From The Times of London
February 23, 2008
The cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts have grown to staggering proportions
Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes
The Bush Administration was wrong about the benefits of the war and it was wrong about the costs of the war. The president and his advisers expected a quick, inexpensive conflict. Instead, we have a war that is costing more than anyone could have imagined.
The cost of direct US military operations - not even including long-term costs such as taking care of wounded veterans - already exceeds the cost of the 12-year war in Vietnam and is more than double the cost of the Korean War.
And, even in the best case scenario, these costs are projected to be almost ten times the cost of the first Gulf War, almost a third more than the cost of the Vietnam War, and twice that of the First World War. The only war in our history which cost more was the Second World War, when 16.3 million U.S. troops fought in a campaign lasting four years, at a total cost (in 2007 dollars, after adjusting for inflation) of about $5 trillion (that's $5 million million, or £2.5 million million). With virtually the entire armed forces committed to fighting the Germans and Japanese, the cost per troop (in today's dollars) was less than $100,000 in 2007 dollars. By contrast, the Iraq war is costing upward of $400,000 per troop.
Most Americans have yet to feel these costs. The price in blood has been paid by our voluntary military and by hired contractors. The price in treasure has, in a sense, been financed entirely by borrowing. Taxes have not been raised to pay for it - in fact, taxes on the rich have actually fallen. Deficit spending gives the illusion that the laws of economics can be repealed, that we can have both guns and butter. But of course the laws are not repealed. The costs of the war are real even if they have been deferred, possibly to another generation.
On the eve of war, there were discussions of the likely costs. Larry Lindsey, President Bush's economic adviser and head of the National Economic Council, suggested that they might reach $200 billion. But this estimate was dismissed as “baloney” by the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. His deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, suggested that postwar reconstruction could pay for itself through increased oil revenues. Mitch Daniels, the Office of Management and Budget director, and Secretary Rumsfeld estimated the costs in the range of $50 to $60 billion, a portion of which they believed would be financed by other countries. (Adjusting for inflation, in 2007 dollars, they were projecting costs of between $57 and $69 billion.) The tone of the entire administration was cavalier, as if the sums involved were minimal.
Even Lindsey, after noting that the war could cost $200 billion, went on to say: “The successful prosecution of the war would be good for the economy.” In retrospect, Lindsey grossly underestimated both the costs of the war itself and the costs to the economy. Assuming that Congress approves the rest of the $200 billion war supplemental requested for fiscal year 2008, as this book goes to press Congress will have appropriated a total of over $845 billion for military operations, reconstruction, embassy costs, enhanced security at US bases, and foreign aid programmes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
As the fifth year of the war draws to a close, operating costs (spending on the war itself, what you might call “running expenses”) for 2008 are projected to exceed $12.5 billion a month for Iraq alone, up from $4.4 billion in 2003, and with Afghanistan the total is $16 billion a month. Sixteen billion dollars is equal to the annual budget of the United Nations, or of all but 13 of the US states. Even so, it does not include the $500 billion we already spend per year on the regular expenses of the Defence Department. Nor does it include other hidden expenditures, such as intelligence gathering, or funds mixed in with the budgets of other departments.
Because there are so many costs that the Administration does not count, the total cost of the war is higher than the official number. For example, government officials frequently talk about the lives of our soldiers as priceless. But from a cost perspective, these “priceless” lives show up on the Pentagon ledger simply as $500,000 - the amount paid out to survivors in death benefits and life insurance. After the war began, these were increased from $12,240 to $100,000 (death benefit) and from $250,000 to $400,000 (life insurance). Even these increased amounts are a fraction of what the survivors might have received had these individuals lost their lives in a senseless automobile accident. In areas such as health and safety regulation, the US Government values a life of a young man at the peak of his future earnings capacity in excess of
$7 million - far greater than the amount that the military pays in death benefits. Using this figure, the cost of the nearly 4,000 American troops killed in Iraq adds up to some $28 billion.
The costs to society are obviously far larger than the numbers that show up on the government's budget. Another example of hidden costs is the understating of US military casualties. The Defence Department's casualty statistics focus on casualties that result from hostile (combat) action - as determined by the military. Yet if a soldier is injured or dies in a night-time vehicle accident, this is officially dubbed “non combat related” - even though it may be too unsafe for soldiers to travel during daytime.
In fact, the Pentagon keeps two sets of books. The first is the official casualty list posted on the DOD website. The second, hard-to-find, set of data is available only on a different website and can be obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. This data shows that the total number of soldiers who have been wounded, injured, or suffered from disease is double the number wounded in combat. Some will argue that a percentage of these non-combat injuries might have happened even if the soldiers were not in Iraq. Our new research shows that the majority of these injuries and illnesses can be tied directly to service in the war.
From the unhealthy brew of emergency funding, multiple sets of books, and chronic underestimates of the resources required to prosecute the war, we have attempted to identify how much we have been spending - and how much we will, in the end, likely have to spend. The figure we arrive at is more than $3 trillion. Our calculations are based on conservative assumptions. They are conceptually simple, even if occasionally technically complicated. A $3 trillion figure for the total cost strikes us as judicious, and probably errs on the low side. Needless to say, this number represents the cost only to the United States. It does not reflect the enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq.
From the beginning, the United Kingdom has played a pivotal role - strategic, military, and political - in the Iraq conflict. Militarily, the UK contributed 46,000 troops, 10 per cent of the total. Unsurprisingly, then, the British experience in Iraq has paralleled that of America: rising casualties, increasing operating costs, poor transparency over where the money is going, overstretched military resources, and scandals over the squalid conditions and inadequate medical care for some severely wounded veterans.
Before the war, Gordon Brown set aside £1 billion for war spending. As of late 2007, the UK had spent an estimated £7 billion in direct operating expenditures in Iraq and Afghanistan (76 per cent of it in Iraq). This includes money from a supplemental “special reserve”, plus additional spending from the Ministry of Defence.
The special reserve comes on top of the UK's regular defence budget. The British system is particularly opaque: funds from the special reserve are “drawn down” by the Ministry of Defence when required, without specific approval by Parliament. As a result, British citizens have little clarity about how much is actually being spent.
In addition, the social costs in the UK are similar to those in the US - families who leave jobs to care for wounded soldiers, and diminished quality of life for those thousands left with disabilities.
By the same token, there are macroeconomic costs to the UK as there have been to America, though the long-term costs may be less, for two reasons. First, Britain did not have the same policy of fiscal profligacy; and second, until 2005, the United Kingdom was a net oil exporter.
We have assumed that British forces in Iraq are reduced to 2,500 this year and remain at that level until 2010. We expect that British forces in Afghanistan will increase slightly, from 7,000 to 8,000 in 2008, and remain stable for three years. The House of Commons Defence Committee has recently found that despite the cut in troop levels, Iraq war costs will increase by 2 per cent this year and personnel costs will decrease by only 5 per cent. Meanwhile, the cost of military operations in Afghanistan is due to rise by 39 per cent. The estimates in our model may be significantly too low if these patterns continue.
Based on assumptions set out in our book, the budgetary cost to the UK of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through 2010 will total more than £18 billion. If we include the social costs, the total impact on the UK will exceed £20 billion.
© Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes, 2008. Extracted from The Three Trillion Dollar War, to be published by Allen Lane on February 28 (£20). Copies can be ordered for £18 with free delivery from The Times BooksFirst 0870 1608080.
Joseph Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank and won the Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics in 2001. Linda Bilmes is a lecturer in public policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
Friday, February 22, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Inquiry into Montana soldier's death continues
By MARTIN J. KIDSTON
Independent Record
The investigation into the death of Pvt. Daren Smith remains ongoing, military officials said last week, adding that such cases take time to resolve because of wartime challenges.
Smith, a Montana soldier who served with a light-infantry unit based out of Fort Polk, La., died in Baghdad on Dec. 13, two months after arriving.
At the time, the Department of Defense attributed Smith's death to a non-combat-related incident, but it hasn't said what the incident was.Noncombat causes could mean anything from accidental death to suicide or homicide.
Samantha Evans, media relations officer at Fort Polk, said Thursday that the case was being handled by the Criminal Investigation Division.
She had no new information on the case and referred all questions to military investigators.
"We don't have anything to do with that," she said. "We don't have any investigative resources here that would help us conclude what happened over there in Iraq."
Chris Grey, chief of public affairs for the U.S. Army's Criminal Investigation Com-mand, based outside Washington, D.C., said Friday that the investigation continues and may take time to resolve."
It's an open investigation," Grey said. "You can't compare these types of investigations to a typical American city. Depending on the circumstances, you have various factors you don't see in a lot of investigations."
Grey said logistics, time and distance often add to the challenges of completing an investigation in a case that occurred in a war zone. Soldiers are a mobile unit, he said, and are rarely in one place for very long.
Grey added that simply because the case had been turned over the Criminal Investigation Division doesn't necessarily mean a crime had occurred.
However, Grey couldn't say what factors may have played a hand in Smith's death."
We won't quit until we have all the answers," Grey said. "But it takes time. Every case is different."
Smith was born in Butte and lived there until he reached middle school, when he moved to Helena. He graduated from Helena High School in 2006 and completed a semester at the University of Montana-Helena.
Smith joined the Army in March 2007 and arrived at Fort Polk in August before deploying to Iraq.
Published on Sunday, February 17, 2008.
Independent Record
The investigation into the death of Pvt. Daren Smith remains ongoing, military officials said last week, adding that such cases take time to resolve because of wartime challenges.
Smith, a Montana soldier who served with a light-infantry unit based out of Fort Polk, La., died in Baghdad on Dec. 13, two months after arriving.
At the time, the Department of Defense attributed Smith's death to a non-combat-related incident, but it hasn't said what the incident was.Noncombat causes could mean anything from accidental death to suicide or homicide.
Samantha Evans, media relations officer at Fort Polk, said Thursday that the case was being handled by the Criminal Investigation Division.
She had no new information on the case and referred all questions to military investigators.
"We don't have anything to do with that," she said. "We don't have any investigative resources here that would help us conclude what happened over there in Iraq."
Chris Grey, chief of public affairs for the U.S. Army's Criminal Investigation Com-mand, based outside Washington, D.C., said Friday that the investigation continues and may take time to resolve."
It's an open investigation," Grey said. "You can't compare these types of investigations to a typical American city. Depending on the circumstances, you have various factors you don't see in a lot of investigations."
Grey said logistics, time and distance often add to the challenges of completing an investigation in a case that occurred in a war zone. Soldiers are a mobile unit, he said, and are rarely in one place for very long.
Grey added that simply because the case had been turned over the Criminal Investigation Division doesn't necessarily mean a crime had occurred.
However, Grey couldn't say what factors may have played a hand in Smith's death."
We won't quit until we have all the answers," Grey said. "But it takes time. Every case is different."
Smith was born in Butte and lived there until he reached middle school, when he moved to Helena. He graduated from Helena High School in 2006 and completed a semester at the University of Montana-Helena.
Smith joined the Army in March 2007 and arrived at Fort Polk in August before deploying to Iraq.
Published on Sunday, February 17, 2008.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
IG: Families not told in friendly fire cases
By Andrew Tilghman - Staff writerPosted : Monday Feb 18, 2008 13:25:32 EST
Friendly fire incidents have caused six Marine deaths and at least 85 other casualties since the beginning of the war in Iraq — a total that is roughly 1 percent of the Corps’ 9,000 reported casualties, according to a report from the Inspector General of the Marine Corps.
In all but four of those 91 cases, the Corps failed to promptly notify the Marine’s family that the casualty resulted from friendly fire, according to the report, obtained by Marine Corps Times under the Freedom of Information Act.
While the 25-page report was just released publicly, it was completed in October and distributed internally among senior Marine officials.
The report resulted in the creation of a Corps-wide “Combat Casualty Cell” in December, when responsibility for all casualty notifications was centralized in the Personal and Family Readiness Division office in Quantico, Va. The office doubled its staff from 11 to 22 to handle the new duties.
Previously, the Corps expected individual commanders to notify families when friendly fire investigations began.
“The IG found a disturbing lack of understanding and compliance” with the rule requiring commanders to send family members formal letters updating them on the status of investigations, the report said. The failures between 2003 and 2007 to properly notify family members resulted from “unclear procedures, outdated directives and a confusing chain of command,” but not from “negligence, personal indifference or professional incompetence,” according to the report.
Military policies for full-disclosure of friendly fire incidents came under scrutiny after the death of Army Cpl. Pat Tillman in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004.
Tillman, a former safety for the Arizona Cardinals, turned down a multimillion-dollar National Football League contract to join the Army after Sept. 11, 2001. Army officials initially told Tillman’s family that he was killed by enemy fire, but the family later learned he was mistakenly killed by another Army Ranger.
Policy change lauded
Families of fallen service members say full and timely disclosure about casualties is a welcome policy change.
“People can handle the truth. People can find peace with circumstances of the loss if they are given accurate and honest information in a supportive and compassionate way,” said Bonnie Carroll, chairman of the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, an advocacy group for families of fallen service members.
“The steps by the Marine Corps and the Army leadership to ensure that families are given honest information have made a tremendous difference in the families’ ability to cope with the loss,” Carroll said.
The only cases in which a Marine’s family was promptly notified about the results of a friendly fire investigation involved four Marines who were killed in action. In all other cases of friendly fire casualties, families were either not notified at all or not notified until the Corps’ Inspector General launched its investigation last year, the report said.
Sixteen of the injuries were listed as “SI,” or serious injury, which included a Marine who was shot in the arm and abdomen during a combat operation and another who was struck by an artillery round after the wrong grid point was identified as an enemy target.
In 65 of the friendly fire incidents, the injuries were categorized as “NSI,” or not a serious injury, such as a shrapnel wound to the leg.
In two deaths resulting from friendly fire — those of Lance Cpls. Robert Zurheide and Brad Shuder, who were killed by a misguided artillery round on April 12, 2004 — their families were not told that the cause was friendly fire until July 2007, after the IG began its investigation, according to the report.
A new 24-hour hot line for family members seeking information about a casualty report or incident investigation was set up in December as part of the new procedures at the Personal and Family Readiness Division. It is (800) 847-1597.
‘You can’t bring him back’
Such a hot line was not available for Glenn Shuder, who remembers the day, April 13, 2004, when a Marine officer and Navy chaplain showed up on his doorstep near Sacramento, Calif., and a told him and his wife that their son, Brad, 21, had been killed near Fallujah while serving with 2nd Battalion, 1st Marines.
“They never told us what actually happened. They said it was hostile fire. We sort of kind of left it at that. I guess with all the shock and grief, we just went on,” Shuder said in a telephone interview Feb. 6.
About six months later, the Shuders met informally with several junior Marines who served with their son. The Marines told them that their son had not been killed by enemy fire, but was struck by an artillery round misfired by other Marines. Brad Shuder and Zurheide were killed, while several others were injured.
The Shuders made no effort to contact their son’s command for confirmation or explanation.
“We didn’t know who to contact. We had no access; there was no information that came to us for how to do this. It was six months later, and I just didn’t want to known about it,” Shuder said.
“My wife and I talked about it and she said, ‘What’s it going to change? You can’t bring him back. He’s dead.’ So we sort of didn’t pursue it.”
According to the Marine Corps’ procedures at the time, Lance Cpl. Shuder’s commander should have written the parents a letter informing them that the Corps had initiated a friendly fire investigation. After the investigation was complete, the results should have been reported to them.
Instead, the Shuders heard nothing from the Corps until last year, after members of Congress began inquiring about the Corps’ policies for disclosing the existence and results of friendly fire incidents.
More than three years after Brad Shuder’s death, the Inspector General’s review found that the Marine Corps had never notified his family that he had not been killed by enemy fire, as the family was initially told.
In July 2007, a general and several other high-ranking Marines from Camp Pendleton, Calif., went to the Shuders’ home and gave them a complete explanation. The Shuders listened, but asked few questions.
Glenn Shuder said the circumstances of his son’s death have not changed the nature of his grief. But he does sometimes think about the Marine, whose name he does not know, who misfired the fatal artillery round.
“It’s the fog of war, and things happen. I completely understand that,” he said. “The individual who made that mistake knows what he did, and it’s something he has to live with for the rest of his life.”
--submitted by Patti Woodard
Friendly fire incidents have caused six Marine deaths and at least 85 other casualties since the beginning of the war in Iraq — a total that is roughly 1 percent of the Corps’ 9,000 reported casualties, according to a report from the Inspector General of the Marine Corps.
In all but four of those 91 cases, the Corps failed to promptly notify the Marine’s family that the casualty resulted from friendly fire, according to the report, obtained by Marine Corps Times under the Freedom of Information Act.
While the 25-page report was just released publicly, it was completed in October and distributed internally among senior Marine officials.
The report resulted in the creation of a Corps-wide “Combat Casualty Cell” in December, when responsibility for all casualty notifications was centralized in the Personal and Family Readiness Division office in Quantico, Va. The office doubled its staff from 11 to 22 to handle the new duties.
Previously, the Corps expected individual commanders to notify families when friendly fire investigations began.
“The IG found a disturbing lack of understanding and compliance” with the rule requiring commanders to send family members formal letters updating them on the status of investigations, the report said. The failures between 2003 and 2007 to properly notify family members resulted from “unclear procedures, outdated directives and a confusing chain of command,” but not from “negligence, personal indifference or professional incompetence,” according to the report.
Military policies for full-disclosure of friendly fire incidents came under scrutiny after the death of Army Cpl. Pat Tillman in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004.
Tillman, a former safety for the Arizona Cardinals, turned down a multimillion-dollar National Football League contract to join the Army after Sept. 11, 2001. Army officials initially told Tillman’s family that he was killed by enemy fire, but the family later learned he was mistakenly killed by another Army Ranger.
Policy change lauded
Families of fallen service members say full and timely disclosure about casualties is a welcome policy change.
“People can handle the truth. People can find peace with circumstances of the loss if they are given accurate and honest information in a supportive and compassionate way,” said Bonnie Carroll, chairman of the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, an advocacy group for families of fallen service members.
“The steps by the Marine Corps and the Army leadership to ensure that families are given honest information have made a tremendous difference in the families’ ability to cope with the loss,” Carroll said.
The only cases in which a Marine’s family was promptly notified about the results of a friendly fire investigation involved four Marines who were killed in action. In all other cases of friendly fire casualties, families were either not notified at all or not notified until the Corps’ Inspector General launched its investigation last year, the report said.
Sixteen of the injuries were listed as “SI,” or serious injury, which included a Marine who was shot in the arm and abdomen during a combat operation and another who was struck by an artillery round after the wrong grid point was identified as an enemy target.
In 65 of the friendly fire incidents, the injuries were categorized as “NSI,” or not a serious injury, such as a shrapnel wound to the leg.
In two deaths resulting from friendly fire — those of Lance Cpls. Robert Zurheide and Brad Shuder, who were killed by a misguided artillery round on April 12, 2004 — their families were not told that the cause was friendly fire until July 2007, after the IG began its investigation, according to the report.
A new 24-hour hot line for family members seeking information about a casualty report or incident investigation was set up in December as part of the new procedures at the Personal and Family Readiness Division. It is (800) 847-1597.
‘You can’t bring him back’
Such a hot line was not available for Glenn Shuder, who remembers the day, April 13, 2004, when a Marine officer and Navy chaplain showed up on his doorstep near Sacramento, Calif., and a told him and his wife that their son, Brad, 21, had been killed near Fallujah while serving with 2nd Battalion, 1st Marines.
“They never told us what actually happened. They said it was hostile fire. We sort of kind of left it at that. I guess with all the shock and grief, we just went on,” Shuder said in a telephone interview Feb. 6.
About six months later, the Shuders met informally with several junior Marines who served with their son. The Marines told them that their son had not been killed by enemy fire, but was struck by an artillery round misfired by other Marines. Brad Shuder and Zurheide were killed, while several others were injured.
The Shuders made no effort to contact their son’s command for confirmation or explanation.
“We didn’t know who to contact. We had no access; there was no information that came to us for how to do this. It was six months later, and I just didn’t want to known about it,” Shuder said.
“My wife and I talked about it and she said, ‘What’s it going to change? You can’t bring him back. He’s dead.’ So we sort of didn’t pursue it.”
According to the Marine Corps’ procedures at the time, Lance Cpl. Shuder’s commander should have written the parents a letter informing them that the Corps had initiated a friendly fire investigation. After the investigation was complete, the results should have been reported to them.
Instead, the Shuders heard nothing from the Corps until last year, after members of Congress began inquiring about the Corps’ policies for disclosing the existence and results of friendly fire incidents.
More than three years after Brad Shuder’s death, the Inspector General’s review found that the Marine Corps had never notified his family that he had not been killed by enemy fire, as the family was initially told.
In July 2007, a general and several other high-ranking Marines from Camp Pendleton, Calif., went to the Shuders’ home and gave them a complete explanation. The Shuders listened, but asked few questions.
Glenn Shuder said the circumstances of his son’s death have not changed the nature of his grief. But he does sometimes think about the Marine, whose name he does not know, who misfired the fatal artillery round.
“It’s the fog of war, and things happen. I completely understand that,” he said. “The individual who made that mistake knows what he did, and it’s something he has to live with for the rest of his life.”
--submitted by Patti Woodard
Army Hazing Victim Dies in Moscow
February 18th, 2008 •
Filed Under: All News • Featured • Repression
Tags: conscription • military • Roman Rudakov • Yezhednevny Zhurnal
Roman Rudakov, an army private who suffered serious injuries after hazing from fellow soldiers and officers, died in Moscow on February 13th after over a year of hospitalization. Rudakov, 21, was bullied, beaten and humiliated during his mandatory military service in the Russian armed forces.
The soldier’s struggle is far from an isolated case. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, some 500-1000 conscripts died of non-combat related injuries, including hazing and suicide in 2007. Unofficial estimates from human rights groups like the St. Petersburg-based Soldiers’ Mothers run even higher.
The secrecy and slow response of the Russian military to Rudakov’s condition are similarly typical. Officials first denied that he was harassed, then hid critical medical records. When Germany, France and Israel offered to help with the private’s medical treatment, Russia flat-out refused.
Finally, little has changed in the armed forces since Rudakov was first hospitalized in the fall of 2006. There is doubt that his death will have any effect on how the military treats its conscripts.
Read the full story from Yezhednevny Zhurnal:
Without An Answer
February 13, 2008. 15:28
Yezhednevny Zhurnal
On Tuesday, after an operation, Private Roman Rudakov, a victim of bullying in the army, died in the intensive care unit of the Burdenko hospital, where he had spent over a year.
Over the course of many months, he was waiting on an intestinal and kidney transplant operation. He was 21 years old, and he died slowly and painfully. According to his sister, he said this of the doctors treating him: “they are simply waiting for my death.”
When Roman Rudakov’s story first appeared in the media, Sergei Ivanov, then the minister of Defense, publicly said that Roman had a “rare blood disease.” – and no manner of “bullying.”
Almost immediately it became apparent that this wasn’t so: Rudakov genuinely suffers from a blood condition, but “bullying” was also present. Medical documents and witness testimony soon surfaced and made it clear that Roman was regularly beaten in the unit where he served.
In September 2006, an alleged blow to the stomach injured the vessels of his small intestine, after which the youth began to suffer tissue necrosis. After that, Rudakov was given directions to the Sosnovoborsky hospital, and he was sent on foot, without money, to the doctors.
The distance between the Pesochnoye village, where Rudakov was serving, and the Sosnovoborsky hospital is more than 80 kilometers. Later, his small intestine was removed in St. Petersburg, and it was then when the story really became publicly known.
The “Soldiers’ Mothers” found the dying soldier on a hospital bed and raised a racket.
Political movements and human rights activists rose to Roman’s defense, led protest actions, wrote complaints. Rudakov was transferred to Moscow to the Burdenko hospital.
Then there was the court, where Private First Class Maxim Lomonin, [a fellow recruit] was made the scapegoat, even though Roman said that he was beaten by officers. Lomonin was given a 3 year sentence (suspended).
Afterwards, everyone forgot about Rudakov: infrequent reports that his condition was worsening appeared in the media, and that was it. Only the “Soldier’s Mothers” were following Roman’s fate, and there was nothing they could do.
The military exerted such efforts to hide any information about this story, that it’s unclear to this day whether or not anything could have been done to save Roman. Why was the operation postponed for so long? Is is true that they couldn’t find a donor (or didn’t want to)? And what did Roman Rudakov die of – according to relatives, an operation was attempted, but they don’t really know anything. There are many questions.
Translated by theotherrussia.org
Filed Under: All News • Featured • Repression
Tags: conscription • military • Roman Rudakov • Yezhednevny Zhurnal
Roman Rudakov, an army private who suffered serious injuries after hazing from fellow soldiers and officers, died in Moscow on February 13th after over a year of hospitalization. Rudakov, 21, was bullied, beaten and humiliated during his mandatory military service in the Russian armed forces.
The soldier’s struggle is far from an isolated case. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, some 500-1000 conscripts died of non-combat related injuries, including hazing and suicide in 2007. Unofficial estimates from human rights groups like the St. Petersburg-based Soldiers’ Mothers run even higher.
The secrecy and slow response of the Russian military to Rudakov’s condition are similarly typical. Officials first denied that he was harassed, then hid critical medical records. When Germany, France and Israel offered to help with the private’s medical treatment, Russia flat-out refused.
Finally, little has changed in the armed forces since Rudakov was first hospitalized in the fall of 2006. There is doubt that his death will have any effect on how the military treats its conscripts.
Read the full story from Yezhednevny Zhurnal:
Without An Answer
February 13, 2008. 15:28
Yezhednevny Zhurnal
On Tuesday, after an operation, Private Roman Rudakov, a victim of bullying in the army, died in the intensive care unit of the Burdenko hospital, where he had spent over a year.
Over the course of many months, he was waiting on an intestinal and kidney transplant operation. He was 21 years old, and he died slowly and painfully. According to his sister, he said this of the doctors treating him: “they are simply waiting for my death.”
When Roman Rudakov’s story first appeared in the media, Sergei Ivanov, then the minister of Defense, publicly said that Roman had a “rare blood disease.” – and no manner of “bullying.”
Almost immediately it became apparent that this wasn’t so: Rudakov genuinely suffers from a blood condition, but “bullying” was also present. Medical documents and witness testimony soon surfaced and made it clear that Roman was regularly beaten in the unit where he served.
In September 2006, an alleged blow to the stomach injured the vessels of his small intestine, after which the youth began to suffer tissue necrosis. After that, Rudakov was given directions to the Sosnovoborsky hospital, and he was sent on foot, without money, to the doctors.
The distance between the Pesochnoye village, where Rudakov was serving, and the Sosnovoborsky hospital is more than 80 kilometers. Later, his small intestine was removed in St. Petersburg, and it was then when the story really became publicly known.
The “Soldiers’ Mothers” found the dying soldier on a hospital bed and raised a racket.
Political movements and human rights activists rose to Roman’s defense, led protest actions, wrote complaints. Rudakov was transferred to Moscow to the Burdenko hospital.
Then there was the court, where Private First Class Maxim Lomonin, [a fellow recruit] was made the scapegoat, even though Roman said that he was beaten by officers. Lomonin was given a 3 year sentence (suspended).
Afterwards, everyone forgot about Rudakov: infrequent reports that his condition was worsening appeared in the media, and that was it. Only the “Soldier’s Mothers” were following Roman’s fate, and there was nothing they could do.
The military exerted such efforts to hide any information about this story, that it’s unclear to this day whether or not anything could have been done to save Roman. Why was the operation postponed for so long? Is is true that they couldn’t find a donor (or didn’t want to)? And what did Roman Rudakov die of – according to relatives, an operation was attempted, but they don’t really know anything. There are many questions.
Translated by theotherrussia.org
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Bayh Challenges Comment by Army General
By KIMBERLY HEFLING Associated Press Writer
4:54 PM CST, February 15, 2008
WASHINGTON - A Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee said Friday it was inappropriate for the Army's surgeon general to compare the overdose deaths of injured soldiers in the military's care to that of actor Heath Ledger.
Earlier this month, Army Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker made reference to the 28-year-old "Brokeback Mountain" star's death as he discussed the overdose deaths of some troops in the Army's "warrior transition units." The units give wounded troops coordinated medical care, financial advice, legal help and other services as they make the adjustments necessary either to return to active duty or re-enter civilian life.
"This isn't restricted to the military, alone, as we all saw the unfortunate death of one of our leading actors recently," Schoomaker told Pentagon reporters. His comments came a day after it was announced that Ledger had died Jan. 22 from an accidental overdose -- the effect of taking several types of painkillers and sedatives.
Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., told reporters during a conference call Friday that likening Ledger's death to the deaths by overdose of wounded soldiers was not appropriate because Ledger was not injured in combat."He didn't have a traumatic brain injury," Bayh said. "He wasn't, as far as I know, under a physician's care or residing in a unit designed to protect him and treat him or given by his own caregivers potentially lethal doses of medication and left to self medicate himself when he had a traumatic brain injury."
Said Bayh, "I just think that analogy is inappropriate and I hope it will stop."The senator pushed for an investigation following the death of Sgt. Gerald Cassidy, a member of the Indiana National Guard. Cassidy, who was in one of the transition units, was found dead in his room Sept. 21 at Fort Knox, Ky., about 15 months after being wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq.
An autopsy later determined he had been dead for hours and might have been unconscious for days before he was found alone. The Army Criminal Investigation Command determined the death was accidental and caused by a multidrug toxicity complicated by severe atherosclerotic coronary arterial disease.
Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman, said Friday that Schoomaker's intent by the comments was to educate about the growing health risk of overdoses in the military population and the American population as a whole.
Bayh and other Democratic senators on the conference call praised changes that have been made since shoddy outpatient housing and bureaucratic delays were exposed last year at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. But Bayh said the focus has been too heavily placed on Walter Reed. He said the entire system should be reformed.
Also Friday, Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, announced that he was told by the Veterans Affairs Department that veterans diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder while on active duty will automatically have the diagnosis recognized by the VA. The decision could eliminate a hurdle for some veterans as they seek compensation.
On Thursday, the Army said there have been 11 deaths not due to natural causes between June and Feb. 5 in the special transition units. The 11 deaths included four suicides, three accidental overdoses of prescribed medications, three deaths still under investigation and one motor vehicle accident, the Army said.
___Associated Press writer Pauline Jelinek contributed to this report.
4:54 PM CST, February 15, 2008
WASHINGTON - A Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee said Friday it was inappropriate for the Army's surgeon general to compare the overdose deaths of injured soldiers in the military's care to that of actor Heath Ledger.
Earlier this month, Army Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker made reference to the 28-year-old "Brokeback Mountain" star's death as he discussed the overdose deaths of some troops in the Army's "warrior transition units." The units give wounded troops coordinated medical care, financial advice, legal help and other services as they make the adjustments necessary either to return to active duty or re-enter civilian life.
"This isn't restricted to the military, alone, as we all saw the unfortunate death of one of our leading actors recently," Schoomaker told Pentagon reporters. His comments came a day after it was announced that Ledger had died Jan. 22 from an accidental overdose -- the effect of taking several types of painkillers and sedatives.
Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., told reporters during a conference call Friday that likening Ledger's death to the deaths by overdose of wounded soldiers was not appropriate because Ledger was not injured in combat."He didn't have a traumatic brain injury," Bayh said. "He wasn't, as far as I know, under a physician's care or residing in a unit designed to protect him and treat him or given by his own caregivers potentially lethal doses of medication and left to self medicate himself when he had a traumatic brain injury."
Said Bayh, "I just think that analogy is inappropriate and I hope it will stop."The senator pushed for an investigation following the death of Sgt. Gerald Cassidy, a member of the Indiana National Guard. Cassidy, who was in one of the transition units, was found dead in his room Sept. 21 at Fort Knox, Ky., about 15 months after being wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq.
An autopsy later determined he had been dead for hours and might have been unconscious for days before he was found alone. The Army Criminal Investigation Command determined the death was accidental and caused by a multidrug toxicity complicated by severe atherosclerotic coronary arterial disease.
Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman, said Friday that Schoomaker's intent by the comments was to educate about the growing health risk of overdoses in the military population and the American population as a whole.
Bayh and other Democratic senators on the conference call praised changes that have been made since shoddy outpatient housing and bureaucratic delays were exposed last year at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. But Bayh said the focus has been too heavily placed on Walter Reed. He said the entire system should be reformed.
Also Friday, Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, announced that he was told by the Veterans Affairs Department that veterans diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder while on active duty will automatically have the diagnosis recognized by the VA. The decision could eliminate a hurdle for some veterans as they seek compensation.
On Thursday, the Army said there have been 11 deaths not due to natural causes between June and Feb. 5 in the special transition units. The 11 deaths included four suicides, three accidental overdoses of prescribed medications, three deaths still under investigation and one motor vehicle accident, the Army said.
___Associated Press writer Pauline Jelinek contributed to this report.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Army: 3 ODs, 4 suicides in unit for wounded
By Pauline Jelinek - The Associated Press
Posted : Friday Feb 15, 2008 9:41:05 EST
There have been at least three accidental drug overdoses and four suicides among soldiers in special units the Army set up last summer to help war-wounded troops, officials said late Thursday.
A team of pharmacists and other military officials met early this week at the Pentagon to look into the deaths in so-called “warrior transition units” — established to give sick, injured and wounded troops coordinated medical care, financial advice, legal help and other services as they attempt to make the transition toward either a return to uniform or back into civilian life.
The Army said officials had determined that among those troops there have been 11 deaths that were not due to natural causes between June and Feb. 5.
That included four suicides, three accidental overdoses of prescribed medications, three deaths still under investigation and one motor vehicle accident, the Army said.
“Army medical and safety professionals continue to remind soldiers and their families of the importance of prescription-drug safety precautions, including following the printed directions and information for each medicine,” the Army said of the overdoses in a statement Thursday.
Noting the death of actor Heath Ledger, Army Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker last week first disclosed the issue of drug overdoses in the 35 special transition units, which care for more than 9,500 soldiers.
“This isn’t restricted to the military, alone, as we all saw the unfortunate death of one of our leading actors recently,” Schoomaker told Pentagon reporters. He made his comments the day after The New York medical examiner announced that Ledger, the 28-year-old “Brokeback Mountain” star, died Jan. 22 from an accidental overdose — the effects of taking several types of painkillers and sedatives.
Schoomaker didn’t have statistics with him at the time and said he didn’t know whether the number of overdoses among soldiers was on the rise. He said the series of deaths in the new units was noticed and getting attention partly because the units concentrate the Army’s temporarily disabled and ill troops into special groups, thus making it possible for leaders to track and tabulate their health issues more closely and carefully than ever before.
He made the comment about overdoses when asked to comment on recent Army suicide figures. Preliminary figures show that, as of last month, officials had confirmed 89 suicides last year among all active duty and activated National Guard and Reserve — and that another 32 deaths were still under investigation. If all are confirmed, the total of 121 would be nearly a 20 percent increase over 2006.
Statistics show accidental overdoses have become a national problem, with the deaths from accidental ingestion of multiple prescription drugs now exceeding deaths from illegal drugs, Schoomaker said.
The transition units are part of deep and numerous changes the Army has made in its medical system since shoddy outpatient housing and bureaucratic delays were exposed last year at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
Posted : Friday Feb 15, 2008 9:41:05 EST
There have been at least three accidental drug overdoses and four suicides among soldiers in special units the Army set up last summer to help war-wounded troops, officials said late Thursday.
A team of pharmacists and other military officials met early this week at the Pentagon to look into the deaths in so-called “warrior transition units” — established to give sick, injured and wounded troops coordinated medical care, financial advice, legal help and other services as they attempt to make the transition toward either a return to uniform or back into civilian life.
The Army said officials had determined that among those troops there have been 11 deaths that were not due to natural causes between June and Feb. 5.
That included four suicides, three accidental overdoses of prescribed medications, three deaths still under investigation and one motor vehicle accident, the Army said.
“Army medical and safety professionals continue to remind soldiers and their families of the importance of prescription-drug safety precautions, including following the printed directions and information for each medicine,” the Army said of the overdoses in a statement Thursday.
Noting the death of actor Heath Ledger, Army Surgeon General Lt. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker last week first disclosed the issue of drug overdoses in the 35 special transition units, which care for more than 9,500 soldiers.
“This isn’t restricted to the military, alone, as we all saw the unfortunate death of one of our leading actors recently,” Schoomaker told Pentagon reporters. He made his comments the day after The New York medical examiner announced that Ledger, the 28-year-old “Brokeback Mountain” star, died Jan. 22 from an accidental overdose — the effects of taking several types of painkillers and sedatives.
Schoomaker didn’t have statistics with him at the time and said he didn’t know whether the number of overdoses among soldiers was on the rise. He said the series of deaths in the new units was noticed and getting attention partly because the units concentrate the Army’s temporarily disabled and ill troops into special groups, thus making it possible for leaders to track and tabulate their health issues more closely and carefully than ever before.
He made the comment about overdoses when asked to comment on recent Army suicide figures. Preliminary figures show that, as of last month, officials had confirmed 89 suicides last year among all active duty and activated National Guard and Reserve — and that another 32 deaths were still under investigation. If all are confirmed, the total of 121 would be nearly a 20 percent increase over 2006.
Statistics show accidental overdoses have become a national problem, with the deaths from accidental ingestion of multiple prescription drugs now exceeding deaths from illegal drugs, Schoomaker said.
The transition units are part of deep and numerous changes the Army has made in its medical system since shoddy outpatient housing and bureaucratic delays were exposed last year at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Soldier, After Bipolar Treatment and Suicide Attempts, Sent Back to War Zone
Published: February 11, 2008
7:30 AM ET
FORT CARSON A Fort Carson soldier who says he was in treatment at Cedar Springs Hospital for bipolar disorder and alcohol abuse was released early and ordered to deploy to the Middle East with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team.
The 28-year-old specialist spent 31 days in Kuwait and was returned to Fort Carson on Dec. 31 after health care professionals in Kuwait concurred that his symptoms met criteria for bipolar disorder and “some paranoia and possible homicidal tendencies,” according to e-mails obtained by a Denver newspaper.
The soldier, who asked not to be identified because of the stigma surrounding mental illness and because he will seek employment when he leaves the Army, said he checked himself into Cedar Springs on Nov. 9 or Nov. 10 after he attempted suicide while under the influence of alcohol. He said his treatment was supposed to end Dec. 10, but his commanding officers showed up at the hospital Nov. 29 and ordered him to leave.
“I was pulled out to deploy,” said the soldier, who has three years in the Army and has served a tour in Iraq.
Soldiers from Fort Carson and across the country have complained they were sent to combat zones despite medical conditions that should have prevented their deployment. Late last year, Fort Carson said it sent 79 soldiers who were considered medical “no-gos” overseas. Officials said the soldiers were placed in light-duty jobs and are receiving treatment there. So far, at least six soldiers have been returned.
An e-mail sent Jan. 3 by Capt. Scot Tebo, the brigade surgeon, says the 3rd Brigade Combat Team had “been having issues reaching deployable strength” and that some “borderline” soldiers were sent overseas.
Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, was outraged.“If he’s an inpatient in a hospital, they should have never taken him out. The chain of command needs to be held accountable for this. Washington needs to get involved at the Pentagon to make sure this doesn’t happen again.
“First, we had the planeload of wounded, injured and ill being forced back to the war zone. And now we have soldiers forcibly removed from mental hospitals. The level of outrage is off the Richter scale.”
The soldier said that on Nov. 29, he was called to the office at Cedar Springs. His squad leader, his platoon leader, his Army Substance Abuse Program counselor and two counselors from Cedar Springs “came and ambushed me.”
He said an Army alcohol counselor told him alcoholism and anxiety could not stop him from being deployed. “They said, ‘You know what? Tough it out. All of us like to drink.’”
In the December e-mail, Tebo tells brigade leaders: “Evidently, while at Cedar Springs, he was started on psychiatric medications that should have made him non-deployable, but somehow no one was notified. He may have been pending a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, but that information was not passed on at discharge. He deployed with his unit and has not been doing well here.”
In Kuwait, the soldier isolated himself. He said he had “racing thoughts” and couldn’t keep still.
“I was ... burning my fingertips with cigarettes, just anything to keep my mind off of things,” the soldier said.
“I had homicidal thoughts. I don’t know at the time if I intended on doing anything. But at the time, it was there, I had homicidal and suicidal thoughts.”
Since his return, he has been in treatment. He said his medical record contains a permanent profile for bipolar disorder, an illness that makes him unfit for military service. He is undergoing the process to be medically discharged from the Army.
--AP
7:30 AM ET
FORT CARSON A Fort Carson soldier who says he was in treatment at Cedar Springs Hospital for bipolar disorder and alcohol abuse was released early and ordered to deploy to the Middle East with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team.
The 28-year-old specialist spent 31 days in Kuwait and was returned to Fort Carson on Dec. 31 after health care professionals in Kuwait concurred that his symptoms met criteria for bipolar disorder and “some paranoia and possible homicidal tendencies,” according to e-mails obtained by a Denver newspaper.
The soldier, who asked not to be identified because of the stigma surrounding mental illness and because he will seek employment when he leaves the Army, said he checked himself into Cedar Springs on Nov. 9 or Nov. 10 after he attempted suicide while under the influence of alcohol. He said his treatment was supposed to end Dec. 10, but his commanding officers showed up at the hospital Nov. 29 and ordered him to leave.
“I was pulled out to deploy,” said the soldier, who has three years in the Army and has served a tour in Iraq.
Soldiers from Fort Carson and across the country have complained they were sent to combat zones despite medical conditions that should have prevented their deployment. Late last year, Fort Carson said it sent 79 soldiers who were considered medical “no-gos” overseas. Officials said the soldiers were placed in light-duty jobs and are receiving treatment there. So far, at least six soldiers have been returned.
An e-mail sent Jan. 3 by Capt. Scot Tebo, the brigade surgeon, says the 3rd Brigade Combat Team had “been having issues reaching deployable strength” and that some “borderline” soldiers were sent overseas.
Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, was outraged.“If he’s an inpatient in a hospital, they should have never taken him out. The chain of command needs to be held accountable for this. Washington needs to get involved at the Pentagon to make sure this doesn’t happen again.
“First, we had the planeload of wounded, injured and ill being forced back to the war zone. And now we have soldiers forcibly removed from mental hospitals. The level of outrage is off the Richter scale.”
The soldier said that on Nov. 29, he was called to the office at Cedar Springs. His squad leader, his platoon leader, his Army Substance Abuse Program counselor and two counselors from Cedar Springs “came and ambushed me.”
He said an Army alcohol counselor told him alcoholism and anxiety could not stop him from being deployed. “They said, ‘You know what? Tough it out. All of us like to drink.’”
In the December e-mail, Tebo tells brigade leaders: “Evidently, while at Cedar Springs, he was started on psychiatric medications that should have made him non-deployable, but somehow no one was notified. He may have been pending a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, but that information was not passed on at discharge. He deployed with his unit and has not been doing well here.”
In Kuwait, the soldier isolated himself. He said he had “racing thoughts” and couldn’t keep still.
“I was ... burning my fingertips with cigarettes, just anything to keep my mind off of things,” the soldier said.
“I had homicidal thoughts. I don’t know at the time if I intended on doing anything. But at the time, it was there, I had homicidal and suicidal thoughts.”
Since his return, he has been in treatment. He said his medical record contains a permanent profile for bipolar disorder, an illness that makes him unfit for military service. He is undergoing the process to be medically discharged from the Army.
--AP
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Ft. Carson Soldiers In Court, Accused Of Murder
Reporter: Stephanie RossEmail Address: mailto:sross@kktv11news.com?subject=Ft.
Fort Carson soldiers Bruce Bastien and Louis Bressler were in court Friday for a preliminary hearing for the murder of another soldier, Robert James, in August.
The two are also suspected in the murder of Kevin Shields, also a soldier at Fort Carson.
Detective Derek Graham of the Colorado Springs Police department took the stand and described the evening of August 3rd, 2007, into the morning of August 4th, when police found the body of Robert James in the Bank of the Broadmoor parking lot.
James was shot multiple times and the testimony of Detective Graham describes two gun shots to James' throat and one shot to the top of his head. It was described as execution style. The prosecution showed graphic photos of the body and the gunshot wounds in court.
The prosecution also began to pull out similarities between this murder and another murder that police were investigating involving the death of Kevin Sheilds. The detective testified that the same style of gun was used in both homicides and the manner was similar.
The detective also described an interview he conducted with Bruce Bastien where he told police that Bressler had shot James after he had told Bastien that they should rob him. In his testimony he said that Bastien had said that he did not know that Bressler was going to shoot and kill James.
After hearing testimony, the judge decided not to consolidate the murders.
Bastien and Bressler will be back in court in March, at which time they are expected to enter a plea.
http://www.kktv.com/news/headlines/15446876.html
--submitted by Patti Woodard
More details can be found here.
Fort Carson soldiers Bruce Bastien and Louis Bressler were in court Friday for a preliminary hearing for the murder of another soldier, Robert James, in August.
The two are also suspected in the murder of Kevin Shields, also a soldier at Fort Carson.
Detective Derek Graham of the Colorado Springs Police department took the stand and described the evening of August 3rd, 2007, into the morning of August 4th, when police found the body of Robert James in the Bank of the Broadmoor parking lot.
James was shot multiple times and the testimony of Detective Graham describes two gun shots to James' throat and one shot to the top of his head. It was described as execution style. The prosecution showed graphic photos of the body and the gunshot wounds in court.
The prosecution also began to pull out similarities between this murder and another murder that police were investigating involving the death of Kevin Sheilds. The detective testified that the same style of gun was used in both homicides and the manner was similar.
The detective also described an interview he conducted with Bruce Bastien where he told police that Bressler had shot James after he had told Bastien that they should rob him. In his testimony he said that Bastien had said that he did not know that Bressler was going to shoot and kill James.
After hearing testimony, the judge decided not to consolidate the murders.
Bastien and Bressler will be back in court in March, at which time they are expected to enter a plea.
http://www.kktv.com/news/headlines/15446876.html
--submitted by Patti Woodard
More details can be found here.
Monday, February 04, 2008
High Rate of Soldier Suicide
The number of American soldiers who try to commit suicide is at an all time high, according to an independent study. And one Colorado Springs man says he may know why. Richard "Singe" Stites says his son, who was in the Army, took his own life seven years ago.
Private Nolan Edward Stites began his military career at Fort Carson. He began his training while he was still in high school.
Private Nolan was then transferred to Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri. It was there that he killed himself. He was just two days shy of his 19Th birthday.
According to Private Nolan's father, Nolan was not a sad kid.
His father called him a perfectionist. "He loved the outdoors. He was an expert marksman with all types of firearms and he was a good student", said Richard Stites.
Private Nolan also loved his country and knew at a ripe age he wanted to join the Army. But when he finally did, his dad says, his life crumbled beneath him.
"He lost his appetite and had trouble sleeping", said Richard Stites.
Private Nolan was depressed and told his dad he felt like killing himself. So Richard Stites ordered his son to seek help.
"The two main things that happen to people when they die from suicide is a feeling of not belonging and of being a burden", said Richard Stites.
The Army, Richard Stites believes, did not treat his son with compassion nor get him appropriate help. "I feel I never got the truth", said Richard Stites.
Richard Stites said he was told by his son's peers that their drill sergeant made Private Nolan feel foolish for being depressed. "Whatever was wrong with him, the treatment he received for 15 days, having my son running around in front of his peers with out his belt and boot laces, being made fun of, exacerbated the problem tremendously", said Richard Stites.
Richard Stites says there are probably hundreds of reasons why men and women in the military take their lives. But one of them he believes is because they're too embarrassed to come forward. "There's that stigma. They're afraid to get help", said Richard Stites.
Second, he believes soldiers being deployed time after time is simply unhealthy.
Last year, more than 2,000 soldiers tried to end their lives. Compare that to 2001, when nearly 500 soldiers attempted suicide.
Private Nolan Edward Stites began his military career at Fort Carson. He began his training while he was still in high school.
Private Nolan was then transferred to Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri. It was there that he killed himself. He was just two days shy of his 19Th birthday.
According to Private Nolan's father, Nolan was not a sad kid.
His father called him a perfectionist. "He loved the outdoors. He was an expert marksman with all types of firearms and he was a good student", said Richard Stites.
Private Nolan also loved his country and knew at a ripe age he wanted to join the Army. But when he finally did, his dad says, his life crumbled beneath him.
"He lost his appetite and had trouble sleeping", said Richard Stites.
Private Nolan was depressed and told his dad he felt like killing himself. So Richard Stites ordered his son to seek help.
"The two main things that happen to people when they die from suicide is a feeling of not belonging and of being a burden", said Richard Stites.
The Army, Richard Stites believes, did not treat his son with compassion nor get him appropriate help. "I feel I never got the truth", said Richard Stites.
Richard Stites said he was told by his son's peers that their drill sergeant made Private Nolan feel foolish for being depressed. "Whatever was wrong with him, the treatment he received for 15 days, having my son running around in front of his peers with out his belt and boot laces, being made fun of, exacerbated the problem tremendously", said Richard Stites.
Richard Stites says there are probably hundreds of reasons why men and women in the military take their lives. But one of them he believes is because they're too embarrassed to come forward. "There's that stigma. They're afraid to get help", said Richard Stites.
Second, he believes soldiers being deployed time after time is simply unhealthy.
Last year, more than 2,000 soldiers tried to end their lives. Compare that to 2001, when nearly 500 soldiers attempted suicide.
Military Sexual Predator Shipped to Phoenix Area for 2 years Without Accountability
What do Zero Tolerance and Undue Command Influence Have in Common?
They were supposed to be the military’s answer once again to another sexual abuse scandal within the services. There have been over 22 Congressional Task Forces without significant change to any genuine and real policies to dramatically decrease sexual predator lack of accountability in the US military services.
Dimly in the shadow of the Lauterbach case, this young raped female Marine who became pregnant from her rape, faced down Marine leadership and gang mob mentality demanded her rapist be held accountable as the leadership said, “her rape was not violent.”
Maria Lauterbach and her 8 month (in womb) son was brutally murdered. One would hope the military and government has NOW gotten it, and stop going after the courageous victims who stand up and speak out! That the military gets these victims are pin pointing what they can’t do, point out the abusers. But, that is not so, the US Air Force in an attempt to have little press coverage of a sexual predator among their ranks, and who they simply shipped across country without accountability is beginning a trial under the cover of the Super Bowl in Phoenix, Arizona at Luke Air Force Base the week of Feb 6th.
This case deals with an Air Force married recruiter Sgt Deveau who while in Maine allegedly sexually groomed and manipulated multiple young recruitees, and personnel ignoring other military policies for his own gratification.
One wonders if the Air Force failed Sgt Deveau or IF Sgt Deveau failed the Air Force by not living up to the policies of the Aberdeen Proving Ground Rape Scandal in which Recruiters of Recruits wrongfully used of chain of command power of Undue Command Influence to prey upon young recruits sexually. Using duress and coercion Deveau of his authority knowing the less then lackluster prosecution record of the US military for sexual abuse crimes, decided his own sexual exploits were far more important then following any current military policy previously on the books.
Sgt Deveau’s abuses while in Maine of untold young women has resulted in bringing 2 to 3 young women in as witnesses, the tracking down of many other victims for testimony have been determined to be irrelevant by the Air Force.
As Deveau kept abusing Maine’s daughters in the style of the military services—the Air Force transferred Sgt Deveau to Luke Air Force Base without warning to Arizona citizens.
As one of the victims spoke out, she was treated abusively in the military time and again, but refusing to back down and she is forcing the trial the Air Force doesn’t want to occur.
Instead the Air Force is systematically going after the women victims set to testify by bringing in hostile witnesses. At this time it is not known if the Air Force prosecutors will bring authentic expert witnesses on behalf of the victim to counter the attacks of the hostile witnesses. It remains a systemic problem that the military goes after victims rather then predators who continue to groom to abuse. It appears time and again, the government and military selective prosecution of predators and they still refuse to honor their own military policies such as Zero Tolerance and Undue Command Influence that put only one of dozens of Army predators in prison for 25 years.
The two witnesses are set to testify had have already suffered re-traumatization from ongoing harassment by the military legal counsels in questioning and in bringing hostile witnesses against them.
We are asking for press to help in bringing a leveling playing field to this situation by demonstrating an interest in this case. If you want to really know what Lauterbach and all military survivors go through after reporting these crimes - look into this case.
We need your help to be supportive of these young women, and hold fully accountable the alleged sexual predator Sgt Deveau and the leadership that allows the gang mob mentality to take over.
Please contact me if interested in this case. I will put you in contact with the families. They have been financially ruined due to these issues.
Rev. Dorothy Mackey Executive Director of STAAAMP, Survivors Take Action Against Abuse by Military Personnel, contact
They were supposed to be the military’s answer once again to another sexual abuse scandal within the services. There have been over 22 Congressional Task Forces without significant change to any genuine and real policies to dramatically decrease sexual predator lack of accountability in the US military services.
Dimly in the shadow of the Lauterbach case, this young raped female Marine who became pregnant from her rape, faced down Marine leadership and gang mob mentality demanded her rapist be held accountable as the leadership said, “her rape was not violent.”
Maria Lauterbach and her 8 month (in womb) son was brutally murdered. One would hope the military and government has NOW gotten it, and stop going after the courageous victims who stand up and speak out! That the military gets these victims are pin pointing what they can’t do, point out the abusers. But, that is not so, the US Air Force in an attempt to have little press coverage of a sexual predator among their ranks, and who they simply shipped across country without accountability is beginning a trial under the cover of the Super Bowl in Phoenix, Arizona at Luke Air Force Base the week of Feb 6th.
This case deals with an Air Force married recruiter Sgt Deveau who while in Maine allegedly sexually groomed and manipulated multiple young recruitees, and personnel ignoring other military policies for his own gratification.
One wonders if the Air Force failed Sgt Deveau or IF Sgt Deveau failed the Air Force by not living up to the policies of the Aberdeen Proving Ground Rape Scandal in which Recruiters of Recruits wrongfully used of chain of command power of Undue Command Influence to prey upon young recruits sexually. Using duress and coercion Deveau of his authority knowing the less then lackluster prosecution record of the US military for sexual abuse crimes, decided his own sexual exploits were far more important then following any current military policy previously on the books.
Sgt Deveau’s abuses while in Maine of untold young women has resulted in bringing 2 to 3 young women in as witnesses, the tracking down of many other victims for testimony have been determined to be irrelevant by the Air Force.
As Deveau kept abusing Maine’s daughters in the style of the military services—the Air Force transferred Sgt Deveau to Luke Air Force Base without warning to Arizona citizens.
As one of the victims spoke out, she was treated abusively in the military time and again, but refusing to back down and she is forcing the trial the Air Force doesn’t want to occur.
Instead the Air Force is systematically going after the women victims set to testify by bringing in hostile witnesses. At this time it is not known if the Air Force prosecutors will bring authentic expert witnesses on behalf of the victim to counter the attacks of the hostile witnesses. It remains a systemic problem that the military goes after victims rather then predators who continue to groom to abuse. It appears time and again, the government and military selective prosecution of predators and they still refuse to honor their own military policies such as Zero Tolerance and Undue Command Influence that put only one of dozens of Army predators in prison for 25 years.
The two witnesses are set to testify had have already suffered re-traumatization from ongoing harassment by the military legal counsels in questioning and in bringing hostile witnesses against them.
We are asking for press to help in bringing a leveling playing field to this situation by demonstrating an interest in this case. If you want to really know what Lauterbach and all military survivors go through after reporting these crimes - look into this case.
We need your help to be supportive of these young women, and hold fully accountable the alleged sexual predator Sgt Deveau and the leadership that allows the gang mob mentality to take over.
Please contact me if interested in this case. I will put you in contact with the families. They have been financially ruined due to these issues.
Rev. Dorothy Mackey Executive Director of STAAAMP, Survivors Take Action Against Abuse by Military Personnel, contact
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Soldier Suicides at Record Level: Increase Linked to Long Wars, Lack of Army Resources
By Dana Priest, Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Lt. Elizabeth Whiteside, a psychiatric outpatient at Walter Reed Army Medical Center who was waiting for the Army to decide whether to court-martial her for endangering another soldier and turning a gun on herself last year in Iraq, attempted to kill herself Monday evening. In so doing, the 25-year-old Army reservist joined a record number of soldiers who have committed or tried to commit suicide after serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"I'm very disappointed with the Army," Whiteside wrote in a note before swallowing dozens of antidepressants and other pills. "Hopefully this will help other soldiers." She was taken to the emergency room early Tuesday. Whiteside, who is now in stable physical condition, learned yesterday that the charges against her had been dismissed.
Whiteside's personal tragedy is part of an alarming phenomenon in the Army's ranks: Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006.
At the same time, the number of attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries in the Army has jumped sixfold since the Iraq war began. Last year, about 2,100 soldiers injured themselves or attempted suicide, compared with about 350 in 2002, according to the U.S. Army Medical Command Suicide Prevention Action Plan.
The Army was unprepared for the high number of suicides and cases of post-traumatic stress disorder among its troops, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have continued far longer than anticipated. Many Army posts still do not offer enough individual counseling and some soldiers suffering psychological problems complain that they are stigmatized by commanders. Over the past year, four high-level commissions have recommended reforms and Congress has given the military hundreds of millions of dollars to improve its mental health care, but critics charge that significant progress has not been made.
The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have placed severe stress on the Army, caused in part by repeated and lengthened deployments. Historically, suicide rates tend to decrease when soldiers are in conflicts overseas, but that trend has reversed in recent years. From a suicide rate of 9.8 per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2001 -- the lowest rate on record -- the Army reached an all-time high of 17.5 suicides per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2006.
Last year, twice as many soldier suicides occurred in the United States than in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, the Army's top psychiatrist and author of the study, said that suicides and attempted suicides "are continuing to rise despite a lot of things we're doing now and have been doing." Ritchie added: "We need to improve training and education. We need to improve our capacity to provide behavioral health care."
Ritchie's team conducted more than 200 interviews in the United States and overseas, and found that the common factors in suicides and attempted suicides include failed personal relationships; legal, financial or occupational problems; and the frequency and length of overseas deployments. She said the Army must do a better job of making sure that soldiers in distress receive mental health services. "We need to know what to do when we're concerned about one of our fellows."
The study, which the Army's top personnel chief ordered six months ago, acknowledges that the Army still does not know how to adequately assess, monitor and treat soldiers with psychological problems. In fact, it says that "the current Army Suicide Prevention Program was not originally designed for a combat/deployment environment."
Staff Sgt. Gladys Santos, an Army medic who attempted suicide after three tours in Iraq, said the Army urgently needs to hire more psychiatrists and psychologists who have an understanding of war. "They gave me an 800 number to call if I needed help," she said. "When I come to feeling overwhelmed, I don't care about the 800 number. I want a one-on-one talk with a trained psychiatrist who's either been to war or understands war."
Santos, who is being treated at Walter Reed, said the only effective therapy she has received there in the past year have been the one-on-one sessions with her psychiatrist, not the group sessions in which soldiers are told "Don't hit your wife, don't hit your kids," or the other groups where they play bingo or learn how to properly set a table.
Over the past year, the Army has reinvigorated its efforts to understand mental health issues and has instituted new assessment surveys and new online videos and questionnaires to help soldiers recognize problems and become more resilient, Ritchie said. It has also hired more mental health providers. The plan calls for attaching more chaplains to deployed units and assigning "battle buddies" to improve peer support and monitoring.
Increasing suicides raise "real questions about whether you can have an Army this size with multiple deployments," said David Rudd, a former Army psychologist and chairman of the psychology department at Texas Tech University.
On Monday night, as President Bush delivered his State of the Union address and asked Congress to "improve the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives of hope and promise and dignity," Whiteside was dozing off from the effects of her drug overdose. Her case highlights the Army's continuing struggles to remove the stigma surrounding mental illness and to make it easier for soldiers and officers to seek psychological help.
Whiteside, the subject of a Post article in December, was a high-achieving University of Virginia graduate, and she earned top scores from her Army raters. But as a medic in charge of a small prison team in Iraq, she was repeatedly harassed by one of her commanders, which disturbed her greatly, according to an Army investigation.
On Jan. 1, 2007, weary from helping to quell riots in the prison after the execution of Saddam Hussein, Whiteside had a mental breakdown, according to an Army sanity board investigation. She pointed a gun at a superior, fired two shots into the ceiling and then turned the weapon on herself, piercing several organs. She has been at Walter Reed ever since.
Whiteside's two immediate commanders brought charges against her, but Maj. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker, the only physician in her chain of command and then the commander of Walter Reed, recommended that the charges be dropped, citing her "demonstrably severe depression" and "7 years of credible and honorable service."
The case hinged in part on whether her mental illness prompted her actions, as Walter Reed psychiatrists testified last month, or whether it was "an excuse" for her actions, as her company commander wrote when he proffered the original charges in April. Those charges included assault on a superior commissioned officer, aggravated assault, kidnapping, reckless endangerment, wrongful discharge of a firearm, communication of a threat and two attempts of intentional self-injury without intent to avoid service.
An Army hearing officer cited "Army values" and the need to do "what is right, legally and morally" when he recommended last month that Whiteside not face court-martial or other administration punishment, but that she be discharged and receive the medical benefits "she will desperately need for the remainder of her life." Whiteside decided to speak publicly about her case only after a soldier she had befriended at the hospital's psychiatric ward hanged herself after she was discharged without benefits.
But the U.S. Army Military District of Washington, which has ultimate legal jurisdiction over the case, declined for weeks to tell Whiteside whether others in her chain of command have concurred or differed with the hearing officer, said Matthew MacLean, Whiteside's civilian attorney and a former military lawyer.
MacLean and Whiteside's father, Thomas Whiteside, said the uncertainty took its toll on the young officer's mental state. "I've never seen anything like this. It's just so far off the page," said Thomas Whiteside, his voice cracking with emotion. "I told her, 'If you check out of here, you're not going to be able to help other soldiers.' "
Whiteside recently had begun to take prerequisite classes for a nursing degree, and her mental stability seemed to be improving, her father said. Then late last week, she told him she was having trouble sleeping, with a possible court-martial weighing on her. On Monday night, she asked her father to take her back to her room at Walter Reed so she could study.
She swallowed her pills there. A soldier and his wife, who live next door, came to her room and, after a while, noticed that she was becoming groggy, Thomas Whiteside said. When they returned later and she would not open the door, they called hospital authorities.
Yesterday, after having spent two nights in the intensive care unit, he said, his daughter was transferred to the psychiatric ward.
Whiteside left two notes, one titled "Business," in which her top concern was the fate of her dog. "Appointment for the Vetenarian is in my blue book. Additional paperwork on Chewy is in the closet at the apartment in a folder." On her second note, she penned a postscript: "Sorry to do this to my family + friends. I love you."
Staff writer Anne Hull contributed to this report.
-- submitted by Lois Vanderbur
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Lt. Elizabeth Whiteside, a psychiatric outpatient at Walter Reed Army Medical Center who was waiting for the Army to decide whether to court-martial her for endangering another soldier and turning a gun on herself last year in Iraq, attempted to kill herself Monday evening. In so doing, the 25-year-old Army reservist joined a record number of soldiers who have committed or tried to commit suicide after serving in Iraq or Afghanistan.
"I'm very disappointed with the Army," Whiteside wrote in a note before swallowing dozens of antidepressants and other pills. "Hopefully this will help other soldiers." She was taken to the emergency room early Tuesday. Whiteside, who is now in stable physical condition, learned yesterday that the charges against her had been dismissed.
Whiteside's personal tragedy is part of an alarming phenomenon in the Army's ranks: Suicides among active-duty soldiers in 2007 reached their highest level since the Army began keeping such records in 1980, according to a draft internal study obtained by The Washington Post. Last year, 121 soldiers took their own lives, nearly 20 percent more than in 2006.
At the same time, the number of attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries in the Army has jumped sixfold since the Iraq war began. Last year, about 2,100 soldiers injured themselves or attempted suicide, compared with about 350 in 2002, according to the U.S. Army Medical Command Suicide Prevention Action Plan.
The Army was unprepared for the high number of suicides and cases of post-traumatic stress disorder among its troops, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have continued far longer than anticipated. Many Army posts still do not offer enough individual counseling and some soldiers suffering psychological problems complain that they are stigmatized by commanders. Over the past year, four high-level commissions have recommended reforms and Congress has given the military hundreds of millions of dollars to improve its mental health care, but critics charge that significant progress has not been made.
The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have placed severe stress on the Army, caused in part by repeated and lengthened deployments. Historically, suicide rates tend to decrease when soldiers are in conflicts overseas, but that trend has reversed in recent years. From a suicide rate of 9.8 per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2001 -- the lowest rate on record -- the Army reached an all-time high of 17.5 suicides per 100,000 active-duty soldiers in 2006.
Last year, twice as many soldier suicides occurred in the United States than in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Col. Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, the Army's top psychiatrist and author of the study, said that suicides and attempted suicides "are continuing to rise despite a lot of things we're doing now and have been doing." Ritchie added: "We need to improve training and education. We need to improve our capacity to provide behavioral health care."
Ritchie's team conducted more than 200 interviews in the United States and overseas, and found that the common factors in suicides and attempted suicides include failed personal relationships; legal, financial or occupational problems; and the frequency and length of overseas deployments. She said the Army must do a better job of making sure that soldiers in distress receive mental health services. "We need to know what to do when we're concerned about one of our fellows."
The study, which the Army's top personnel chief ordered six months ago, acknowledges that the Army still does not know how to adequately assess, monitor and treat soldiers with psychological problems. In fact, it says that "the current Army Suicide Prevention Program was not originally designed for a combat/deployment environment."
Staff Sgt. Gladys Santos, an Army medic who attempted suicide after three tours in Iraq, said the Army urgently needs to hire more psychiatrists and psychologists who have an understanding of war. "They gave me an 800 number to call if I needed help," she said. "When I come to feeling overwhelmed, I don't care about the 800 number. I want a one-on-one talk with a trained psychiatrist who's either been to war or understands war."
Santos, who is being treated at Walter Reed, said the only effective therapy she has received there in the past year have been the one-on-one sessions with her psychiatrist, not the group sessions in which soldiers are told "Don't hit your wife, don't hit your kids," or the other groups where they play bingo or learn how to properly set a table.
Over the past year, the Army has reinvigorated its efforts to understand mental health issues and has instituted new assessment surveys and new online videos and questionnaires to help soldiers recognize problems and become more resilient, Ritchie said. It has also hired more mental health providers. The plan calls for attaching more chaplains to deployed units and assigning "battle buddies" to improve peer support and monitoring.
Increasing suicides raise "real questions about whether you can have an Army this size with multiple deployments," said David Rudd, a former Army psychologist and chairman of the psychology department at Texas Tech University.
On Monday night, as President Bush delivered his State of the Union address and asked Congress to "improve the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives of hope and promise and dignity," Whiteside was dozing off from the effects of her drug overdose. Her case highlights the Army's continuing struggles to remove the stigma surrounding mental illness and to make it easier for soldiers and officers to seek psychological help.
Whiteside, the subject of a Post article in December, was a high-achieving University of Virginia graduate, and she earned top scores from her Army raters. But as a medic in charge of a small prison team in Iraq, she was repeatedly harassed by one of her commanders, which disturbed her greatly, according to an Army investigation.
On Jan. 1, 2007, weary from helping to quell riots in the prison after the execution of Saddam Hussein, Whiteside had a mental breakdown, according to an Army sanity board investigation. She pointed a gun at a superior, fired two shots into the ceiling and then turned the weapon on herself, piercing several organs. She has been at Walter Reed ever since.
Whiteside's two immediate commanders brought charges against her, but Maj. Gen. Eric B. Schoomaker, the only physician in her chain of command and then the commander of Walter Reed, recommended that the charges be dropped, citing her "demonstrably severe depression" and "7 years of credible and honorable service."
The case hinged in part on whether her mental illness prompted her actions, as Walter Reed psychiatrists testified last month, or whether it was "an excuse" for her actions, as her company commander wrote when he proffered the original charges in April. Those charges included assault on a superior commissioned officer, aggravated assault, kidnapping, reckless endangerment, wrongful discharge of a firearm, communication of a threat and two attempts of intentional self-injury without intent to avoid service.
An Army hearing officer cited "Army values" and the need to do "what is right, legally and morally" when he recommended last month that Whiteside not face court-martial or other administration punishment, but that she be discharged and receive the medical benefits "she will desperately need for the remainder of her life." Whiteside decided to speak publicly about her case only after a soldier she had befriended at the hospital's psychiatric ward hanged herself after she was discharged without benefits.
But the U.S. Army Military District of Washington, which has ultimate legal jurisdiction over the case, declined for weeks to tell Whiteside whether others in her chain of command have concurred or differed with the hearing officer, said Matthew MacLean, Whiteside's civilian attorney and a former military lawyer.
MacLean and Whiteside's father, Thomas Whiteside, said the uncertainty took its toll on the young officer's mental state. "I've never seen anything like this. It's just so far off the page," said Thomas Whiteside, his voice cracking with emotion. "I told her, 'If you check out of here, you're not going to be able to help other soldiers.' "
Whiteside recently had begun to take prerequisite classes for a nursing degree, and her mental stability seemed to be improving, her father said. Then late last week, she told him she was having trouble sleeping, with a possible court-martial weighing on her. On Monday night, she asked her father to take her back to her room at Walter Reed so she could study.
She swallowed her pills there. A soldier and his wife, who live next door, came to her room and, after a while, noticed that she was becoming groggy, Thomas Whiteside said. When they returned later and she would not open the door, they called hospital authorities.
Yesterday, after having spent two nights in the intensive care unit, he said, his daughter was transferred to the psychiatric ward.
Whiteside left two notes, one titled "Business," in which her top concern was the fate of her dog. "Appointment for the Vetenarian is in my blue book. Additional paperwork on Chewy is in the closet at the apartment in a folder." On her second note, she penned a postscript: "Sorry to do this to my family + friends. I love you."
Staff writer Anne Hull contributed to this report.
-- submitted by Lois Vanderbur
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Returned from Iraq and still at war
February 1, 2008
ERIC RUDER explains how the politicians are failing the soldiers they sent to war.
THE YOUNG men and women sent to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan who manage to return home physically intact tend to count themselves among the fortunate. But they soon learn that the struggle to return to the lives they left behind has just begun for them.
A small but growing segment of veterans is losing that battle. They find themselves confronted by inner demons--reliving memories of the horrors of war, dwelling on the loss of fallen comrades, and tormented by nervous systems that seem stuck in a constant state of high alert after all those months in the field.
Any number of indicators show the consequences of these hidden scars--substance abuse, unemployment, homelessness, suicide and murder.
A New York Times investigative series found 121 cases of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who committed or were charged with murder after returning from war. A third of the victims were spouses, girlfriends, children or other relatives; a quarter were fellow servicemembers; and the rest were acquaintances or strangers.
During the six years before and six years after the war in Afghanistan began, homicides committed by active-duty personnel and recent veterans increased by 89 percent--from 184 to 349--according to the Times.
What stuns advocates for these troubled veterans, however, is the speed with which veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are showing up in these categories.
After a happy homecoming, 28-year-old Peter Mohan broke his collarbone in a car crash, touching off a downward spiral. When he moved to be closer to his wife, who had taken a new job, he suddenly found himself without friends--and privately warring with the post-traumatic stress disorder caused by his military service.
He couldn't find a job. He turned to drinking and flirted with suicide. And when his wife felt she had exhausted her ability to help him and asked him to move out, he ended up in a homeless shelter.
“While many Vietnam veterans began showing manifestations of stress disorders roughly 10 years after returning from the front, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have shown the signs much earlier,” the Associated Press reported.
The disproportionate number of veterans among the homeless is a well-established trend, dating from the Vietnam years. “Veterans have long accounted for a high share of the nation's homeless,” according to the National Alliance to End Homelessness. “Although they make up 11 percent of the adult population, they make up 26 percent of the homeless on any given day.”
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has identified about 1,500 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who were homeless at some point in 2006--a small but growing proportion of the 336,000 veterans who were homeless that same year.
The VA contends it's doing what's necessary to help these veterans. It spends about $265 million annually on programs for homeless veterans. But compared to the $8 billion a month the U.S. is spending to put soldiers on the battlefield, the money for such programs--about 0.3 percent of annual war spending--is tiny.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE VA has also failed to address the epidemic of suicide among veterans--a fact starkly revealed by a CBS News investigation that found the Department of Defense grossly understates the number of veterans who take their own lives.
The Pentagon only acknowledges 130 self-inflicted fatalities among U.S. military personnel in Iraq since 2003, but the U.S. Army alone reported 97 suicides in 2006. CBS News found that there were at least 6,256 suicides by veterans of all eras in 2005--an average of 120 a week.
Veterans of all ages were twice as likely as non-veterans to commit suicide, but among 20- to 24-year-olds, the suicide rate for veterans was two to four times higher.
“The Department of Defense has managed to keep what has clearly become an epidemic of death beneath the radar of public awareness by systematically concealing statistics about soldier suicides,” wrote Penny Coleman, the widow of a Vietnam veteran who committed suicide and author of a book entitled Flashback: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, Suicide and the Lessons of War.
“They have done everything from burying them on official casualty lists in a category they call 'accidental non-combat deaths' to outright lying to the parents of dead soldiers. And the Department of Veterans Affairs has rubber-stamped their disinformation, continuing to insist that their studies indicate that soldiers are killing themselves, not because of their combat experiences, but because they have 'personal problems.'”
Politicians try to muzzle antiwar critics with the charge that they don't “support the troops”--at the same time that the military and political establishment has failed to address the basic needs of returning troops.
In reality, it's the antiwar movement that stands for both the immediate withdrawal of troops from harm's way--and increased funding for health and other services that veterans deserve and desperately need.
ERIC RUDER explains how the politicians are failing the soldiers they sent to war.
THE YOUNG men and women sent to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan who manage to return home physically intact tend to count themselves among the fortunate. But they soon learn that the struggle to return to the lives they left behind has just begun for them.
A small but growing segment of veterans is losing that battle. They find themselves confronted by inner demons--reliving memories of the horrors of war, dwelling on the loss of fallen comrades, and tormented by nervous systems that seem stuck in a constant state of high alert after all those months in the field.
Any number of indicators show the consequences of these hidden scars--substance abuse, unemployment, homelessness, suicide and murder.
A New York Times investigative series found 121 cases of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who committed or were charged with murder after returning from war. A third of the victims were spouses, girlfriends, children or other relatives; a quarter were fellow servicemembers; and the rest were acquaintances or strangers.
During the six years before and six years after the war in Afghanistan began, homicides committed by active-duty personnel and recent veterans increased by 89 percent--from 184 to 349--according to the Times.
What stuns advocates for these troubled veterans, however, is the speed with which veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are showing up in these categories.
After a happy homecoming, 28-year-old Peter Mohan broke his collarbone in a car crash, touching off a downward spiral. When he moved to be closer to his wife, who had taken a new job, he suddenly found himself without friends--and privately warring with the post-traumatic stress disorder caused by his military service.
He couldn't find a job. He turned to drinking and flirted with suicide. And when his wife felt she had exhausted her ability to help him and asked him to move out, he ended up in a homeless shelter.
“While many Vietnam veterans began showing manifestations of stress disorders roughly 10 years after returning from the front, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have shown the signs much earlier,” the Associated Press reported.
The disproportionate number of veterans among the homeless is a well-established trend, dating from the Vietnam years. “Veterans have long accounted for a high share of the nation's homeless,” according to the National Alliance to End Homelessness. “Although they make up 11 percent of the adult population, they make up 26 percent of the homeless on any given day.”
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has identified about 1,500 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who were homeless at some point in 2006--a small but growing proportion of the 336,000 veterans who were homeless that same year.
The VA contends it's doing what's necessary to help these veterans. It spends about $265 million annually on programs for homeless veterans. But compared to the $8 billion a month the U.S. is spending to put soldiers on the battlefield, the money for such programs--about 0.3 percent of annual war spending--is tiny.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE VA has also failed to address the epidemic of suicide among veterans--a fact starkly revealed by a CBS News investigation that found the Department of Defense grossly understates the number of veterans who take their own lives.
The Pentagon only acknowledges 130 self-inflicted fatalities among U.S. military personnel in Iraq since 2003, but the U.S. Army alone reported 97 suicides in 2006. CBS News found that there were at least 6,256 suicides by veterans of all eras in 2005--an average of 120 a week.
Veterans of all ages were twice as likely as non-veterans to commit suicide, but among 20- to 24-year-olds, the suicide rate for veterans was two to four times higher.
“The Department of Defense has managed to keep what has clearly become an epidemic of death beneath the radar of public awareness by systematically concealing statistics about soldier suicides,” wrote Penny Coleman, the widow of a Vietnam veteran who committed suicide and author of a book entitled Flashback: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, Suicide and the Lessons of War.
“They have done everything from burying them on official casualty lists in a category they call 'accidental non-combat deaths' to outright lying to the parents of dead soldiers. And the Department of Veterans Affairs has rubber-stamped their disinformation, continuing to insist that their studies indicate that soldiers are killing themselves, not because of their combat experiences, but because they have 'personal problems.'”
Politicians try to muzzle antiwar critics with the charge that they don't “support the troops”--at the same time that the military and political establishment has failed to address the basic needs of returning troops.
In reality, it's the antiwar movement that stands for both the immediate withdrawal of troops from harm's way--and increased funding for health and other services that veterans deserve and desperately need.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Fellow Marine charged in ’06 death of Gordon County native
A corporal faces court-martial in the death of a deployed Gordon Marine reportedly shot in the neck.
01/27/08
From the Calhoun Times
Lance Cpl. Kristopher Cody Warren died Nov. 9, 2006.
The Marine Corps is calling the 2006 death of Calhoun native Cody Warren negligence and has charged another Marine in his death.
Lance Cpl. Kristopher Cody Warren, 19, was killed Nov. 9, 2006, while his Marine Reserve detachment was deployed in Iraq. Click here to read a previous report: "Gordon mourning Marine.
At the time, Warren’s death was listed as “non-combat-related,” but the Marines now have charged Cpl. Douglas Michael Sullivan, who was assigned to a military police unit at Camp Pendleton, Calif., with culpable negligence, authorities said.
Lance Cpl. Blake Knowles, who served with Warren in Chattanooga-based Mike Battery, said Sullivan shot Warren in the back of the neck while Warren was working radio duty in a combat operations center, the Chattanooga Times Free Press reported.
“From day one as a Marine we are taught never to point a weapon at anything you don’t intend to shoot,” Knowles told the Chattanooga newspaper. “Every rule, he broke.”
Sullivan faces a general court-martial at Camp Pendleton next month.
An official with Naval Criminal Investigative Services confirmed NCIS is conducting an ongoing investigation into the death and said the agency cannot comment.
Warren was a 2005 graduate of Gordon Central High School, sang in the school’s chorus and was drum major of the Blue Wave Marching Band during his junior and senior years.
Kim Watters, who directed Warren in the GCHS chorale, said military officials told Warren’s family very little at the time of his death.
“I spent a good bit of time with his family at the time, and they knew nothing about the circumstances of his death,” Watters told the Calhoun Times on Saturday. “The military told them an investigation was being conducted but that it would be at least nine months before it was completed.
“That’s not going to bring Cody back,” Watters said when told the Marines plan to court-martial Sullivan. “There’s just not a good answer here.”
Warren, who performed with the GCHS Chorale, had “a strong tenor voice,” Watters said when news of his death reached Calhoun. Watters described Warren as an ideal student who pulled the best out of the people around him.
Watters said Warren’s family was working with Gordon Central officials to establish a scholarship in his memory to support a student who excels in band and chorus.
Warren was proud to be a Marine and of his service in Iraq, Neal Crawford, GCHS band director, said at the time of his death.
The Chattanooga Times Free Press contributed to this report.
01/27/08
From the Calhoun Times
Lance Cpl. Kristopher Cody Warren died Nov. 9, 2006.
The Marine Corps is calling the 2006 death of Calhoun native Cody Warren negligence and has charged another Marine in his death.
Lance Cpl. Kristopher Cody Warren, 19, was killed Nov. 9, 2006, while his Marine Reserve detachment was deployed in Iraq. Click here to read a previous report: "Gordon mourning Marine.
At the time, Warren’s death was listed as “non-combat-related,” but the Marines now have charged Cpl. Douglas Michael Sullivan, who was assigned to a military police unit at Camp Pendleton, Calif., with culpable negligence, authorities said.
Lance Cpl. Blake Knowles, who served with Warren in Chattanooga-based Mike Battery, said Sullivan shot Warren in the back of the neck while Warren was working radio duty in a combat operations center, the Chattanooga Times Free Press reported.
“From day one as a Marine we are taught never to point a weapon at anything you don’t intend to shoot,” Knowles told the Chattanooga newspaper. “Every rule, he broke.”
Sullivan faces a general court-martial at Camp Pendleton next month.
An official with Naval Criminal Investigative Services confirmed NCIS is conducting an ongoing investigation into the death and said the agency cannot comment.
Warren was a 2005 graduate of Gordon Central High School, sang in the school’s chorus and was drum major of the Blue Wave Marching Band during his junior and senior years.
Kim Watters, who directed Warren in the GCHS chorale, said military officials told Warren’s family very little at the time of his death.
“I spent a good bit of time with his family at the time, and they knew nothing about the circumstances of his death,” Watters told the Calhoun Times on Saturday. “The military told them an investigation was being conducted but that it would be at least nine months before it was completed.
“That’s not going to bring Cody back,” Watters said when told the Marines plan to court-martial Sullivan. “There’s just not a good answer here.”
Warren, who performed with the GCHS Chorale, had “a strong tenor voice,” Watters said when news of his death reached Calhoun. Watters described Warren as an ideal student who pulled the best out of the people around him.
Watters said Warren’s family was working with Gordon Central officials to establish a scholarship in his memory to support a student who excels in band and chorus.
Warren was proud to be a Marine and of his service in Iraq, Neal Crawford, GCHS band director, said at the time of his death.
The Chattanooga Times Free Press contributed to this report.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Transcript of Marine Corps Statement and Reaction
Marine Corps statement gives timeline of Lauterbach case
January 15, 2008 - 10:12PM
Marine Corps officials held a news conference at Camp Lejeune this afternoon to talk about the case of Lance Cpl Maria Lauterbach, a pregnant Marine whose remains were found in the back yard of another Marine.
Here is the statement given at the opening of the news conference:
OPENING STATEMENT
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, my name is Lieutenant Colonel Curtis Hill and I’m the public affairs officer for the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force, or II MEF as we refer to it, here at Camp Lejeune. I’m joined here by Colonel Gary Sokoloski, the Staff Judge Advocate for II MEF, and Special Agent in Charge Paul Ciccarelli from the Camp Lejeune field office of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
First, on behalf of the Commanding General of II Marine Expeditionary Force, we wish to offer our deepest sympathy and our heartfelt sorrow to the Lauterbach family and their friends for the loss of their daughter, Maria, and their grandchild. It is our hope that they will find strength during these tragic times. We, her Marine Corps family, miss her and we join the family in mourning her. Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with them.
Second, I want to thank you for your patience as we within II MEF and our subordinate command, 2d Marine Logistics Group, worked to collect information and conduct a review to determine what information was available to commanders and when that information was available in relation to the tragic events involving Lance Cpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean. Additionally, we collected information and reviewed actions taken as a result of information becoming available. We are now in a position to provide information to you that we are confident is accurate and will not adversely impact ongoing investigations or possible future judicial proceedings.
I will provide you a statement that will, within the limitations of what I can provide, lay out a timeline for this tragic case. I’d ask that you hold questions till the end of the statement. At that time, I’ll open the floor for questions.
I will begin with some background information on the two Marines:
LCpl Maria Lauterbach was born in Orange City, Florida. Her home of record when she joined the Marine Corps in July of 2005 was Vandalia, Ohio. She graduated from Boot Camp in September of 2006 and was trained as a Personnel Clerk. This was her first duty station after completing her required training. She had not deployed in support of the Global War on Terrorism. She was promoted to Lance Corporal on February 1st, 2007, and her record indicates she was a solid Marine.
Cpl Cesar Laurean was born in Mexico and is a naturalized American citizen. His home of record when he joined the Marine Corps was Las Vegas, Nevada. He graduated from Boot Camp in December of 2004 and was trained as a Personnel Clerk. This was his first duty station after completing his required training. He had not deployed in support of the Global War on Terrorism. He was meritoriously promoted to Corporal on September 2nd, 2006, and his record indicates he was a stellar Marine.
On May 11th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach confides in her Officer-in-Charge two incidents of a sexual nature with Cpl Laurean. After some initial discussions, the command’s Uniform Victim Advocate meets with LCpl Lauterbach and explains the Victim Advocate Program to her. The UVA takes LCpl Lauterbach to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service office aboard Camp Lejeune to file a formal complaint. LCpl Lauterbach reports to NCIS an alleged sexual encounter with Cpl Laurean on March 26, 2007, and a second encounter approximately two weeks later. LCpl Lauterbach alleged she had been raped by Cpl Laurean. The command’s UVA accompanies LCpl Lauterbach to the medical department for a medical exam. Due to the length of time that elapsed between the alleged assault and the complaint, a forensic examination, or rape kit, is not performed. However, a “Well Woman” exam is performed to include a pregnancy test. The pregnancy test result is negative.
NCIS opens a rape investigation.
On May 12, 2007, the company commander of both LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean provides a verbal order to Cpl Laurean not to initiate any contact or communication with LCpl Lauterbach and stay a minimum of 1000 feet from her. Additionally, LCpl Lauterbach’s UVA accompanies her to the Family Service Center for victim counseling. Both individual and group counseling are offered to her.
Also on this date, the regimental commander reassigned LCpl Lauterbach to a duty office building geographically separated from Cpl Laurean, basically across the base from each other. The commander deemed it appropriate to move LCpl Lauterbach as her new duty location co-located her with her Uniform Victim Advocate.
At this point, there have been no charges preferred, the evidence did not contain elements of force or threats, and there were no indications Cpl Laurean was a flight risk. The regimental commander considered these factors and Cpl Laurean’s military character and decided pre-trial restraint was not appropriate.
On May 18th, 2007, NCIS interviews Cpl Laurean and he denies any sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach.
On May 24, 2007, the company commander follows up the verbal order of May 12th, with a written Military Protective Order effective through June 24th. The MPO was established to preserve the integrity of the investigation and developing case, it was not based on any perceived threat towards LCpl Lauterbach.
From June 19th through June 24th, LCpl Lauterbach takes annual leave to parents home in Ohio. Upon returning from leave, LCpl Lauterbach behaves normally and displays no anxieties or unusual behavior.
On June 25th, 2007, the company commander re-issues a written Military Protective Order effective through September 24th. Again, the MPO is renewed to preserve the integrity of the investigation and developing case, it was not based on any perceived threat towards LCpl Lauterbach. Additionally, there is no indication LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean have been in contact in any way.
On June 27th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach is ill and seeks medical attention. She is administered a pregnancy test. The result of the test is positive with medical personnel estimating the conception date as 14 May 2007. LCpl Lauterbach’s UVA calls NCIS to report the pregnancy. LCpl Lauterbach goes to NCIS to make a statement regarding her pregnancy and belief that Cpl Laurean is the father as a result of the alleged rape.
From July 11th through July 26th, Cpl Laurean takes annual leave. He returns as expected and behaves normally afterwards.
During the summer months, both Marines perform their daily jobs; participated in two long liberty periods, Independence Day and Labor Day that both returned from on time, and there are no indications of contact between LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean. Additionally, the NCIS investigation continues.
On September 17, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach requests permission from her command to move into off-base housing in order to prepare a home for her and her expected child. This is common practice for Marines who are about to go through a life changing event, for example a marriage or having a child.
On September 20, 2007, the regimental commander issues a written Military Protective Order effective through December 23rd. The regimental commander issues this MPO because the company commander is on annual leave and unavailable. Again, the MPO is renewed to preserve the integrity of the investigation and developing case, it was not based on any perceived threat towards LCpl Lauterbach. Additionally, there is no indication LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean have been in contact in any way.
From September 26th through October 2nd, LCpl Lauterbach takes annual leave. She returns as expected and no unusual behavior is observed.
On October 18, 2007, NCIS recommends no disciplinary action be initiated on the alleged rape until forensic evidence DNA can be retrieved from the child. Cpl Laurean denied having any sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach and this was believed to be significant evidence.
On October 22, 2007, the regimental commander submits a request for legal services requesting prosecutors review the investigation and provide a recommended Course of Action with an eye towards an Article 32 investigation. An Article 32 investigation allows for witnesses to testify under oath and subject to cross examination. An accused is present and represented by counsel.
On October 23rd, trial counsel discusses the case with the regimental commander.
On October 31, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach’s request to move out of the barracks into off-base housing is approved.
On November 5, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach moves into an off-base house, renting a room from Sgt Durham who is scheduled to deploy during late December and was looking for someone to rent his home while he was deployed. Additionally on this day, trial counsel re-interviews LCpl Lauterbach who readjusts her statement that her pregnancy is a result of the rape. However, she continues to maintain that she was raped by Cpl Laurean. Trial counsel continues to look at evidence and prepare recommendations for further actions to the regimental commander. NCIS continues to look for evidence to corroborate LCpl Lauterbach’s allegations.
From November 4th through November 13th, Cpl Laurean takes annual leave to his home in Las Vegas.
On November 26, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach attends a scheduled OB appointment at the Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital.
At this point in the alleged rape investigation, the regimental commander and trial counsel continue to discuss the evidence and the possible charges, if any, to prefer against Cpl Laurean. The regimental commander has not made a decision regarding what charges, if any, to prefer against Cpl Laurean and has not consulted with his Staff Judge Advocate. Cpl Laurean has not been detailed government defense counsel and no Article 32 hearing is scheduled as Cpl Laurean has not been charged with any offenses.
On Friday, December 14, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach reported to work as normal. The work day ended at 12 noon as the command was having a Christmas party. Attendance was not mandatory and LCpl Lauterbach elected not to attend. That morning Sgt Durham saw her car at the home when leaving for work.
At this point, we’ll discuss a few things that occurred December 14th that the command did not know until sometime later. For example, when Sgt Durham arrives home from work, he finds a note left for him by LCpl Lauterbach stating, “I could not take this Marine Corps life anymore. So I am going away. Sorry for the inconvenience. Maria.” Sgt Durham notices that some of her personal items are missing. She does not leave the house key behind. Sgt Durham calls LCpl Lauterbach’s sister concerning the note. Shortly after this conversation, LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother calls Sgt Durham. Sgt Durham text messages a junior member of LCpl Lauterbach’s work section indicating his belief she was going into an Unauthorized Absence status, commonly referred to as “going UA.” There is an ATM withdrawal of $700 from LCpl Lauterbach’s account. Transaction occurs in Jacksonville. Video surveillance confirms LCpl Lauterbach makes the withdrawal. The ATM information is not provided to the command until January 9th. Please remember LCpl Lauterbach was at work on Friday, was not required to attend the Christmas party, and therefore was not required to be at work until Monday morning.
On Saturday, December 15th, Greyhound bus records reflect a ticket is purchased in LCpl Lauterbach’s name for one way to El Paso, Texas departing that evening. Ticket is not redeemed. Command is not notified of this information until January 9th.
On Monday, December 17, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach failed to report to work. Her leadership begins to inquire as to her whereabouts by calling her cell phone. Sgt Durham physically arrives at her work section and provides the note to her leadership. Sgt Durham also provides information that LCpl Lauterbach appears to have taken some clothing, personal hygiene items, and her car with her. The command takes the extraordinary step of sending representatives to her residence to check to see if she is there. They knock on the door of Sgt Durham’s residence with no response. LCpl Lauterbach’s vehicle is not there. LCpl Lauterbach is entered into the administrative system in an Unauthorized Absence status. There is an elevated concern for her welfare because of the advanced stage of pregnancy. The command requests permission to list LCpl Lauterbach as a deserter in order to release a DD553 to apprehend her. This was an extraordinary step taken in hope of having her returned so the command could ensure she was receiving the proper medical care. Basically, with a DD553, federal resources could be used to assist in locating her.
On Tuesday, December 18, 2007, the section OIC calls LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother to notify her of her daughter’s absence. Mother states she spoke to Sgt Durham on December 14th, at which time he notified her of LCpl Lauterbach’s absence. Mother also states she last spoke to her daughter on December 14th. The section OIC asks Mother about LCpl Lauterbach’s whereabouts and possible reasons for leaving. Mother stated she didn’t know where she was and didn’t have reasons why she may have left. Mother files a Missing Persons Report locally in Ohio. Command receives information regarding the MPR on December 27th.
Command determines LCpl Lauterbach has voluntarily placed herself in an Unauthorized Absence status. The determination is based on the note left behind and some personal items taken to include her car.
On Wednesday, December 19th, 2007, Ohio authorities contacted local law enforcement authorities here in Onslow County about the Missing Persons Report. Onslow County Sheriff’s Office notifies the Naval Criminal Investigative Service of the MPR. The notification went to the Onslow County Sheriff’s Office as LCpl Lauterbach’s residence falls within County jurisdiction. The command is not notified of the MPR until December 27th.
On Thursday, December 20th, 2007, Sgt Durham contacts section OIC informing him that he will be leaving on December 28th for training in California and that access to the residence would be difficult after that date. LCpl Lauterbach’s cell phone is found along Highway 24 in Jacksonville, NC. The phone was used to make several calls by stranded motorist, one of which was LCpl Lauterbach’s sister, who requests that the individual turn the phone into the police. The command is notified about the cell phone recovery and the circumstance surrounding the recovery on January 9th.
On Friday, December 21st, 2007, the Christmas Holiday liberty period begins.
On Monday, December 24th, 2007, an unidentified male withdraws $400 from Lauterbach’s account. Location is Western Blvd, Jacksonville. The command is notified on January 9th.
On Wednesday, December 26th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach does not attend a scheduled OB appointment at the Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune. Command is not aware of this until January 9th. The Christmas Holiday liberty period ends at 6 o’clock in the evening.
On Thursday, December 27th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach’s leadership contact mother for any updates she may have on her daughter’s whereabouts. Mother states she has had no contact with her daughter since December 14th. Mother also states that she has filed a Missing Person Report (MPR) with Onslow County Sheriff’s Office. Onslow County Sheriff’s Office contacts LCpl Lauterbach’s OIC and confirms that the MPR exists. Detective also asks for LCpl Lauterbach’s vehicle description and asks whether her OIC believed she left of her own free will. This was the command’s first contact with OCSD concerning LCpl Lauterbach. Command is notified by NCIS that authorities from Vandalia, OH contacted Onslow County Sheriff’s Office concerning MPR that was originally filed by mother in Ohio.
On December 28, 2007, as Sgt Durham is about to depart for training in California, and with Sgt Durham’s permission, the command inventories and boxes LCpl Lauterbach’s personal belongings at the residence in order to secure her property. The New Year’s Holiday liberty period begins at noon.
On Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008, the New Year’s Holiday liberty period expires at 6 o’clock in the evening.
On Thursday, January 3rd, 2008, the command turns in LCpl Lauterbach’s inventoried gear to the supply warehouse. Supply re-inventories the gear and reports no discrepancies from the original inventory sheets.
On January 4th, 2008, the required 10-day letter is sent to LCpl Lauterbach’s family. The letter is delayed a few days due to the holiday period; however, the command has been in previous contact with LCpl Lauterbach's mother.
LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother contacts Company 1stSgt. The section OIC is made aware of the phone call to the Company 1stSgt and calls Mrs. Lauterbach. Mother asks if the command has done anything additional to find LCpl Lauterbach. According to the section OIC, the mother’s concern had clearly intensified. Mother states to the Section OIC that she is coming to Camp Lejeune on Monday, January 7th, to meet with the command and will be bringing her brother. The section OIC plans to meet her at the gate at 9:45 on Monday, January 7th, to assist her with her visit. Section OIC plans to escort her to the workspaces to meet with the leadership. The mother gives no indication during this phone call that outside law enforcement would be involved or that she thought foul play was the reason for her daughter’s absence. NCIS receives a call from LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother. NCIS receives specifics from LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother they previously did not have. Examples include specifics of LCpl Lauterbach’s cell phone recovery.
At this point, the commander has no reason to believe LCpl Lauterbach is not voluntarily UA. There is no evidence she has been the victim of foul play, and though her mother’s concern has intensified, there is still no indication that something has happened to LCpl Lauterbach. The command still has not received any information concerning recovery of her cell phone, or of the suspicious activity on her ATM account. Cpl Laurean has not been implicated in the absence in any way.
On Monday, January 7, 2008, LCpl Lauterbach’s mother and uncle arrive at Camp Lejeune earlier than expected accompanied by an Onslow County Sheriff’s Office Detective and ask for a meeting with NCIS and the command. Regimental legal officer attends the meeting once the request was sent via the proper protocol. This is the first indication to the command that foul play may be suspected in her absence. During the afternoon, LCpl Lauterbach’s section SNCOIC calls the Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital to ask if she had attended her December 26th OB appointment. Through either a mistake or confusion, the SNCOIC is told she had attended the appointment. The correct information regarding her attendance at the November 26th appointment and failure to attend the December 26th appointment was not received until January 9th.
On Tuesday, January 8, 2008, the company commander re-issues a written Military Protective Order effective through March 28th. There was a lapse in MPO coverage between December 24th and January 7th due to an administrative oversight during the holiday period. At one o’clock, Cpl Laurean’s OIC accompanies Cpl Laurean to NCIS to speak with Onslow County Sheriff’s Office. He is questioned as a possible witness, not a suspect. He was not provided his Miranda warnings. There’s no information provided to the command to implicate Cpl Laurean in LCpl Lauterbach’s absence. Cpl Laurean requests time during the workday to meet with his civilian attorneys at their office. His OIC approves the request.
On Wednesday, January 9, 2008, Cpl Laurean is out of the office all day with his civilian attorneys but maintains phone contact with OIC. Cpl Laurean requests additional time off to meet with his civilian attorneys. His OIC approves the request. Evidence previously not provided to the command is available. However, most of this evidence still points to LCpl Lauterbach going UA. Cpl Laurean’s requests to meet with his lawyers does not raise concerns as he is also under investigation for the alleged rape. Additionally, Cpl Laurean maintains contact with his OIC throughout the day by phone. There has been no request from law enforcement agencies to detain or otherwise restrict Cpl Laurean.
As the situation developed and information was provided by investigators, all indications led the command to believe LCpl Lauterbach had voluntarily placed herself in an unauthorized absence status.
On Thursday, January 10th, 2008, LCpl Lauterbach’s personal possessions are turned over to NCIS for delivery to Onslow County Sheriff’s Office. Cpl Laurean is out of his work section all day but maintains phone contact with his OIC throughout the day. That evening, Cpl Laurean informs his OIC of a possible appointment with his attorneys on Friday morning. Cpl Laurean is directed to call at 7:30 in the morning to confirm the appointment or to be at his work space at 7:30 if he does not have an appointment.
At two o’clock, the Onslow County Sheriff holds a press conference where he, the head of the lead investigating agency, implies anticipation of a positive outcome to the case. Additionally, he makes an on-camera plea for LCpl Lauterbach to return. The Onslow County Sheriff names Sgt Durham as a “person of interest” and tells the media the Marine Corps is returning him from California to Onslow County so he can interview Sgt Durham.
On Friday, January 11, 2008, Cpl Laurean fails to report to work and fails to call his OIC. His section makes several attempts to contact him by phone with no response. Cpl Laurean is reported UA. The morning reports in the media indicate there will be an announcement of a positive break in the case at a noon press conference. The command receives information regarding a note in the possession of Cpl Laurean’s spouse that will have a significant bearing on the case. The announcement is made that LCpl Lauterbach is believed to be dead and buried in Onslow County. Cpl Laurean is named a “person of interest” and the releasable information on Cpl Laurean is provided to the media to include a photograph.
At no point prior to Friday morning when information about the note was provided by Cpl Laurean’s spouse, did the regimental commander or the NCIS investigators feel that LCpl Lauterbach was anything other than UA or have information that Cpl Laurean was involved in LCpl Lauterbach’s absence in any way.
I’d like to discuss briefly some specific information received by the command and when it was received:
• Information regarding a $700 ATM withdrawal made on December 14th was provided to the command on January 9th.
• Information regarding the purchase of the Greyhound bus ticket to El Paso on December 15th was provided to the command on January 9th.
• Information regarding LCpl Lauterbach’s cell phone being recovered and the circumstances of the recovery was provided to the command on January 9th.
• Information regarding an unidentified male withdrawing $400 from LCpl Lauterbach’s account on December 24th is provided on January 9th.
• Information regarding LCpl Lauterbach’s vehicle being found near the Greyhound bus station in Jacksonville on January 7th was provided on January 9th.
At this point, Col Gary Sokoloski will provide a message from LtGen Keith Stalder, the commanding general of II Marine Expeditionary Force:
Ladies and Gentlemen, LtGen Stalder, Commanding General of II Marine Expeditionary Forces is not in the State today.
“I want to extend my deepest sympathies to Maria Lauterbach's family and friends. The loss of any Marine or sailor in combat, or garrison, is tragic and effects us all deeply - it effects members of this command, the Marine Corps Base, and our friends in the local civilian community - we all grieve.
I am satisfied with the actions of the commanders in this case. We followed applicable regulations and procedures with the information available to the commander. I am impressed with the level of cooperation between our County neighbors, Naval Criminal Investigative Service and the flow of information during this period of intensive investigative activity.
As I indicated to Sheriff Brown this past Sunday evening, I continue to pledge the MEF’s full cooperation with Onslow County Sheriff's Office and the District Attorney, Mr. Dewey Hudson. Thank you for your attendance.”
We’ll now take your questions.
-------------------------------------------------
Reaction from Dorothy Mackey of STAMP:
Can you please send this out--- as the US Government, military/Marine Corps move to shut down the Lauterbach case, they are blaming Ms. Lauterbach. If outrage does not follow, then we are Hitler's sheep and we now know what the German people went through that allow all their senses to become numb...
A Call for Outrage: The Marine Corps and US Government Allowed Lance Cpl Lauterbach to be raped, refused her any serious protection, and then helped her assailant(s) to murder "mother and child" and then allowed escape!!! America TAKE Notice your sons and daughters are NOT SAFE in these systems. There will be more, and they will be spun to suit the military machine!
In honor and memory of Lance Cpl Lauterbach, our martyr!!!! And in her name we will move forward and win!
http://www.orato.com/podium/2008/01/16/sexual-violence-military
http://www.orato.com/podium/2008/01/16/summary-torture-and-abuse-dorothy-mackey-rev
January 15, 2008 - 10:12PM
Marine Corps officials held a news conference at Camp Lejeune this afternoon to talk about the case of Lance Cpl Maria Lauterbach, a pregnant Marine whose remains were found in the back yard of another Marine.
Here is the statement given at the opening of the news conference:
OPENING STATEMENT
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, my name is Lieutenant Colonel Curtis Hill and I’m the public affairs officer for the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force, or II MEF as we refer to it, here at Camp Lejeune. I’m joined here by Colonel Gary Sokoloski, the Staff Judge Advocate for II MEF, and Special Agent in Charge Paul Ciccarelli from the Camp Lejeune field office of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
First, on behalf of the Commanding General of II Marine Expeditionary Force, we wish to offer our deepest sympathy and our heartfelt sorrow to the Lauterbach family and their friends for the loss of their daughter, Maria, and their grandchild. It is our hope that they will find strength during these tragic times. We, her Marine Corps family, miss her and we join the family in mourning her. Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with them.
Second, I want to thank you for your patience as we within II MEF and our subordinate command, 2d Marine Logistics Group, worked to collect information and conduct a review to determine what information was available to commanders and when that information was available in relation to the tragic events involving Lance Cpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean. Additionally, we collected information and reviewed actions taken as a result of information becoming available. We are now in a position to provide information to you that we are confident is accurate and will not adversely impact ongoing investigations or possible future judicial proceedings.
I will provide you a statement that will, within the limitations of what I can provide, lay out a timeline for this tragic case. I’d ask that you hold questions till the end of the statement. At that time, I’ll open the floor for questions.
I will begin with some background information on the two Marines:
LCpl Maria Lauterbach was born in Orange City, Florida. Her home of record when she joined the Marine Corps in July of 2005 was Vandalia, Ohio. She graduated from Boot Camp in September of 2006 and was trained as a Personnel Clerk. This was her first duty station after completing her required training. She had not deployed in support of the Global War on Terrorism. She was promoted to Lance Corporal on February 1st, 2007, and her record indicates she was a solid Marine.
Cpl Cesar Laurean was born in Mexico and is a naturalized American citizen. His home of record when he joined the Marine Corps was Las Vegas, Nevada. He graduated from Boot Camp in December of 2004 and was trained as a Personnel Clerk. This was his first duty station after completing his required training. He had not deployed in support of the Global War on Terrorism. He was meritoriously promoted to Corporal on September 2nd, 2006, and his record indicates he was a stellar Marine.
On May 11th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach confides in her Officer-in-Charge two incidents of a sexual nature with Cpl Laurean. After some initial discussions, the command’s Uniform Victim Advocate meets with LCpl Lauterbach and explains the Victim Advocate Program to her. The UVA takes LCpl Lauterbach to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service office aboard Camp Lejeune to file a formal complaint. LCpl Lauterbach reports to NCIS an alleged sexual encounter with Cpl Laurean on March 26, 2007, and a second encounter approximately two weeks later. LCpl Lauterbach alleged she had been raped by Cpl Laurean. The command’s UVA accompanies LCpl Lauterbach to the medical department for a medical exam. Due to the length of time that elapsed between the alleged assault and the complaint, a forensic examination, or rape kit, is not performed. However, a “Well Woman” exam is performed to include a pregnancy test. The pregnancy test result is negative.
NCIS opens a rape investigation.
On May 12, 2007, the company commander of both LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean provides a verbal order to Cpl Laurean not to initiate any contact or communication with LCpl Lauterbach and stay a minimum of 1000 feet from her. Additionally, LCpl Lauterbach’s UVA accompanies her to the Family Service Center for victim counseling. Both individual and group counseling are offered to her.
Also on this date, the regimental commander reassigned LCpl Lauterbach to a duty office building geographically separated from Cpl Laurean, basically across the base from each other. The commander deemed it appropriate to move LCpl Lauterbach as her new duty location co-located her with her Uniform Victim Advocate.
At this point, there have been no charges preferred, the evidence did not contain elements of force or threats, and there were no indications Cpl Laurean was a flight risk. The regimental commander considered these factors and Cpl Laurean’s military character and decided pre-trial restraint was not appropriate.
On May 18th, 2007, NCIS interviews Cpl Laurean and he denies any sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach.
On May 24, 2007, the company commander follows up the verbal order of May 12th, with a written Military Protective Order effective through June 24th. The MPO was established to preserve the integrity of the investigation and developing case, it was not based on any perceived threat towards LCpl Lauterbach.
From June 19th through June 24th, LCpl Lauterbach takes annual leave to parents home in Ohio. Upon returning from leave, LCpl Lauterbach behaves normally and displays no anxieties or unusual behavior.
On June 25th, 2007, the company commander re-issues a written Military Protective Order effective through September 24th. Again, the MPO is renewed to preserve the integrity of the investigation and developing case, it was not based on any perceived threat towards LCpl Lauterbach. Additionally, there is no indication LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean have been in contact in any way.
On June 27th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach is ill and seeks medical attention. She is administered a pregnancy test. The result of the test is positive with medical personnel estimating the conception date as 14 May 2007. LCpl Lauterbach’s UVA calls NCIS to report the pregnancy. LCpl Lauterbach goes to NCIS to make a statement regarding her pregnancy and belief that Cpl Laurean is the father as a result of the alleged rape.
From July 11th through July 26th, Cpl Laurean takes annual leave. He returns as expected and behaves normally afterwards.
During the summer months, both Marines perform their daily jobs; participated in two long liberty periods, Independence Day and Labor Day that both returned from on time, and there are no indications of contact between LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean. Additionally, the NCIS investigation continues.
On September 17, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach requests permission from her command to move into off-base housing in order to prepare a home for her and her expected child. This is common practice for Marines who are about to go through a life changing event, for example a marriage or having a child.
On September 20, 2007, the regimental commander issues a written Military Protective Order effective through December 23rd. The regimental commander issues this MPO because the company commander is on annual leave and unavailable. Again, the MPO is renewed to preserve the integrity of the investigation and developing case, it was not based on any perceived threat towards LCpl Lauterbach. Additionally, there is no indication LCpl Lauterbach and Cpl Laurean have been in contact in any way.
From September 26th through October 2nd, LCpl Lauterbach takes annual leave. She returns as expected and no unusual behavior is observed.
On October 18, 2007, NCIS recommends no disciplinary action be initiated on the alleged rape until forensic evidence DNA can be retrieved from the child. Cpl Laurean denied having any sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach and this was believed to be significant evidence.
On October 22, 2007, the regimental commander submits a request for legal services requesting prosecutors review the investigation and provide a recommended Course of Action with an eye towards an Article 32 investigation. An Article 32 investigation allows for witnesses to testify under oath and subject to cross examination. An accused is present and represented by counsel.
On October 23rd, trial counsel discusses the case with the regimental commander.
On October 31, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach’s request to move out of the barracks into off-base housing is approved.
On November 5, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach moves into an off-base house, renting a room from Sgt Durham who is scheduled to deploy during late December and was looking for someone to rent his home while he was deployed. Additionally on this day, trial counsel re-interviews LCpl Lauterbach who readjusts her statement that her pregnancy is a result of the rape. However, she continues to maintain that she was raped by Cpl Laurean. Trial counsel continues to look at evidence and prepare recommendations for further actions to the regimental commander. NCIS continues to look for evidence to corroborate LCpl Lauterbach’s allegations.
From November 4th through November 13th, Cpl Laurean takes annual leave to his home in Las Vegas.
On November 26, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach attends a scheduled OB appointment at the Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital.
At this point in the alleged rape investigation, the regimental commander and trial counsel continue to discuss the evidence and the possible charges, if any, to prefer against Cpl Laurean. The regimental commander has not made a decision regarding what charges, if any, to prefer against Cpl Laurean and has not consulted with his Staff Judge Advocate. Cpl Laurean has not been detailed government defense counsel and no Article 32 hearing is scheduled as Cpl Laurean has not been charged with any offenses.
On Friday, December 14, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach reported to work as normal. The work day ended at 12 noon as the command was having a Christmas party. Attendance was not mandatory and LCpl Lauterbach elected not to attend. That morning Sgt Durham saw her car at the home when leaving for work.
At this point, we’ll discuss a few things that occurred December 14th that the command did not know until sometime later. For example, when Sgt Durham arrives home from work, he finds a note left for him by LCpl Lauterbach stating, “I could not take this Marine Corps life anymore. So I am going away. Sorry for the inconvenience. Maria.” Sgt Durham notices that some of her personal items are missing. She does not leave the house key behind. Sgt Durham calls LCpl Lauterbach’s sister concerning the note. Shortly after this conversation, LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother calls Sgt Durham. Sgt Durham text messages a junior member of LCpl Lauterbach’s work section indicating his belief she was going into an Unauthorized Absence status, commonly referred to as “going UA.” There is an ATM withdrawal of $700 from LCpl Lauterbach’s account. Transaction occurs in Jacksonville. Video surveillance confirms LCpl Lauterbach makes the withdrawal. The ATM information is not provided to the command until January 9th. Please remember LCpl Lauterbach was at work on Friday, was not required to attend the Christmas party, and therefore was not required to be at work until Monday morning.
On Saturday, December 15th, Greyhound bus records reflect a ticket is purchased in LCpl Lauterbach’s name for one way to El Paso, Texas departing that evening. Ticket is not redeemed. Command is not notified of this information until January 9th.
On Monday, December 17, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach failed to report to work. Her leadership begins to inquire as to her whereabouts by calling her cell phone. Sgt Durham physically arrives at her work section and provides the note to her leadership. Sgt Durham also provides information that LCpl Lauterbach appears to have taken some clothing, personal hygiene items, and her car with her. The command takes the extraordinary step of sending representatives to her residence to check to see if she is there. They knock on the door of Sgt Durham’s residence with no response. LCpl Lauterbach’s vehicle is not there. LCpl Lauterbach is entered into the administrative system in an Unauthorized Absence status. There is an elevated concern for her welfare because of the advanced stage of pregnancy. The command requests permission to list LCpl Lauterbach as a deserter in order to release a DD553 to apprehend her. This was an extraordinary step taken in hope of having her returned so the command could ensure she was receiving the proper medical care. Basically, with a DD553, federal resources could be used to assist in locating her.
On Tuesday, December 18, 2007, the section OIC calls LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother to notify her of her daughter’s absence. Mother states she spoke to Sgt Durham on December 14th, at which time he notified her of LCpl Lauterbach’s absence. Mother also states she last spoke to her daughter on December 14th. The section OIC asks Mother about LCpl Lauterbach’s whereabouts and possible reasons for leaving. Mother stated she didn’t know where she was and didn’t have reasons why she may have left. Mother files a Missing Persons Report locally in Ohio. Command receives information regarding the MPR on December 27th.
Command determines LCpl Lauterbach has voluntarily placed herself in an Unauthorized Absence status. The determination is based on the note left behind and some personal items taken to include her car.
On Wednesday, December 19th, 2007, Ohio authorities contacted local law enforcement authorities here in Onslow County about the Missing Persons Report. Onslow County Sheriff’s Office notifies the Naval Criminal Investigative Service of the MPR. The notification went to the Onslow County Sheriff’s Office as LCpl Lauterbach’s residence falls within County jurisdiction. The command is not notified of the MPR until December 27th.
On Thursday, December 20th, 2007, Sgt Durham contacts section OIC informing him that he will be leaving on December 28th for training in California and that access to the residence would be difficult after that date. LCpl Lauterbach’s cell phone is found along Highway 24 in Jacksonville, NC. The phone was used to make several calls by stranded motorist, one of which was LCpl Lauterbach’s sister, who requests that the individual turn the phone into the police. The command is notified about the cell phone recovery and the circumstance surrounding the recovery on January 9th.
On Friday, December 21st, 2007, the Christmas Holiday liberty period begins.
On Monday, December 24th, 2007, an unidentified male withdraws $400 from Lauterbach’s account. Location is Western Blvd, Jacksonville. The command is notified on January 9th.
On Wednesday, December 26th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach does not attend a scheduled OB appointment at the Naval Hospital, Camp Lejeune. Command is not aware of this until January 9th. The Christmas Holiday liberty period ends at 6 o’clock in the evening.
On Thursday, December 27th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach’s leadership contact mother for any updates she may have on her daughter’s whereabouts. Mother states she has had no contact with her daughter since December 14th. Mother also states that she has filed a Missing Person Report (MPR) with Onslow County Sheriff’s Office. Onslow County Sheriff’s Office contacts LCpl Lauterbach’s OIC and confirms that the MPR exists. Detective also asks for LCpl Lauterbach’s vehicle description and asks whether her OIC believed she left of her own free will. This was the command’s first contact with OCSD concerning LCpl Lauterbach. Command is notified by NCIS that authorities from Vandalia, OH contacted Onslow County Sheriff’s Office concerning MPR that was originally filed by mother in Ohio.
On December 28, 2007, as Sgt Durham is about to depart for training in California, and with Sgt Durham’s permission, the command inventories and boxes LCpl Lauterbach’s personal belongings at the residence in order to secure her property. The New Year’s Holiday liberty period begins at noon.
On Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008, the New Year’s Holiday liberty period expires at 6 o’clock in the evening.
On Thursday, January 3rd, 2008, the command turns in LCpl Lauterbach’s inventoried gear to the supply warehouse. Supply re-inventories the gear and reports no discrepancies from the original inventory sheets.
On January 4th, 2008, the required 10-day letter is sent to LCpl Lauterbach’s family. The letter is delayed a few days due to the holiday period; however, the command has been in previous contact with LCpl Lauterbach's mother.
LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother contacts Company 1stSgt. The section OIC is made aware of the phone call to the Company 1stSgt and calls Mrs. Lauterbach. Mother asks if the command has done anything additional to find LCpl Lauterbach. According to the section OIC, the mother’s concern had clearly intensified. Mother states to the Section OIC that she is coming to Camp Lejeune on Monday, January 7th, to meet with the command and will be bringing her brother. The section OIC plans to meet her at the gate at 9:45 on Monday, January 7th, to assist her with her visit. Section OIC plans to escort her to the workspaces to meet with the leadership. The mother gives no indication during this phone call that outside law enforcement would be involved or that she thought foul play was the reason for her daughter’s absence. NCIS receives a call from LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother. NCIS receives specifics from LCpl Lauterbach’s Mother they previously did not have. Examples include specifics of LCpl Lauterbach’s cell phone recovery.
At this point, the commander has no reason to believe LCpl Lauterbach is not voluntarily UA. There is no evidence she has been the victim of foul play, and though her mother’s concern has intensified, there is still no indication that something has happened to LCpl Lauterbach. The command still has not received any information concerning recovery of her cell phone, or of the suspicious activity on her ATM account. Cpl Laurean has not been implicated in the absence in any way.
On Monday, January 7, 2008, LCpl Lauterbach’s mother and uncle arrive at Camp Lejeune earlier than expected accompanied by an Onslow County Sheriff’s Office Detective and ask for a meeting with NCIS and the command. Regimental legal officer attends the meeting once the request was sent via the proper protocol. This is the first indication to the command that foul play may be suspected in her absence. During the afternoon, LCpl Lauterbach’s section SNCOIC calls the Camp Lejeune Naval Hospital to ask if she had attended her December 26th OB appointment. Through either a mistake or confusion, the SNCOIC is told she had attended the appointment. The correct information regarding her attendance at the November 26th appointment and failure to attend the December 26th appointment was not received until January 9th.
On Tuesday, January 8, 2008, the company commander re-issues a written Military Protective Order effective through March 28th. There was a lapse in MPO coverage between December 24th and January 7th due to an administrative oversight during the holiday period. At one o’clock, Cpl Laurean’s OIC accompanies Cpl Laurean to NCIS to speak with Onslow County Sheriff’s Office. He is questioned as a possible witness, not a suspect. He was not provided his Miranda warnings. There’s no information provided to the command to implicate Cpl Laurean in LCpl Lauterbach’s absence. Cpl Laurean requests time during the workday to meet with his civilian attorneys at their office. His OIC approves the request.
On Wednesday, January 9, 2008, Cpl Laurean is out of the office all day with his civilian attorneys but maintains phone contact with OIC. Cpl Laurean requests additional time off to meet with his civilian attorneys. His OIC approves the request. Evidence previously not provided to the command is available. However, most of this evidence still points to LCpl Lauterbach going UA. Cpl Laurean’s requests to meet with his lawyers does not raise concerns as he is also under investigation for the alleged rape. Additionally, Cpl Laurean maintains contact with his OIC throughout the day by phone. There has been no request from law enforcement agencies to detain or otherwise restrict Cpl Laurean.
As the situation developed and information was provided by investigators, all indications led the command to believe LCpl Lauterbach had voluntarily placed herself in an unauthorized absence status.
On Thursday, January 10th, 2008, LCpl Lauterbach’s personal possessions are turned over to NCIS for delivery to Onslow County Sheriff’s Office. Cpl Laurean is out of his work section all day but maintains phone contact with his OIC throughout the day. That evening, Cpl Laurean informs his OIC of a possible appointment with his attorneys on Friday morning. Cpl Laurean is directed to call at 7:30 in the morning to confirm the appointment or to be at his work space at 7:30 if he does not have an appointment.
At two o’clock, the Onslow County Sheriff holds a press conference where he, the head of the lead investigating agency, implies anticipation of a positive outcome to the case. Additionally, he makes an on-camera plea for LCpl Lauterbach to return. The Onslow County Sheriff names Sgt Durham as a “person of interest” and tells the media the Marine Corps is returning him from California to Onslow County so he can interview Sgt Durham.
On Friday, January 11, 2008, Cpl Laurean fails to report to work and fails to call his OIC. His section makes several attempts to contact him by phone with no response. Cpl Laurean is reported UA. The morning reports in the media indicate there will be an announcement of a positive break in the case at a noon press conference. The command receives information regarding a note in the possession of Cpl Laurean’s spouse that will have a significant bearing on the case. The announcement is made that LCpl Lauterbach is believed to be dead and buried in Onslow County. Cpl Laurean is named a “person of interest” and the releasable information on Cpl Laurean is provided to the media to include a photograph.
At no point prior to Friday morning when information about the note was provided by Cpl Laurean’s spouse, did the regimental commander or the NCIS investigators feel that LCpl Lauterbach was anything other than UA or have information that Cpl Laurean was involved in LCpl Lauterbach’s absence in any way.
I’d like to discuss briefly some specific information received by the command and when it was received:
• Information regarding a $700 ATM withdrawal made on December 14th was provided to the command on January 9th.
• Information regarding the purchase of the Greyhound bus ticket to El Paso on December 15th was provided to the command on January 9th.
• Information regarding LCpl Lauterbach’s cell phone being recovered and the circumstances of the recovery was provided to the command on January 9th.
• Information regarding an unidentified male withdrawing $400 from LCpl Lauterbach’s account on December 24th is provided on January 9th.
• Information regarding LCpl Lauterbach’s vehicle being found near the Greyhound bus station in Jacksonville on January 7th was provided on January 9th.
At this point, Col Gary Sokoloski will provide a message from LtGen Keith Stalder, the commanding general of II Marine Expeditionary Force:
Ladies and Gentlemen, LtGen Stalder, Commanding General of II Marine Expeditionary Forces is not in the State today.
“I want to extend my deepest sympathies to Maria Lauterbach's family and friends. The loss of any Marine or sailor in combat, or garrison, is tragic and effects us all deeply - it effects members of this command, the Marine Corps Base, and our friends in the local civilian community - we all grieve.
I am satisfied with the actions of the commanders in this case. We followed applicable regulations and procedures with the information available to the commander. I am impressed with the level of cooperation between our County neighbors, Naval Criminal Investigative Service and the flow of information during this period of intensive investigative activity.
As I indicated to Sheriff Brown this past Sunday evening, I continue to pledge the MEF’s full cooperation with Onslow County Sheriff's Office and the District Attorney, Mr. Dewey Hudson. Thank you for your attendance.”
We’ll now take your questions.
-------------------------------------------------
Reaction from Dorothy Mackey of STAMP:
Can you please send this out--- as the US Government, military/Marine Corps move to shut down the Lauterbach case, they are blaming Ms. Lauterbach. If outrage does not follow, then we are Hitler's sheep and we now know what the German people went through that allow all their senses to become numb...
A Call for Outrage: The Marine Corps and US Government Allowed Lance Cpl Lauterbach to be raped, refused her any serious protection, and then helped her assailant(s) to murder "mother and child" and then allowed escape!!! America TAKE Notice your sons and daughters are NOT SAFE in these systems. There will be more, and they will be spun to suit the military machine!
In honor and memory of Lance Cpl Lauterbach, our martyr!!!! And in her name we will move forward and win!
http://www.orato.com/podium/2008/01/16/sexual-violence-military
http://www.orato.com/podium/2008/01/16/summary-torture-and-abuse-dorothy-mackey-rev
Thursday, January 17, 2008
For the Love of a Soldier
The book is finally getting published and should be available this week. The cheapest way to get a copy is to buy one right away at the www.rowman.com website, where you can get a prepublication discount.
...my son 1st Lt. Phil Kent's story is featured in one of 29 amazing stories about our dedicated young people who have served or are serving...
Thank you
Laura Kent
Proud Mother of 1st Lt. Phil Kent
...my son 1st Lt. Phil Kent's story is featured in one of 29 amazing stories about our dedicated young people who have served or are serving...
Thank you
Laura Kent
Proud Mother of 1st Lt. Phil Kent
Monday, January 14, 2008
US war veterans bringing death back home
Dominic Brock
More than 120 US veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have committed or been charged with a murder since arriving home from war, the New York Times has found.The newspaper discovered 121 murder cases involving the recent veterans, with combat trauma, stress, alcohol abuse and family troubles often leading to the killings.
Three quarters of the veterans were still in the army when they committed the killings, most of which involved the use of guns. Other murders involved stabbings, beatings, strangulations and bathtub drownings.
The Times found an 89 per cent increase in homicides involving military personnel in the six years since war broke out, compared to the previous six-year period. This was despite there being fewer troops stationed in the US in the past six years, and an overall drop in homicide rates in the country.
Severe depression was a key element in many of the incidents. Thirteen veterans committed suicide after the killings, with others expressing a death wish after being caught.
Joshua Pol, a former soldier convicted of vehicular homicide, told a judge at court in 2006, “To be honest with you, I really wish I had died in Iraq.”The Pentagon did not keep track of such killings, and declined to comment on the Times’ story.
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/01/13/US_war_veterans_bringing_death_back_home
-- submitted by Patti Woodard
A major story on this topic appeared in the New York Times. You can find it here.
More than 120 US veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have committed or been charged with a murder since arriving home from war, the New York Times has found.The newspaper discovered 121 murder cases involving the recent veterans, with combat trauma, stress, alcohol abuse and family troubles often leading to the killings.
Three quarters of the veterans were still in the army when they committed the killings, most of which involved the use of guns. Other murders involved stabbings, beatings, strangulations and bathtub drownings.
The Times found an 89 per cent increase in homicides involving military personnel in the six years since war broke out, compared to the previous six-year period. This was despite there being fewer troops stationed in the US in the past six years, and an overall drop in homicide rates in the country.
Severe depression was a key element in many of the incidents. Thirteen veterans committed suicide after the killings, with others expressing a death wish after being caught.
Joshua Pol, a former soldier convicted of vehicular homicide, told a judge at court in 2006, “To be honest with you, I really wish I had died in Iraq.”The Pentagon did not keep track of such killings, and declined to comment on the Times’ story.
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/01/13/US_war_veterans_bringing_death_back_home
-- submitted by Patti Woodard
A major story on this topic appeared in the New York Times. You can find it here.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Pentagon, Big Pharma: Drug Troops to Numb Them to Horrors of War
By Penny Coleman, AlterNet
In June, the Department of Defense Task Force on Mental Health acknowledged "daunting and growing" psychological problems among our troops: Nearly 40 percent of soldiers, a third of Marines and half of National Guard members are presenting with serious mental health issues.
They also reported "fundamental weaknesses" in the U.S. military's approach to psychological health. That report was followed in August by the Army Suicide Event Report (ASER), which reported that 2006 saw the highest rate of military suicides in 26 years. And last month, CBS News reported that, based on its own extensive research, over 6,250 American veterans took their own lives in 2005 alone -- that works out to a little more than 17 suicides every day.
That's all pretty bleak, but there is reason for optimism in the long-overdue attention being paid to the emotional and psychic cost of these new wars. The shrill hypocrisy of an administration that has decked itself in yellow ribbons and mandatory lapel pins while ignoring a human crisis of monumental proportion is finally being exposed.
On Dec. 12, Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, called a hearing on "Stopping Suicides: Mental Health Challenges Within the Department of Veterans Affairs." At that hearing suggestions were raised and conversations begun that hopefully will bear fruit.
But I find myself extremely anxious in the face of some of these new suggestions, specifically what is being called the Psychological Kevlar Act of 2007 and use of the drug propranalol to treat the symptoms of posttraumatic stress injuries. Though both, at least in theory, sound entirely reasonable, even desirable, in the wrong hands, under the wrong leadership, they could make the sci-fi fantasies of Blade Runner seem prescient.
The Psychological Kevlar Act "directs the secretary of defense to develop and implement a plan to incorporate preventive and early-intervention measures, practices or procedures that reduce the likelihood that personnel in combat will develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other stress-related psychopathologies, including substance use conditions. (Kevlar, a DuPont fiber, is an essential component of U.S. military helmets and bullet-proof vests advertised to be "five times stronger than steel.") The stated purpose of this legislation is to make American soldiers less vulnerable to the combat stressors that so often result in psychic injuries.
On the face of it, the bill sounds logical and even compassionate. After all, our soldiers are supplied with physical armor -- at least in theory. So why not mental? My guess is that the representatives who have signed on to this bill are genuinely concerned about the welfare of troops and their families. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., is the bill's sponsor, and I have no reason to question his genuine commitment to mental health issues, both within and outside of the military. Still, I find myself chilled at the prospects. To explain my discomfort, I need to go briefly into the history of military training.
Since World War II, our military has sought and found any number of ways to override the values and belief systems recruits have absorbed from their families, schools, communities and religions. Using the principles of operant conditioning, the military has found ways to reprogram their human software, overriding those characteristics that are inconvenient in a military context, most particularly the inherent resistance human beings have to killing others of their own species. "Modern combat training conditions soldiers to act reflexively to stimuli," says Lt. Col. Peter Kilner, a professor of philosophy and ethics at West Point, "and this maximizes soldiers' lethality, but it does so by bypassing their moral autonomy. Soldiers are conditioned to act without considering the moral repercussions of their actions; they are enabled to kill without making the conscious decision to do so. If they are unable to justify to themselves the fact that they killed another human being, they will likely -- and understandably -- suffer enormous guilt. This guilt manifests itself as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and it has damaged the lives of thousands of men who performed their duty in combat."
By military standards, operant conditioning has been highly effective. It's enabled American soldiers to kill more often and more efficiently, and that ability continues to exact a terrible toll on those we have designated as the "enemy." But the toll on the troops themselves is also tragic. Even when troops struggle honorably with the difference between a protected person and a permissible target (and I believe that the vast majority do so struggle, though the distinction is one I find both ethically and humanely problematic) in war "shit happens." When soldiers are witness to overwhelming horror, or because of a reflexive accident, an illegitimate order, or because multiple deployments have thoroughly distorted their perceptions, or simply because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time -- those are the moments that will continue to haunt them, the memories they will not be able to forgive or forget, and the stuff of posttraumatic stress injuries.
And it's not just the inherent conscientious objector our military finds inconvenient: current U.S. military training also includes a component to desensitize male soldiers to the sounds of women being raped, so the enemy cannot use the cries of their fellow soldiers to leverage information. I think it not unreasonable to connect such desensitization techniques to the rates of domestic violence in the military, which are, according to the DoD, five times those in the civilian population. Is anyone really surprised that men who have been specifically trained to ignore the pain and fear of women have a difficult time coming home to their wives and families? And clearly they do. There were 2,374 reported cases of sexual assault in the military in 2005, a 40 percent increase over 2004. But that figure represents only reported cases, and, as Air Force Brig. Gen. K.C. McClain, commander of DoD's Joint Task Force for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response pointed out, "Studies indicate that only 5 percent of sexual assaults are reported."
I have thought a lot about the implications of "psychological Kevlar" -- what kind of "preventive and early-intervention measures, practices or procedures" might be developed that would "reduce the likelihood that personnel in combat will develop post-traumatic stress disorder." How would a soldier with a shield against moral response "five times stronger than steel" behave?
I cannot convince myself that what is really being promoted isn't a form of moral lobotomy.
I cannot imagine what aspects of selfhood will have to be excised or paralyzed so soldiers will no longer be troubled by what they, not to mention we, would otherwise consider morally repugnant. A soldier who has lost an arm can be welcomed home because he or she still shares fundamental societal values. But the soldier who sees her friend emulsified by a bomb, or who is ordered to run over children in the road rather than slow down the convoy, or who realizes too late that the woman was carrying a baby, not a bomb -- if that soldier's ability to feel terror and horror has been amputated, if he or she can no longer be appalled or haunted, something far more precious has been lost. I am afraid that the training or conditioning or drug that will be developed to protect soldiers from such injuries will leave an indifference to violence that will make them unrecognizable to themselves and to those who love them. They will be alienated and isolated, and finally unable to come home.
Posttraumatic stress injuries can devastate the lives of soldiers and their families. The suicides that are so often the result of such injuries make it clear that they can be every bit as lethal as bullets or bombs, and to date no cure has been found. Treatment and disability payments, both for injured troops and their families, are a huge budgetary concern that becomes ever more daunting as these wars drag on. The Psychological Kevlar Act perhaps holds out the promise of a prophylactic remedy, but it should come as no surprise that Big Pharma has been looking for a chemical intervention.
What they have come up with has already been dubbed "the mourning after pill." Propranalol, if taken immediately following a traumatic event, can subdue a victim's stress response and so soften his or her perception of the memory. That does not mean the memory has been erased, but proponents claim that the drug can render it emotionally toothless.
If your daughter were raped, the argument goes, wouldn't you want to spare her a traumatic memory that might well ruin her life? As the mother of a 23-year old daughter, I can certainly understand the appeal of that argument. And a drug that could prevent the terrible effects of traumatic injuries in soldiers? If I were the parent of a soldier suffering from such a life-altering injury, I can imagine being similarly persuaded.
Not surprisingly, the Army is already on board. Propranolol is a well-tolerated medication that has been used for years for other purposes.
And it is inexpensive.
But is it moral to weaken memories of horrendous acts a person has committed? Some would say that there is no difference between offering injured soldiers penicillin to prevent an infection and giving a drug that prevents them from suffering from a posttraumatic stress injury for the rest of their lives. Others, like Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics, object to propranolol's use on the grounds that it medicates away one's conscience. "It's the morning-after pill for just about anything that produces regret, remorse, pain or guilt," he says. Barry Romo, a national coordinator for Vietnam Veterans Against the War, is even more blunt. "That's the devil pill," he says. "That's the monster pill, the anti-morality pill. That's the pill that can make men and women do anything and think they can get away with it. Even if it doesn't work, what's scary is that a young soldier could believe it will."
It doesn't take a neuroscientist to see the problem with both of these solutions. Though both hold the promise of relief from the effects of an injury that causes unspeakable pain, they do so at what appears to be great cost. Whatever research projects might be funded by the Psychological Kevlar Act and whatever use is made of propranolol, they will almost certainly involve a diminished range of feelings and memory, without which soldiers and veterans will be different. But in what ways?
I wish I could trust the leadership of our country to prioritize the lives and well-being of our citizens. I don't. The last six years have clearly shown the extent to which this administration is willing to go to use soldiers for its own ends, discarding them when they are damaged. Will efforts be made to fix what has been broken? Return what has been taken? Bring them home?
Will citizens be enlightened about what we are condoning in our ignorance, dispassion or indifference? Or will these two solutions simply bring us closer to realizing the bullet-proof mind, devoid of the inconvenient vulnerability of decent human beings to atrocity and horror? And finally, these are all questions about the morality of proposals that are trying to prevent injuries without changing the social circumstances that bring them about, which sidestep the most fundamental moral dilemma: that of sending people to war in the first place.
Penny Coleman is the widow of a Vietnam veteran who took his own life after coming home. Her latest book, Flashback: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Suicide and the Lessons of War, was released on Memorial Day, 2006. Her blog is Flashback.
-- submitted by Lois Vanderbur
In June, the Department of Defense Task Force on Mental Health acknowledged "daunting and growing" psychological problems among our troops: Nearly 40 percent of soldiers, a third of Marines and half of National Guard members are presenting with serious mental health issues.
They also reported "fundamental weaknesses" in the U.S. military's approach to psychological health. That report was followed in August by the Army Suicide Event Report (ASER), which reported that 2006 saw the highest rate of military suicides in 26 years. And last month, CBS News reported that, based on its own extensive research, over 6,250 American veterans took their own lives in 2005 alone -- that works out to a little more than 17 suicides every day.
That's all pretty bleak, but there is reason for optimism in the long-overdue attention being paid to the emotional and psychic cost of these new wars. The shrill hypocrisy of an administration that has decked itself in yellow ribbons and mandatory lapel pins while ignoring a human crisis of monumental proportion is finally being exposed.
On Dec. 12, Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, called a hearing on "Stopping Suicides: Mental Health Challenges Within the Department of Veterans Affairs." At that hearing suggestions were raised and conversations begun that hopefully will bear fruit.
But I find myself extremely anxious in the face of some of these new suggestions, specifically what is being called the Psychological Kevlar Act of 2007 and use of the drug propranalol to treat the symptoms of posttraumatic stress injuries. Though both, at least in theory, sound entirely reasonable, even desirable, in the wrong hands, under the wrong leadership, they could make the sci-fi fantasies of Blade Runner seem prescient.
The Psychological Kevlar Act "directs the secretary of defense to develop and implement a plan to incorporate preventive and early-intervention measures, practices or procedures that reduce the likelihood that personnel in combat will develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other stress-related psychopathologies, including substance use conditions. (Kevlar, a DuPont fiber, is an essential component of U.S. military helmets and bullet-proof vests advertised to be "five times stronger than steel.") The stated purpose of this legislation is to make American soldiers less vulnerable to the combat stressors that so often result in psychic injuries.
On the face of it, the bill sounds logical and even compassionate. After all, our soldiers are supplied with physical armor -- at least in theory. So why not mental? My guess is that the representatives who have signed on to this bill are genuinely concerned about the welfare of troops and their families. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., is the bill's sponsor, and I have no reason to question his genuine commitment to mental health issues, both within and outside of the military. Still, I find myself chilled at the prospects. To explain my discomfort, I need to go briefly into the history of military training.
Since World War II, our military has sought and found any number of ways to override the values and belief systems recruits have absorbed from their families, schools, communities and religions. Using the principles of operant conditioning, the military has found ways to reprogram their human software, overriding those characteristics that are inconvenient in a military context, most particularly the inherent resistance human beings have to killing others of their own species. "Modern combat training conditions soldiers to act reflexively to stimuli," says Lt. Col. Peter Kilner, a professor of philosophy and ethics at West Point, "and this maximizes soldiers' lethality, but it does so by bypassing their moral autonomy. Soldiers are conditioned to act without considering the moral repercussions of their actions; they are enabled to kill without making the conscious decision to do so. If they are unable to justify to themselves the fact that they killed another human being, they will likely -- and understandably -- suffer enormous guilt. This guilt manifests itself as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and it has damaged the lives of thousands of men who performed their duty in combat."
By military standards, operant conditioning has been highly effective. It's enabled American soldiers to kill more often and more efficiently, and that ability continues to exact a terrible toll on those we have designated as the "enemy." But the toll on the troops themselves is also tragic. Even when troops struggle honorably with the difference between a protected person and a permissible target (and I believe that the vast majority do so struggle, though the distinction is one I find both ethically and humanely problematic) in war "shit happens." When soldiers are witness to overwhelming horror, or because of a reflexive accident, an illegitimate order, or because multiple deployments have thoroughly distorted their perceptions, or simply because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time -- those are the moments that will continue to haunt them, the memories they will not be able to forgive or forget, and the stuff of posttraumatic stress injuries.
And it's not just the inherent conscientious objector our military finds inconvenient: current U.S. military training also includes a component to desensitize male soldiers to the sounds of women being raped, so the enemy cannot use the cries of their fellow soldiers to leverage information. I think it not unreasonable to connect such desensitization techniques to the rates of domestic violence in the military, which are, according to the DoD, five times those in the civilian population. Is anyone really surprised that men who have been specifically trained to ignore the pain and fear of women have a difficult time coming home to their wives and families? And clearly they do. There were 2,374 reported cases of sexual assault in the military in 2005, a 40 percent increase over 2004. But that figure represents only reported cases, and, as Air Force Brig. Gen. K.C. McClain, commander of DoD's Joint Task Force for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response pointed out, "Studies indicate that only 5 percent of sexual assaults are reported."
I have thought a lot about the implications of "psychological Kevlar" -- what kind of "preventive and early-intervention measures, practices or procedures" might be developed that would "reduce the likelihood that personnel in combat will develop post-traumatic stress disorder." How would a soldier with a shield against moral response "five times stronger than steel" behave?
I cannot convince myself that what is really being promoted isn't a form of moral lobotomy.
I cannot imagine what aspects of selfhood will have to be excised or paralyzed so soldiers will no longer be troubled by what they, not to mention we, would otherwise consider morally repugnant. A soldier who has lost an arm can be welcomed home because he or she still shares fundamental societal values. But the soldier who sees her friend emulsified by a bomb, or who is ordered to run over children in the road rather than slow down the convoy, or who realizes too late that the woman was carrying a baby, not a bomb -- if that soldier's ability to feel terror and horror has been amputated, if he or she can no longer be appalled or haunted, something far more precious has been lost. I am afraid that the training or conditioning or drug that will be developed to protect soldiers from such injuries will leave an indifference to violence that will make them unrecognizable to themselves and to those who love them. They will be alienated and isolated, and finally unable to come home.
Posttraumatic stress injuries can devastate the lives of soldiers and their families. The suicides that are so often the result of such injuries make it clear that they can be every bit as lethal as bullets or bombs, and to date no cure has been found. Treatment and disability payments, both for injured troops and their families, are a huge budgetary concern that becomes ever more daunting as these wars drag on. The Psychological Kevlar Act perhaps holds out the promise of a prophylactic remedy, but it should come as no surprise that Big Pharma has been looking for a chemical intervention.
What they have come up with has already been dubbed "the mourning after pill." Propranalol, if taken immediately following a traumatic event, can subdue a victim's stress response and so soften his or her perception of the memory. That does not mean the memory has been erased, but proponents claim that the drug can render it emotionally toothless.
If your daughter were raped, the argument goes, wouldn't you want to spare her a traumatic memory that might well ruin her life? As the mother of a 23-year old daughter, I can certainly understand the appeal of that argument. And a drug that could prevent the terrible effects of traumatic injuries in soldiers? If I were the parent of a soldier suffering from such a life-altering injury, I can imagine being similarly persuaded.
Not surprisingly, the Army is already on board. Propranolol is a well-tolerated medication that has been used for years for other purposes.
And it is inexpensive.
But is it moral to weaken memories of horrendous acts a person has committed? Some would say that there is no difference between offering injured soldiers penicillin to prevent an infection and giving a drug that prevents them from suffering from a posttraumatic stress injury for the rest of their lives. Others, like Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics, object to propranolol's use on the grounds that it medicates away one's conscience. "It's the morning-after pill for just about anything that produces regret, remorse, pain or guilt," he says. Barry Romo, a national coordinator for Vietnam Veterans Against the War, is even more blunt. "That's the devil pill," he says. "That's the monster pill, the anti-morality pill. That's the pill that can make men and women do anything and think they can get away with it. Even if it doesn't work, what's scary is that a young soldier could believe it will."
It doesn't take a neuroscientist to see the problem with both of these solutions. Though both hold the promise of relief from the effects of an injury that causes unspeakable pain, they do so at what appears to be great cost. Whatever research projects might be funded by the Psychological Kevlar Act and whatever use is made of propranolol, they will almost certainly involve a diminished range of feelings and memory, without which soldiers and veterans will be different. But in what ways?
I wish I could trust the leadership of our country to prioritize the lives and well-being of our citizens. I don't. The last six years have clearly shown the extent to which this administration is willing to go to use soldiers for its own ends, discarding them when they are damaged. Will efforts be made to fix what has been broken? Return what has been taken? Bring them home?
Will citizens be enlightened about what we are condoning in our ignorance, dispassion or indifference? Or will these two solutions simply bring us closer to realizing the bullet-proof mind, devoid of the inconvenient vulnerability of decent human beings to atrocity and horror? And finally, these are all questions about the morality of proposals that are trying to prevent injuries without changing the social circumstances that bring them about, which sidestep the most fundamental moral dilemma: that of sending people to war in the first place.
Penny Coleman is the widow of a Vietnam veteran who took his own life after coming home. Her latest book, Flashback: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Suicide and the Lessons of War, was released on Memorial Day, 2006. Her blog is Flashback.
-- submitted by Lois Vanderbur
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)