Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Admiral Says War Veterans Will Suffer for Years
NEW YORK - Homelessness, family strains and psychological problems among returning veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will persist in the U.S. for generations to come, the top U.S. military officer said Thursday.
"This is not a 10-year problem. It is a 50- or 60- or 70-year problem," Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a lunchtime audience at the Hudson Union Society, a group that promotes nonpartisan debate.
Mullen said he was particularly disturbed by the emergence of homelessness as a problem among war veterans.
"I have started to meet with, in veterans hospitals, homeless veterans" of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he said. "And they are every bit as homeless and every bit as tragic as any homeless vet we've ever had. We as a country should not allow that to happen."
At a White House news conference last week, President Barack Obama said that some of the funding increases in his proposed budget for veterans affairs are directed at alleviating the problem of homelessness among veterans, which he said is a bigger problem, proportionally, than is homelessness in the rest of the American population.
Mullen said he also was worried by a rising number of suicides among U.S. military members.
"The trends are all in the wrong direction," he said, adding that "we're just at the beginning of understanding" how to deal with the psychological wounds and scars that military members incur during combat service.
"I believe the cumulative effects of these deployments, the pressure that so many are under, the impact of what ... mostly our soldiers and Marines have been through" on the battlefield "in our eighth year of war has a lot to do with" the suicide and other stress-related problems that are plaguing the military and their families, he said.
Mullen said the military has added hundreds of mental health professionals to help with the problem, yet "we're struggling with respect to that." Another aspect of the problem, he added, is the impact on children, who can suffer severely from the extended and repeated absence of a mother or father going off to war.
In a wide-ranging question-and-answer session with his audience, Mullen also said he was "reasonably comfortable" that Pakistan's nuclear weapons are secure amid a rising tide of insurgent violence aimed at the government.
"We have invested in that (effort), they've taken significant steps in recent years, so I'm comfortable," he said. "My biggest concern is that if Pakistan gets to a point where it implodes, you've got a country that could be an Islamist, theocratic country with nuclear weapons which could both use them and proliferate them. One of our goals is to make sure that doesn't happen."
He also explicitly linked the Pakistani military's intelligence arm, the Inter-Services Intelligence, to elements of the insurgency inside Pakistan, a connection that others have said helps empower the Taliban and other extremist groups.
"They've got an intelligence organization that must, in my view, change its strategic approach and be completely disconnected from the insurgents. And they're not right now," he said.
The role of Pakistani intelligence was discussed Wednesday at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in which Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East and in Afghanistan, said there have been cases where Pakistani intelligence warned the insurgents of impending U.S. or Pakistani military strikes against them.
Petraeus called those episodes troubling. He said he and Mullen have raised the problem directly with the chief of Pakistani intelligence, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha.
- Posted in



41 Comments so far
Show AllThe only larger shame than Cheney and Bush starting these wars is the shabby treatment of these kids by their government and some sick elements of our society.
They deserve far better.
"...of the People, by the People, for the People."
Those damn three fingers pointing back at me are poking me in the eye and pushing this "beam" thing into the deeper recesses of my mind; not very comfortable.
Why does a homeless person who served in say Iraq, deserve any better then one who is homeless because she lost his or her home through "downsizing" at some Corporation?
The reality is a whole lot of people "deserve better" in ANY country as wealthy as the United States of America.
They are not getting "better" because the economic system we have chosen to embrace creates "winners" and "losers".
Because most of these kids, so I'm told, have much more to deal with than others. In that sense, yes they do deserve more. Any of the folks with mental problems should get first call.
"The reality is a whole lot of people "deserve better" in ANY country as wealthy as the United States of America."
We agree totally. Though rich is a quantative term these days.
"They are not getting "better" because the economic system we have chosen to embrace creates "winners" and "losers"."
Ask any poor person which country in the world where they would rather be poor and you will have your answer as to why you are wrong about our economic system. Not even in Appalachia will you find the grinding poverty in most countries.
Have you ever been to Appalachia? It doesn't sound to me as though you have, because there you will find every bit as much grinding poverty as you will in any other third world country.
ekaton aka d.k.shaw
I have been there and all I can ask is have you been in rural China, Laos, Sudan, Ethopia? There is no comparison. None at all in my opinion.
>>Ask any poor person which country in the world where they would rather be poor and you will have your answer as to why you are wrong about our economic system. Not even in Appalachia will you find the grinding poverty in most countries
This is a rather weak argument. The bulk of the world has CHOSEN to embrace economic systems that do not look after the people as the first priority. I am sure if you ask any Tibetan where they would rather live, they would rather live in Tibet.
I am sure any Sudanese would rather remain in the Sudan.
Poverty in Sweden, Finland and the like is not even measurable. This comes along with access to health care and education. This due to SOCIAL porgrams.
There is more poverty in the USA then Canada. There is more poverty in Canada then Sweden.
I would PREFER to stay in Canada and have our Government adopt some of the same policies that The Swedes have adopted to address poverty.
pk
"Poverty in Sweden, Finland and the like is not even measurable. This comes along with access to health care and education. This due to SOCIAL porgrams."
But the United States simply cannot afford these "entitlement programs" because we have to spend a trillion dollars every year on the military and an aggressive interventionist militaristic foreign policy. We must fight them there so we don't have to fight them here. No matter that it is our very presence that stirs their anger.
EKATON
Though what you say is true, don't forget other reasons. A lot of the money is wasted in "administration" and running it thru organizations that siphon off a lot of money. The Republicans "privitized" many Health and Humasn service agencies in as many States as they could, so a lot of money is wasted by the extra layers of useless "administration" and useless organization/programming. Banks taking a hefty slice out when the folks use their cards, etc, etc......
As you can tell, you hit one of my hot spots. It infuriates me to see how much money is wasted. We could probably feed and clothe every poor person in America and Canada if it weren't drained off.
Texas is one of the worst offenders in this area.
After you subtract my mortgage payment, the money I give away, and the cost of maintaining a house, a barn, and fifty acres from which I receive no income, I'm rather poor.
I like it that way.
If you and your family have food, shelter, health care, and a reasonable degree of security, you are poor only if you believe the people who say you are.
Due to the waste referred to by EKATON an outrageous number of people on this planet are poor by any standards. Words such as criminal, and sinful come to mind.....And for what? So that a few people can be obscenely rich according to statistics.
They are not rich. They are miserable, and therefore poor by any standard.
Nietzsche
"If you and your family have food, shelter, health care, and a reasonable degree of security, you are poor only if you believe the people who say you are."
I was speaking of folks a lot worse off than rich devils like you (I only have 5 acres) (LOL), but seriously, you are right. I have yet to see a grat amount of money make anyone happy except for some who gave most of it away.
What!!!! I don't don't even have 1/2 of an acre.....What are you guys wheat farmers??? lol
>>The reason we have more poverty is because we are bigger and allow more immigration, same reason for Canada. You could fit Finland and Swedan and their populations, (which combined I believe aren't as big as the pop. of Texas) in my State and still have plenty of room.
Sweden has a foreign born population that relative to its size is marginally less then The United States of America.
Canada has a foreign born population that relative to its size is much LARGER then the United States.
Your reasoning therefore is flawed.
Sweden has much less in the way of natural resources then the United States of America, This is a fact. They have a much lessor ability grow their own food. This is a fact. They have next to no sources of oil and natural gas. This is a fact.
FURTHER to that and most importantly.
Sweden does not have a currency that is the worlds "reserve Currency". The greatest part of Americans wealth is not due to "capitalism" it is due to the fact that their currency is the worlds reserve currency thus can be printed at will.
Take away that from America and it will plummet to third world status as far as its standard of living goes.
You spoke of what these veterans deserved and I am going to re-frame my response in terms you can better understand.
Take 25 people out of those tent cities in Sacramento.
Take 25 bankers out of a Private Club off wall Street in New York City.
It very OBVIOUS which of these groups the SYSTEM we call capitalism rewarded and which of these peoples it has determined to have the MOST value. As far as the system called Capitalism is concerned it is the very bankers that bankrupted the United States of America.
That system called capitalism has also determined that those people in the tent cities of Sacramento have LESS value.
The same is true of the Veterans that served in Iraq and Afghanistan. The SYSTEM called Capitalism has determined they have little to no value thus they are "rewarded" with less and sleep in the streets.
The system called "capitalism" has determined that the owners of the Corporations that make the weapons of war have MORE value thus are rewarded with greater wealth.
The ONLY way this inequity can be addressed is via SOCIAL programs wherein the excess of wealth from one group is taken away from them and given to the other.
This IS Socialism.
You are exactly correct. That is Socialism. And that is why America is different and more sucessful, it does not reward everyone equally. Equality does not mean that every one gets their share of all thats produced, no matter who did the work.
The system is out of whack at the moment and I believe your comparisons of the 25 and 25 are valid, but thats not what I grew up with nor did I make my living in that climate. Thats why we need to dump these nogoodniks and return to regulated capitalism wtith oversight.
But there is no doubt you are right in that my country needs to do a better job of taking care of the less fortunate of our own citizens.
>>You are exactly correct. That is Socialism. And that is why America is different and more sucessful, it does not reward everyone equally.
I do not call people sleeping in tents successful.
I do not call wall street bankers drinking 10000$$ bottles of Scotch successful.
By your measure,The united States America of 1800 was "successful" simply because wealth was being created off slavery.
That wealth inequality is a measure of FAILURE not success.
Indeed the Aboriginal populations , upon seeing how the Europeans treated their own wherein one group of people were tremndously wealthy while a much larger group poor attributed it to a mental illness.
"I do not call people sleeping in tents successful.
I do not call wall street bankers drinking 10000$$ bottles of Scotch successful."
I don't either.
"Indeed the Aboriginal populations , upon seeing how the Europeans treated their own wherein one group of people were tremndously wealthy while a much larger group poor attributed it to a mental illness."
That was when they were taking a break from killing or enslaving each other. I don't know if in the strictist sense that our indigenous
population would even be considered indigenous, especially in Texas because we have recorded history before Indian tribes occupied the region. In any case we know there were no native people to the US unless you count the folks in Alaska which I assume are kin to your Canadian Aboriginal population.
>>That was when they were taking a break from killing or enslaving each other. I don't know if in the strictist sense that our indigenous
This was different then the Europeans HOW?
When a native tribe took anothers as a slave, that slave would become a full member of the tribe in time. Is this the same treatement the Americans give to the Black slaves?
Yes the native tribes had wars , but they were not SLAUGHTERS as occurred on Civilized Europes battlefields.
>>In any case we know there were no native people to the US unless you count the folks in Alaska which I assume are kin to your Canadian Aboriginal population.
Stuff and nonsense. You know exactly what i was talking about so do not try and split hairs.
Eglatarianism is the sign of SUCCESS. No poverty is a igno fsuccess. A healthy well educated populace is a sign of SUCCESS.
By all those measures the Countries with SOCIAL programs are more successful then is the United States of America.
Whewn Canada ends poverty inside its borders. When Canada implements policies that can see all of its people have equal access to education, when we all have equal access to health care and can put roofs over all of our citizens heads rather then see them sleep in the strets. When canada can develop a sustainable economy preserving the enviroemtn for future genearations, only then will we be successful.
Capitalism will not get us there as capitalism needs the rich and the poor and it needs winners and losers and it needs to MONETIZE all a nations resources so that peoples can profit of it.
If canada is to move forwards and become more successful, we need to emulate the United States of America LESS and Countries like Sweden more.
Obviously you have a very different opinion as to what success means.
Wheat? I'm going for a cash crop and have seeded with nickles. The first dollars should be sprouting any minute!
Thomas,
Perhaps I could do the small garden version of your Texas cash crop on our less than half acre in Decatur. I am sure my wife would agree that seeding nickles and harvesting dollars would definitely be considered a profitable yield. (The hell with the wheat..lol)
Thomas,
Are there any provisions to compensate for crop failure? (Like a Barach Obama style bailout)....I do have to pay my wife her annual retention bonus......(It is in the fine print of our marriage contract)
Mr. Dante Sir
I cannot see any reason you should be treated any differently than Archer Midlands Daniel.......just pick up your check in D.C., even if your crop doesn't fail.
Smart wife!
"he Republicans "privatized" many Health and Human service agencies in as many States as they could,.."
Naomi Klein referred to this as "hollowed out government."
GwNorth
It wasn't an argument really, I just believe its true. I am sure you are right though, most people would prefer to remain in their homeland with their friends and families in their own culture. Including the Sudanese. IF there was freedom, peace, safety, work, the ability to support their families, etc......nobody would leave home but the adventurous.
Unfortunately, its not that way and many people go to other countries seeking a better life for various reasons.
"There is more poverty in the USA then Canada. There is more poverty in Canada then Sweden."
The reason we have more poverty is because we are bigger and allow more immigration, same reason for Canada. You could fit Finland and Swedan and their populations, (which combined I believe aren't as big as the pop. of Texas) in my State and still have plenty of room.
"I would PREFER to stay in Canada and have our Government adopt some of the same policies that The Swedes have adopted to address poverty."
Its hard to transpose policies from a smaller country to a much larger one usually.
I'm not at all familiar with Swedens policies in that area. Could you please tell me what they are? Thanks.
The opposite of love is not hate -- it's indifference; there's a lot of that being exhibited.
You nailed it!
If you want to stop the "psychological problems among returning veterans", then stop sending them off to fight political wars. The only winners in political wars are the politicians and the losers are the vets who fought the war.
Hoa binh
And you sir have hit the answer to keeping these kids from dying or from suffering the terrible mental agonies some of these kids go through. Any combat veteran deals with things and pictures they never want to think of again, but many have experiences they just can't deal with.
Lets stop sending them to fight anywhere unless we are given no other choice....an extreme "no other choice".
The solution really is you don't "send them" to fight anywhere. If we didn't have so many overseas military bases, and offer so much torturous training to foreign militaries and provide weapons to dictators, we would not be a target in the least. The only war we should ever fight is on our own shores, if some nation was fool enough to try to invade this massively gun slinging society. But alas, the whole purpose of warfare is to cull the herd, especially of those who are well prepared to survive the extreme treachery the government has in store. Depleted Uranium munitions to breathe, armorless trucks, dismissing the Iraqi army without it's rightful pension, all of it a setup to see to the US militaries destruction. Since 1890 there's been about 5 years that the US military wasn't involved in murdering people. Probably those years it was just kept quiet enough to evade the history books.
Yes, bingo! Who would of thought that losing your legs, or your mind at 21 was a bad thing. If only we had fought a "war to end all wars" once or twice to learn this lesson,...oh wait, we did!
Many US poor join the army in the hope that they can go to university, right?
We have a better system. We skip the taking over third world country step and go directly to government subsidized schools. how do we afford it? It is very complicated: step one: don't spend all your money on bombs, step two: spend on education, got it?
Clever eh...Shucks, it's all that book learnin'
"I believe the cumulative effects of these deployments, the pressure that so many are under, the impact of what ... mostly our soldiers and Marines have been through" on the battlefield "in our eighth year of war has a lot to do with" the suicide and other stress-related problems that are plaguing the military and their families, he said.
"Another aspect of the problem, he added, is the impact on children, who can suffer severely from the extended and repeated absence of a mother or father going off to war."
Mullen also noted that recently the military has discovered that water is wet, fire is hot, and the sky is blue but sometimes obscured by clouds.
-- ekaton
I see them standing on freeway off ramps shivering in the rain
and holding the cardboard sign that says
"No Job - No Home - No Food - Veteran"
I keep a small bag in my old car for these encounters with some canned goods,
toothbrush, soap and a few dollars of hope but I keep thinking that
"War Profiteers Will Feast for Years"
and I wonder if this was the 'democracy' these men were fighting for.
"No Job - No Home - No Food - Veteran"
Authors Woodward and Bernstein, authors of "The Final Days" noted that the book was "the work of four people. Scott Armstrong, a former Senate Watergate Committee investigator, and Al Kamen, a free-lance writer/researcher, assisted us full time in the reporting, research and some of the writing."
Here is the FULL KISSINGER QUOTE verbatim from the bottom two lines of page 194:
In Haig's presence, Kissinger referred pointedly to military men as "dumb, stupid animals to be used" as pawns for foreign policy.
-- ekaton
Henry, considered the brains of the Nixon Administration, was a dumbass because he believed that political power and influence was the ultimate in power, and rendered himself invincible.
He was a heartless bastard for believing it and a dumbass for saying it.
Humbaba
"I keep a small bag in my old car for these encounters with some canned goods,
toothbrush, soap and a few dollars of hope but I keep thinking that"
God bless you for your kindness and understanding.
"and I wonder if this was the 'democracy' these men were fighting for."
I think not. Mostly when it comes to it, you are fighting for those with you and to stay alive. John Wayne types are far and few between thankfully.
Once again, thank you so much for your help for these poor kids. Not all kids though, sadly.
You are a good person Humbaba.
""They've got an intelligence organization that must, in my view, change its strategic approach and be completely disconnected from the insurgents. And they're not right now," he said."
So much for diplomacy.
Anybody who has been in a war will suffer for the rest of their lives.
Their children will suffer for the rest of THEIR lives from the rearing practices that only a soul damaged person can give, not to mention the genetic damage from the modern weapons with which technology has blessed us.
What an institution is war. A combination of mass murder, theft, cultural crime, and PROFIT.
Nietzsche
I must disagree. I don't believe for one moment that being in a war damages your "soul" Not that it doesn't happen, but certainly not as a general rule at all.
The problem is a voluntary military.
Some think that joining the military will improve you, be ‘all you can be. It is kind of like a lip stick wearing pig. It’s still a pig.
When it’s totally voluntary you get a lower class of Americans trying to escape something.
You can take the kid out of Appalachia but you can’t take the Appalachia out of the kid.
They come back delusional because the military didn’t improve them. And reality hasn’t changed while they were gone.
The Military have been lowering their standards to fill their ranks.
Bring back the draft so we get a real cross section of Americans.
It would do wonders for morale of all of them. And
Have peers help peers.
All people from 18 to 21 should do something to help and improve America.
Peace Corps etc.
No sir...no draft...unless you make military service absolutely voluntary and have all physically able kids serve the same amount of time as the soldiers in whatever capacity they are assigned. They can choose their service...Peace Corp, etc, but thats the only choice they get.
Draft or no draft, the choices stink. But at least a draft will get the people involved and get rid of war-profiteering mercenaries.
Nietzsche, good point about the generational harm. The current discussion about what is due our vets is leaving that out.
Native Americans consider their choices in terms of the impact on seven generations, and so does the Bible. Interesting. No copyright on wisdom.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson