral relativism taken to its most ludicrous extreme.   They did what they did, and they still wanna be considered heroes?  If they didn't have their ridiculous buzzword "PTSD" to muddy the waters, the whole thing would be a non-starter.

I'll tell you something, I've GOT a family.  It's not a platoon.  It's not a bunch of redneck moron killers.  If these guys choose to think of their platoon as their family, I have to shudder to think of what kind of real family they must have.  A mother who napalms other mothers' kids?  A father who tortures prisoners or turns a blind eye to it?    This "family" BS is really lame - - they're "family" like the Manson Family is "family."  A band of professional killers is "family?"  Only in the most perverted of Republican "family values" are these guys "family" to one another.  When I was their age, my mum and dad were all the "family" I needed.  I was proud of them.  I didn't need to go find a bunch of redneck psychos to be my new "family."  What a fucking insult to real family.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #17 on: November 19, 2007, 03:10:24 PM »
Quote
If the platoon, my "family" as you would have it, rapes and kills a 14-year-old girl, they're not my family any more.  They deserve to be strung up by the balls, let alone turned in.

And if they didn't participate in a war crime,  would they not qualify as having PTSD?

Quote
If my "family" decided to participate in a full-scale deadly assault on somebody else's family on the other side of town, I have the option to disown them before they start out and say "No thanks" to the invitation.

So if there are mitigating circumstances to the rape, you wife was dressed provocatively, you wouldn't protect her?

Or if the war is characterized as unjust, then soldiers who participate are not afflicted with PTSD?

Quote
I'll tell you something, I've GOT a family.  It's not a platoon.  It's not a bunch of redneck moron killers.  If these guys choose to think of their platoon as their family, I have to shudder to think of what kind of real family they must have.  A mother who napalms other mothers' kids?  A father who tortures prisoners or turns a blind eye to it?    This "family" BS is really lame - - they're "family" like the Manson Family is "family."  A band of professional killers is "family?"  Only in the most perverted of Republican "family values" are these guys "family" to one another.  When I was their age, my mum and dad were all the "family" I needed.  I was proud of them.  I didn't need to go find a bunch of redneck psychos to be my new "family."  What a fucking insult to real family.

You reveal a lot about yourself in that paragraph.






sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #18 on: November 19, 2007, 03:32:50 PM »
Quote
I'll tell you something, I've GOT a family.  It's not a platoon.  It's not a bunch of redneck moron killers.  If these guys choose to think of their platoon as their family, I have to shudder to think of what kind of real family they must have.  A mother who napalms other mothers' kids?  A father who tortures prisoners or turns a blind eye to it?    This "family" BS is really lame - - they're "family" like the Manson Family is "family."  A band of professional killers is "family?"  Only in the most perverted of Republican "family values" are these guys "family" to one another.  When I was their age, my mum and dad were all the "family" I needed.  I was proud of them.  I didn't need to go find a bunch of redneck psychos to be my new "family."  What a fucking insult to real family.

You reveal a lot about yourself in that paragraph.

Ain't that an understatement.  Pooch accurately highligted this egregious level of bigotry, just last week
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #19 on: November 19, 2007, 04:05:31 PM »
  I have met veterans of the good war, WWII who have had to make peace with the demons spawned from hellish experience.

  Guilt is not the only important factor in PTSD , and guilt is not always from wrongdoing either.

    Some of these experiences are of being surprised ay an explosion in the night , a wound caused by a booby trap ro a freind expireing in plain sight but unreachable because of the swarming bullets.


    Do people feel guilt irrationally when they survive things that kill their freinds? Do people experience fear when a sound or smell simular to one preceeding a grevious wound is replayed by some innocent cause?


    War is a very extreme thing survivors of it deserve some respect for the surviveing that they do when surviveing isn't easy. 

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2007, 11:35:23 AM »
plane's right, of course.  (And BT to the extent that he dealt with possible PTSD causes)   Guilt is not the ONLY significant factor in PTSD.  I overlooked the other causes of which plane gave some good examples.  I guess I was responding more to the initial post, where the guy was clearly concerned with exorcising the demons of guilt.  I think from that writer's POV, or at least my impression of it, he was mostly concerned with escaping the consequences of guilt-induced PTSD.  (And by "guilt," I mean legitimate guilt, guilt for crimes and atrocities, rather than the "guilt" of watching a buddy die and not being able to help.)
« Last Edit: November 20, 2007, 11:43:05 AM by Michael Tee »

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2007, 10:44:50 PM »
I'll tell you something, I've GOT a family.  It's not a platoon.  It's not a bunch of redneck moron killers.  If these guys choose to think of their platoon as their family, I have to shudder to think of what kind of real family they must have.  A mother who napalms other mothers' kids?  A father who tortures prisoners or turns a blind eye to it?    This "family" BS is really lame - - they're "family" like the Manson Family is "family."  A band of professional killers is "family?"  Only in the most perverted of Republican "family values" are these guys "family" to one another.  When I was their age, my mum and dad were all the "family" I needed.  I was proud of them.  I didn't need to go find a bunch of redneck psychos to be my new "family."  What a fucking insult to real family.


Wow! Real family?
Next you'll be spreading gravy across the wall at Thanksgiving spelling the word, PIGS!
And YOU're full of compassion enough to understand that there's a REAL world out there with REAL people who have REAL feelings attached to their REAL life experiences??

You're unreal, M-tee and frankly, I find this post of yours a slap in the face to the soldiers of the world.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #22 on: November 20, 2007, 11:12:28 PM »
<<You're unreal, M-tee and frankly, I find this post of yours a slap in the face to the soldiers of the world.>>

A slap in the face, huh?  So what do you find it when the "soldiers of the world" drop napalm or WP on somebody's baby?  A kick in the ass?

Tell ya the truth, Cynthia, I'd worry a little less about the hurt feelings of "the soldiers of the world" and a little more about what damage they inflict on their fellow human beings, which if you ever get out of your little cocoon, you would find to be truly appalling and horrific.

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #23 on: November 21, 2007, 12:29:29 AM »
<<You're unreal, M-tee and frankly, I find this post of yours a slap in the face to the soldiers of the world.>>

A slap in the face, huh?  So what do you find it when the "soldiers of the world" drop napalm or WP on somebody's baby?  A kick in the ass?

Tell ya the truth, Cynthia, I'd worry a little less about the hurt feelings of "the soldiers of the world" and a little more about what damage they inflict on their fellow human beings, which if you ever get out of your little cocoon, you would find to be truly appalling and horrific.

Michael Tee. If I live in a cocoon, I celebrate that because I know that I will eventually burst forth to fly above the  of the wee "Tees" of the world who hold HATE in their hearts. Hate for those who wear a uniform. Your "slurs" are at teh heart of this hate, M-tee. Those "negative slurs" are at the heart of your hate. Why not express your thoughts without the personal jabs?
 Not all soldiers are "killers".
You show little respect for the total process....Metamorphosis is total.
Your minimal slights tossed at ALL SOLDIERS is a cutting remark, if not ridiculous.
Make your apples on the apple tree, and your oranges in the grove.

Not all soldiers kill babies. Not all ducks line up, Michael in the way YOU WANT in order to make the world right. Come on. Think,man. Who the heck are you really talking about?
Talk about that old saying BROAD STROKING!
Yes, your statement was bigoted because it placed all soldiers in the pile of a heap without a heart.
I would rather spread my wings, and live a life of compassion that hold such hate for a human being as you do.

Your political views have cut the curtain. Once the curtain is sliced, there's no turning back.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #24 on: November 21, 2007, 01:45:05 AM »
Not all soldiers kill babies. Not all ducks line up, Michael in the way YOU WANT in order to make the world right. Come on. Think,man. Who the heck are you really talking about?
Talk about that old saying BROAD STROKING!
Yes, your statement was bigoted because it placed all soldiers in the pile of a heap without a heart.

-------------------------------------------------

Still dodging the main issue, aren't you?  "Not all soldiers kill babies."  Brilliant.  What's next, "Not all Nazis gassed Jews?"  "Not all terrorists blow up buildings?"   When did the issue ever become whether the crimes and misdemeanours of the army involved 100% of all its personnel?  and what difference would it make if 1% or 2% or 5% or 10% of all soldiers had no direct part in any horrific and atrocious deeds committed by their comrades-in-arms? 

A simple FACT seems to escape you completely:  depending on whose count you trust more, there are from EIGHTY THOUSAND TO SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND dead Iraqi civilians who died by violence since the U.S. invaded Iraq.  Directly at the hands of the U.S. forces or killed by the various indigenous forces set loose in the wake of the U.S. invasion.  Many of them now armed, equipped and counselled by the U.S. 

While you are fretting about "insults" and hurt feelings of the trained killers who invaded that country and tortured and/or killed tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, the sufferings of the victims of U.S. militarism and their families sails right on by over your head.  Not worth a second's thought, apparently.  Better to hold to the thought that some soldiers are responsible for the killing and some aren't.  Which is ridiculous because they're ALL there on the same mission, the ones who aren't directly involved in the killing are doing whatever they can to facilitate it, whether it's warehousing and distributing the guns and ammo, analysing the intelligence so that the killers can track down even more victims for torture and murder, or giving press conferences to the MSM so that public support will remain high enough to allow the killing spree to continue.

<<I would rather spread my wings, and live a life of compassion that hold such hate for a human being as you do.>>

Yeah, well that's nice,  so would I.   It's very uplifting.   It's just that your compassion seems to be a little short in regard to the victims of U.S. militarism, who are infants, children, nursing mothers, teachers, teenagers, working men and women and old folks, and a little long in regard to their torturers and murderers. 

And BTW, I'd go a little lighter on the armchair psychoanalysis if I were you.  You don't really know me and you don't know who I hate, how much hate I'm capable of holding, how much I actually hold or (if I do hate anyone) who those lucky people happen to be.  I don't have a very high opinion of the U.S. military, that is perfectly obvious from my posts, and some of that opinion is deliberately exaggerated to make a point,  but whether or not I actually hate them is something that you know absolutely nothing about.  I don't think much of a moron and I don't think much of a professional killer, but it's a long reach from there to actually hating them.

<<Your political views have cut the curtain. Once the curtain is sliced, there's no turning back. >>

Well, I sure as hell hope that YOU know what you are talking about there, because I don't have the faintest idea.

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #25 on: November 21, 2007, 01:24:05 PM »

"Not all soldiers kill babies."  Brilliant.  What's next, "Not all Nazis gassed Jews?"  "Not all terrorists blow up buildings?""

Not all American Soldier kill babies! No they don't. Can't really say that all Nazi's were innocent of celebrating such racial hate that led to mass killings. Can't say that all terrorists don't WANT to kill by blowing up buildings. But they want to kill!
Most would welcome the chance.
I was responding to your broad stroking anti-American soldier rant. You admit it. So be it. I respond to it. That's the issue here.
The issue of war crimes is another post all together. 


"...what difference would it make if 1% or 2% or 5% or 10% of all soldiers had no direct part in any horrific and atrocious deeds committed by their comrades-in-arms?"
Your thoughts here seem to find a way to involve ALL American soldiers even if they are not involved. How is that fair?
In my opinion, a bigot gives little room for fairness or logic. What about the killing of thousands outside of a war stage? How about killing pregnant women, old men, children....without protocol? The fact that you are even comparing soldiers to Terrorists is uneven and wrong. But you will find a way to make the argument go your way...why?
Do you think it would be feasible if all Americans sat back and allowed the terrorists of the world plan more attacks?
What if Iraq had declared the war on America. I am not saying Bush was right to invade Iraq.
What would you say about killings, be they justified or not, in any war...be it rational or not? Would you cheer on the under-dog Americans if they were the victim? I doubt it.  Why? You hold a sort of bigoted tone against them. IMO
War and terrorism are obviously two different things. Who wants a war?
Not I, said the duck. Not I, said the poor little child who cries for his father or mother to return from the battle field.
But who wants the support of someone like Saddam? Not the men, women or children who cried for the return of loved ones......to return from the pits they were buried in. (no battle field there)

I don't agree with your numbers by the way. Show me the statistics of the #'s of Iraqi's killed by the mean American with a proof of the soldiers "intent" to massacre in each statistic, as well. INTENT, please.  Your posts seem to infer that soldiers are "red-neck mass murderers".....thus the bigoted stream".



<<Your political views have cut the curtain. Once the curtain is sliced, there's no turning back. >>

"Well, I sure as hell hope that YOU know what you are talking about there, because I don't have the faintest idea"


It's an old Persian saying. You have made outrageous statements that seem to be coming from a bigoted base mind-set, Michael.
I was responding to the way you throw that hate in the direction of all, instead of a few.

What this saying basically means is that once you have "sliced or cut the curtain" in terms of your choice of words, or actions toward another person(s), it can't be repaired. You have made meanspirited and highly generalized comments about the American military in total.
How can you repair your bigoted statements now, M-tee?



You don't really know me and you don't know who I hate, how much hate I'm capable of holding, how much I actually hold or (if I do hate anyone) who those lucky people happen to be.  I don't have a very high opinion of the U.S. military, that is perfectly obvious from my posts, and some of that opinion is deliberately exaggerated to make a point,

I get a pretty good idea of your intent. Not trying to Psychoanalyze you, but a man's words show plenty about his soul. If anything I think your hate speaks for itself, and that is what I was responding to. Not your feelings about life in general. Don't know how far your hate goes. Spreadin' those butterfly wings?

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #26 on: November 21, 2007, 03:16:21 PM »
As I suspected, you don't know much about me or psychoanalysis.  My opinion of the American military is pretty low, I hate the men who cooked up this war on lies and false claims, but in fact I don't hate the soldiers themselves except for the ones who actually commit the atrocities.  So much for your ability to read a man's soul through his words.  It's possible, of course, but I think you let your own prejudices, likes and dislikes get in the way of an accurate reading.

The "intent" of the U.S. military insofar as it relates to the casualties they caused is, of course, a red herring.  In fact, it's a crock.  Their INTENT was to invade, subdue and dominate a nation of 23 million.  Naturally they would prefer to do it the "nice" way, with everyone rolling over and meekly accepting U.S. dominance, but when THAT doesn't happen (as if!!) then they bomb wherever they bomb, shoot wherever they shoot, and thousands of Iraqis, mostly civilian, happen to wind up dead.  Like they would give a shit if they were told that the bomb that killed them didn't have their name on it.  Every bomb that is dropped is dropped with the intention of doing harm, of fucking somebody up real bad, and whoever it fucks up is the victim - - NONE of the bombs were dropped with the intention that they would explode somewhere harmlessly, doing harm to no sentient being.

<<Your thoughts here seem to find a way    to involve ALL American soldiers even if they are not involved. How is that fair? >>

I dunno.  You tell me.  Are any of those soldiers over there under the mistaken belief that they were to be America's delegate to a peace conference?

<<What about the killing of thousands outside of a war stage? >>

Sounds wrong to me.

<<How about killing pregnant women, old men, children....without protocol?>>

That's wrong, too.  Isn't it?

<<Do you think it would be feasible if all Americans sat back and allowed the terrorists of the world plan more attacks? >>

Some of us are pretty certain, on good evidence,  that your "President" and his Cabinet lied to you, that Saddam and his entourage were NOT terrorists, did not attack America and in fact were way too secular to have any sympathy for the so-called "terrorists" at all.  So that there is absolutely NO credible way that you can equate not invading Iraq with "sitting back and letting the terrorists of the world plan more attacks."

<<I don't agree with your numbers by the way.>>

Well, they're not "MY" numbers, the low ones are Iraq Body Count and the high ones are Lancet's, a British Medical Journal.  If you don't agree with them, show me a set of numbers you DO agree with and let me know why I should believe them rather than Iraq Body Count or The Lancet.

<< Show me the statistics of the #'s of Iraqi's killed by the mean American with a proof of the soldiers "intent" to massacre in each statistic, as well. INTENT, please. >>

As I stated above, the requirement of "intent" is a real crock.  I've already answered it in this post.

<< Your posts seem to infer that soldiers are "red-neck mass murderers".....thus the bigoted stream".>>

They're not that simple and you're just not paying attention.  They are either doing the killing or aiding and abetting the killers.  I like the phrase "redneck mass murderers," which is pretty much the same as "unconcerned that their activities have caused the death of about a hundred thousand Iraqi civilians to date, at a minimum and 600,000 at a maximum."  "Redneck mass murderers" is a more colourful way of expressing more or less that same concept.  You'll notice that their former commander, Tommy Franks, in reference to civilian casualties, famously stated that "We don't do body counts," a more conclusive statement of indifference to civilian casualties you could not hope to find.  Why don't you try to read HIS soul through HIS words, and the souls of the men who stood ready to carry out any order that this apostle of humanity might issue?

<<What this saying basically means is that once you have "sliced or cut the curtain" in terms of your choice of words, or actions toward another person(s), it can't be repaired. >>

Oh.  You mean like once you've blown a family to shit with bombs, missiles or tank shells, you can't just sew them back together again?  Yeah, I'll go along with that.

<<You have made meanspirited and highly generalized comments about the American military in total.
How can you repair your bigoted statements now, M-tee?>>

Geeze, I dunno, Cynthia.  I'll give it some more thought when they've figured out how to repair the hundreds of thousands of civilians they've blasted and shot and fried to death.   Accidentally, of course. 

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #27 on: November 21, 2007, 03:49:21 PM »
<<Do you think it would be feasible if all Americans sat back and allowed the terrorists of the world plan more attacks? >>

Some of us are pretty certain, on good evidence,  that your "President" and his Cabinet lied to you

Of course, "evidence" in this case being defined as pointing to some completely prejudiced Bush-lied" web site, perseverating blatant distortions, and Tee-leaf (il)logic, when not out and out lying about lying.  THAT is what consititutes "good evidence" for "Some"


"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8030
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #28 on: November 21, 2007, 04:05:36 PM »
  A good man would NOT commit an atrocity

I kinda doubt this
a good person would have trouble ,but if push come to shove there is a small chance anything can happen

it`s like the issue of torture ,if you live a clean life you will be magiclly be immune to torture
I`m talking about false confessions retrieved by police officers.

it`s not impossible push a person to go too far

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: On PTSD, or more properly, on Coming Home
« Reply #29 on: November 21, 2007, 04:18:09 PM »
No one has claimed otherwise, Kimba
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle