Soldiers dealing with the trauma of killing

[xoxoxoBruce]

How will they cope?

Soldiers are untrained, experts say, for the trauma of killing. Forty years after lessons learned about combat stress in Vietnam, experts charge that avoidable psychological damage goes unchecked because military officials don't include emotional preparation in basic training.
Troops, returning home with untreated and little-understood mental health issues, put themselves and their families at risk for suicide and domestic violence, experts say. Twenty-three U.S. troops in Iraq took their lives last year, according to the Defense Department — an unusually high number, one official acknowledged.

[bluesdave]

The great thing about the mini series: Band of Brothers is that it shows what life was like for the guys in the "trenches" - how they coped (or not), with being shot at, and how they coped with having to shoot another man. The accompanying documentary with interviews with surviving veterans really adds to your understanding of what they went through - as much as it is possible for us to understand. I just can't imagine what it would be like to go through a war. I feel a great deal of empathy for those poor men (and women), and I am extremely grateful for their sacrifices. I admire those people immensely.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Much of the military's research on killing and battle stress began after World War II, when studies revealed that only a small number of troops — as few as 15% — fired at their adversaries on the battlefield. Military studies suggested that troops were unexpectedly reluctant to kill. Military training methods changed, Grossman and others say, to make killing a more automatic behavior

Well it worked because by Viet Nam the number was 95%, but nobody bothered to de-train/de-brief these guys, which caused a lot of trouble at home.

[Kitsune]

Wow, that's really depressing. I'm sad just from reading the article in thinking what it must be like to have to deal with those mental demons for the rest of your life. It also reminds me that I probably could not endure what those soliders do. I think I would crack early and easily.

[wolf]

It is supposed to be protocol for returning troops to be provided critical incident stress debriefing to assist with "reentry" into civilian life.

[Beestie]

I was acquainted with an Army Ranger once. I have no idea how "typical" he was of elite soldiers. What I do know is how unnerved I was upon learning how easy it was for him to adjust to the idea of killing someone once he put them in "The Box." * It was also disturbingly easy for him to put people in the box - even people he would encounter in daily life - stateside - like an obnoxious fan at a football game who directed some (unthreatening) trash talk in our general direction.

The military taught him that. And they didn't seem interested in unteaching it. My guess is that they consider it a vital attribute for as long as you serve but once you get out you are not military anymore so its not their problem.

He never said it in so many words but I got the distinct impression that he was a little scared of himself. I know I was.

* The Box was a way of recategorizing someone into non-person status making their dispatch simple, morally uncomplicated and emotionless.

[Troubleshooter]

I think that the box is a good idea.

Something similar could be used by the military overall.

For us, submariners, combat is impersonal and not too difficult the adjust too. Stress is the only real concern.

They could train all of the personel who needed it in how to use it and then when they are done, all they have to do is readjust the criteria for who goes in the box, instead of having to readjust them from the much larger issue of killing in general.

It also works in the long term in case you have to recall them. A little box adjustment and back in the field they go.

[DanaC]

Which goes to show that what's beneficial to the military is not necessairly beneficial to the society from whcne they came and into which they will eventually be returned

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Which goes to show that what's beneficial to the military is not necessairly beneficial to the society from whcne they came and into which they will eventually be returned

Not necessarily. The ability to keep a defensive vanguard on hand, even after they muster out is a good idea.

You have to figure out what you want to change, and what you don't want to change. Changing the ability to kill is very difficult, changing the ability to kill discriminately might not be so difficult. Kill or don't kill is a strong set of absolutes. Open a wide window when you they are being sent into the theater and then all you have to do is teach a very narrow window of boxhood when you return them to the states.

The long term benefits for the military personell is good as well. They are given a cohesive and concrete ideology within which to protect themselves from some of the guilt of their actions as well as a way to control the tension levels.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Which goes to show that what's beneficial to the military is not necessairly beneficial to the society from whence they came and into which they will eventually be returned

Its not the military's concern to return good citizens to the society it is sworn to protect. Maybe society can pick up that burden. I mean, which of the two do you think is more qualified to do that job?

[Undertoad]

The people I have known that have been in the military have seemed better adjusted than average. Few of these people saw actual combat though.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by Beestie

Its not the military's concern to return good citizens to the society it is sworn to protect. Maybe society can pick up that burden. I mean, which of the two do you think is more qualified to do that job?

Not a bad idea. Maybe society could also look at their responsibility as more than just paying taxes overall as well.

[lookout123]

the individuals i know who have pulled trigger on other humans, post VN era are extremely well adjusted. military training doesn't turn one into a sociopath capable of killing anyone at a drop of a hat.
the training covers two separate areas 1) physical 2) mental.

the physical portion of it really boils down to repetition so that muscle memory takes over. certain processes are done the exact same way every single time, that way if a need arises stress and environmental issues will not slow one down or get in the way. anyone can learn this if they practice enough. "enough" is different for everyone, obviously.

the mental portion is simply training in risk analysis. the shooter is taught to separate the population into 2 basic categories. 1) those who want to harm you 2) those who wish you no harm.
if you come across the one who wishes you harm - only one of you gets to write a letter home to loved ones that evening; which one do you want that to be?
this is extremely simplified but is pretty accurate. if you get the opportunity to talk to people that have pulled the trigger fairly regularly you will find that most have no special malice or hatred towards their enemy/target. it boils down to them vs. me and mine. the "mine" concept is your friends, the people you live and work with everyday. most of the "hero's" that we know of had no death wish or desire to take on the world, they simply knew that if they didn't do ______ harm would come to their buddies and that was unacceptable.

i forget who quoted it, but Dave Grossman's work is an excellent resource if you want to learn more and don't have the ability to pick the brains of any shooters.

[jane_says]

As the wife of an Army Ranger, I haven't seen any problems myself related to guilt. I will say that Mr. Jane wants absolutely nothing to do with former Army buddies, though, and trots out the old "I could tell you, but I'd have to kill you" with a wink whenever someone asks him a question about his time in service. He never gets nasty about it, but he does refuse to discuss most things. I do know that he killed two men at fairly close range, but that's about it. He also has chosen not to take advantage of any government programs for vets, like tuition, VA home loans, etc. and seems to want to forget it all.

That said, Mr. Jane has shown, in a couple of unfortunate situations since his (honorable) discharge that he is willing to defend his family with his life, and I have seen him go from "zero to rage" in about three seconds when he felt that I or one of the children was threatened, and it's almost like tunnel vision. He is not an aggressive person, but is certainly defensive enough to make me feel completely at ease no matter where we go. He was once arrested for attempted murder, but not tried after the story of what actually happened was relayed to the judge (he had done no wrong, and was indeed defending the family). I can't say he wouldn't have had the same reaction without his training. I don't know.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by jane_says

... Mr. Jane has shown... that he is willing to defend his family with his life... no matter where we go. He was once arrested for attempted murder but not tried ... he ... was indeed defending the family.

That's it. No more taking the wife and kids to biker bars for Mr. Jane.