Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
  • A New Medal of Honor Recipient

    David Botti | May 23, 2008 04:58 PM
    Just a quick note to let you know the White House gave word today of a new Medal of Honor recipient.  Nineteen-year-old Army Pfc. Ross McGinnis was killed in late-2006 when he jumped on a grenade to save his comrades.  From the Associated Press:

    McGinnis was perched in the gunner's hatch of a Humvee when a grenade sailed past him and into the truck where four other soldiers sat. He shouted a warning to the others, then jumped on the grenade. The grenade, which was lodged near the vehicle's radio, blew up and killed him.

    McGinnis is the fourth service member to received the Medal of Honor for service in Iraq.
    More
  • The Sex Lives of Wounded Vets

    David Botti | May 23, 2008 07:46 AM
    Though the Iraq War has lasted more than five years now, and health issues concerning veterans are constantly in the news, there's always been one subject that seems to be overlooked -- sex.  Last Wednesday in Washington, D.C. a conference was held to take a look at just how a veteran's war injuries -- both physical and psychological -- can affect his or her sex life.  The Associated Press took a look at what was discussed at the conference, including an appearance by former senator Bob Dole, who was wounded in WWII.

    Said Dole: "Most of us go through this transition from able-bodied to disabled, and it's tough. And I worry about these young men and women ... who are 17, 18, 19, because I don't think it's really going to hit them until they're 20, 25, 30 years of age."  For the injured, questions of self-worth and a fear of rejection because of physical or other changes they've undergone can form barriers in their relationships.


    Mitchel S. Tepper, assistant project director at the Center of Excellence for Sexual Health at Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta, which organized the conference, told the AP one of the hardest things about this issue is the lack of discussion between doctors and patients.

    Tepper said badly injured patients are extremely interested in the subject, even if they're shy about asking. He said studies of the general population of people with spinal cord injuries find that some rank the desire to have sex above the ability to walk again.  Healthy intimate relationships add meaning to life and can aid in recovery from other injuries, he said. And the loss of a relationship can be detrimental, even a factor in suicide.


    Then there was this veteran who decided to tell his story as an example of what kinds of difficulties are involved:

    Jackson, of Des Moines, Iowa, was injured in Iraq in 2003 while serving in the Iowa Army National Guard. In addition to losing his legs, he had burns, post-traumatic stress disorder, and he was heavily medicated. When his wife initially wanted to be intimate, he refused.

    His wife said she felt rejected, and went to talk to his doctor with specific questions. She said the doctor just told her things would get better with time, and she wasn't sure what that meant. She said she and her husband kept talking and were able to work things out.


    In a separate interview with About.com late last year, Tepper gave an in-depth look at what the sexual intimacy problems are affecting vets, and what he plans to do about them.  But he was clear to make this distinction:

    Is important to note that sexual health encompasses more than the absence of disease and more than reproductive function. Sexual health includes how people feel about themselves as lovable and capable partners; establishing and maintaining intimate relationships; freedom from stigma, discrimination, sexual abuse, coercion and violence; and the ability to enjoy sexual pleasure and satisfaction.
    More
  • Advertisement
  • In Washington, D.C., a Vet Refuses Iraq Service

    David Botti | May 19, 2008 09:15 AM
    Late last week a U.S. Army soldier stood in the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building and announced during a press conference that he's now refusing orders for deployment to Iraq.  Sergeant Matthis Chiroux, who served as a military photojournalist, gave his statement soon after a number of anti-war veterans testified before Congress -- the first time such veterans have done so.  AFP gave this account of the hearing:

    Former army sergeant Kristofer Goldsmith told the landmark hearing of "lawless murders, looting and the abuse of countless Iraqis."  He spoke of the psychologically fragile men and women who return from Iraq to find little help or treatment offered from official circles.  Goldsmith said he had "self-medicated" for several months to treat the wounds of the war...Another soldier told AFP he had to boost his medication to treat anxiety and social agoraphobia -- two of many lingering mental wounds he carries since his deployments in Iraq -- before testifying.  A group of veterans in the packed hearing room gazed blankly as their comrades' testimonies shattered the official version that the U.S. effort in Iraq is succeeding.  Almost to a man, the testifiers denounced serious flaws in the chain of command in Iraq.


    As for Sgt. Chiroux, he said his position as a military journalist gave exposed him to countless disturbing stories he was afraid to publish for fear of retribution by the Army.  He arrived in Washington, D.C. with Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW), which coordinated the testimonies before Congress.  Below is a video of Chiroux's speech, where he also said he will remain in the U.S. despite the great number of war resistors who move to Canada.
    More
  • More Debate Over New GI Bill

    David Botti | May 15, 2008 11:45 AM
    Discussion over proposed GI Bill overhauls is front and center on the House floor as lawmakers debate an add-on to President Bush's request for more war funding.  The goal of the add-on is to update the WWII-era GI Bill which allows veterans to receive money for attending college.  Under the current proposal, Iraq and Afghanistan vets would be allowed to attend any four-year public university after having served at least three years in the active-duty military.  To pay for this, the plan calls for a surtax on people making over $500,000, or couples with a combined income of $1 million.  The Associated Press has reactions from both sides of the debate:

    "We are talking about people who are making over $1 million to pay a small sacrifice for this war where our military families are paying a huge sacrifice," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill.

    The White House weighed in with an official veto promise Thursday that also attacked the Democratic plan for increasing taxes.

    "The president has been clear that tax increases are unacceptable," the White House statement said.


    The overall war spending bill proposal calls for $163 billion to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, while the GI Bill add-on expects to raise $54 billion over the next 10 years through the surtax.  The bill would also allow veterans 15 years to use the benefits, whereas currently the limit is 10 years.

    In the Senate Wednesday, Sen. McCain's proposal for a GI Bill overhaul lost in a 55-42 vote to a counter proposal by Sen. Jim Webb.  MSNBC summarized the differences between the two:

    In the simplest terms, the Webb bill would effectively pay for tuition and housing at a four-year public college for those serving at least three years of active duty. The McCain measure isn't as generous, as it increases existing education benefits by $400 a month for the same time served: from $1,100 to $1,500.

    After the vote, McCain had this reaction [via ABC News]:

    “My job is to get people to stay in the military, not only to join, but to stay as well,” McCain said, although he added that he will be sitting down with Webb to try to work out a compromise. He wants to make sure to include a component of his bill which is not in Webb bill that would allow for transferability of benefits to family members.

    Talk of McCain's proposal also entered the presidential campaigns when Barack Obama criticized his potential opponent's unwillingness to expand more veterans benefits.  McCain's camp countered by saying it was absurd for Obama to criticize McCain's commitment to veterans.  In Obama's words [via USA Today]:

    I have great respect for John McCain's service to this country and I know he loves it dearly and honors those who serve. But he is one of the few senators of either party who oppose this bill because he thinks it's too generous. I couldn't disagree more. At a time when the skyrocketing cost of tuition is pricing thousands of Americans out of a college education, we should be doing everything we can to give the men and women who have risked their lives for this country the chance to pursue the American Dream.

    Also in military benefits news, the House Armed Services Committee approved next year's defense spending bill which includes a 3.9 percent pay raise for members of the military.

    More
  • In the News: Night Patrols, Psych Units, and Military Town Money

    David Botti | May 13, 2008 12:53 PM

    News roundup: 


    *Bill Ardolino of The Long War Journal takes his readers along on a night patrol with U.S. soldiers and members of a Baghdad neighborhood watch called Sons of Iraq:

     

    Co-founded seven months ago by local leaders and members of the 82nd Airborne, the Al Sadria branch of the neighborhood watch is composed of about 250 members who are paid by and coordinate with American units. The branch is responsible for a series of predominantly Shia neighborhoods in central Baghdad that include part of the Shorja Market. Though leader Faris Abdul-Hassan refers to his group as “the first Shia Awakening” against criminals and terrorists, he refuses to hire anyone with sectarian allegiances.

    According to Ardolino, with a decrease in the number of U.S. troops, the Sons of Iraq have been successful in shouldering the burden of peacekeeping in their own section of Baghdad.  While the final goal is integration with the Iraqi police, many in the Sons of Iraq are weary of high infiltration rates within the police by members of the Mahdi Army.  See a photo slideshow of the patrol here.


    *The Marine Corps Times reports that the Navy plans to expand the number of mobile psychiatric teams embedded within Marine units.  A bit of context: the Marine Corps doesn't have its own medical services, but rather relies on the Navy to provide personnel (the Marine Corps is part of the Department of the Navy).  The units, known as Navy Operational Stress Control and Readiness (or OSCAR), should number at 23 within two years.  The purpose is to provide initial psychiatric counseling to Marines while they are still serving out in the field:

    “We want to put mental health professionals with our small-unit leaders,” Navy Surgeon General Vice Adm. Adam Robinson said. “We think if we can train them there. Tere’s a real synergy that can come. We can be there to help with treatment, training and surveillance.”


    *One doesn't see much reporting out of Basra these days, but the New York Times Baghdad Bureau blog has an interesting piece today.  An Iraqi member of the Times staff took a four-day reporting trip to Basra to see just what the situation is there.  Some selections:

    I stopped for a while and I saw many Iraqi Army cars riddled with bullets. I saw troops deployed everywhere I looked: on the roof of every high building, every road intersection, occupying government offices that before were occupied by political factions.

    I was shocked when I saw traces of the fight, which was clear on the buildings close to the main streets.

    As an Iraqi from the south who knows exactly what was going on, with the militias controlling everything in particular cities or ports, I did not expect that the Iraqi forces – which are majority Shia - would be able to confront the militia influence.

    There was a new feeling. I had never seen before the Iraq Army, without hesitation, accusing the Mahdi Army of being involved in all the disorder there.

    One of the soldiers told me: “The Mahdi Army are a group of criminals, they will destroy everything if we don’t stop them.”

    In the past, I have never seen soldiers dare to say anything about them. I felt the reign of fear is broken, and that is it. Exactly the same feeling as when the Baathist regime fell.



    *Military.com recently posted an article taking a look at the rise in per capita income within military communities:

    The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could be behind the jumps in income, according to experts. Combat pay and re-enlistment bonuses for professional soldiers, combined with the activation of National Guard and Reserve units, put more money in the bank accounts of personnel shipping out of Fort Bragg, said David G. Lenze of the U.S. Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis, which issued the income data.

     

    According to the piece, in North Carolina two major military communities ranked first and second in areas of the state with the highest per capita growth.  The first of these, the Fort Bragg area, saw personal income rise more than $8,900 over five years.  Military towns in Georgia and Tennessee saw these numbers rise by between 35 and 37 percent. 

     

    More
  • Pat Tillman's Legacy Four Years On

    David Botti | May 9, 2008 01:58 PM
    Though he was killed in Afghanistan in 2004, Pat Tillman's death is still a subject of controversy and tremendous reflection. Tillman, you will recall, was the NFL player turned Army Ranger who was originally said to have died under enemy fire (he was awarded the Silver Star), but later reports found he was killed by friendly fire.

    Now his mother, Mary, has published a book in which she charges that former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld knew about the cover-up over the details of her son's death.  As she writes [via MSNBC]:

    “... I believe Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld knew Pat was killed by fratricide and permitted the cover-up.  It is not believable that a man known for his propensity to micromanage would not want to know what happened to his most high-profile soldier. I informed the committee that Pat received a personal letter from Rumsfeld shortly after he and his brother enlisted, commending him for his commitment to serve. Pat was obviously in Rumsfeld's consciousness."

    During a recent 60 Minutes interview, Katie Couric questioned Army Secretary Pete Geren over the alterations of eyewitness accounts of Tillman's death used for his Silver Star citation.  She asked if he knew who manipulated the statements, and he replied:

    "Well, that's one of the questions that we will never completely answer.  But it certainly is one of the areas that that raises questions. There are so many mistakes. So many things that happened. If you add them all together, it certainly calls into question the credibility of those who handled this. And raises the kind of questions that Ms. Tillman raises. I don't blame her for that. And I don't expect her ever to believe us. But there was no effort to deceive. There were mistakes and grievous errors by the legions. And as a result, we fell short of our duty to her as a mother of one of our heroes."

    Over at the IAVA blog, Perry Jefferies takes issue with Sec. Geren's uncertainty, saying that the process for awarding medals should clearly indicate who writes a citation:

    Only a certain amount of people handle the citation for the Silver Star, one of our highest military awards. Each commander signs a block on the document and there is a document called a transmittal letter that accompanies it from office to office. Only organizational will prevents the Army from prosecuting the criminal that a) faked an official document and b) tried to leave a lower grade enlisted Soldier to take the blame.

    If indeed the medal was awarded under dishonest conditions, should it still stand?  A letter to the Arizona Republic newspaper took this stance:

    The awarding of the decoration was illegal, as the incident obviously didn't represent "gallantry in action against an armed enemy," as required by the Army's own regulations.  This award does a disservice to all of our veterans who have legitimately earned this august award. The Tillman family should return the award to the Army, which should then rescind the award as unjustified and issued illegally.

    Another reader then responded:
    Yes, it may be true that this star represents "gallantry in action against an armed enemy." What could be more gallant than a young man giving up not only his career but his life?  Pat Tillman gave up his life to serve in an illegal war that has ruined our economy with the billions of dollars being wasted but, more important, the loss of the respect of the rest of the world.

    In the New York Times' look at Mary Tillman's new book, there's an interesting historical note of other athletes who've been killed in action.

    Eddie Grant, the Giants’ third baseman, died in France in 1918. Christy Mathewson, the great Giants pitcher, had his life shortened from a mustard-gas accident in training near the end of World War I. And Nile Kinnick, the star running back from Iowa, died in a training flight in 1943. But Pat Tillman’s death was different because of the way he was used, posthumously, blatantly.

    You can read a Newsweek Q&A with Mary Tillman here.

    More
  • Stephen King and Controversy Over Army Literacy

    David Botti | May 8, 2008 02:52 PM
    A war of words began recently between writer Stephen King and a conservative blogger over remarks King made about literacy and the U.S. Army.  During an appearance at the Library of Congress last month King said:

    "I don't want to sound like an ad, a public service ad on TV, but the fact is if you can read, you can walk into a job later on. If you don't, then you've got the Army, Iraq, I don't know, something like that. It's not as bright."

    Blogger Noel Sheppard of the Website NewsBusters: Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias, criticized King and likened his words to those of John Kerry when he said in 2006 that having a poor education would get someone stuck in Iraq.  Sheppard wrote further: "Nice sentiment when the nation is at war, Stephen."

    After Sheppard's blog post appeared, King countered on his own Website:

    I guess he also feels that the war in Iraq has nationwide approval. Well, it doesn’t have mine. It is a waste of national resources...and that includes the youth and blood of the 4,000 American troops who have lost their lives there and for the tens of thousands who have been wounded. I live in a national guard town, and I support our troops, but I don’t support either the war or educational policies that limit the options of young men and women to any one career—military or otherwise.

    King further instructed readers of his website to email Sheppard with the words: “Hi, Noel—Stephen King says to shut up and I agree.”

    According to the Associated Press, the U.S. Army released a statement yesterday responding to King's remarks:

    "America's soldiers are proudly serving and fighting for us all. We can be proud of our soldiers' selfless service, their skill and their ingenuity. They certainly are role models for every high-school student in America considering a noble career...and many book authors."

    Just as John Kerry's 2006 remarks sparked the ire of veterans and average citizens alike, King has found himself the subject some negative blogging since Sheppard's original post.  One commenter for the original post did offer a point of view from the middle ground:

    I actually don't think King meant to insult the troops. He made a mistake of trotting out an outdated draft-era notion about the military to prove a totally different point. But he compounded his error by lashing out at those who pointed out his mistake. Now it's a "thing" in the media, and he's not looking very good, or smart.
    More
  • A West Point Cadet Opts for the NFL

    David Botti | May 6, 2008 10:36 AM
    There's been some pointed discussions lately over the future of West Point cadet Caleb Campbell, who was a seventh round NFL draft pick of the Detroit Lions late last month.  While many of his classmates may be deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan in the future, Campbell will (if he makes the roster) do recruiting and PR events for the Army during the offseason.  The Army's point of view is that Campbell can use his NFL status in a unique way to help the service.  The New York Times provides the Army's official policy:

    Any member of the Army with an exceptional skill who could provide recruiting and public affairs benefits to the Army could be assigned to the nearest recruiting unit for their two-year active-duty period. Those approved can participate in their professional activity — in Campbell’s case, pro football — as long as it does not interfere with military duties. Then they can apply for early release from active duty.

    Campbell also described to the Times how he came to the decision to pursue football:
    More
  • Still Wondering: Is Afghanistan Forgotten?

    David Botti | Apr 30, 2008 10:28 AM
    Is it possible that, when all is said and done, the war in Afghanistan will become a "forgotten war"?  An article in yesterday's Philadelphia Inquirer on U.S. soldiers killed in Afghanistan got me thinking about where that war will end up in the history books--and I couldn't help but think of the Korean War. My knowledge of that war comes primarily from my father, an Air Force veteran who served during the conflict. Ever since I could remember, whenever he talks about Korea he prefaces the conversation lamenting the fact the Korean War receives much less attention than WWII or Vietnam. Korea shows that even a modern war can fade from collective memory.

    It's clear that Iraq overshadows Afghanistan in the public consciousness, but it seems as though over the past few years the term "overshadows" has become somewhat of an understatement.  Here's the situation over there as told by the Inquirer:

    The U.S. military death toll will soon reach 500 in Afghanistan, where the war has received less media attention than the conflict in Iraq despite an increasingly violent insurgency, the resurgence of al-Qaeda, and a growing commitment of troops...

    ...By the Pentagon's latest count, the armed forces have suffered 489 deaths so far. And still troops arrive: The number in Afghanistan exceeds 34,000, with 7,500 additional men and women requested.

    The U.S. troops are part of a 40-nation force expanded from 40,000 in fall 2006 to nearly 70,000 today. Last year was the deadliest since 2001, according to the United Nations, which reported 8,000 fatalities, including 1,500 civilians.


    As far back as 2004, Time Magazine published a cover story whose online component was titled: "Remember Afghanistan?" And then there was this New York Times 2005 editorial titled: "Afghanistan's Forgotten War." Now, in 2008, we're still wondering if Afghanistan is forgotten. But, why? Is it simply because of less media coverage? Is it because of Iraq? Is it because people don't care, don't understand, or don't have enough energy to follow two U.S. wars at the same time?

    Whatever the reason, the violence still continues. Yesterday came word that U.S. Marines recently deployed to Afghanistan, launched a major operation attacking a Taliban-held town in the violent Helmand region.  According to the Associated Press, this was the furthest south U.S. forces had operated in years:

    The goal is to stretch NATO's presence into an area where illegal opium poppy fields are plentiful and the Taliban is strong. British troops man a small base on Garmser's northern edge but insurgents rule the countryside south of the outpost all the way to the Pakistan border.

    Also yesterday, Canada's Globe and Mail Newspaper published an opinion piece by Brigadier General Dennis Tabbernor, deputy commanding general, Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan.  The paper posed the question: "Is Afghanistan Worth It?," and he answered in part:
    More
  • Trying to Modernize the GI Bill

    David Botti | Apr 29, 2008 10:41 AM
    More than half a century after the GI Bill was first enacted to help send vets to college, politicians and advocates are touting a new proposed bill to expand these benefits. The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act was introduced by a number of Republicans and Democrats in both the House and Senate. Among them is Virginia Senator (and Vietnam vet) Jim Webb whose posted this statement on his Website:

    The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act is designed to offer the brave men and women who have served honorably since September 11, 2001 a level of educational benefits on par with those provided to veterans of the World War II era.

    In a profile of numerous veterans struggling to capitalize on education opportunities after returning home from war, the Washington Post helps to break down where the current GI Bill stands now.  The problem is that these benefits can no longer fully fund higher education, as they once did for earlier generations of veterans.

    Many people enlist to earn money for college, and almost everyone signs up for the education benefits -- which, in the case of the main GI Bill, requires a service member to pay about $1,200 into the plan-- but not everyone takes advantage of it. And that buy-in is not returned even if the benefits are unused.

    About 70 percent use at least some part of it, said Keith Wilson, director of the education service, but the VA does not track how many earn degrees.

    An independent study found that just over half use some part of the benefits, said Ray Kelley of AMVETS, a veterans support group, and only 8 percent use all. "Congress is realizing we're not giving them the benefits we say we're giving them," Kelley said. "They only have 36 months from the time they start using it to the time they finish." That means going to school full time, year-round.


    Earlier this month NPR's Morning Edition broke down more of the specifics of the proposed bill.
    More
  • Airline Goes Bankrupt, Homecomings Delayed

    David Botti | Apr 25, 2008 03:03 PM
    The Air Force Times reported today that the bankruptcy of a civilian airline under contract to provide flights for the military is delaying homecoming for some troops. ATA shut down the day after filing for bankruptcy on April 2--the airline's second bankruptcy in nearly three years. An army spokesman told the AF Times that troops could expect delays of two to six days for the next several weeks.

    ATA was part of the FedEx Teaming Arrangement, a group of airlines contracted by the military to transport troops and their families overseas. The Indianapolis Star reported on the circumstances of the local air carrier's demise:
    Hampered by unprofitable routes, ATA lost $75 million last year and was in talks with five potential suitors when FedEx, with apparently little explanation, decided to cut off the Indianapolis carrier's only money maker: military charters...Its roots were passenger charters that led the carrier, earlier known as American Trans Air, to branch out into troop charters. ATA operates a $340 million-a-year airborne bus line ferrying troops and their families to and from places where the U.S. military stations troops worldwide.

    Back on the home front, military families awaiting the return of their stranded loved ones are speaking out.  The Hartford Courant has the story of one father who reached out to his old college roommate, Miramax Films co-founder Harvey Weinstein, for help:
    More
  • Veterans Suing the VA, Senators Call for Resignation

    David Botti | Apr 23, 2008 09:57 AM
    A trial in U.S. District Court is now underway as a group of veterans challenge the Department of Veterans Affairs over the lack of care afforded to returning troops. The case, Veterans for Common Sense v. Peake, is said by the plaintiffs' attorney to be the first of its kind.  Yesterday a suicide expert testified on behalf of the plaintiffs that veterans are killing themselves at three to seven times the rate of the general population. The American Lawyer has a good summary of what the case is all about:
    The suit claims that many disabled combat veterans are in dire need of counseling and other services they are not currently receiving from the U.S. government. Erspamer [the plaintiff's counsel] estimates that 120 veterans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan commit suicide each week. The veterans' groups are not seeking monetary damages but want reform of a health care system in which they allege a huge backlog of cases prevents veterans from receiving timely care.

    The San Francisco Chronicle outlined what suicide expert Ronald Maris sees as a complete lack of readiness within the VA to deal with the great number of veterans suicides:

    A majority of the VA's counselors, doctors, social workers and psychologists "don't have the tools and the information that they need to intervene effectively with suicidal vets," said Maris, a former president of the American Association of Suicidology who has been a consultant to the Army on suicide prevention.

    He was particularly critical of the VA's top health care administrator, William Feeley, who said in a pretrial deposition April 9 that the agency has no systematic national plan for suicide prevention. Feeley also said he was unaware of any methods of tracking veterans at risk of suicide and that suicide rates "are not a metric we are measuring."


    The impact of the trial is being felt in Washington, D.C. where two U.S. senators are now calling for the resignation of the VA's chief mental health official, Dr. Ira Katz.  Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) is citing evidence learned in the trial showing that the VA withheld information on the rising number of veterans suicides.  As her statement reads:
    More
  • The "Stop-Loss" Continues

    David Botti | Apr 22, 2008 11:25 AM
    The army announced yesterday that the practice of "stop-loss," where a solider is held past his/her enlistment contract, should continue for at least another year. While military leaders are making efforts to reduce combat tour lengths, and increase the size of the army, the Associated Press reports there are roughly 12,000 soldiers serving under the stop-loss. The numbers break down to: "6,800 active-duty Army, about 3,800 in the Army National Guard and close to 1,500 in the Reserves."

    USA Today breaks down the numbers even further, putting the latest stop-loss news into a wider historical context:

    -In May 2007 the practice of stop-loss reached a three-year low of 8,540.

    -"Since then, the number of soldiers forced to remain in the Army rose 43% to 12,235 in March."

    -"Soldiers affected by stop loss now serve, on average, an extra 6.6 months...Key leaders at the small-unit level — sergeants through sergeants first class — make up 45% of those soldiers. Soldiers typically enlist for four-year stints."

    -58,300 soldiers have been affected by the stop-loss since 2002.

    People have often asked me what exactly a stop-loss is -- especially after they hear it referred to as the "back door draft."  First, USA Today offers this concise summary of how the army views the policy: "Stop loss can keep a soldier in the service if his or her unit deploys within 90 days of the end of the soldier's commitment. It is necessary, the Army says, to maintain the integrity of units headed to war."

    Second, I sometimes use the example of my own unit on the eve of the invasion into Iraq back in 2003.  Most of us in my reserve unit enlisted under a six-year contract.  That meant that for six years were would actively train with our home unit, and be subject to mobilizations if ordered by the president.  Afterwards, we would spend two years in the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR) during which time we would not train, but would still "be on the books," in case the military needed more troops.

    In March 2003, when my unit got word it was heading to Iraq, a number of marines were reaching the end of their six-year contract.  Depending on how long we stayed in Iraq, their contract might end while they were over there.  It was these marines who were subject to stop-loss.  They were senior members of the unit whose experience would be invaluable during the deployment, and our company would be hurt if our numbers decreased.  So, they stayed and deployed with us; then left the military after returning home.

    Most did not complain about serving past their enlistment contract.  Their buddies were going to war, and the stop-loss marines wanted to go with them -- and, at that point, the war was still new.  Many felt they'd miss out on a major historical event that would go down in the history books.  But, times have changed, and the war is more than five years old.  As James Martin, a social work professor at Bryn Mawr College and retired Army colonel, told USA Today:  "These are the guys who bear the brunt of it. They just get put back into the grinder continually."
    More
  • 19 Percent of Iraq/Afghanistan Vets Suffer from Depression

    David Botti | Apr 17, 2008 01:22 PM
    A new comprehensive report by the RAND Corporation has concluded that 300,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from depression or PTSD--and only about half have sought out treatment, according to the Associated Press. The report surveyed 1,965 vets in what the AP calls the first large scale private study of its kind. The numbers show that 18.5 percent of all Iraq and Afghanistan vets suffer from these these symptoms. According to RAND, possible solutions to temper these problems may be available:

    Among our recommendations is that effective treatments documented in the scientific literature — evidence-based care — are available for PTSD and major depression. Delivery of such care to all veterans with PTSD or major depression would pay for itself within two years, or even save money, by improving productivity and reducing medical and mortality costs. Such care may also be a cost-effective way to retain a ready and healthy military force for the future. However, to ensure that this care is delivered requires system-level changes across the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the U.S. health care system.


    The AP offered up more conclusions drawn from the study, including why vets are not seeking care:
    They gave various reasons for not getting help, including that they worried about the side effects of medication; believe family and friends could help them with the problem, or that they feared seeking care might damage their careers.

    The report also noted who is most susceptible to depression and PTSD, although, in the end, it is a vet's exposure to combat trauma that is the greatest predictor:
    Rates of PTSD and major depression were highest among Army soldiers and Marines, and among service members who were no longer on active duty (people in the reserves and those who had been discharged or retired from the military). Women, Hispanics and enlisted personnel all were more likely to report symptoms of PTSD and major depressions.

    Last November the Pentagon opened the Defense Center of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury in an effort to bring together education, treatment, and research.  From the Department of Defense:

    The center also will set standards and assess, survey and validate DoD programs, and decide, in part, how resources are directed... Center officials are reviewing hundreds of research project proposals that hope to claim a piece of the $300 million set aside by Congress last year for brain injury research. The office also will work with the military services to see which of the many programs funded with another $600 million from Congress are working and how to direct those funds to programs most beneficial to servicemembers and families.


    More
  • In the News: Iraqi Recruits, Grassroots, and a New Memoir

    David Botti | Apr 16, 2008 01:49 PM
    A selection of military news stories over the recent days:

    The Associated Press reports on troubles with training the Iraqi Navy and Marine Corps, and cites recent issues with Iraqi Army troops fighting in Basra as indicative of the overall training situation.  As the rebuilt Iraqi navy is tasked with defending the country's two vital oil platforms, the AP tells of a disconnect between the reality of the situation and how it is perceived by the navy recruits:

    The day when Iraq alone can defend its shores — and protect its critical offshore oil installations — seems remote.

    Iraq’s navy now has five Chinese-made patrol boats and 26 fast-attack aluminum vessels — fewer than half of which are operational. Its personnel number about 1,350, including 350 Marines.

    “They think they are an elite unit, but they are not,” said Capt. Jock Alexander of the British Royal Marines, who is in charge of training Iraqi Marines to guard the 1.8-mile exclusion zone around each of the country’s two oil platforms.

    The struggle to build a credible Iraqi navy is mirrored — on larger scales — by the mounting delays and costs to form a new Iraqi army and air force after Washington disbanded Saddam Hussein’s military.


    The San Francisco Chronicle reports on a series of grass-roots efforts aimed at joining Iraq veterans in need with U.S. citizens ready to help.  Among the programs are an upcoming online forum of therapists around the country who've offered their services to treating Iraq veterans.  Many of these therapists have committed one hour of free counseling to Iraq vets per week, for as long as they wish.  Then there's a series of Websites dedicated to linking vets with people willing to donate money for basic necessities.  Still, the VA is hesitant to get on board with these groups:

    While Veterans Affairs officials appreciate the support of community groups like Bobrow's, they're careful about embracing them. Because of privacy regulations, the VA can't disclose who has used their services. Often, VA employees are reluctant to even hand out flyers from fledgling groups until thoroughly checking them out.

    "The veterans and their families have suffered enough. So when they put up a public profile or say they need help, we want to make sure they don't get injured again," said Patricia Matthews, a spokeswoman for the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Center.


    In a profile of Elise Forbes Tripp, author of "Surviving Iraq: Soldiers' Stories," the Portsmouth Herald News details some of her most interesting findings through interviews with Iraq vets, including this one:

    She was surprised at the men being upset at having women in their units. "I would get long responses about how useless women are in war ...; not sexist but how they don't belong there."

    Men said they created sexual tension and diverted attention. They require involvement from male colleagues for their safety, for example, having to guard their showers or to calm them during a difficult time. "And I think they felt it was unfair that woman could get pregnant and go home," she says. "I was just listening, thinking this is amazing."


    The New York Times reports that Donald Rumsfeld is set to pen his own memoir:
    Donald H. Rumsfeld, who resigned as secretary of defense in late 2006, will write his memoirs for the Sentinel imprint of Penguin Group USA. Mr. Rumsfeld, 75, will cover not only his years in the Bush administration but also his experiences with Presidents Richard M. Nixon, Gerald R. Ford and Ronald Reagan; his work in the private sector; and his early life. In contrast to other recent political figures who have produced memoirs, Mr. Rumsfeld is forgoing an advance and will donate profits to a nonprofit foundation he recently established to make educational grants to young people interested in public service and establishing links between the United States and Central Asia.


    The Marine Corps Times reports that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is proposing new measures that would provide homes for severely injured veterans on VA property.  The proposal came during a Senate defense appropriations subcommittee hearing where issues of long-term veterans care were raised.  Sen. Feinstein cited VA property in West Los Angeles that includes 300 acres of undeveloped land:

    Feinstein said she offered VA’s West LA campus as an example because she often visits the site, but she believes such housing also could be built at other VA facilities around the country.

    Feinstein and other California lawmakers have been trying to block VA from leasing out the unused land for commercial purposes, but they have not agreed on what to do with the property. Some want the land to be public park land, some have proposed building housing for homeless veterans and others have talked about leaving it completely undeveloped so it can be used by future generations.

     

    More
The Peek
 
 
SPORTS

Speedo's new and controversial high-tech LZR suit is helping swimmers smash dozens of records. How the company plans to capitalize on Olympic gold.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
AFRICA

These are among the ruling party's weapons against opposition voters. Still, the population clearly didn't cooperate in Friday's vote.

Sponsored by