Fatigue cripples US army in Iraq

Users who are viewing this thread

JuJu

Member
Messages
239
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Lieutenant Clay Hanna looks sick and white. Like his colleagues he does not seem to sleep. Hanna says he catches up by napping on a cot between operations in the command centre, amid the noise of radio. He is up at 6am and tries to go to sleep by 2am or 3am. But there are operations to go on, planning to be done and after-action reports that need to be written. And war interposes its own deadly agenda that requires his attention and wakes him up.

The Americans he commands, like the other men at Sullivan - a combat outpost in Zafraniya, south east Baghdad - hit their cots when they get in from operations. But even when they wake up there is something tired and groggy about them. They are on duty for five days at a time and off for two days. When they get back to the forward operating base, they do their laundry and sleep and count the days until they will get home. It is an exhaustion that accumulates over the patrols and the rotations, over the multiple deployments, until it all joins up, wiping out any memory of leave or time at home. Until life is nothing but Iraq.

Hanna and his men are not alone in being tired most of the time. A whole army is exhausted and worn out. You see the young soldiers washed up like driftwood at Baghdad's international airport, waiting to go on leave or returning to their units, sleeping on their body armour on floors and in the dust.

Where once the war in Iraq was defined in conversations with these men by untenable ideas - bringing democracy or defeating al-Qaeda - these days the war in Iraq is defined by different ways of expressing the idea of being weary. It is a theme that is endlessly reiterated as you travel around Iraq. 'The army is worn out. We are just keeping people in theatre who are exhausted,' says a soldier working for the US army public affairs office who is supposed to be telling me how well things have been going since the 'surge' in Baghdad began.

They are not supposed to talk like this. We are driving and another of the public affairs team adds bitterly: 'We should just be allowed to tell the media what is happening here. Let them know that people are worn out. So that their families know back home. But it's like we've become no more than numbers now.'

The first soldier starts in again. 'My husband was injured here. He hit an improvised explosive device. He already had a spinal injury. The blast shook out the plates. He's home now and has serious issues adapting. But I'm not allowed to go back home to see him. If I wanted to see him I'd have to take leave time (two weeks). And the army counts it.'

A week later, in the northern city of Mosul, an officer talks privately. 'We're plodding through this,' he says after another patrol and another ambush in the city centre. 'I don't know how much more plodding we've got left in us.'

When the soldiers talk like this there is resignation. There is a corrosive anger, too, that bubbles out, like the words pouring unbidden from a chaplain's assistant who has come to bless a patrol. 'Why don't you tell the truth? Why don't you journalists write that this army is exhausted?'

It is a weariness that has created its own culture of superstition. There are vehicle commanders who will not let the infantrymen in the back fall asleep on long operations - not because they want the men alert, but because, they say, bad things happen when people fall asleep. So the soldiers drink multiple cans of Rip It and Red Bull to stay alert and wired.

But the exhaustion of the US army emerges most powerfully in the details of these soldiers' frayed and worn-out lives. Everywhere you go you hear the same complaints: soldiers talk about divorces, or problems with the girlfriends that they don't see, or about the children who have been born and who are growing up largely without them.

'I counted it the other day,' says a major whose partner is also a soldier. 'We have been married for five years. We added up the days. Because of Iraq and Afghanistan we have been together for just seven months. Seven months ... We are in a bad place. I don't know whether this marriage can survive it.'

The anecdotal evidence on the ground confirms what others - prominent among them General Colin Powell, the former US Secretary of State - have been insisting for months now: that the US army is 'about broken'. Only a third of the regular army's brigades now qualify as combat-ready. Officers educated at the elite West Point academy are leaving at a rate not seen in 30 years, with the consequence that the US army has a shortfall of 3,000 commissioned officers - and the problem is expected to worsen.

And it is not only the soldiers that are worn out. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have led to the destruction, or wearing out, of 40 per cent of the US army's equipment, totalling at a recent count $212bn (£105bn).

But it is in the soldiers themselves - and in the ordinary stories they tell - that the exhaustion of the US military is most obvious, coming amid warnings that soldiers serving multiple Iraq deployments, now amounting to several years, are 50 per cent more likely than those with one tour to suffer from acute combat stress.

The army's exhaustion is reflected in problems such as the rate of desertion and unauthorised absences - a problem, it was revealed earlier this year, that had increased threefold on the period before the war in Afghanistan and had resulted in thousands of negative discharges.

'They are scraping to get people to go back and people are worn out,' said Thomas Grieger, a senior US navy psychiatrist, told the International Herald Tribune in April.

'Modern war is exhausting,' says Major Stacie Caswell, an occupational therapist with a combat stress unit attached to the military hospital in Mosul. Her unit runs long group sessions to help soldiers with emerging mental health and discipline problems: often they have seen friends killed and injured, or are having problems stemming from issues at home - responsible for 50 to 60 per cent of their cases. One of the most common problems in Iraq is sleep disorders.

'This is a different kind of war,' says Caswell. 'In World War II it was clear who the good guys and the bad guys were. You knew what you would go through on the battlefield.' Now she says the threat is all around. And soldiering has changed. 'Now we have so many things to do...'

'And the soldier in Vietnam,' interjects Sergeant John Valentine from the same unit, 'did not get to see the coverage from home that these soldiers do. We see what is going on at home on the political scene. They think the war is going to end. Then we have the frustration and confusion. That is fatiguing. Mentally tiring.'

'Not only that,' says Caswell, 'but because of the nature of what we do now, the number of tasks in comparison with previous generations - even as you are finishing your 15 months here you are immediately planning and training for your next tour.' Valentine adds: 'There is no decompression.'

The consequence is a deep-seated problem of retention and recruitment that in turn, says Caswell, has led the US army to reduce its standards for joining the military, particularly over the issue of no longer looking too hard at any previous history of mental illness. 'It is a question of honesty, and we are not investigating too deeply or we are issuing waivers. The consequence is that we are seeing people who do not have the same coping skills when they get here, and this can be difficult.

'We are also seeing older soldiers coming in - up to 41 years old - and that is causing its own problems. They have difficulty dealing with the physical impact of the war and also interacting with the younger men.'
Valentine says: 'We are not only watering down the quality of the soldiers but the leadership too. The good leaders get out. I've seen it. And right now we are on the down slope.'

America's 'war tsar' has called for the nation's political leaders to consider bringing back the draft to help a military exhausted by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In a radio interview, Lieutenant General Douglas Lute said the option had always been open to boost America's all-volunteer army by drafting in young men in the same way as happened in Vietnam. 'I think it makes sense to consider it,' he said. Lute was appointed 'war tsar' earlier this year after President Bush decided a single figure was needed to oversee the nation's military efforts abroad.

Rumours of a return to the draft have long circulated in military circles as the pressure from fighting two large conflicts at the same time builds on America's forces. However, politically it would be extremely difficult to achieve, especially for any leader hoping to be elected in 2008. Bush has previously ruled out the suggestion as unnecessary.

A draft would revive bad memories of the turmoil of the 1960s and early 1970s when tens of thousands of young men were drafted to fight and die in Vietnam. Few other policies proved as divisive in America and the memories of anti-war protesters burning their draft cards and fleeing to Canada are still vivid in the memory.
Fatigue cripples US army in Iraq | World | The Observer

Nah, this country wouldn't stand for a military draft.
 
  • 27
    Replies
  • 3K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
I am against having a draft.

What is a soldier worth that is not willing to protect their country on their own accord? Nothing IMO. What good would they be in war to their country? They'd probably end up getting their fellow soldiers killed because they are too busy complaining about where they are at if they don't end up running first.

If enough people are not willing to voluntarily stand up for the liberty of their selves and others then our country is either in a war it shouldn't be in or our society is soaked with morally decayed cowards IMO.
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I am against having a draft.

What is a soldier worth that is not willing to protect their country on their own accord? Nothing IMO. What good would they be in war to their country? They'd probably end up getting their fellow soldiers killed because they are too busy complaining about where they are at if they don't end up running first.

If enough people are not willing to voluntarily stand up for the liberty of their selves and others then our country is either in a war it shouldn't be in or our society is soaked with morally decayed cowards IMO.


That is a pretty big statement to make. Just because someone doesn't want to fight does not make them a coward.
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
There IS a time and a place for a draft... this occupation isn't the time.

The draft works well in the right situations. Look at WWI & WWII both were primarily handled by draftees. There were over 10 million people drafted for WWII alone. Not many of them running or hiding. But I guess they were cowards since they didn't sign up on their own. :dunno
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
There were close to 18,000 draftee's in WWII that either refused the draft or opted for other work besides going to war and serving their country.
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
There were close to 18,000 draftee's in WWII that either refused the draft or opted for other work besides going to war and serving their country.

That's one 1/10th of 1%, only 1 out of 562 people... very small numbers when it comes to putting your life on the line...

It still doesn't take away the fact that 10,110,000 people were drafted into war for this country... which they won in less time than we have been in Iraq
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
I didn't say that it did Tim.

But it still doesn't change the fact that today many do not want to serve their country. I am not putting into question the character of my Mother's generation. It is the character of today's generation that I put in question.
 

JuJu

Member
Messages
239
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I didn't say that it did Tim.

But it still doesn't change the fact that today many do not want to serve their country. I am not putting into question the character of my Mother's generation. It is the character of today's generation that I put in question.


Character? Enlistment may be down because folks started lookin' around 'n seein' this administration has repeatedly lied about the state of that 'war' and realized this 'war' is for corporate profit and has little to do with freedom.

I'd say today's generation finally got smart along with the rest of America (at least in reference to this 'war').
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
Which is why I stated this:

I am against having a draft.

What is a soldier worth that is not willing to protect their country on their own accord? Nothing IMO. What good would they be in war to their country? They'd probably end up getting their fellow soldiers killed because they are too busy complaining about where they are at if they don't end up running first.

If enough people are not willing to voluntarily stand up for the liberty of their selves and others then our country is either in a war it shouldn't be in or our society is soaked with morally decayed cowards IMO.
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
Grace I think it has to do more with the kind of war we are in than this generation. WW2 was a genuine, good cause to fight for. While our intentions with Iraq are....more than questionable.
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
Grace I think it has to do more with the kind of war we are in than this generation. WW2 was a genuine, good cause to fight for. While our intentions with Iraq are....more than questionable.
We aren't in a draft situation yet, so I don't know for sure of course. Just stating the way I see it.

But in the draft thread, you see people talking about going to Canada if there was a draft. Why? Is it because they do not think that terrorists are a threat to this country and the freedoms that the western world has? Or is it because this generation is morally decayed? Do people not remember how the American people were just about brought economically to their knees?

Personally, I think that terrorists ARE a threat to this country and others. This was evident way before 9/11. But it took 9/11 for the government and the American public to collectively pull their heads out of the orifice on their back sides to do something about it.

We either bow to their ways or we protect our way of life. But sitting back and doing nothing or running to Canada is crap IMO. Maybe if I didn't think this war was worthwhile I'd see it differently. ;)
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
Personally, I think that terrorists ARE a threat to this country and others.

Terrorists are always a threat to this country, there is nothing we can do about that. We WILL be hit again in the future. So what? Do you honestly think that going to war with a country is the best course of action to protect us? Was it Iraq or any other nation that threatened us with terrorism? We didn't invade Iraq because of terrorism or 9/11. So how is that protecting us? Every nation out there has some form of WMD's or another. Every nation has some citizens that want to harm us, even our own people. Terrorists ARE a threat to our country, so we should take the steps we need to protect ourselves here at home. But we must do so in a way that safeguards our constitutional rights. The greatest threat that any terrorist has ever posed to us is when they cause our own government to effectively remove our freedoms in the name of protecting us from them.

We either bow to their ways or we protect our way of life.

We don't bow to them or their ways and we also don't let them win by removing our own freedoms and liberties.

We can never be 100% safe from those who wish us harm. Isolating ourselves from the rest of the world or living in fear does more harm to our nation than any sort of terrorist attack. And poor foreign policy is a sure way to ignite an entire region to rise up against us.
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
Terrorists are always a threat to this country, there is nothing we can do about that.
I disagree.

We WILL be hit again in the future. So what?
So what? :confused This is the kind of attitude I'm talking about.

Do you honestly think that going to war with a country is the best course of action to protect us?
One among many that needed to be taken, yes.

Was it Iraq or any other nation that threatened us with terrorism? We didn't invade Iraq because of terrorism or 9/11.
We are not going to agree on this area, so there's no point in me answering this one.

Terrorists ARE a threat to our country, so we should take the steps we need to protect ourselves here at home. But we must do so in a way that safeguards our constitutional rights. The greatest threat that any terrorist has ever posed to us is when they cause our own government to effectively remove our freedoms in the name of protecting us from them.
You know, fundamentally I agree with you on this. But unfortunately we have many people in this country now that will defend the rights of a criminal over the authorities that are trying to make society a safe place to live. We have people in this country that haven't a clue what is required of our men and women in uniform and are quick to defend the enemy than to defend the guys in uniform that are protecting their freedoms.

I just don't see it from the same perspective as you do Tim. I don't believe in sitting here, isolating myself off, and doing nothing about it (you'd probably not see it as doing nothing), except watching my own back. I believe we should be helping to eradicate evil in other parts of the world as well.

We don't bow to them or their ways and we also don't let them win by removing our own freedoms and liberties.
I do not feel any less free now than I did 20 years ago.

Isolating ourselves from the rest of the world -
so we should take the steps we need to protect ourselves here at home
Pretty much sounds like you are suggesting isolation yourself. I don't agree with that. I agree with our current stance against terrorism.

living in fear
I don't live in fear. I would however if were not taking a stand against terrorism. We should have done so before 9/11.

And poor foreign policy is a sure way to ignite an entire region to rise up against us.
Oh yes let's pass the buck. Like I stated they were rising up against us way before 9/11.
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
I don't believe we should sit back and do nothing. I believe we were right in going after Bin Laden and trying to destroy his terrorist network. He is the cause of 9/11 yet here we are 6 long years later and our "great" military cannot find one man who was hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan. Now he's in Pakistan and we still are no closer to getting him. Doesn't any of that concern you? The fact that he and his organization are just as strong, if not stronger than when he hit the US...

Redirecting our focus and protecting ourselves at home is in no way isolationism. Our military is not used in that capacity. That is the role for law enforcement and the FBI. There are still viable targets that our military needs to focus on elsewhere in the world.
 

GraceAbounds

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,998
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.00z
our "great" military cannot find one man who was hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan. Now he's in Pakistan and we still are no closer to getting him.
Well it sounds like you have all the intelligence and know exactly where he is. Maybe you should join our "great" military.

Doesn't any of that concern you?
Yes, but I have faith that our efforts will eventually bear fruit. Perseverance is a wonderful thing.

The fact that he and his organization are just as strong, if not stronger than when he hit the US...
I'm just not feeling it. He is hiding like a piss ant in the ground and they have not succeeded in attacking our homeland since 9/11.

Redirecting our focus and protecting ourselves at home is in no way isolationism.
I believe we are focused on protecting ourselves at home. Now if we could just secure or borders, but then that is another subject.

There are still viable targets that our military needs to focus on elsewhere in the world.
And they are IMO.

I think you are a bright guy Tim, I just don't happen to agree with you on how to go about accomplishing certain things. It's cool chatting with you though. :)
 
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top