| Iraqi Resistance Report for events of Tuesday, 24 July 2007. Translated and/or compiled by Muhammad Abu Nasr, member, editorial board, the Free Arab Voice.
Tuesday, 24 July 2007.
· US soldier reported killed in early morning Resistance attack in al-Qa’im.
· Resistance unleashes heaviest mortar barrage in months on US ‘Ayn al-Asad Air Base near al-Baghdadi in western Iraq.
· US, Iran announce agreement to join forces against Iraqi Resistance.
· Shi‘i sectarian torture, murder spree continues: 24 more bodies found dumped aroung Baghdad Tuesday.
· US admits death of four more American occupation troops.
· Puppet official reports that 80 percent of Iraq’s health workers have left hospitals since US occupation.
Al-Anbar Province. Al-Qa’im.
US soldier reported killed in early morning Resistance attack in al-Qa’im.
In a dispatch posted at 5:34pm Makkah time Tuesday afternoon, Mafkarat al-Islam reported that an early morning Iraqi Resistance attack on American troops in a neighborhood of al-Qa’im near the Syrian border in western Iraq had heavily damaged a US military vehicle and left one American soldier dead and three more wounded.
Mafkarat al-Islam reported a captain in the puppet police as saying that the attack took place in the ash-Shayshan popular neighborhood at the entrance to al-Qa’im early Tuesday morning.
The puppet captain said that after the attack, the Americans surrounded the scene of the attack and imposed a curfew on the neighborhood. They also managed to disarm a second bomb that they found at the same location/ The US troops also arrested one local man and his daughter, taking them in for “interrogation.”
Al-Baghdadi.
Resistance unleashes heaviest mortar barrage in months on US ‘Ayn al-Asad Air Base near al-Baghdadi.
In a dispatch posted at 5:26pm Makkah time Tuesday afternoon, Mafkarat al-Islam reported that the Iraqi Resistance blasted the US-occupied ‘Ayn al-Asad Air Base with a violent barrage of heavy 120mm mortar rounds at 2am local time Tuesday morning.
Mafkarat al-Islam reported eyewitnesses as saying that 11 heavy mortar shells slammed into the US-occupied base, the largest such US facility, located near al-Baghdadi, about 180km west of Baghdad.
The witnesses said that the barrage ignited fires and set off secondary explosions as US materiel began exploding inside the base. Sirens wailed inside the American compound and US helicopters could be seen flying at low altitude over the area, one of them emblazoned with the red cross – implying that there had been casualties, though in keeping with the standard US policy of concealing facts regarding American losses in Iraq, no information on the nature or extent of casualties was made available.
Mafkarat al-Islam reported that this was the first such attack on the US base since a number of tribes agreed to collaborate in the so-called “al-Anbar Salvation Council” with the US occupation authorities, ostensibly against al-Qa‘idah (although in practice against all the Iraqi Resistance).
Baghdad.
US, Iran announce agreement to join forces against Iraqi Resistance.
In a dispatch posted at 7:45pm Makkah time Tuesday afternoon, Mafkarat al-Islam reported that representatives of Iran and the United States had concluded talks in Baghdad on Tuesday with an agreement to join forces to fight the Iraqi Resistance.
Mafkarat al-Islam reported that talks between Iran and the United States, together with the puppet “Iraqi regime” ended in Baghdad on Tuesday with an agreement to form a tripartite committee on “Security” to coordinate the war against the Iraqi Resistance in the country.
A spokesman for the American-installed puppet regime in Baghdad told the press that the three countries agreed to form a tripartite “Security Committee” with the aim of bolstering their common effort to “impose security” in the country and stamp out the Iraqi Reistance.
A communiqué issued at the end of the meeting by the office of Nuri al-Maliki, the American-installed puppet “Prime Minister” of Iraq reported that the US and Iranian sides had agreed to support what they called “the political process in Iraq” – meaning the US sponsored puppet regime and its security organs, most of whose members have been drawn from Iranian-trained Shi‘i sectarian militias.
US Ambassador Ryan Crocker announced that Iran and the United States had agreed to set up a committee to “improve security” in Iraq. Crocker said that the talks between the two hegemonic powers had taken place in a “positive and frank” atmosphere.
The negotiations were conducted by Ryan Crocker, US Ambassador to occupied Iraq; and Hasan Kazimi Qummi, the Iranian Ambassador to occupied Iraq. The US installed Iraqi puppet regime was represented in the meetings by the puppet “Foreign Minister” Hushyar Zibari.
Shi‘i sectarian torture, murder spree continues: 24 more bodies found dumped aroung Baghdad Tuesday.
In a dispatch posted on its website Tuesday, Quds Press reported that the Iraqi puppet police had retrieved the bodies of 24 more victims of the Shi‘i sectarian torture, murder spree in various parts of Baghdad on Tuesday.
Sources with the puppet police disclosed to Quds Press that most of the bodies were found in al-Karakh, an area where the Shi‘i sectarian militias are highly active. The bodies were bond and blindfolded and showed signs of intense torture – a trademark of the Shi‘i sectarian militias and the US-backed security forces most of whose members are drawn from those sectarian militias.
Quds Press reported that according to the officially announced statistics of the US-installed puppet regime, the latest batch of murder victims brings the toll for the month of July to 425 people killed by the sectarian death squads.
The Shi‘i sectarian militias are engaged in a massive campaign to drive Sunnis out of vast swaths of Baghdad and central and southern Iraq in preparation for the implementation of US and Zionist plans to partition Iraq on sectarian lines.
Efforts to split Iraq along religious and ethnic lines are part of the plans that US and Zionist politicians have long been cultivating with a view to fragmenting the Arab region.
The idea of “the dissolution of Iraq into a Shi‘ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part” was voiced by veteran Zionist military correspondent Ze’ev Schiff in Ha'aretz on 2 June 1982 and was a part of the divide-and-rule strategy laid out by Zionist writer Oded Yinon in his “Strategy for Israel in the 1980s,” published in Kivunim (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism, published by the World Zionist Organization in occupied Jerusalem in February 1982. (It was translated by the late anti-Zionist writer and activist Israel Shahak and is widely available.)
The idea of splitting the Shi‘ah in Iraq from the rest of the country was a cornerstone of the neo-Conservative strategy laid out in “A Clean Break” a paper drawn up by American Zionist government officials Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, and Paul Wolfowitz in 1996 for the then Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Then in 2000 the neo-Conservative Project for a New American Century wrote Rebuilding America’s Defenses on the basis of the “Clean Break.”
The American version of the strategy for a partition of Iraq appeared in the article “The Three-State Solution” published in The New York Times on 25 November 2003 by Leslie Gelb (President Emeritus of the US Council on Foreign Relations). The same idea was reiterated, this time with “bi-partisan support” in the article by Gelb and US Democratic Senator Joseph Biden in “Unity through Autonomy in Iraq,” in The New York Times on 1 May 2006.
Then on 8 October 2006 the London Sunday Times reported that the partition of Iraq along religious and ethnic lines was one of the suggestions that the Baker-Hamilton commission was advancing.
Resistance bomb wound puppet troops Tuesday morning.
In a dispatch posted at 3:19pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that a bomb went off by a patrol of the puppet “Iraqi Army” on Qahtan Square in Baghdad’s al-Yarmuk district.
The AMSI reported that two puppet soldiers were wounded in the blast that also damaged one of the vehicles in the detail.
Resistance bomb targets puppet police patrol Tuesday morning.
In a dispatch posted at 3:19pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that an Iraqi Resistance bomb exploded by a puppet police patrol in the Zuyunah district of Baghdad on Tuesday morning.
The AMSI reported a source in the puppet police as claiming that the blast wounded one of the patrolmen and one civilian in addition to damaging patrol cars.
US admits death of four more American occupation troops.
In a dispatch posted at 9:10am Baghdad time Tuesday morning, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that the US admitted that four more of its occupation troops had been killed in Iraq – one each in al-Anbar Province and the city of Samarra’, and two in Baghdad, on Saturday and Sunday.
The AMSI reported that one American communiqué reported that one US soldier was killed on Saturday 21 July while on a mission somewhere in al-Anbar Province.
A second American statement acknowledged that another American had been killed when an Iraqi Resistance bomb exploded by a US military vehicle that was on a combat mission to the south of Samarra’, 120km north of Baghdad, also on Saturday, 21 July.
The third US communiqué announced that a bomb exploded in Baghdad on Sunday, 22 July, killing an American Marine.
Another communiqué issued at dawn on Tuesday reported that yet one other American had died in Baghdad on Saturday.
Puppet official reports that 80 percent of Iraq’s health workers have left hospitals since US occupation.
In a dispatch posted at 4:08pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that a deputy to the US-installed puppet “Iraqi Parliament” had delivered an official report on health and the environment in which he disclosed that 80 percent of Iraqi physicians had completely left work in the hospitals of the country.
The AMSI reported the puppet official as appearing at a press conference with other members of the puppet “Parliament” on Tuesday where they announced that the figure of 80 percent applied to all health care professionals, including dentists, pharmacists, and other health workers. He added that “the main reason for that is the deterioration of security that Iraqis are living through.”
The official said: “the reports issued by the [puppet] “Iraqi Ministry of Health” indicated that 132 medical personnel had been killed, in addition to 223 health workers, 186 non-nursing health workers, and 78 institutional guards.”
Salah ad-Din Province. Samarra’.
US imposes 24-hour curfew on Samarra’.
In a dispatch posted at 3:53pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that US forces imposed a 24-hour curfew on the city of Samarra’, 120km north of Baghdad, at 12 noon Tuesday.
The AMSI reported that the curfew was to remain in force until 12 noon Wednesday, but no explanation for the restrictive measure was provided.
Diyala Province. Al-Mada’in.
Resistance bomb kills three puppet policemen in al-Mada’in.
In a dispatch posted at 3:53pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that an Iraqi Resistance bomb exploded near the al-Mada’in fuel station in al-Mada’in, 25km southeast of Baghdad, on Tuesday.
The AMSI reported eyewitnesses as saying that a bomb that had been planted near the fuel station went off as a puppet police patrol approached, killing three of the puppet policemen and wounding still more of them.
US forces carry out mass arrests in al-Mada’in Tuesday.
In a dispatch posted at 3:53pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that US forces made raids and arrests in the al-Bawi area and the neighborhood of al-Wahdah of al-Mada’in, 25km southeast of Baghdad, on Tuesday.
The AMSI reported that the number of people abducted by the Americans was unknown.
Babil Province. Al-Hillah.
Unexplained car bomb kills 22 in al-Hillah.
In a dispatch posted at 3:19pm Baghdad time Tuesday afternoon, the Association of Muslim Scholars of Iraq (AMSI) reported that a car bomber blew up in the city of al-Hillah, 100km south of Baghdad on Tuesday.
The AMSI reported the puppet police as announcing that the blast killed 22 people and wounded 66 more. AMSI noted that al-Hillah has been the scene of several bombings in recent days despite the heavy deployment of US and puppet regime troops in the city. |
Friday, July 27, 2007
US soldier reported killed in early morning Resistance attack in al-Qa’im.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Monday, July 16, 2007
The Illegalities of the Iraq War
America Leads the Way
By Robert Fantina
07/14/07 "Counterpunch" -- -- In the four years since the United States and its so-called 'Coalition of the Willing' invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq, only one stated goal has been accomplished: the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Peace and democracy are simply pipe dreams, the continued fantasies of a deluded U.S. president and his gaggle of yes-men who all choose to remain oblivious to Iraq's bloody civil war.
In its perpetration of unspeakable terror upon the people of Iraq, the United States and its willing and/or coerced cohorts have violated international law at almost every turn. A few shocking examples are instructive.
In March of 2003, British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith responded to then Prime Minister Tony Blair's request for input on the legality of the 'coalition's' pending invasion. The U.S. had said that Iraq was in violation of Security Council Resolution 687, passed in 1991. The United Kingdom, Mr. Goldsmith said, believed that this determination could only be made by the U.N Security Council. He commented: "The US have a rather different view: they maintain that the fact of whether Iraq is in breach is a matter of objective fact which may therefore be assessed by individual Member States. I am not aware of any other state which supports this view."
One can readily deduce from this brief statement that Mr. Blair joined President Bush in his frenzied rush to war despite serious reservations that Mr. Goldsmith had about its legality, and which were made known to Mr. Blair prior to the invasion. Yet the then British Prime Minister, not called the Yankee Poodle for nothing, was willing to ignore the counsel of his own Attorney General and put his reputation, and the lives of thousands of young Britons, on the line as he happily jumped through the hoops Mr. Bush held for him.
Slowly, as the war dragged on, the name Abu Ghraib became familiar to the world. In this city's prison, once a center for torture of Iraqis by Saddam Hussein, American soldiers continued this disgraceful tradition. The world was horrified as photographs were released of the torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of American soldiers. But as has been the case throughout U.S. military history, only low-ranking military personnel have been held accountable.
That torture is part of U.S. military procedures cannot be surprising when one recalls the words of U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in reference to 'questioning' techniques used on prisoners: "In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions." With the U.S.'s top law enforcement officer deciding arbitrarily that any provisions of the Geneva Conventions are 'quaint' (archaic, outdated), the use of savagely-cruel, inhumane treatment of civilians and soldiers cannot be surprising.
America's unending arrogance is once again manifest in Mr. Gonzales' statement. The Geneva Conventions, developed over a period of more than one hundred years and ratified by one hundred and ninety-four countries, clearly cover the topics of treatment of prisoners of war and of aggressive war, and mandate serious consequences for nations in violation. Yet the U.S. Attorney General is able to dismiss them with a wave of his bloody hand, with hardly a ripple of protest from the mainstream press. That such negligence makes the press complicit in Mr. Gonzales' crimes is only obvious.
For many years the United States was quite cozy with Mr. Hussein and his nation. The U.S. provided him with weapons and other aid when it was convenient for it to do so. This may cause one to wonder about the commonalities between the two nations, or at least the most recent leaders of both. One cannot legitimately refer to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as the leader of Iraq, since a nation in the midst of a catastrophic civil war cannot be thought of as having a leader. The words of Benjamin Ferencz, a chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials, are worth noting. Now in his eighty-seventh year he said: "Nuremberg declared that aggressive war is the supreme international crime." Knowing what he does about aggressive war, Mr. Ferencz compared Mr. Bush to Mr. Hussein and said that both should be tried for their aggressive wars: Mr. Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and Mr. Bush's invasion of Iraq thirteen years later.
The evidence against Mr. Bush is overwhelming; casual students of U.S. politics will scratch their heads in wonder that Congress overlooks these crimes without even a cursory investigation. When Iraq, in 1990, invaded Kuwait, Mr. Bush's father did not hesitate to summon the U.N and take aggressive action. Whether this was due to his righteous indignation at this clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, or because he had a close eye on Kuwait's oil riches and his own future (present?) finger in that particularly lucrative pie, cannot be known. But the world saw that one nation could not with impunity arbitrarily invade another sovereign nation. In the decade and a half that have since passed, the U.S. Congress has apparently turned a blind eye to such flagrant violations of the Geneva Conventions as 'pre-emptive' war and torture of prisoners.
Prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, millions of people the world over protested the possibility of this obscene 'pre-emptive' strike; Mr. Bush compared them to a task force. Members of Congress from both parties seemed to fall all over each other to grab the microphone and utter jingoistic phrases that could have been considered nonsensical if their consequences were no so dire. Some of those, whether due to a genuine study of the situation in Iraq or to accommodate the prevailing winds of daily polls, have now changed their view and ostensibly oppose the war. Yet when placed in a position of following through on their spoken convictions, many of them fell back onto the old, over-used, totally false and completely bizarre cliché of continuing the war to support the troops.
Millions of people marching in the U.S. and European streets cannot end the Iraq war. American soldiers fighting in the streets of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities cannot end the war. The Iraqi Parliament cannot end the war. This civil war will only end once the Iraqi people are left to determine their own course of action. At present they are united only in their hatred of the United States; removing U.S. participation in the war will eliminate one major roadblock to peace.
The U.S. Congress can bring the end of the war closer; in November of 2006 its members were elected to do just that. That they have failed to uphold their duties to the Constitution, the nation, the citizens that elected them and the world that looks to them to end the war cannot be disputed. Although in ever-decreasing numbers, they look upon the situation in Iraq with rose-colored glasses, unaware that the reddish hue they see is the blood of Americans and Iraqis that they have caused to be spilled. Until the members of Congress fully recognize both the futility and tragedy of the Iraq war, and show the backbone necessary to end it, the unspeakable horror will continue.
Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006.'
By Robert Fantina
07/14/07 "Counterpunch" -- -- In the four years since the United States and its so-called 'Coalition of the Willing' invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq, only one stated goal has been accomplished: the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Peace and democracy are simply pipe dreams, the continued fantasies of a deluded U.S. president and his gaggle of yes-men who all choose to remain oblivious to Iraq's bloody civil war.
In its perpetration of unspeakable terror upon the people of Iraq, the United States and its willing and/or coerced cohorts have violated international law at almost every turn. A few shocking examples are instructive.
In March of 2003, British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith responded to then Prime Minister Tony Blair's request for input on the legality of the 'coalition's' pending invasion. The U.S. had said that Iraq was in violation of Security Council Resolution 687, passed in 1991. The United Kingdom, Mr. Goldsmith said, believed that this determination could only be made by the U.N Security Council. He commented: "The US have a rather different view: they maintain that the fact of whether Iraq is in breach is a matter of objective fact which may therefore be assessed by individual Member States. I am not aware of any other state which supports this view."
One can readily deduce from this brief statement that Mr. Blair joined President Bush in his frenzied rush to war despite serious reservations that Mr. Goldsmith had about its legality, and which were made known to Mr. Blair prior to the invasion. Yet the then British Prime Minister, not called the Yankee Poodle for nothing, was willing to ignore the counsel of his own Attorney General and put his reputation, and the lives of thousands of young Britons, on the line as he happily jumped through the hoops Mr. Bush held for him.
Slowly, as the war dragged on, the name Abu Ghraib became familiar to the world. In this city's prison, once a center for torture of Iraqis by Saddam Hussein, American soldiers continued this disgraceful tradition. The world was horrified as photographs were released of the torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of American soldiers. But as has been the case throughout U.S. military history, only low-ranking military personnel have been held accountable.
That torture is part of U.S. military procedures cannot be surprising when one recalls the words of U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in reference to 'questioning' techniques used on prisoners: "In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions." With the U.S.'s top law enforcement officer deciding arbitrarily that any provisions of the Geneva Conventions are 'quaint' (archaic, outdated), the use of savagely-cruel, inhumane treatment of civilians and soldiers cannot be surprising.
America's unending arrogance is once again manifest in Mr. Gonzales' statement. The Geneva Conventions, developed over a period of more than one hundred years and ratified by one hundred and ninety-four countries, clearly cover the topics of treatment of prisoners of war and of aggressive war, and mandate serious consequences for nations in violation. Yet the U.S. Attorney General is able to dismiss them with a wave of his bloody hand, with hardly a ripple of protest from the mainstream press. That such negligence makes the press complicit in Mr. Gonzales' crimes is only obvious.
For many years the United States was quite cozy with Mr. Hussein and his nation. The U.S. provided him with weapons and other aid when it was convenient for it to do so. This may cause one to wonder about the commonalities between the two nations, or at least the most recent leaders of both. One cannot legitimately refer to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as the leader of Iraq, since a nation in the midst of a catastrophic civil war cannot be thought of as having a leader. The words of Benjamin Ferencz, a chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials, are worth noting. Now in his eighty-seventh year he said: "Nuremberg declared that aggressive war is the supreme international crime." Knowing what he does about aggressive war, Mr. Ferencz compared Mr. Bush to Mr. Hussein and said that both should be tried for their aggressive wars: Mr. Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and Mr. Bush's invasion of Iraq thirteen years later.
The evidence against Mr. Bush is overwhelming; casual students of U.S. politics will scratch their heads in wonder that Congress overlooks these crimes without even a cursory investigation. When Iraq, in 1990, invaded Kuwait, Mr. Bush's father did not hesitate to summon the U.N and take aggressive action. Whether this was due to his righteous indignation at this clear violation of the Geneva Conventions, or because he had a close eye on Kuwait's oil riches and his own future (present?) finger in that particularly lucrative pie, cannot be known. But the world saw that one nation could not with impunity arbitrarily invade another sovereign nation. In the decade and a half that have since passed, the U.S. Congress has apparently turned a blind eye to such flagrant violations of the Geneva Conventions as 'pre-emptive' war and torture of prisoners.
Prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, millions of people the world over protested the possibility of this obscene 'pre-emptive' strike; Mr. Bush compared them to a task force. Members of Congress from both parties seemed to fall all over each other to grab the microphone and utter jingoistic phrases that could have been considered nonsensical if their consequences were no so dire. Some of those, whether due to a genuine study of the situation in Iraq or to accommodate the prevailing winds of daily polls, have now changed their view and ostensibly oppose the war. Yet when placed in a position of following through on their spoken convictions, many of them fell back onto the old, over-used, totally false and completely bizarre cliché of continuing the war to support the troops.
Millions of people marching in the U.S. and European streets cannot end the Iraq war. American soldiers fighting in the streets of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities cannot end the war. The Iraqi Parliament cannot end the war. This civil war will only end once the Iraqi people are left to determine their own course of action. At present they are united only in their hatred of the United States; removing U.S. participation in the war will eliminate one major roadblock to peace.
The U.S. Congress can bring the end of the war closer; in November of 2006 its members were elected to do just that. That they have failed to uphold their duties to the Constitution, the nation, the citizens that elected them and the world that looks to them to end the war cannot be disputed. Although in ever-decreasing numbers, they look upon the situation in Iraq with rose-colored glasses, unaware that the reddish hue they see is the blood of Americans and Iraqis that they have caused to be spilled. Until the members of Congress fully recognize both the futility and tragedy of the Iraq war, and show the backbone necessary to end it, the unspeakable horror will continue.
Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006.'
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
The Mind of the Returning Iraq War Veteran
They Don't Come Back the Same
By Helen Redmond
"They fly the flag when you attack: when you come home they turn their backs." - Iraq Veterans Against the War cadence
07/03/07 "Counterpunch" -- -- One hears it all the time from soldiers who fight in wars: "You don't come back the same." It's a simple truism with enormous consequences for the men and women who are on their way back to the United States from Afghanistan and Iraq. Many thousands of soldiers will be forever changed from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). To be diagnosed with PTSD is an affirmation that a soldier is human. It is the mammalian brain functioning at its highest level and acknowledging that--despite all the training and brainwashing in boot camp (KILL, KILL, KILL)--it is in no way normal or natural to kill other human beings, to torture and commit atrocities (Haditha, Abu GHraib), to humiliate, subjugate and occupy a people and their country.
The negative psychological impact of war is well known by the Pentagon brass that sends soldiers into theaters of war where daily, death and dismemberment are facts of life. They understand when soldiers see their comrades-in-arms blown to bits, missing limbs, bloodied and burned bodies and grey matter strewn on walls, bridges, and highways that a psychological price is paid. The media in the United States does not show us these grisly images, but they are seared in the brains of countless soldiers.
Combat trauma has been studied since WW1. Over 8 million soldiers died in 4 years in that war. The death toll banished the notion that soldiers glory in battle and "real men" are impervious to the horrors of war. Under conditions of unrelenting exposure to the barbarity of trench warfare, soldiers began to have mental break downs in massive numbers. The British psychologist Charles Myers called the resulting nervous disorder "shell shock." He believed it was the concussive effects of exploding shells that caused symptoms like screaming, crying uncontrollably, loss of memory and the inability to feel. But in fact, it was the emotional stress of prolonged exposure to violent death and destruction that produced what was later called post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD.) Military authorities refused to believe it. When the existence of a combat neurosis could not longer be denied, military psychiatrists and other personnel--instead of treating soldiers humanely and with compassion--did the opposite. These soldiers were called "moral invalids," cowards, malingerers, and unpatriotic. Some argued they should be court-martialed or dishonorably discharged rather than offered psychological care. Progressive medical authorities disagreed and advocated humane treatment.
Siegfried Sassoon, a soldier in WW1, was treated for shell shock. He became famous when, while still in uniform, he publicly joined the pacifist movement and denounced the war. The text of his Soldier's Declaration written in 1917 is remarkably relevant for the imperialist wars of the 21st century, and most presciently, the occupation of Iraq. He wrote:
I am making this statement as an act of willful defiance of military authority, because I believe that the war is being deliberately prolonged by those who have the power to end it.
I am a soldier, convinced that I am acting on behalf of soldiers. I believe that this war, upon which I entered as a war of defense and liberation, has now become a war of aggression and conquest I have seen and endured the suffering of the troops, and I can no longer be a party to prolong the sufferings for ends which I believe to be evil and unjust.
A few years after the war was over, medical interest in the subject of combat neurosis ended.
The Vietnam War opened the wound up again, but this time the impetus to understand the psychological impact of war was organized by soldiers themselves. The Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) started "rap groups." These meetings were peer led and allowed soldiers to talk about the traumatic experiences of war. They were also political meetings that raised consciousness around the causes of war, imperialism, class, and racism. These vets refused to be stigmatized and insisted that the war itself was to blame for their psychological problems.
The power of the antiwar movement was also crucial and gave strength to veterans, and veterans who spoke out against the war and threw their medals away gave power and legitimacy to the antiwar movement.
After the war ended Vietnam vets forced the Veterans Administration to address the mental health issues of returning soldiers. In 1980, post-traumatic stress disorder finally became a "real" diagnosis and was included in the American Psychiatric Association's official manual of mental disorders. Without the organizing of soldiers, together with the anti-war movement, the psychological trauma of war (PTSD) would have been conveniently forgotten once again.
Those who run the war machine have always sought to ignore, downplay or deny the irrefutable fact that war profoundly damages the human psyche. How could they continue to recruit fresh troops if it were widely known, discussed, and taken seriously that almost every soldier will experience PTSD to some degree? That for some, they will be psychiatrically disabled for life, or become addicted to drugs to cope with the flashbacks and fear, perhaps unable to work and unable to enjoy the freedom they supposedly fought for. But the good news is with treatment PTSD is treatable and can be cured. That's the other thing about the mammalian brain--with the love, support, and understanding of other human beings, trauma can be overcome.
The problem is getting that treatment and the need is overwhelming. According to Paul Rieckhoff, director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, one in three veterans is now returning with some form of PTSD. The number of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans getting treatment for PTSD at VA hospitals and counseling centers increased by 87 percent from September 2005 to June 2006. But there are many more that never get treatment because there is still a stigma attached to admitting to psychological problems. Soldiers report being made fun of, punished, demoted, and threatened with dishonorable discharge.
One of the main reasons for the increase in numbers is the Pentagon's stop-loss policy. More troops are serving two, three and occasionally four tours-of-duty in Iraq which puts them at greater risk for PTSD.
The VA hospital and clinic system are in deep crisis as the recent revelations at Walter Reed showed. VA's all over the country are underfunded and understaffed. How can this be when billions of dollars a month are spent on the war? There is a backlog of 600,000 cases and vets can wait up to 170 days for mental health treatment. For some it is already too late. A report by the Defense Manpower Data Center stated that suicide accounted for over 25 percent of all non-combat Army deaths in Iraq in 2006. And Pentagon statistics reveal that the suicide rate for U.S. troops who have served in Iraq is double what it was in peacetime.
One thing is clear: President Bush and the other war criminals in the Whitehouse and Pentagon don't give a shit about the lives of soldiers. They are canon fodder and nothing else.
Now a new generation of veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will have to continue the struggle for mental health care that they and their families will need.
Helen Redmond, LCSW CADC, redmondmadrid@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
