Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Massacre Puts War Trauma Under the Spotlight
SAN FRANCISCO - A U.S. soldier shot five of his colleagues dead at a base in Baghdad, Iraq Monday. The Pentagon says at least two other people were hurt in the shootings and the gunman is in custody.
Details are still coming in, but the incident reportedly happened at a stress clinic where troops get help for personal issues or combat trauma.
At an afternoon press conference, Secretary of Defence Robert Gates was tight-lipped about the details of the shooting, the first such spree by a U.S. soldier through six years of war in Iraq.
"We're still in the process of gathering information on exactly what happened," Gates said, "but if the preliminary reports are confirmed, such a tragic loss of life at the hands of our own forces is a cause for great and urgent concern."
A military statement said the shooting took place at around 2 p.m. local time in the mental health clinic at Camp Liberty, a sprawling base next to Baghdad International Airport. The Pentagon said the names of the dead soldiers were being withheld pending family notification. The name of the shooter was also not released.
Veterans' advocates say the details of the incident will be critical in assessing whether the killings could have been prevented.
"We need to know if this soldier was examined by a physician before or after deployment and if any mental health symptoms were observed," said Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense.
"We know from repeated Congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers with physical and mental health diagnoses and severe symptoms back to the war zones. In some cases, the service members killed themselves or others," he said.
More than 230 active soldiers, airmen and marines committed suicide last year - the highest military suicide statistic in nearly 30 years. In January, more U.S. soldiers killed themselves than died in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
In November 2006, a New York National Guardsman was arraigned in a military court on charges of murdering two officers in an explosion at one of Saddam Hussein's former palaces.
The series of incidents leaves some observers to recall the military's internal meltdown during the Vietnam War.
"In December of 1972, the Defence Department acknowleged that somewhere between 800 and 1,000 officers had actually been blown up by their subordinates," explained Vietnam war widow Penny Coleman, author of the book 'Flashback: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder: Suicide and the Lessons of War'.
Back then, the killings were called 'fragging', because fragmentation bombs were usually used.
"The fragmentation devices were the weapon of choice because they left no evidence. There were obviously no fingerprints," Coleman said. "There was no way of tracking it."
Iraq war veterans watched the news come in with a mixture of shock, outrage, and resignation.
Former U.S. Army Captain Luis Carlos Montalvan received two Purple Hearts for wounds sustained during his two tours in Iraq. He first saw the news in the waiting room in Manhattan's Veterans' Affairs hospital, where Montalvan and his fellow veterans had all been waiting for hours to see a doctor.
"We were just shaking our heads," he said.
Montalvan said many of his fellow veterans felt a mix of irony and horror that while they were waiting for hours to receive government health care stateside, their active duty counterparts were being killed by one of their own in a clinic in the war zone.
"It's horrifying," he added, "that there were men and women in a combat stress centre at Camp Liberty who were going to seek help and now their relatives back home who thought that their loved ones were going to get treatment are dead. They went to get treatment and they're dead. Can you imagine the grief?"
At the Pentagon press conference this afternoon, the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, said the military's investigation will include an examination into the number of tours the suspect had served in Iraq and whether he had been deployed to the war zone despite an earlier mental health diagnosis.
Mullen said the shooting spree "does speak to me about the need for us to redouble our efforts in terms of dealing with the stress [of war], dealing with those kinds of things."
After eight years of war in Afghanistan and six years of war in Iraq, the Pentagon reports nearly 800,000 U.S. soldiers have served more than one tour in the war zone. According to the non-partisan Rand Corporation, approximately 300,000 Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or major depression, while another 320,000 have sustained a traumatic brain injury, physical brain damage often caused by roadside bombs and mortars.
"The first impulse is to be angry at a service member for taking lives, that's the first inclination," Montalvan added, "but then you can't help but ask: 'What caused this person to be this upset, this angry?' And the likely conclusion is that this person could not get help."
IPS contributor Aaron Glantz is author of "The War Comes Home: Washington's Battle Against America's Veterans" (University of California Press/January 2009).

38 Comments so far
Show AllThe stories of "fragging" bad officers in Vietnam did not begin to leak out until the end of that nightmare. Flash forward to now and the first publicly acknowledged episode of a soldier going postal is out. The "legacy" costs of the Iraq debacle has already resulted in the Building 18 scandal at Walter Reed, what other problems await as a result of Dubya, Cheney, & Co.'s biggest error do we have to look forward to and pay for?
Although this may be the first report of an internal massacre occuring on Iraqi soil, the same type of incident occurred at a US military base in Kuwait during the first year of the Iraq Occupation.
Although Viet Nam DRAFTEES were often the killers, conditions are now ripe in Iraq and Afghanistan for a repeat of the Viet Nam internal killing phenomenon:
1)Until 2007 more than half of the "volunteers" in the "all volunteer" US miltary were in the military by choice. Since the depression started in December 2007 a majority of the "volunteers" are victims of a de facto draft.
2)The US Army has been lowering its standards for the past six years and has added many criminals to its ranks. In 2005 I was in a small town courtroom in a very blue state and watched the judge give convicts the choice of signing up with the jailer who sat to his left, or signing up with the army recruiter who sat to his right.
3)Escalating the wars has not stabilized the economy and people are getting more stressed by the day.
Sioux Rose
RAY: I appreciate the many insights (and facts) you bring to this forum. Thank you.
ray, most rapists are not given the option to re-up. petty crimes don't make one a "criminal," esp. youthful (first?) offenders.
the army has lowered its standards? a pretty convenient explanation, but i'd like to see some evidence that that has any bearing on this kind of stuff.
I calls em as I seez them.
While I'm not sure how the converstaion turned to rapists, I concur that I haven't seen any evidence that a CONVICTED rapist has been allowed to enlist or re-up.
Although I have not seen any cause/effect studies that link criminal records to behavior in the military, mainstream media articles have addressed incidents where:
1)The army has recruited people convicted of assault and other not-so-petty crimes.
2)Local military bases have experienced more crimes against people during the past two years compared to previous years.
In the current economic environment it is safe to bet that the army will no longer need to accept anybody with a criminal record. The lack of jobs on the "outside" has created a defacto draft that is drawing people into the military who would have never considered it two years ago. Hell, if you join the miltary and survive you can have medical insurance and retire in 20 years. Compare that to many American workers who have been in the workforce for 30 to 40 years and are HOPING they can stay insured and maybe even retire within the next 20 years !
"2)The US Army has been lowering its standards for the past six years and has added many criminals to its ranks."
Yet, political correctness demands we refer to them as "our best and brightest."
The long never ending war that the public questions more as the toll and debt rises means the only way to deal with the stress of this racket is to get out, Declare it a mistake, apologize for empire and begin a new quest for Truth, Justice and peace.
And that is the easy Part, but it's a START.
One two three, one two three--Lets do the fragging waltz.
I'm old enough to remember two waltzes. How many more until I die.
Obama, old boy, how about getting us off the dance floor. You made some promises--do you remember? Or are you just another politician, of a slightly darker hue.
My condolences to EVerybody that's suffered because of this illegal invasion.
This also seems to refute the argument that if more people were armed, massacres like this wouldn't happen. This was an Army base, after all, not a high school.
I think we all knew this was a matter of 'when' and not 'if' - and suspected it's already happened a lot more than you'd think, and been covered up - SOP.
"they're dead. Can you imagine the grief?" Wonder if they feel that way about all the Iraqis they kill? Or don't they count?
I knew this would happen - and all the rest. I've done the VA Tango before - both with Vietnam and Gulf-I - and I cried, devastated for months, knowing what this country was going to do - again - to both the brainwashed ignorant soldiers going thousands of miles away to kill innocent civilians, and the beknighted recipients of our 'gift' to the world - war without end. Well, I have hesitation about getting involved again. What do you tell these soldiers - about what they did to themselves, and what they did to their victims? What do you tell their victims? How do you square this circle? Tell the truth. That's been my advice - but few people have the courage to do so. My parents had that kind of courage - they fought the wars, and then they fought the people who start wars. That's what we all have to do - or this recurring theme will never end.
Sioux Rose
ARMY BRAT: Actually nothing is ever won through a direct fight. The I ching shares uncanny wisdom in a discussion on the nature of evil that began several THOUSAND years ago. Its conclusion is that no battle directly fought against evil can ever succeed because once one gets embroiled in such a struggle, they have little choice but to take up evil's own ends. Thus the advice is NOT to get into the struggle, but rather to use all of one's resources in building something else. That is to say, taking energy away from the thing that offends by purposely directing it elsewhere. In Martial arts one seldom seems to waste or use up one's own force, when with skillful moves, one can merely get out of the way and use the opponent's momentum against him/her.
When Christ suggested casting the net to the other side, it was a metaphor recommending a shift in consciousness. Emmet Fox called it "building new mental equivalents" which is related to the World Social Forum's quest to similarly work towards "Another Possible World." (I know, it's "Another World is Possible.") So instead of fighting militarism, if more persons find themselves engaged in creative enterprises where they learn to work with others of different backgrounds, the violence that Mars/war/military feeds upon is lessened. I believe this recipe to be timeless and hardly ever put into practice.
the hypocrisy of this story is almost too much to comprehend.
bumbling bob gates: "... such a tragic loss of life at the hands of our own forces is a cause for great and urgent concern."
paul sullivan, veterans for common sense (yet another oxymoron to grace recent articles here on common dreams): "we know from repeated congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers with physical and mental health diagnoses and severe symptoms back to the war zone." you reap what you sow, or you get what you pay for. your choice, mr. sullivan.
then we have an army captain asking us, or himself, or whomever, "can you imagine the grief?" and another classic: "what caused this person to be this upset, this angry?" duh. gee captain, officer, sir, do you think it might have anything to do with the horrors and the atrocities of war? which, if imagination serves me correctly, involves the killings and the raping of innocents along with an ingrained attitude toward a basic disregard of human life.
let's throw in an admiral for good measure, the one stating that the shooting spree is speaking to him. so that's what it takes to get our government's undivided attention? thanks for the tip.
why, suddenly, do the number of tours of the suspect carry significance?
why, suddenly, barackstar, is torture off the front pages?
the hypocrisy of this story is almost too much to comprehend.
bumbling bob gates: "... such a tragic loss of life at the hands of our own forces is a cause for great and urgent concern."
paul sullivan, veterans for common sense (yet another oxymoron to grace recent articles here on common dreams): "we know from repeated congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers with physical and mental health diagnoses and severe symptoms back to the war zone." you reap what you sow, or you get what you pay for. your choice, mr. sullivan.
then we have an army captain asking us, or himself, or whomever, "can you imagine the grief?" and another classic: "what caused this person to be this upset, this angry?" duh. gee captain, officer, sir, do you think it might have anything to do with the horrors and the atrocities of war? which, if imagination serves me correctly, involves the killings and the raping of innocents along with an ingrained attitude toward a basic disregard of human life.
let's throw in an admiral for good measure, the one stating that the shooting spree is speaking to him. so that's what it takes to get our government's undivided attention? thanks for the tip.
why, suddenly, do the number of tours of the suspect carry significance?
why, suddenly, barackstar, is torture off the front pages?
Deepa
In the darkest depths of the human beings, individuals are not conscious of in many of their activities. Their behavior is stamped with impulses they do not explicitly notice. Men and women who are controlled by violence are no longer able to recognize their own evil deeds, and so all the more project everything evil onto their adversary. The blindness of violence can become so acute that sometimes the real adversary is lost from sight. The aroused passions then turn upon any chance object. The characteristics of violence are the ability to create adversaries at will, to turn without cause upon others, and to vent itself upon any chance objects.
Violence is powerful and blind. Since it is powerful, reason and good will can hardly resist it head-on. The qualities that lend violence its particular terror are its blind brutality, and the fundamental absurdity of its manifestations. With these qualities goes the strange propensity to seize upon surrogate victims to satisfy his/her raging hunger.
The American slogan “god, gun, and gut” confirms that violence is at the foundation of the American culture and religion. Violence is promoted and justified subtly as self-defense or national security. Superior violence is eulogized and divinized. Heroes in fairy tales (and video games) are the raging giants and fire-spewing monsters. God is conceived as the superior violence. That is why the actual conduct of warfare is set within the Christian religious context. Victory is conceived as an expression of good relations between the US and its Christian god. Victory is nothing but a decisive act of violence. Victory embraces superior violence. Through superior violence God bestows victory. In other words, military victory was regarded as a direct manifestation of the divine.
Unless Americans individually and as a nation take time to introspect their culture of violence and their veneration of superior violence, they as individuals and a nation remain a security threat to the life of sovereign countries and their citizens around the world.
Sioux Rose
DEEPA: Excellent post. It reflects the same points I have raised in this forum and placed under the banner of "Mars rules." Whatever title we give to it, you have identified many of the root causes that stamp violence strongly onto the American psyche. It's so pervasive that those who argue for peace are the ones arrested and called unpatriotic, spied upon as potential dangers to the state. And another way to define it is under the simple heading: Insanity!
The Neocons unleashed the dogs of war, and they will run until this crap ends.
It's part of the Karma of unjust and illegal wars.
We've sown the wind and are reaping the whirlwind.
Regardless of what really happened, we'll never know from the sanitized press and "National Security."
Like Vietnam, we are in a country where anybody can be the enemy because, to them, WE are the enemy. They want us out of their country, as do the Afghans and the Pakistanis. Our troops are trained to hate the enemy, to deny their humanity so they can be killed with impunity. We make them "Hajis," and "ragheads," and when killed or maimed, they become "collateral damage."
Don't you thnk that may spill over into our own? Perhaps the guy was teased with a racial or ethnic slur and hit the wall. Perhaps he had gotten to the point where "he was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore," and had a gun.
I'm sure there will be the usual military "investigation," and we will find out that he had been overlooked and was mentally ill. Somebody will get demoted for misfiling his case and the incident will be closed.
The incident will never be closed until we stop invading and killing for the profit of the MIC and the dreams of empire. Sadly, I do not see that happening. We seem to be only interested in making our killing more efficient so our troops won't be harmed. If we were in a desperate war of defense against a superior military, that might be laudable as a goal, but not when we are just getting more efficient at killing peasants in lands far away.
600,000 mentally damaged trained killers returned to the general civlian population. Makes for a great society.
How many of these walking timebombs has Secretary of War, Robert Gates, released into unsuspecting America?
As my local chief of police tells me, "those returning from the front are very competent with high powered firearms, and when Dubya and Congress let the assault weapons ban expire, it became legal for every one of them (and us)to own an arsenal of military ordinance."
I suspect that Gates is doing a bit of soul-searching, wondering whether what the US is doing is right. He is crying inside, almost inconsolably, as he asks softly "Why God, or why? Why did this soldier murder his fellow soldiers instead of the furiners we trained him to kill? Oh, Jesus, please help me understand how to best train soldiers so that they are perfect killing machines, only killing those we tell them to."
right on kivals. nobody gives a crap about this, i mean nobody at the Top, that is.
except that it looks bad.
fortunately for the PR men at the DOD, this kind of stuff happens regularly enough in the civilian population, in "the homeland." you know, a few bad apples, more screening, destigmatizing "mental health" issues, grief counseling, etc. funny how that all sounds like a replay of VA Tech. more state intervention, more drugs, more "experts" poking around in people's lives for signs of "deviance."
funny how such "experts" think a person can be "sane" in an insane social environment.
The Army definitely lowered its standards...not only have criminals (some violent) been accepted, actual gang members have also come on-board.
Re: (Humbaba) "How many of these walking timebombs has Secretary of War, Robert Gates, released into unsuspecting America?"
While I too, would like to lay this tragedy at someone else's feet
(and I would be more inclined to pick Bush and Cheney as the culprits...which they are), nevertheless it is an inescapable fact that "most of us" are just as much to blame, because "most of us" didn't care enough to do our utmost to stop the wrong-headed and probably illegal invasion of Iraq. We weren't "directly involved". Someone else's sons and daughters were being fed into the meat grinder.Someone else needed a paying job desperately enough to "volunteer" for this duty station.
But most of us didn't care enough about what our government was doing in our name...not enough to try to stop it. We are the ones ultimately responsible for all those "walking time-bombs"...just like during and after the Viet Nam War.
This isn't the first crop of walking time-bombs...just the most recent.
However did we become such a violent nation?
I appreciate your sentiments, but our nation was birthed in a bloodbath of violence, and it has not stopped since.
Also, please don't lump all citizens in with the politicians and corporations that make war. While some do support, a large portion does not and is working towards creating peace and justice, perhaps just more locally. I know I feel that is the best way for me to affect my community as every letter, every protest, every meeting and every action I take towards my congressional "representatives" is completely rebuffed.
These hundreds of thousands of Veterans will soon be living in a neighborhood near you.
I would point out that the Number of Americans being killed by returning Veterans since 9/11 is greater then the number of Americans killed by "muslim Terrorists" in the United States of America.
"Quelle May 12th, 2009 6:04 pm
The Army definitely lowered its standards...not only have criminals (some violent) been accepted, actual gang members have also come on-board."
I doubt that that is a new thing.
Quelle:
"Re: (Humbaba) "How many of these walking timebombs has Secretary of War, Robert Gates, released into unsuspecting America?"
While I too, would like to lay this tragedy at someone else's feet
(and I would be more inclined to pick Bush and Cheney as the culprits...which they are), nevertheless it is an inescapable fact that "most of us" are just as much to blame, because "most of us" didn't care enough to do our utmost to stop the wrong-headed and probably illegal invasion of Iraq."
ONE THING at a time, for you didn't answer the question you quoted from poster or reader (Humbaba!)!
It's not the war supporters in the general population who are responsible for returning to civic society soldiers suffering from severe PTSD. That's the fault of the U.S. presidency and all complicit government officials.
Also, "the wrong-headed and probably illegal invasion of Iraq", really?
If you really believe that that's the or even a valid viewpoint to have, then you clearly have not been doing much of anything to educate yourself on these GWoT wars ... over all of these ... plenty of years! Right! The war on Iraq is not "probably illegal"; it's been hellbent illegal, criminal all along, including during 2002 when the Bush admin. was pretending to seek authorisation for recourse to war on Iraq.
Pretending? Yes, and I say it because the admin. probably (if not surely) knew the authorisation would be obtained with the hellbent criminal, treasonous Congress we had. The least of the reasons for believing this is that the Congress was controlled by the Repub. Party, so the party that had the presidency. Another reason to believe it is that the Dem. and Repub. Parties are very [merged], anyway.
They're very merged? Yes! Just consider how hellbent criminal and treasonous the Congress has been ever since the Dem. Party gained a majority in this bs piece of government poli-body. This is only one of plenty of examples, btw.
The damn hellbent criminal and treasonous Congress evidently hasn't improved, still, to this day. And this is nothing new. Consider that there are. plenty of historical Congressional cover-ups of serious and extreme crimes, including the criminals. One example is when former USMC Major General Smedley Butler testified before Congress about the corporate-fascist coup d'etat that Prescott Bush, Maxwell House, Heinz, and other rich "elites" of the USA plotted, [conspiratorially], against the presidency of FDR and apparently because of his 'New Deal' project, only, alone, for reason; from what I've gathered it was the reason anyway. Gen. Butler historically testified about this and Congress recorded the testimony, but while it treasonously kept plenty of the identities of the "elite" conspirers or conspirators secret.
That, from what I've gathered, is officially [recorded] history; oh, while of course not the part about the Congress having deliberately kept the identities of most, if not all, of the conspirators secret. That's something Congress of course did not include in the record; this act of treasonous secrecy that it committed.
Quelle:
"But most of us didn't care enough about what our government was doing in our name...not enough to try to stop it."
True; most of the USA didn't care enough.
Otoh, there were also supporters who only naively and mistakenly believed the Bush admin.'s lies about WMD and the non-existing relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qa'ida or Usama Bin Ladin. Once these supporters came to realise that they had been mistaken to believe this bs, they became opposers of the war, as well as the criminal occupation of Iraq. Some of them also expressed sincere regrets for having "taken the bait" presented to the population of the USA (and the rest of the world), having expressed this regret publicly.
It's not time, now, to start reproaching these latter initial supporters, for their initial mistake. We can be angry because people made such mistakes, to believe the "leadership" of such a hellbent lying, murdering, ... government; but we should not start making reproaches to people who at least "came to their wits", [awakened].
Quelle:
"However did we become such a violent nation?"
"Boy", do you lack education. Take a good period to read essays of, f.e., Wade Frazier, www.ahealedplanet.net . There you can read the essays linked in the same section as "American Empire" or a title very similar to that, and the essay about the lies he grew up with, for a serious start.
The whole history of the USA, the real history of it, much of which is not taught in U.S. schools, certainly not such that most students ever come across it anyway; well, the whole of history has been of extreme violence. The USA did not [become] an extremely violent country (not nation, but country); it's [always] been this.
The only real nation I know of in the USA is that of the American Indians, and the same applies in Canada, for the First Nations of this country. I don't think the rest of us merit calling ourselves part of nation in these vast lands that were historically invaded, aggressed, genocided, etcetera, especially when the genocidal ways continue; even if not as violently as in the past, still genocidal conduct continues today.
"GwNorth May 12th, 2009 7:42 pm
...
I would point out that the Number of Americans being killed by returning Veterans since 9/11 is greater then the number of Americans killed by "muslim Terrorists" in the United States of America."
IS THERE an online resource site for such statistics or are you making this up, that this many U.S. citizens, and I suppose non-citizen residents, have been killed in this manner since 9/11?
Simply that no Terrorists have killed an American inside the USA since 9/11>
(Where you stand on 9/11 and whether that Muslim terrorists or nor a different matter).
This coupled with the number of reports Of ex Iraqi Veterans killing spouses etc.
I doubt there an acccurate number reprted of the totals. It not in the interests of the media to report such so one would have to do a Google of EX Iraqi veteran kills XXXX.
I base this merely on the individual news reports of ex iraqi veterans involved in Homicides in the USA coupled with the hype over the threat that terrorism poses.
I should have been clearler when I posted such .
"raydelcamino May 12th, 2009 5:27 pm
...
In the current economic environment it is safe to bet that the army will no longer need to accept anybody with a criminal record. The lack of jobs on the "outside" has created a defacto draft that is drawing people into the military who would have never considered it two years ago."
WHAT does that say about the USA? That it's a society in which [real], [true] conscience is awfully absent. That implies that most families don't spend significant, if any, time in helping their young'uns to develop [real], [true] consciences. And that in turn implies that it's an arrogantly and negligently [ignorant] society. ... etcetera Oh, sick culture, we can surely add.
Actually, may as well add that what the above all "adds up to" is that it's a society in which mass education for the development of real conscience is not only called-for, it's necessary and urgently so. Being prepared to risk one's life in risking to [murder] others for the sake of trying to escape economic hardship is symptomatic of a very sick society that like disease, needs [curing].
Siouxrose May 12th, 2009 5:03 pm,
WHAT YOU describe reminds me of the "Christian Crusades", the Spanish Conquistadors invading South American countries and massacring indigenous people in HUGE numbers, the British doing much the same in the now continental USA and Canada, as well as other countries, the French in at least some African countries and Haiti, although Britain had been in Haiti and fought against France there in order to try to maintain control of the "slavery", ... imposed on the population there as well as Africans forcibly removed from Africa brought to Haiti, culminating in the separation of the land into what today are Haiti and the Dominican Republic; ETCETERA.
Of course they didn't have the msm "news" media using technologies like those employed today to try to brainwash, ... the populations of Spain, Britain, etcetera; but the hellishly extreme crimes they committed against innocent populations in other lands does not seem far different from what's going on today. It was all for ego-tripping power, imperialism, wealth, etcetera, back then as it is today.
INSANE now as well as back then.
So now I'm reminded of something I repeated a considerable number of times over the past several years, but which hasn't been repeated for quite some time now, and it's that humans clearly have not [evolved] except for having developed technologies that didn't exist before; all while having buried knowledge people had in the past and which was very beneficial, even necessary, leaving us ignorant of this once important knowledge. Some people still have enough of such knowledge, such as elders of First Nations Canadians still knowing a lot of the natural, native plants that can be well used for medicinal and nutritional purposes, f.e.; but MOST of us are extremely ignorant of this sort of knowledge that's been, for most of us, abandoned too long ago, already.
We have not evolved as a species in meaningful terms. Furthermore, we are more damn destructive than ever before. Never before have humans, SICK ones, drawn so close to our own extinction and that of other living organisms, animals, etcetera.
We're not more evolved; we became [worse] than ever before!
Siouxrose May 12th, 2009 4:59 pm,
EXCELLENT post, I will say about it!
==================================
"Deepa May 12th, 2009 2:14 pm
Deepa
In the darkest depths of the human beings, individuals are not conscious of in many of their activities. Their behavior is stamped with impulses they do not explicitly notice. Men and women who are controlled by violence are no longer able to recognize their own evil deeds, and so all the more project everything evil onto their adversary. The blindness of violence can become so acute that sometimes the real adversary is lost from sight. ..."
THAT seems to be of good intention and seems "nice", but it also, imo, seems a little exaggerated or perhaps it's only misworded, a little. First of all, Deepa, you'd need to give a brief but adequate explanation of what you mean by being controlled by violence. If you mean that people who act out violence are controlled by it, then what you're saying is that people who are violent don't recognise how they're acting; and I'd say that while that is surely true in some cases, it's not true in all cases. There are people who are violent and know it, both. However, one person I once knew to be of this level of awareness still was not totally at fault and the reason was that he was raised in a family in which the male children were brought up to be violent, the father sometimes was violent towards them, the mother supported the father, the mother wasn't physically violent, but did exaggerate in punishments she applied, such as grounding the person I'm speaking of to a year of not being allowed outside of the yard of their home, a yard of perhaps 60 feet by 100 feet surface area, and this was over a matter that certainly didn't deserve harsh punishment; some discipline, but not harsh punishment. He was cultured in a violent home and had to be a mister "tough guy" to try to be like his older brothers. In this respect, he could not really control himself towards people who'd be easy victims; but he [knew] that he was violent towards them. If he knew it, then he recognised it, and he gave me a very clear clue several years after bullying me, him and a friend of his; having at one point indicated to me, not verbally or explicitly, but through definitely clear, obvious inference, that he wanted to change. What was that? A book on Buddha when he was young, prior to being ever named Buddha. It was a story that reminded me enough of Jesus of Nazareth.
Some violent people know they are violent, but this does not mean that they personally possess the psychological ability to be able to change all by themselves. Such people need real compassionate, emphatetic understanding and a truly friendly helping hand, but the improvements won't happen over-night; they can come, can be achieved, but over [time], requiring patience and helpful understanding, along with helpful and kind coaching, possibly. Such coaching perhaps shouldn't be stated explicitly, like saying to the person that you're acting as a coach, but a kind, friendly coaching approach is possibly useful when trying to help such people to come to change; to help them in their real desire to change against very difficult "odds", the internal struggles they have to go through.
People who are violent and don't really realise it are what? Well, real [insanity] is one thing they certainly suffer from. They're deluded, to say the least. Why they are this way, however, now this requires careful understanding of each of these individuals' personal lives. I don't think there is a stereotypical reason; thinking there are two, or maybe more, reasons that can cause people to be this way. When I say two reasons, I'm thinking in terms of insanity being due to either a bio-chemical imbalance or some other physical imbalance or dysfunction in or of the brain, say, or psychological without any physical impairments of the brain. I'm not an MD or psychologist, or psychiatrist, though, so can only give a layman's guess about there being two, or more, conditions that can cause violent people to be so insane that they don't realise that they're violent.
I have personally known some violent people, people who were violent both physically and psychologically, as well as people who are violent only in psychological terms, and there definitely are variations to remark about all of these people. I cannot stereotype them; must consider each one [individually].
Former VP Richard Cheney most surely knows he is an extremely violent person. He can [pretend] to not know this, but to act is something that humans do, too. He knows he has broken the supreme law of the land in the USA, but he tries to cover this up with his little "sweet boy" acts of what he did is supposedly right, justifiable, etcetera. He is most surely only acting and most surely knows why. What is the 'why'? GREED, wanting control, power, wealth, .... He knows he wants these things. After all, he has been working for decades to get to this point or one similar to it; rather only different in some apparent respects, but not in terms of ultimate objective or goal.
"lino May 12th, 2009 2:11 pm
the hypocrisy of this story is almost too much to comprehend.
bumbling bob gates: "... such a tragic loss of life at the hands of our own forces is a cause for great and urgent concern.""
WHAT is hypocritical about that, if he's sincere?
lino:
"paul sullivan, veterans for common sense (yet another oxymoron to grace recent articles here on common dreams): "we know from repeated congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers with physical and mental health diagnoses and severe symptoms back to the war zone." you reap what you sow, or you get what you pay for. your choice, mr. sullivan.""
WHAT do you mean that Paul Sullivan reaps what he sows, that he gets you he pays for, that it's his choice? It seems to make [no] real sense, really. He did not sow war; he opposes it. He gets what he pays for when he buys something, but he did not choose to pay for the war. He did not choose to have the war. He did not choose to have PTSD's soldiers sent back to or else retained in the war zone.
So, again, what the heck are you talking about? Try to make some [real] sense of the real situation. [Think] again, [carefully] this time.
"NateW May 12th, 2009 11:30 am
The stories of "fragging" bad officers in Vietnam did not begin to leak out until the end of that nightmare. Flash forward to now and the first publicly acknowledged episode of a soldier going postal is out."
IF YOU mean "going postal" by the "fragging" of "bad officers", only, then I guess you're right, but if you mean simply "fragging" among U.S. force members in Iraq and, possibly, that is, Afghanistan, then this wouldn't be the "first publicly acknowledged episode", I believe; because the following AP article tells of several cases. OR, perhaps these cases were't made public until now (?). I'll excerpt only the list of "fragging" incidents.
"American kills 5 fellow soldiers at clinic in Iraq",
by ROBERT H. REID, May 11, 2009
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq
QUOTE:
...
There have been several previous fragging incidents in the Iraq war.
• Last September, Sgt. Joseph Bozicevich, 39, of Minneapolis was detained after allegedly killing two members of his unit south of Baghdad. The case remains under investigation.
• In April 2005, Army Sgt. Hasan Akbar was sentenced to death for killing two officers in Kuwait just before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
• In June 2005, an Army captain and lieutenant were killed when an anti-personnel mine detonated in the window of their room at the U.S. base in Tikrit. National Guard Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez was acquitted in the blast.
• Spc. Chris Rolan, an Army medic, was sentenced to 33 years in prison in 2007 for killing a fellow soldier after a night of heavy drinking in Iraq.
• In 2008, Army Cpl. Timothy Ayers was sentenced to two years and four months in prison after pleading guilty to involuntary manslaughter in the fatal 2007 shooting of his platoon sergeant in Iraq.
END QUOTE
... (an edit, snipping out text I've since found to be irrelevant, the AP article not giving enough of the information I had mentioned in what I'm now snipping out of this post)
I'll address some of the rest of the article.
QUOTE:
BAGHDAD – An American soldier opened fire at a counseling center on a military base Monday, killing five fellow soldiers before being taken into custody, the U.S. command and Pentagon officials said.
...
President Barack Obama said in a statement that he was "shocked and deeply saddened" by the report, adding that "my heart goes out to the families and friends" of all those involved "in this horrible tragedy."
END QUOTE
Obama being "shocked and deeply saddened" by this incident? My ass! The man has already demonstrated, more than enough times, that he does [not] care for human lives; except for the lives of the rats he nests with and wants to become more like. He had already illustrated this much enough during his years as a rather criminal senator, but he's certainly making the reality, about his true self, ever more up-front clearer since the inauguration in January.
If he truly [cared], then he'd end the wars on both Iraq and Afghanistan, would make sure that President Aristide was returned to the presidency of Haiti, and ... so on; ETCETERA, plenty more. This would be a strong start though.
If he truly [cared], then he would express truthful caring about the over 100 Afghan civilians the U.S. just bombed on May 5th, instead of callously stating that he's not going to be holding back from the U.S. committing all of the aerial bombings it wants; as well as escalating the U.S. war on Afghanistan in to Pakistan, like a really cold-blooded murderer in command.
His caring for the five U.S. soldiers in Iraq who were killed this week by another U.S. soldier is [awfully] limited, if existing at all, to any real degree at all. Why would he, wicked as he's proving of himself to be inclined to being, care about soldiers at a [mental health] clinic in Iraq seeking help? After all, they're probably PTSD'd and therefore becoming expendable for the ruling elites of the U.S. government. Like Henry Kissinger was purportedly quoted in saying about what he thinks about soldiers, that they're just dumb animals to serve the interests of their "masters"; paraphrased, but essentially what he said nonetheless. If he really said that, then I think we can count on it not being only his view. Like an old saying says about people "hanging out with their likes"; well, like that old saying implies, it's plural.
He is C-in-C [traitor]!
Also, if he truly had [caring] in his heart or soul, then he would have never treated Rev. Jeremiah Wright the way he did!
He doesn't care.
A little more about Obama's words quoted in the above AP article:
QUOTE:
After a meeting with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Obama said he would make sure "that we fully understand what led to this tragedy" and will do everything possible "to ensure that our men and women in uniform are protected as they serve our country so capably and courageously in harm's way."
END QUOTE
That reminds me of GW Bush while he was U.S. puppet President. It's awfully easy to speak pleasingly; it's a whole other matter to live up to one's words! Charlatans make an "art" of this; being pleasing in words, rats in disguise.
"GwNorth May 12th, 2009 10:06 pm
Simply that no Terrorists have killed an American inside the USA since 9/11>"
WELL, not unless you consider "Americans" killing other "Americans", anyway.
GwNorth:
"Where you stand on 9/11 and whether that Muslim terrorists or nor a different matter)."
THAT does not make any sense. Where I stand on 9-11, however, is that the investigations need to be re-opened and with an impartial, independent investigative team, with absolutely [no] more obstructions from U.S. government officials. Etcetera.
The investigation needs to be re-opened, but unlike some fanatics who push for this, I do NOT believe that we need this investigation to be able to oppose the GWoT wars and demand for these to be stopped, etcetera.
GwNorth:
"This coupled with the number of reports Of ex Iraqi Veterans killing spouses etc.
I doubt there an acccurate number reprted of the totals."
I also doubt there's accurate or thorough reporting, but perhaps IVAW.org might contain these types of statistics, or links to resource websites for such information.
hey mike, great to see your literary achievements back on board here.
i'm not sure how much you're keeping up with your own country's involvement(s) in foreign occupations, but you sure keep adding your two cents worth down here. personally, i didn't think my post was that complex, but if you feel like you're due some sort of explanation, then here: i find it very fucking hypocritical of a person such as, let's say, the secretary of defense, a known warmonger, to come out and boohoo and wax poetic about the "tragic loss of life" in regards to foreign occupations in which said occupations are for the sole purpose of extracting that foreign country's natural resource(s). at any cost. for a bit deeper explanation, check out what the mic is saying about their participation in the recent murder of approximately 140 innocents in yet another foreign country.
re: mr. sullivan, which part of "veterans" is foreign to your north of the border mindset? veterans. get it? someone who chooses to swallow the mic propaganda pile of horse shit. mic propaganda pile of horse shit. get it?
i do, mike, spend much of my time thinking. and part of that time is spent thinking about, or wondering in amazement, at the number of people who are allowed to post here who fail to have even a basic grasp of the english language. if it weren't for the simple fact that my significant other teaches reading and writing to middle school girls, i would suggest you enroll in her classes.
i hope this helps clarify, in some small way, the confusion you seem to be experiencing.
ps - no one here really cares if you're able to fill the thousand word limit you are afforded. KISS.
"lino May 12th, 2009 11:22 pm
hey mike, great to see your literary achievements back on board here.
i'm not sure how much you're keeping up with your own country's involvement(s) in foreign occupations, but you sure keep adding your two cents worth down here."
MY COUNTRY? Which one? The U.S. or Canada; because I am a citizen of both, born and raised in the U.S., where I eventually enlisted in the USN, and then became naturalised citizen in Canada, where my ancestry is from since around 1459, for the first arrival, to 1490's, for the last of the first four arrivals. And I'm a world citizen since ... well, I guess we could say conception, in mother's womb, so that's my first citizenship; one in [humanity], which is global in scope, we all know.
lino:
"i didn't think my post was that complex, but if you feel like you're due some sort of explanation, then here: i find it very fucking hypocritical of a person such as, let's say, the secretary of defense, .... ..."
I wholly agree on Sec. Def. criminal Gates and the whole presidential administration, and most of Congress and the Senate, the military senior officers or simply the officers of all ranks, and so on.
lino:
"re: mr. sullivan, which part of "veterans" is foreign to your north of the border mindset?"
That does not support your accusation that he's supposedly a hypocrite. To err is human and if you think you never err, then you must not do much in life. [All] humans ocassionally err and he's recognised his past error and become an anti-war veteran.
You're accusing [all] veterans and that's BS, moronic, and certainly [immature]! The errors they've made are sad, but people who learn from their mistakes and apply corrective actions and continue to live this way should be accepted among the rest of humanity!
Anyone who is totally unwilling to [forgive] others [never] deserves any forgiveness for [any] of their mistakes or wrongs, either. To live otherwise is to be hypocritical, which is something you purport to hate; purport, I repeat! Your hatred of wars is blinding you to truths about humans, evidently.
"horse shit" is pretty useful shit you should know; it's called fertilizer for Earth's soils and, thereby, plants. Get it?
lino:
"i do, mike, spend much of my time thinking. and part of that time is spent thinking about, or wondering in amazement, at the number of people who are allowed to post here who fail to have even a basic grasp of the english language. if it weren't for the simple fact that my significant other teaches reading and writing to middle school girls, i would suggest you enroll in her classes."
Who fails to grasp the basics of English here? Get with providing some specifics, like real, concrete examples, or be an idiot, if that's your preference!
What these above words of yours illustrate is that you're a pompous little idiot who thinks he's brilliant because his sig. other supposedly taught or is still teaching him or her how to read and write, so I guess it took you until adult age before learning these [simple] skills; unless you and your sig. other are still of childhood age, which'd be rather unusual, ya know what I mean(?).
Teaching you how to think with real integrity, intelligently, how to apply a real understanding of humankind, and then teaching you about the need to be able to forgive, or else you'll [never] deserve any forgiveness for any wrongs you commit; now your sig. other would then be providing you with some truly worthwhile education, so worthwhile that it's better and/or more important (essential) than knowing how to read and write, which even the most evil of humans know how to do and often do quite proficiently, too. LIARS are also quite astute in their mastership of language skills; hellbent, but able readers, writers, and speakers.
You brag about being able to do something so mundane and simple that even the most evil of people can do and do do it too. Wow. I'm impressed. Huh.
Try standing out and demonstrating something truly of value about yourself!
More insane death, the product of the US's insane Endless War on the World,
My heart to still more lost children.
I've no wisdom, only my prayers to their parents.
The fragging in Viet Nam was very effective in that it raised awareness of the incredible evil taking place in the name of the USA. The only problem with that entire affair was the point of aim. They would have had much more success had some politicians and senior military personnel become targets. If similar numbers of politicians and generals been done we would not be at war now! So aim higher fellows get home sooner with no guilt!