Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
February 23, 2013
American Assassination History for Dummies
by Mark Ames | February 21, 2013 - 10:52am
It’s hard to have a serious conversation about America’s drone assassination policy when no one seems to have a basic grasp of recent history. This cultural amnesia epidemic is starting to get me down— which is partly my fault for paying more than two minutes’ attention to Twitter at a single go.
The problem starts with Reagan, as problems so often do. Most people on the left take for granted that Reagan’s executive order 12333 "banned assassinations" — which is not just a false interpretation, but really awful mangling of one of the dark turning points in modern American history.
That same ignorance of the history of assassination policy runs right through today, with the repetition of another myth: That President Obama’s extrajudicial drone-assassinations of American citizens is "unprecedented" and "radical" and that "not even George Bush targeted American citizens."
The truth is a lot worse and a lot more depressing.
American Assassination History for Dummies
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/mark-ames/48219/american-assassination-history-for-dummiesAmerican Assassination History for Dummies
by Mark Ames | February 21, 2013 - 10:52am
It’s hard to have a serious conversation about America’s drone assassination policy when no one seems to have a basic grasp of recent history. This cultural amnesia epidemic is starting to get me down— which is partly my fault for paying more than two minutes’ attention to Twitter at a single go.
The problem starts with Reagan, as problems so often do. Most people on the left take for granted that Reagan’s executive order 12333 "banned assassinations" — which is not just a false interpretation, but really awful mangling of one of the dark turning points in modern American history.
That same ignorance of the history of assassination policy runs right through today, with the repetition of another myth: That President Obama’s extrajudicial drone-assassinations of American citizens is "unprecedented" and "radical" and that "not even George Bush targeted American citizens."
The truth is a lot worse and a lot more depressing.
February 23, 2013
America has the "best justice system in the world," says Blackwater exec
Blackwater Off the Hook Again in Plea Deal With Bush-Appointed Judge
- Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Common Dreams
A criminal case against executives of the defense contractor formerly known as Blackwater ended in a meager misdemeanor plea in court Thursday, amounting to little more than a slap on the wrist for the private military company, critics say.
The charges against the commandos involved weapons trafficking and a wide selection of other weapons violations amounting to fifteen counts of serious felonies.
Instead, as EmptyWheel reported Thursday, "the DOJ collaborated with the defense and walked into court without notice Thursday, filed a new information containing a single misdemeanor charge and proceeded to sentence them on the spot to a hand slap." The plea deal amounts to one count each of failure to keep records on firearms.
Judge Louise W. Flanagan of Federal District Court in North Carolina, a conservative Bush appointee, dismissed all charges against two of the officials, Andrew Howell, Blackwater’s former general counsel, and Ana Bundy, a former vice president, while prosecutors agreed to drop charges against a third, Ronald Slezak, a former weapons manager.
Blackwater Off the Hook Again in Plea Deal With Bush-Appointed Judge
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/02/22-3America has the "best justice system in the world," says Blackwater exec
Blackwater Off the Hook Again in Plea Deal With Bush-Appointed Judge
- Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Common Dreams
A criminal case against executives of the defense contractor formerly known as Blackwater ended in a meager misdemeanor plea in court Thursday, amounting to little more than a slap on the wrist for the private military company, critics say.
The charges against the commandos involved weapons trafficking and a wide selection of other weapons violations amounting to fifteen counts of serious felonies.
Instead, as EmptyWheel reported Thursday, "the DOJ collaborated with the defense and walked into court without notice Thursday, filed a new information containing a single misdemeanor charge and proceeded to sentence them on the spot to a hand slap." The plea deal amounts to one count each of failure to keep records on firearms.
Judge Louise W. Flanagan of Federal District Court in North Carolina, a conservative Bush appointee, dismissed all charges against two of the officials, Andrew Howell, Blackwater’s former general counsel, and Ana Bundy, a former vice president, while prosecutors agreed to drop charges against a third, Ronald Slezak, a former weapons manager.
February 23, 2013
Sequestration Broadly Is Terrible Policy, But Our Military is Overdue for Downsizing
by Miriam Pemberton
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Foreign Policy in Focus
~snip~
If you’re an advocate, Iike I am, for revamped federal priorities that shift resources from a bloated Pentagon budget toward neglected domestic priorities, your take on this animal can’t be simple. You say cutting everything indiscriminately is a bad way to run a government (this view is nearly universal). You oppose the cuts in the domestic budget that will leave us with fewer food safety inspectors, medical researchers, Head Start teachers, and airport baggage screeners on the job. But you can reel off long lists of ways to cut waste in the Pentagon budget to the levels prescribed by sequestration, and show that these cuts will leave us completely safe.
~snip~
Gut the military? That’s what the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been saying any chance they get. Sequestration would “invite aggression,” says lingering Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. It will “put the nation at greater risk of coercion,” says the Joint Chiefs Chair, Martin Dempsey. When asked at a recent congressional hearing which nation might coerce us, though, he couldn’t say.
In fact, sequestration will not “gut” our military. Our military budget has nearly doubled since 2001. Sequestration would take it back to the level it was in 2007 — when we were still fighting two wars. Adjusted for inflation, it would leave that budget higher than its Cold War average — when we had an adversary that was spending roughly what we were on its military. Now, as Michael Cohen notes in The Guardian, the closest thing to a peer adversary we have is China, and we are spending more on research and development of new weapons than the Chinese are spending on their entire military. We spend more on our military, in fact, than the next 14 countries put together.
After the longest period of war in our history, we are due for a defense downsizing. Sequestration would create a shallower downsizing than any of the previous postwar periods since World War II. We can do this, and we should. We need the money for other things.
Sequestration Broadly Is Terrible Policy, But Our Military is Overdue for Downsizing
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1179Sequestration Broadly Is Terrible Policy, But Our Military is Overdue for Downsizing
by Miriam Pemberton
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Foreign Policy in Focus
~snip~
If you’re an advocate, Iike I am, for revamped federal priorities that shift resources from a bloated Pentagon budget toward neglected domestic priorities, your take on this animal can’t be simple. You say cutting everything indiscriminately is a bad way to run a government (this view is nearly universal). You oppose the cuts in the domestic budget that will leave us with fewer food safety inspectors, medical researchers, Head Start teachers, and airport baggage screeners on the job. But you can reel off long lists of ways to cut waste in the Pentagon budget to the levels prescribed by sequestration, and show that these cuts will leave us completely safe.
~snip~
Gut the military? That’s what the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been saying any chance they get. Sequestration would “invite aggression,” says lingering Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. It will “put the nation at greater risk of coercion,” says the Joint Chiefs Chair, Martin Dempsey. When asked at a recent congressional hearing which nation might coerce us, though, he couldn’t say.
In fact, sequestration will not “gut” our military. Our military budget has nearly doubled since 2001. Sequestration would take it back to the level it was in 2007 — when we were still fighting two wars. Adjusted for inflation, it would leave that budget higher than its Cold War average — when we had an adversary that was spending roughly what we were on its military. Now, as Michael Cohen notes in The Guardian, the closest thing to a peer adversary we have is China, and we are spending more on research and development of new weapons than the Chinese are spending on their entire military. We spend more on our military, in fact, than the next 14 countries put together.
After the longest period of war in our history, we are due for a defense downsizing. Sequestration would create a shallower downsizing than any of the previous postwar periods since World War II. We can do this, and we should. We need the money for other things.
February 23, 2013
His holiness the Dalai Lama. Is might be absurd to consider the hypothetical, but then again, what has become the reality of US policy, like the extrajudicial killing a US teenager, would have also once been decried as absurd.
What If the Chinese Killed the Dalai Lama with a Drone Strike?
by Tom Gallagher
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Common Dreams
On the same day we learned of the Obama Administration’s intent to dig in its heels and refuse to share its standards for drone strike targeting with the U.S. Senate, we also learned that China had considered becoming the second nation to launch a drone-based missile strike against one of its enemies on foreign soil. Had it happened as contemplated, the attack in Myanmar would certainly have made waves in Washington. The nature of the “target” would not have been very controversial though, in that Burmese national Naw Kham is a “drug lord” blamed for the killing of 13 Chinese sailors who refused to pay protection money while working on the Mekong River in 2011. (China decided against the strike and instead captured him in Laos last April and subsequently sentenced him to death.)
But what if China decided that the Dalai Lama were a legitimate “target”?
Absurd? Well, yes and no. Yes, it’s not going to happen. Obviously assassinating the Dalai Lama would be rightly denounced as an atrocity in every capital around the world and I don’t for a moment mean to suggest that the Chinese Government would actually consider it. But would it be absurd in the sense that it would somehow be beyond the pale of world standards for drone-based assassination, that is to say, the standards of the one country that has done this – the U.S.? Well, no.
From official Beijing’s point of view, the Dalai Lama is an enemy of the Chinese state, a secessionist whose remarks, according to the official Xinhua news agency “remind us of the cruel Nazis during the Second World War” in advocating policies that would expel Han Chinese from Tibet, which China deems an integral part of the country. Of course, when it comes to comparing any imagined Chinese action with real life American policy, we are at something of a loss, in that, as we’ve been reminded over the course of the Senate hearings on John Brennan’s appointment as CIA Director, President Obama maintains his right to assassinate without telling us on what basis he does so.
What If the Chinese Killed the Dalai Lama with a Drone Strike?
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/02/22-11His holiness the Dalai Lama. Is might be absurd to consider the hypothetical, but then again, what has become the reality of US policy, like the extrajudicial killing a US teenager, would have also once been decried as absurd.
What If the Chinese Killed the Dalai Lama with a Drone Strike?
by Tom Gallagher
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Common Dreams
On the same day we learned of the Obama Administration’s intent to dig in its heels and refuse to share its standards for drone strike targeting with the U.S. Senate, we also learned that China had considered becoming the second nation to launch a drone-based missile strike against one of its enemies on foreign soil. Had it happened as contemplated, the attack in Myanmar would certainly have made waves in Washington. The nature of the “target” would not have been very controversial though, in that Burmese national Naw Kham is a “drug lord” blamed for the killing of 13 Chinese sailors who refused to pay protection money while working on the Mekong River in 2011. (China decided against the strike and instead captured him in Laos last April and subsequently sentenced him to death.)
But what if China decided that the Dalai Lama were a legitimate “target”?
Absurd? Well, yes and no. Yes, it’s not going to happen. Obviously assassinating the Dalai Lama would be rightly denounced as an atrocity in every capital around the world and I don’t for a moment mean to suggest that the Chinese Government would actually consider it. But would it be absurd in the sense that it would somehow be beyond the pale of world standards for drone-based assassination, that is to say, the standards of the one country that has done this – the U.S.? Well, no.
From official Beijing’s point of view, the Dalai Lama is an enemy of the Chinese state, a secessionist whose remarks, according to the official Xinhua news agency “remind us of the cruel Nazis during the Second World War” in advocating policies that would expel Han Chinese from Tibet, which China deems an integral part of the country. Of course, when it comes to comparing any imagined Chinese action with real life American policy, we are at something of a loss, in that, as we’ve been reminded over the course of the Senate hearings on John Brennan’s appointment as CIA Director, President Obama maintains his right to assassinate without telling us on what basis he does so.
February 23, 2013
U.S.-made tear gas canister in Tahrir Square, on January 28, 2011.
Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
Andrea Germanos, staff writer
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Common Dreams
Egypt's Interior Ministry ordered 140,000 teargas canisters from the United States in January, which the US State Department only allowed to be exported without the company's name or any indication they were made in the U.S., the Egypt Independent reports Friday.
From letters between the Interior Ministry and Defense Ministry: "In light of the ongoing incidents and growing need for gas bombs to deal with rioters and preserve the nations safety, Al-Guindy Company for Imports and Exports, a representative of the US Combined System Company in Egypt, has been contracted to import 70,000 gas bombs and 70,000 long-range gas projectiles from the US to Egypt,” the letter stated.
From a memo written on January 28, 2013 by Major General Magdy al-Gohary, head of the Egyptian Department for Police Supply:
“The US government was stringent in issuing export permits for Egypt items that have been contracted since July, due to the unstable situation in Egypt and what was circulated by the media and rights groups about the US company’s effect on protesters while using [the gas canisters] against rioters in Egypt.”
Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/02/22-2U.S.-made tear gas canister in Tahrir Square, on January 28, 2011.
Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
Andrea Germanos, staff writer
Published on Friday, February 22, 2013 by Common Dreams
Egypt's Interior Ministry ordered 140,000 teargas canisters from the United States in January, which the US State Department only allowed to be exported without the company's name or any indication they were made in the U.S., the Egypt Independent reports Friday.
From letters between the Interior Ministry and Defense Ministry: "In light of the ongoing incidents and growing need for gas bombs to deal with rioters and preserve the nations safety, Al-Guindy Company for Imports and Exports, a representative of the US Combined System Company in Egypt, has been contracted to import 70,000 gas bombs and 70,000 long-range gas projectiles from the US to Egypt,” the letter stated.
From a memo written on January 28, 2013 by Major General Magdy al-Gohary, head of the Egyptian Department for Police Supply:
“The US government was stringent in issuing export permits for Egypt items that have been contracted since July, due to the unstable situation in Egypt and what was circulated by the media and rights groups about the US company’s effect on protesters while using [the gas canisters] against rioters in Egypt.”
February 23, 2013
Bradley Manning: 1,000 days in detention and secrecy still reigns
By Ed Pilkington, The Guardian
Saturday, February 23, 2013 3:23 EST
On Saturday Bradley Manning will mark his 1,000th day imprisoned without trial. In the course of those thousand days, from the moment he was formally put into pre-trial confinement on 19 May 2010 on suspicion of being the source of the WikiLeaks disclosures, Manning has been on a long and eventful journey.
It has taken him from the desert of Iraq, where he was arrested at a military operating base outside Baghdad, to a prison tent in Kuwait. From there he endured his infamous harsh treatment at Quantico Marine base in Virginia, and for the last 14 months he has attended a series of pre-trial hearings at Fort Meade in Maryland, the latest of which begins next week.
For the small band of reporters who have tracked the prosecution of Private First Class Manning, the journey has also been long and eventful. Not in any way comparable, of course; none of us have been ordered to strip naked or put in shackles, and we have all been free to go home at night without the prospect of a life sentence hanging over us.
But it’s been an education, nonetheless. Though we are a mixed bag – a fusion of traditional outlets such as the Washington Post and Associated Press and new-look bloggers such as Firedoglake and the Bradley Manning support network – we have been thrown together by our common mission to report on the most high-profile prosecution of an alleged leaker in several decades.
Bradley Manning: 1,000 days in detention and secrecy still reigns
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/23/bradley-manning-1000-days-in-detention-and-secrecy-still-reigns/Bradley Manning: 1,000 days in detention and secrecy still reigns
By Ed Pilkington, The Guardian
Saturday, February 23, 2013 3:23 EST
On Saturday Bradley Manning will mark his 1,000th day imprisoned without trial. In the course of those thousand days, from the moment he was formally put into pre-trial confinement on 19 May 2010 on suspicion of being the source of the WikiLeaks disclosures, Manning has been on a long and eventful journey.
It has taken him from the desert of Iraq, where he was arrested at a military operating base outside Baghdad, to a prison tent in Kuwait. From there he endured his infamous harsh treatment at Quantico Marine base in Virginia, and for the last 14 months he has attended a series of pre-trial hearings at Fort Meade in Maryland, the latest of which begins next week.
For the small band of reporters who have tracked the prosecution of Private First Class Manning, the journey has also been long and eventful. Not in any way comparable, of course; none of us have been ordered to strip naked or put in shackles, and we have all been free to go home at night without the prospect of a life sentence hanging over us.
But it’s been an education, nonetheless. Though we are a mixed bag – a fusion of traditional outlets such as the Washington Post and Associated Press and new-look bloggers such as Firedoglake and the Bradley Manning support network – we have been thrown together by our common mission to report on the most high-profile prosecution of an alleged leaker in several decades.
February 22, 2013
Paula Broadwell's promotion stalled
Published February 21, 2013
Associated Press
The Army has stalled the promotion of Paula Broadwell, the reservist whose affair with former CIA Director David Petraeus led to his resignation.
Broadwell was promoted to lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserves last August. But Army spokesman George Wright says that was reversed early this month and will be pending for as long as she is under investigation.
Investigators have been looking since November into whether Broadwell had classified information in her home without permission.
Under Army rules, a promotion can be delayed if new information about a person comes to light within six months of the promotion. Investigators have said they believe materials found in her home were gathered while she was researching a biography on Petraeus, a retired general and former commander in Afghanistan.
Paula Broadwell's promotion stalled
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/21/paula-broadwell-promotion-stalled/Paula Broadwell's promotion stalled
Published February 21, 2013
Associated Press
The Army has stalled the promotion of Paula Broadwell, the reservist whose affair with former CIA Director David Petraeus led to his resignation.
Broadwell was promoted to lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserves last August. But Army spokesman George Wright says that was reversed early this month and will be pending for as long as she is under investigation.
Investigators have been looking since November into whether Broadwell had classified information in her home without permission.
Under Army rules, a promotion can be delayed if new information about a person comes to light within six months of the promotion. Investigators have said they believe materials found in her home were gathered while she was researching a biography on Petraeus, a retired general and former commander in Afghanistan.
February 22, 2013
NRA developing 'best practices' for school safety
Jackie Kucinich, USA TODAY9:47a.m. EST February 22, 2013
Two months after launching a nationwide program to address school security, the National Rifle Association has begun to put together safety standards and risk assessment guidelines they say will help protect schools from future incidents of violence.
The National School Shield project will not be completed until April but Asa Hutchinson, a former Republican congressman and a Homeland Security undersecretary in the George W. Bush administration, said his team has already found several areas where safety standards would help make schools more secure.
Hutchinson said the risk assessment exercises and "best practices" the NRA is developing have been modeled after those developed by the Department of Homeland Security for use of public and private entities. Once completed the exercises would enable schools to access their risks based on their unique facilities and needs.
"After you look at all of those things and talk to a lot of people then you access what they are doing and what the gaps are in security and more should be done," he said in an interview. "Every school has its unique characteristic…part of it is their unique community and part of it is school design and the threats that they have."
NRA developing 'best practices' for school safety
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/02/22/nra-school-shield/1936721/NRA developing 'best practices' for school safety
Jackie Kucinich, USA TODAY9:47a.m. EST February 22, 2013
Two months after launching a nationwide program to address school security, the National Rifle Association has begun to put together safety standards and risk assessment guidelines they say will help protect schools from future incidents of violence.
The National School Shield project will not be completed until April but Asa Hutchinson, a former Republican congressman and a Homeland Security undersecretary in the George W. Bush administration, said his team has already found several areas where safety standards would help make schools more secure.
Hutchinson said the risk assessment exercises and "best practices" the NRA is developing have been modeled after those developed by the Department of Homeland Security for use of public and private entities. Once completed the exercises would enable schools to access their risks based on their unique facilities and needs.
"After you look at all of those things and talk to a lot of people then you access what they are doing and what the gaps are in security and more should be done," he said in an interview. "Every school has its unique characteristic…part of it is their unique community and part of it is school design and the threats that they have."
February 22, 2013
Panetta, Germany differ on troop numbers in Afghanistan
9:43a.m. EST February 22, 2013
BRUSSELS (AP) — Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and his NATO counterparts are considering leaving 8,000 to 12,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014, but a dispute arose Friday between the U.S. and German defense officials over whether that contingent would be an international force or an American one.
The conflicting accounts came as NATO defense ministers gathered here to discuss the endgame of the 11-year-old war in Afghanistan. President Barack Obama has said that the last combat troops will leave Afghanistan on Dec. 31, 2014, leaving the bulk of the country's security in the hands of the Afghans.
German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere told reporters Panetta had informed him at the Brussels meeting that the United States would leave between 8,000 and 10,000 troops in the war-torn country at the end of 2014.
~snip~
"There's no question in the current budget environment, with deep cuts in European defense spending and the kind of political gridlock that we see in the United States now with regards to our own budget, is putting at risk our ability to effectively act together," he said. "As I prepare to step down as secretary of defense, I do fear that the alliance will soon be, if it is not already, stretched too thin."
Panetta, Germany differ on troop numbers in Afghanistan
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/02/22/germany-us-afghanistan-troops/1938255/Panetta, Germany differ on troop numbers in Afghanistan
9:43a.m. EST February 22, 2013
BRUSSELS (AP) — Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and his NATO counterparts are considering leaving 8,000 to 12,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014, but a dispute arose Friday between the U.S. and German defense officials over whether that contingent would be an international force or an American one.
The conflicting accounts came as NATO defense ministers gathered here to discuss the endgame of the 11-year-old war in Afghanistan. President Barack Obama has said that the last combat troops will leave Afghanistan on Dec. 31, 2014, leaving the bulk of the country's security in the hands of the Afghans.
German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere told reporters Panetta had informed him at the Brussels meeting that the United States would leave between 8,000 and 10,000 troops in the war-torn country at the end of 2014.
~snip~
"There's no question in the current budget environment, with deep cuts in European defense spending and the kind of political gridlock that we see in the United States now with regards to our own budget, is putting at risk our ability to effectively act together," he said. "As I prepare to step down as secretary of defense, I do fear that the alliance will soon be, if it is not already, stretched too thin."
February 22, 2013
In this Oct. 16, 2011, photo, former Marine Capt. Timothy Kudo sits outside his apartment in the Brooklyn borough of New York. Kudo walks among civilians carrying a burden of guilt most Americans don’t want to share. A veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kudo thinks of himself as a killer. "I can't forgive myself ... and the people who can forgive me are dead," he says. Over this decade's wars, there’s been an unprecedented explosion of study into warzone psychology and an evolving understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder.
'I'm a monster': Veterans 'alone' in their guilt
Created on Friday, 22 February 2013
Written by PAULINE JELINEK,Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — A veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, former Marine Capt. Timothy Kudo thinks of himself as a killer — and he carries the guilt every day.
"I can't forgive myself," he says. "And the people who can forgive me are dead."
With American troops at war for more than a decade, there's been an unprecedented number of studies into war zone psychology and an evolving understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder. Clinicians suspect some troops are suffering from what they call "moral injuries" — wounds from having done something, or failed to stop something, that violates their moral code.
Though there may be some overlap in symptoms, moral injuries aren't what most people think of as PTSD, the nightmares and flashbacks of terrifying, life-threatening combat events. A moral injury tortures the conscience; symptoms include deep shame, guilt and rage. It's not a medical problem, and it's unclear how to treat it, says retired Col. Elspeth Ritchie, former psychiatry consultant to the Army surgeon general.
'I'm a monster': Veterans 'alone' in their guilt
http://www.examiner.org/newsx/ap-news/21093-i-m-a-monster-veterans-alone-in-their-guiltIn this Oct. 16, 2011, photo, former Marine Capt. Timothy Kudo sits outside his apartment in the Brooklyn borough of New York. Kudo walks among civilians carrying a burden of guilt most Americans don’t want to share. A veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kudo thinks of himself as a killer. "I can't forgive myself ... and the people who can forgive me are dead," he says. Over this decade's wars, there’s been an unprecedented explosion of study into warzone psychology and an evolving understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder.
'I'm a monster': Veterans 'alone' in their guilt
Created on Friday, 22 February 2013
Written by PAULINE JELINEK,Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — A veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, former Marine Capt. Timothy Kudo thinks of himself as a killer — and he carries the guilt every day.
"I can't forgive myself," he says. "And the people who can forgive me are dead."
With American troops at war for more than a decade, there's been an unprecedented number of studies into war zone psychology and an evolving understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder. Clinicians suspect some troops are suffering from what they call "moral injuries" — wounds from having done something, or failed to stop something, that violates their moral code.
Though there may be some overlap in symptoms, moral injuries aren't what most people think of as PTSD, the nightmares and flashbacks of terrifying, life-threatening combat events. A moral injury tortures the conscience; symptoms include deep shame, guilt and rage. It's not a medical problem, and it's unclear how to treat it, says retired Col. Elspeth Ritchie, former psychiatry consultant to the Army surgeon general.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 11:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364
