• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

at least we got saddam and his sons... :(

Joined
10 April 2000
Messages
6,126
Location
Silicon Valley
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=36056
all copyright / legal mumbo jumbo respected

Iraq Vets Left in Physical and Mental Agony
Aaron Glantz

SAN FRANCISCO, California, Jan 3 (IPS) - On New Year's Eve, the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq passed 3,000. By Tuesday, the death toll had reached 3,004 -- 31 more than died in the Sep. 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.

But the number of injured has far outstripped the dead, with the Veterans Administration reporting that more than 150,000 veterans of the Iraq war are receiving disability benefits.

Advances in military technology are keeping the death rate much lower than during the Vietnam War and World War Two, Dr. Col. Vito Imbascini, an urologist and state surgeon with the California Army National Guard, told IPS, but soldiers who survive attacks are often severely disabled for life.

"If you lost an arm or a leg in Vietnam, you were also tremendously injured in your chest and abdomen, which were not protected by the armour plates back then," he said. "Now, your heart and chest and lungs and heart are protected by armour, leaving only your extremities exposed."

Dr. Imbascini just returned from a four-month deployment to Germany, where he treated the worst of the U.S. war wounded. He said that an extremely high number of wounded soldiers are coming home with their arms or legs amputated. Imbascini said he amputated the genitals of one or two men every day.

"I walk into the operating room and the general surgeons are doing their work and there is the body of this Navy SEAL, which is a physical specimen to behold," he told IPS. "And his abdomen is open, they're exploring both intestines. He's missing both legs below the knee, one arm is blown off, he's got incisions on his thighs to relieve the pressure on the parts of the legs that are hopefully gonna survive and there's genital injuries, and you just want to cry."

According to documents obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, 25 percent of veterans of the "global war on terror" have filed disability compensation and pension benefit claims with the Veterans Benefits Administration.

One is a Jul. 20, 2006, document titled "Compensation and Pension Benefit Activity Among Veterans of the Global War on Terrorism," which shows that 152,669 veterans filed disability claims after fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. Of the more than 100,000 claims granted, Veterans Administration records show at least 1,502 veterans have been compensated as 100 percent disabled.

Pentagon studies show that 12 percent of soldiers who have served in Iraq suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. The group Veterans for America, formerly the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, estimates 70,000 Iraq war veterans have gone to the VA for mental health care.

New guidelines released by the Pentagon released last month allow commanders to redeploy soldiers suffering from traumatic stress disorders.

According to the military newspaper Stars and Stripes, servicemembers with "a psychiatric disorder in remission, or whose residual symptoms do not impair duty performance" may be considered for duty downrange. It lists post-traumatic stress disorder as a "treatable" problem.

"As a layman and a former soldier I think that's ridiculous," Steve Robinson, the director of Veterans Affairs for Veterans for America, told IPS.

"If I've got a soldier who's on Ambien to go to sleep and Seroquel and Qanapin and all kinds of other psychotropic meds, I don't want them to have a weapon in their hand and to be part of my team because they're a risk to themselves and to others," he said. "But apparently, the military has its own view of how well a soldier can function under those conditions and is gambling that they can be successful."

Robinson said problems with the policy are already starting to arise.

On Christmas, for example, Army Reservist James Dean barricaded himself in his father's home with several weapons and threatened to kill himself. After a 14-hour standoff with authorities, Dean was killed by a police officer after he aimed a gun at another officer, authorities told the Washington Post.

Veterans for America's Robinson told IPS that Dean, who had already served 18 months in Afghanistan, had been diagnosed with PTSD. He had just been informed that his unit would be sent to Iraq on Jan. 14.

"We call that suicide by cop," Robinson said.

After his death, Dean's friends told the Washington Post that the reservist enjoyed hunting and fishing but had lost much of his enthusiasm for life when he found out that he was being deployed to Iraq.

"When Congress comes back in session we're looking forward to accountability hearings," Robinson said. "We want to see veterans helped in the first 100 hours of the new session. We want to see the word 'veteran' somewhere in that first hundred hours."

Robinson says his organisation has also documented the existence of at least 1,000 homeless veterans of the Iraq war.

"We need to get on top of the problem of homelessness," he said. "It's too soon to be seeing homelessness. I want to be seeing a commitment from the Democratic Congress to dealing with the war and the needs of the soldiers in the first hundred hours of them coming to power." (END/2007)
 
I find it odd to spin the news that we are now able to save many more soldiers lives than ever before as a bad thing. Injuries in war are oftentimes horrific, (moreso in this war???), but almost to a man, I would bet that those soldiers would choose to live over death.
 
I find it odd to spin the news that we are now able to save many more soldiers lives than ever before as a bad thing. Injuries in war are oftentimes horrific, (moreso in this war???), but almost to a man, I would bet that those soldiers would choose to live over death.

While the article has its biases - the premise is correct and gets overlooked in the daily "bodycounts" we get of Iraq. Point is -- "only" 3,000 soldiers are dead, but the number of crippled is much much higher. This ain't Desert Storm. Horribly tragic. Mission accomplished. :frown:
 
42667b7fd13219b9i3.jpg


Watching the Saddam hanging video.:biggrin:
 
I find it odd to spin the news that we are now able to save many more soldiers lives than ever before as a bad thing. Injuries in war are oftentimes horrific, (moreso in this war???), but almost to a man, I would bet that those soldiers would choose to live over death.

How is he spinning it? It was no spin that people came back from Vietnam with postwar syndrome why is it a spin that they wouldn't have the same syndrome coming back from Iraq? It's not that saving their lives is a bad thing, it's what's left of a persons psyche after you repair their battered flesh. I know quite a few of you are "gung ho" about war and you even admit that injuries can be horrific so why would you say it's spin when you get a report of how many are injured and the evaluation of their total condition is? Would you want some guy doped up on meds guarding your flank? Oh hell no! You'd be like "send his @ss home!

No WMD's ,no links to Al qauida and no connection whatsoever to 9/11 ,yet so many of you are thrilled with Saddams death...why? It can't be for what he did to the people there ,because in the last couple of threads a lot of you referred to Iraqi's as "them" ,"they" and "animals" so you apparently could care less about the people so why the excitement? Is it just bloodlust? it's not revenge as there were no Iraqi's on the planes that did so much damage to our nation and at this point we've lost more soldiers than civilians so now we're doubly hurt.

I'm no pacifist by any means. Sometimes you have to fight ,but currently were dying fighting a people that did nothing to us while the real architect of 9/11 is on the loose and you guys say "Mission Accomplished" ?????? Huh? That just makes no sense:confused: I'm cool with joking around ,but not with somebody else's life...that's just twisted.
 
The slight spin comes from a concentration of numbers from the Iraq part of the "Global War On Terrorism" (GWOT) and not showing any numbers for Afghanistan but combining them with Iraq's and calling those totals GWOT numbers. So there is a slight bias towards just showing a negative in Iraq only.

I feel bad for the reservist, that is a tragedy. I feel bad for most of the Army folks. They are generally in country for a year. When I was there, and this was a news story so I'm not saying anything new, one Army company from Alaska was close to going home after their year and got extended for something like 4 months. I really wish our politicians could grow a pair and set some limits and get our people out of there, both Iraq and Afghanistan. Though I realize it is not that simple.

Bush in not the whole problem. The darn republican congress mandated lower end force numbers for some of the services so we have fewer people. Though they gave Haliburton/KBR (SP?) millions in bonus's.
 
Yay.

Bush is responsible for more American deaths than Osama bin Laden. It was only a matter of time.

Is it 2009 yet?
 
How is he spinning it? It was no spin that people came back from Vietnam with postwar syndrome why is it a spin that they wouldn't have the same syndrome coming back from Iraq? It's not that saving their lives is a bad thing, it's what's left of a persons psyche after you repair their battered flesh. I know quite a few of you are "gung ho" about war and you even admit that injuries can be horrific so why would you say it's spin when you get a report of how many are injured and the evaluation of their total condition is? Would you want some guy doped up on meds guarding your flank? Oh hell no! You'd be like "send his @ss home!
The US soilders during the Viet-con war were mostly drafted. The current was is fought with Volunteered soilders.

Some people join the military because they need to be told what to do, but most of them craved for actions. In a way, it is a form of gambling with their body and life. At my shop, I have many kids who are in the military, and most of them have served in Iraq and Afg. They loved it, and every one of them can't wait to go back there after their time off. I have few even re-enlisted so they can go back there. They believe in what they are doing, and again, in a way, they are right.

The entire Middle East is a mess, and the religious redicals are in control of most of the Islamic countries; they are a big thread to the world. Some one needs to go there and clean up the mess. The sad thing is, in another 100 years, few will care about the religion fanatics because eventually, Capitalism will kick in after all the dictatorship. As an oil rich region, every one will be too busy speding their oil money, living in big house and driving their exotic cars. Just look at countries such as Dubai and Bahrin, peace can exist over there.

By the way, we didn't really start the fire over there, it was the Brits who did. Like how we had to finish the Vietnam war for the French, we had to clean up the mess for the Brits in the middle east.
 
How is he spinning it? It was no spin that people came back from Vietnam with postwar syndrome why is it a spin that they wouldn't have the same syndrome coming back from Iraq? It's not that saving their lives is a bad thing, it's what's left of a persons psyche after you repair their battered flesh. I know quite a few of you are "gung ho" about war and you even admit that injuries can be horrific so why would you say it's spin when you get a report of how many are injured and the evaluation of their total condition is? Would you want some guy doped up on meds guarding your flank? Oh hell no! You'd be like "send his @ss home!
The US soilders during the Viet-con war were mostly drafted. The current was is fought with Volunteered soilders.

Some people join the military because they need to be told what to do, but most of them craved for actions. In a way, it is a form of gambling with their body and life. At my shop, I have many kids who are in the military, and most of them have served in Iraq and Afg. They loved it, and every one of them can't wait to go back there after their time off. I have few even re-enlisted so they can go back there. They believe in what they are doing, and again, in a way, they are right.

The entire Middle East is a mess, and the religious redicals are in control of most of the Islamic countries; they are a big thread to the world. Some one needs to go there and clean up the mess. The sad thing is, in another 100 years, few will care about the religion fanatics because eventually, Capitalism will kick in after all the dictatorship. As an oil rich region, every one will be too busy speding their oil money, living in big house and driving their exotic cars. Just look at countries such as Dubai and Bahrin, peace can exist over there.

By the way, we didn't really start the fire over there, it was the Brits who did. Like how we had to finish the Vietnam War for the French, we had to clean up the mess for the Brits in the Middle East.
 
The US soilders during the Viet-con war were mostly drafted. The current was is fought with Volunteered soilders.

Some people join the military because they need to be told what to do, but most of them craved for actions. In a way, it is a form of gambling with their body and life. At my shop, I have many kids who are in the military, and most of them have served in Iraq and Afg. They loved it, and every one of them can't wait to go back there after their time off. I have few even re-enlisted so they can go back there. They believe in what they are doing, and again, in a way, they are right.

The entire Middle East is a mess, and the religious redicals are in control of most of the Islamic countries; they are a big thread to the world. Some one needs to go there and clean up the mess. The sad thing is, in another 100 years, few will care about the religion fanatics because eventually, Capitalism will kick in after all the dictatorship. As an oil rich region, every one will be too busy speding their oil money, living in big house and driving their exotic cars. Just look at countries such as Dubai and Bahrin, peace can exist over there.

By the way, we didn't really start the fire over there, it was the Brits who did. Like how we had to finish the Vietnam war for the French, we had to clean up the mess for the Brits in the middle east.


Most kids in my area of the country joined before Iraq because they were poor and needed money to pay for college and think there would be much chance for seeing any action ,but hey there's always that chance. Of course recruiters still target the poorer areas around here ,but I don't think to many are taking the bait anymore. As far as being over there and loving it..uh okay:confused:

As far as we didn't start the fire over there that's true ,but we did start the Iraq situation for no good reason and it's making that region worse than it was. What "mess" have we cleaned up over there and when did we "finish" the Vietnam war?
 
I find it funny that Bush went in for Osama (BS) and came out with Saddam. Hung him, and your still over there fighting terror? The terror of the oil fields on fire probably...

Whatever my Congress, Senate,President and country has done or will do,
I still love it and wouldn't trade it for living in yours.
flagshirt.jpg
 
:rolleyes: This is what is used for sarcasm.
Example:

Now I see. It's our President not the enemy that kills our soldiers.:rolleyes:
 
I usually don't get involved in the political threads. However, I just find the situation in Iraq truely sad and digusting.

Let's see:
1. We haven't captured Osama, his #2, or the Taliban's Leader in Afghanistan or in pakistan.:rolleyes:
2. We have lost 3000+ lives and injured 100k+ more.
3. We have spent $467 Billion on the war. Yet we don't have enough money to take help the poor and homeless at home.
4. Iraq has lost some 700,000 lives. I guess thats not really important since they are not Americans(SARCASM). They are much worse off.

What a pathetic foreign policy. How much do we spend on the military every year??
 
…and wouldn't trade it for living in yours.
flagshirt.jpg
Ever tried it? You might be pleasantly surprised. For one thing they don’t have inappropriate aggressive posters like the one you posted above with the snake and that aggressive logo.
That’s a good thing, BTW.
 
I'd be lying if I said I was terribly proud to be American with the current state of things.

Canada doesn't seem too bad to me.

I realize we're lucky to live in the freedom that we do, but the world police mentality we take is sometimes quite ridiculous. I would love to create world peace... by bombing for it... but we have more important things to worry about here.

I'm not saying saving Iraqies from a ruthless dictator isn't a worthy cause... it just isn't #1 in my book. I'm not saying their lives are worth any less... but by aiming at them, the administration is saying the value of American lives is worth less than Iraqies. It's insulting.

I'll never have social security, it'll be dead long before I will. Why aren't we working on the healthcare system?? Why is our education system far from the top in the world?? Why is New Orleans and the Gulf coast still in ruins? I was there last summer on relief help, and nothing had been touched 7 months after the storm, and it's still like that in MANY areas. We have no real progress in getting suburbia off of its fossil fuel addiction. I'm sure there are many things of this importance that I'm blanking on that need fixing here.

We're probably not finished even after we are finished with Iraq. Iran and North Korea are bigger threats to us than Osama or Saddam ever were.

Why aren't we taking care of things here first?? If someone can answer that question, then you are much smarter than I am.

I honestly believe history will judge George W. Bush as one of the worst in the history of the USA
 
Canada.
Once they figure out where it is…

Can't! We borrow money from Canada and Mexico to so those are both safe

So, who's next on the list? Iran? Or North-Korea?

North Korea..LoL they don'y have any oil..LoL Why do you think Bush said talks will work with N Korea.

Iran is possible as Bush doesn't really care since he'll be leaving in two years. He's already said that Iraq would fall on the next Presidents shoulders. I think he might start a war with Iran and then change the Presidency terms saying no one else could take over in the middle of a war and he must remain to keep people safe! I mean his approval ratings can't really go down much further so what's he got to lose:wink:



:rolleyes: This is what is used for sarcasm.
Example:

Now I see. It's our President not the enemy that kills our soldiers.:rolleyes:

Unfotunately in this case yeah. I mean you can either say he sent them out on faulty intelligence ( cough bulls%^t ) or for the real reason "Saddam tried to kill his daddy". I mean Saddam wasn't thinking about us. He found out on TV like everybody else that he had WMD's , Links to Al quiada ,responsiblity for 9/11 and preparing to attack US with nuclear weapons. He was like WTF??? He said well U.N inspections will show I have nothing which isn't good since I'm the only thing keeping the Iranians from sweeping over this region and I know the US doesn't like the Iranians. So U.N goes into action and starts investigating and there not finding anything so Bush starts running jokes about U.N inspectors not being able to find their butt if their heads were on backwards. Americans laugh ,but the rest of the world isn't laughing. Dems say are you sureabout going to war? won't this be expensive? our figures show this would cost waaaaay more than what your telling the American people. Bush said they're just lying I'm popular beleive me:biggrin: Dems backed down fearing the wrath of the American people who were so up in arms they took the french out of french fry's ,because the French said we can't support you in this we can't find any links between Saddam and Al qauida plus U.N weapon inspectors haven't found anything. Americans give the French the finger! U.N finally finds some missles that might possibly exceed the limit of Iraq's Gulf war imposed rocket limitations ( props to anyone who could find what the range was as I can't remember ). They make Saddam start destroying them which he does slowly and in protest ( he knows he needs those either A attack Iran or B attack Isreal to build some support from his other neighbors C is unthinkable as he knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that he can't repel the US ) Bush says this is unacceptable and tells Saddam to get out of power , Saddam says fkcu you! ( bad move their Saddy as Bush is crazy and you don't say that to crazy people LoL ) From there Bush breaks International law, misabuses congressional powers saying use war/force as a last resort. Americans say "Yeeeehaw he's a hero" off we go and now here we are hundreds of billions of dollars spent later ,reputation in the mud ( along with foreign relations ) , prison scandals abounding and everybody pointing fingers. Dang:frown:
 
Last edited:
How Canada managed to stay out of the “Coalition” (referring to Iraq) is beyond me.
Does anybody know this? I would be interested to hear.

The consensus here is that that Canadians seem to know a lot more about the world than their friends to the south so would not agree on the folly of an invasion, but the shear pressure on Canada by the US to join the Coalition must have been enormous, almost overwhelming, I would expect.

As the US was desperately casting around looking for supporters, the FIRST country they would have looked at was Canada and I would have thought the Americans would automatically expect Canada to fall into line. I mean Canada has only a 1 to 10 population ratio and is overwhelmed by US economic might. It is a small (in power) country right next to a superpower.

How on earth did it resist?

And another question:
Canada has a high level of respect from pretty much every other country in the world. It has a disproportionate level (compared to its own population and influence) of peace keeping forces scattered around the world and manages to be effective in many otherwise hopeless situations.
Canada’s poor and homeless situation is relatively minor and its healthcare and living standard consistently rank very high, always much higher than the US’s.
Yet its lifestyle is very similar, almost identical, to the US’s.

So, why is Canada successful in the world and getting respect from the world and at the same time able to care for its own at home, while it’s neighbour to the south is having such a hard time?

These are genuine questions I have heard, I’m not denigrating anybody, just asking here on this forum because by looking at most of the posts, many people here seem have really good comments and views.
 
Back
Top