"Auslandseinsatz"

[Skybird]

That was the title of a German TV-movie that got broadcasted yesterday - and which I actually found surprisngly good. It tells of a group of German soldiers coming to Afghanistan, filled from top to bottom with well-meant idealism, who soon get consumed by the complex realities at location that finally destroys all illusions, beliefs, even friendships and lives. And no, there is no happy-end.

You can watch it in the ARD Mediathek here:

http://www.ardmediathek.de/das-erste/filmmittwoch-im-ersten/auslandseinsatz-fsk-ab-20-uhr?documentId=12149816

The film has an age limit, therefore can be accessed only between 20:00 and 06:00 German time. German time is GMT+1

[Skybird]

I recall that when linking to the Mediathek, some people from overseas reported they cannot access it. I do not know for which countries this is true. Try yourself. I know that the Mediathek has been accessed from people in France, Netherlands, Denmark, Austria, Switzerland for sure. Britain, Poland and Italy I have no info on. America seems to be an issue, and if so, probably Canada as well (other continent).

[CCIP]

Nope, I can watch it just fine. Sadly my German is a bit rusty... fascinating subject, though! And given that it's a German film production about war, I know to expect no patriotic glory going on here. If there's one things Germans excel at, it's making the most anti-war films about war possible :D

[eddie]

Works here in the States, just checked it out for a bit. Will watch the whole thing if I can later. From what I saw, tropps arriving in a bus in Afghanistan seems a bit dangerous, armored troop carriers of some sort would be better I would think.
Movie comes in nice and clear, can't wait to see the whole thing. Needs more english sub titles though.:oops:

[August]

Has there ever been a German movie with a happy ending? :hmmm:

[MH]

Has there ever been a German movie with a happy ending? :hmmm:

For this we have HOLYWOOD.

[Skybird]

Works here in the States, just checked it out for a bit. Will watch the whole thing if I can later. From what I saw, tropps arriving in a bus in Afghanistan seems a bit dangerous, armored troop carriers of some sort would be better I would think.
Movie comes in nice and clear, can't wait to see the whole thing. Needs more english sub titles though.:oops:
The plan and idea for the production started some years ago and bases on information they gathered from even earlier times. The German ROE probably always were schizophrenic, but in the earlier years, security was seen slightly more relaxed.

Movie was shot in Marocco, btw.

[Skybird]

Has there ever been a German movie with a happy ending? :hmmm:Yes. But a war movie being realistic should be uncomfortable and anti-happy ending. There never has been a war with a happy ending, and there never will be. Victory, maybe. But always at a high cost, and plenty of injustice done. Seen that way, a war movie without happy ending is almost a compliment for the screenplay writer.

The intention of the producing people - by their own commenting - was to make the film semi-documentary in style, so: sober, distanced a bit. So not to offer happy endings and easy solutions is even more logical, considering it is about the Afghan maze.

[Penguin]

@Sky & the other Germans: hasn't there been a movie about German soldiers in Afghanistan that sparked the discussion about people coming home with PTSD, some 2 years ago? Or was it a documentary? I remember that our talk shows and media outlets suddenly put a focus on this topic after a film.

I recall that when linking to the Mediathek, some people from overseas reported they cannot access it. I do not know for which countries this is true. Try yourself. I know that the Mediathek has been accessed from people in France, Netherlands, Denmark, Austria, Switzerland for sure. Britain, Poland and Italy I have no info on. America seems to be an issue, and if so, probably Canada as well (other continent).

The ARD Mediathek is usually accessible without country restrictions - it's their policy, they normally have their stuff licensed worldwide. The cheapos from the commercial stations do have country restrictions though, not sure about the ZDF.

[Skybird]

@Sky & the other Germans: hasn't there been a movie about German soldiers in Afghanistan that sparked the discussion about people coming home with PTSD, some 2 years ago? Or was it a documentary? I remember that our talk shows and media outlets suddenly put a focus on this topic after a film.
There was an epsiode of "Tatort", early 2011, that was about four veterans suffering from PTSD, but I cannot remember it anymore, though I saw it. Some time before, there was movie about the German mission in Congo. But again I do not remember it anymore, I seem to recall that it was not bad, but I am not certain.

[Penguin]

There was an epsiode of "Tatort", early 2011, that was about four veterans suffering from PTSD, but I cannot remember it anymore, though I saw it. Some time before, there was movie about the German mission in Congo. But again I do not remember it anymore, I seem to recall that it was not bad, but I am not certain.

Yes, thanks, Tatort is was, indeed: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatort:_Heimatfront
I saw the discussion as something important, as it was for the first time that this topic was put into the public spotlight. It was something people talked not about after our last war experience in '45 - they were just "Kriegszitterer" :-?

[Skybird]

PTSD is a serious injury and should be recognized as that. It can downgrade and destroy lives - the veteran's, his social environment's, both mentally and physically as well. It's like a never-ending war.

The official number of wounded Allied troops in Iraq from 03 to today is close to 40.000 now, I think I read somewhere. If PTSD would be counted and recognized as a WIA as well, I am absolutely sure the number would spike clearly beyond the mark of 100,000 wounded. Numerically, I expect soldiers in hot warzone scenarios being effected by PTSD in the range from one in six to as many as one in four.

If the PTSD does not get diagnosed/recognized, it could become chronic and then leads to lasting personality changes and can lead to personality disorders and even serious psychosis. Different to the American DSM, the WHO's ICD has different diagnostic keys for the entry phase of a PTSD and a later chronification of it.

[August]

Yes. But a war movie being realistic should be uncomfortable and anti-happy ending. There never has been a war with a happy ending, and there never will be. Victory, maybe. But always at a high cost, and plenty of injustice done.

I can see why you Germans might see it that way but that really depends on the scope and subject of the war movie in question.

For example, the story of a Soldier who does his duty to his country serving honorably in a war, then afterward returns safely to his home and the loving arms of his family before going on to live a happy and full life is, by any realistic measure, a war movie with a happy ending.

Just ask some of the millions of our veterans from any of our wars throughout our history whether it was won, lost or tied, who did exactly that. Sure you'll find some who didn't have it work out that way but the overwhelming majority of them did and therefore their tales are far more "realistic" than any negative exception you may care to mention.

[Dan D]

Has there ever been a German movie with a happy ending? :hmmm:

Of course there are German movies with happy endings, August.

Just think of the closing scene in the movie "Downfall", which is German comedy at its best with a happy ending:

"the young boy rides together with the pretty girl on her bicycle into the sunrise" :sunny::haha:?

[joea]

Yes. But a war movie being realistic should be uncomfortable and anti-happy ending. There never has been a war with a happy ending, and there never will be. Victory, maybe. But always at a high cost, and plenty of injustice done. Seen that way, a war movie without happy ending is almost a compliment for the screenplay writer.

The intention of the producing people - by their own commenting - was to make the film semi-documentary in style, so: sober, distanced a bit. So not to offer happy endings and easy solutions is even more logical, considering it is about the Afghan maze.

Well said Skybird-I think so for every war. This happens sometimes in fiction too, contrast the ending of the Lord of the Rings films with Star Wars, no I'm serious. Both against really evil enemies (thouigh both with nuances, even Sauron in Tolkien's writings started out wanting to do good) but LOTR had a very bittersweet ending with a lot of loss and changes from the conflict. You see a little of that in US films outside of Vietnam films, notably Thin Red Line and Band of Brothers.

[Skybird]

I can see why you Germans might see it that way but that really depends on the scope and subject of the war movie in question.

For example, the story of a Soldier who does his duty to his country serving honorably in a war, then afterward returns safely to his home and the loving arms of his family before going on to live a happy and full life is, by any realistic measure, a war movie with a happy ending.

Just ask some of the millions of our veterans from any of our wars throughout our history whether it was won, lost or tied, who did exactly that. Sure you'll find some who didn't have it work out that way but the overwhelming majority of them did and therefore their tales are far more "realistic" than any negative exception you may care to mention.
But that does not change that no war ever is fair, humane, just. It is inhumane, barbaric, filled with destruction and dying, and all too many innocents suffer dearly from it. Always. A given ending of a war might have been necessary as an objective to achieve, but it never is fair, happy, humane. That's why I say there are wars of needs and wars of desires, and the first must be accepted, but the latter should be avoided at all cost.

And that is not just a German issue, August. When your forefathers had their civil war, I think I read somewhere that most American families suffered casualties and lost loved ones. And even if it is no majority, it still were damn many families whose sons and fathers bled to death and whose wifes and daughters got raped or murdered. The outcome of the war, as an objective to be achieved, might have been necessary. Still, for those having been effected by the war, the end of the war brought relief that it was over. But no happy end.

Or to say it with LaoTse (and I use German since it is my own translation, I am not satisfied with any of the translations to German around, and I cannot put it in better words or adequately transport it to English):

Auch beste Waffen sind Zeichen des Todes,
Der Weise verächtlich meidet sie.
Er wendet sich ab von ihnen.
Die Freude erfüllt sein Leben im Frieden,
Die Trauer erfüllt sein Leben im Krieg.
Waffen sind nicht des Wesens Weise,
Nur gezwungen benutzt sie ein weiser Mensch,
Wenn es gar nicht mehr anders sonst geht.
Nichts weiß er von der Freude am Kämpfen,
Den Sieg zu lieben heißt mordfreudig sein.
Wer mordfreudig ist, ist außerhalb der Freude, zu Leben.
Nach dem Sieg ist der Truppe die Freude,
Des Feldherrn indes sei die Trauer,
Er begehe den Sieg wie eine Trauerfeier.
Töten heißt Trauer schaffen,
Wessen Handeln Trauer schafft,
Dem sei jeder Sieg wie ein Begräbnis.

Let people celebrate in relief that they survived it without own losses to their health, life, family, friends. But never ever mistake that with wars having happy endings. Every warrior is a gravedigger.

[Catfish]

Millions of the victor did NOT return to home, it is not anyhow like e.g. this infamous propaganda painter Norman Rockwell depicts his idyllic world.

http://uploads7.wikipaintings.org/images/norman-rockwell/the-american-way-1944.jpg!Blog.jpg


If anyone wins it is the weapon industries, and other war profiteers.

"The conquered mourns, the conqueror is undone" - they sure knew their wars.

[Skybird]

Well said Skybird-I think so for every war. This happens sometimes in fiction too, contrast the ending of the Lord of the Rings films with Star Wars, no I'm serious. Both against really evil enemies (thouigh both with nuances, even Sauron in Tolkien's writings started out wanting to do good) but LOTR had a very bittersweet ending with a lot of loss and changes from the conflict. You see a little of that in US films outside of Vietnam films, notably Thin Red Line and Band of Brothers.

A Thin Red Line is so much more than just a war movie. It's almost a religious meditation about so much more than just war. War is just one part of the roundely that "it" all is. I hold that film in very high esteem, it is one of my all time favourites, and the - by far - best of all of Malick's movies, imo.

Band of Brothers also was very good, though obviously setting the scope for a different fix. Although similiar in style and the visual way in which it was relaised to Private ryan, the one thing that imo makes Brothers better than Ryan is that Ryxan at the end has this Hollywood typical timing for a - though pathetic, which makes it even worse - happy ending, the P-47 I think it was sweeping in and cleaning the enemy, and the heroic Captain having given his life to acchieve this ending. Brothers just ran out at the end, showed a slow, nonsensational shift from combat to occupation and relative peace. - Indeed a very very good series, one of the best pieces about WWII ever shot. I find it remarkable that an American crew could ha<ve made a film about American "heroes" withgout either hacking away at them or gloryfying them, simply paionting them as humans without all that usual pathetic glory&patriotism posture on display that you usually expect from a Hollywood movie.

The BBC made a good and probably realistic movie about war as well, the Bosnia war. The film was called "Warriors", and is already a bit older. Sober, tragic, showing the inner conflicts of the British soldiers being eaten up by the impossible and even shameful situation the UN's idiocy had put them into. "Auslandseinsatz" reminded me of that a bit.

Armies' and soldiers' job is not to improve civilian infrastructure and to rebuild schools. Their business is to wage war when there is war, or to train for fighting a war when there is peace currently. Europe has forgotten that. The madnesses we got ourselves entangled in since the Balkan wars, is a direct result of this. The psychic conflicts the actors suffer from in "Auslandseinsatz", also is a result from this illusion. Maybe a well-meant illusion, but still an illusion. The part on "well-meant", actually means nothing in this, it causes no good effects. What causes effects, bad ones, is the illusion.

[August]

Millions of the victor did NOT return to home, it is not anyhow like e.g. this infamous propaganda painter Norman Rockwell depicts his idyllic world.

Yeah but even more millions did return home and lived full and happy lives afterward. The truth is that casualty rates, at least in my country, were about 1 in 15 overall. To listen to you guys one would think that was the survivor rate.

I'm not minimizing the horrible things that happen in war but to act like the worst experiences and later outcomes are the norm is just not realistic.

[Skybird]

Having soldiered yourself, you should know that in that closed parallel society the military is (that is no matter of nationality), men tend to avoid talking about what they see as their weaknesses, and they avoid to remind or get reminded of what could happen to them. Appearing to be strong, tough, invincible, is the parole most live by, the boasting is meant to gloss over insecurity in the face of threat by death and injury, and I think this is a coping mechanism to deal with the negative sides of the job that in fact could get you traumatized, injured, crippled, killed. It probably has always been like this, with soldiers of all armies in all times.

It is said that racedrivers hate to be asked about the chance that they could crash and get killed.

Bomber pilots are said to not like being told how many people their bomb dropping killed on the ground.

It is not only about your own troops returning. It also is about the civilian population that inevitably get caught in the crossfire, and mostly suffers the lion's share of the suffering, wounding, killing. For your generation that starts with the Southern Vietnamese who were left behind and were held responsible by the victors for their cooperation with the US and the south, and the many villagers who got caught in the fighting and aerial bombardements, got killed by both sides. It goes on with the Iraqis who were confronted with the outburst of ethnic violence, old bills being settled, organised crime, state's death squads, torture, abduction industry (not mentioning supression of Christians, other Islamic sects, females in general). It then leads to the Afghans being left at the mercy - or lack of mercy - of the Taliban once the last troops have pulled out, they already are victims right now, and have been since years.

The losses of the civilians in all these and almost every other wars, outclasses that of the troops in scale and dimension. From WWII iover the 30-year-war to the wars of the Romans: the civilian population suffers the most, often marginalising that of the armies in numbers.

I googled and found a reference to a study that I vaguely remembered, from some two years ago. I did not find the original which was published, but this CNN update on it. Up to 31% of US troops in Iraq return with PTSD, and half of these see serious problems and limitations in their daily life. That is pretty much within my own estimation I mentioned earlier, 15-25% I said, actually the total the study here mentions even exceeds my estimations.

Add to these 14%/31% of the study the almost 40,000 physically injured the official counting marks (and that until today excludes PTSD as far as I know). How many troops have been rotating in and out in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past ten years? Several hundred thousand? 14%/31% of these makes a worrying high number.

I dare to bet against you, August, that much, much more vets return from their servicetime in Iraq or Afghanistan than just that one in 15 you mentioned who actually suffer issues from their time in war. It's just that they have become used to hide that as long as possible and not to talk about it as long as they can avoid it. It is against what I tried to summarize in the opening paragraph. You do not show your fears or weaknesses. You just don't. You instead smile and say "All okay." The vacuum consuming you when you sit alone in your room or the isolation you feel when being in the middle of a crowd and the adrenaline starts pumping or the memories turning your sleep into hell - is something you guys even do not tell a doctor as long as you still can uphold the illusion that you "have evertyhing under control". Loss of control is weakness.

[Nippelspanner]

From what I saw, tropps arriving in a bus in Afghanistan seems a bit dangerous, armored troop carriers of some sort would be better I would think.

:-?

We had to learn this lesson on 7/6/2003

http://www.faz.net/polopoly_fs/1.1328567!/image/849237566.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_aufmacher_klein/849237566.jpg

29 Wounded
4 Killed

Andreas Beljo (†28)
Carsten Kühlmorgen (†32)
Jörg Baasch (†23)
Helmi Jimeniz-Paradis (†29)

[August]

I dare to bet against you, August, that much, much more vets return from their servicetime in Iraq or Afghanistan than just that one in 15 you mentioned who actually suffer issues from their time in war. It's just that they have become used to hide that as long as possible and not to talk about it as long as they can avoid it. It is against what I tried to summarize in the opening paragraph. You do not show your fears or weaknesses. You just don't. You instead smile and say "All okay." The vacuum consuming you when you sit alone in your room or the isolation you feel when being in the middle of a crowd and the adrenaline starts pumping or the memories turning your sleep into hell - is something you guys even do not tell a doctor as long as you still can uphold the illusion that you "have evertyhing under control". Loss of control is weakness.

Don't try to tell a soldier and the son (and grandson and great grandson) of a soldier how soldiers feel Skybird. We had something like 15 million people under arms during WW2. The overwhelming majority of them went on to lead great lives. Now you can claim that they all suffered some kind of hidden damage but if so it wasn't so great that it left them damaged goods. It did not stop them from living long and happy lives afterwards.

We have a saying over here that goes "the proof is in the pudding". The real lives of millions trumps your claims to the contrary.

[Dowly]

Don't try to tell a soldier and the son (and grandson and great grandson) of a soldier how soldiers feel Skybird. We had something like 15 million people under arms during WW2. The overwhelming majority of them went on to lead great lives. Now you can claim that they all suffered some kind of hidden damage but if so it wasn't so great that it left them damaged goods. It did not stop them from living long and happy lives afterwards.

I agree. Whatever war is in question, plenty of vets have returned to a normal life.

But, I also kinda agree with Skybird. I'm sure war changes most of the people
that go through it, some just learn to cope with it while others dont. :hmmm:

[Skybird]

Don't try to tell a soldier and the son (and grandson and great grandson) of a soldier how soldiers feel Skybird. We had something like 15 million people under arms during WW2. The overwhelming majority of them went on to lead great lives. Now you can claim that they all suffered some kind of hidden damage but if so it wasn't so great that it left them damaged goods. It did not stop them from living long and happy lives afterwards.

We have a saying over here that goes "the proof is in the pudding". The real lives of millions trumps your claims to the contrary.

I doubt you are int he nbpsoition to make claims on behalf of millions of people, becasue you have noit made any systmatic effort to estzblish a methdolgoicvially correct statistic on it. I however trust such statistics better than individual cklaims basing onb a handful of personal exmaple spomebody knows, because when statistics are done well, this is what they excel in: deribing huge populationsd regharding the features and characterists of interst as exmained by such statistics.

And the statistics from according reasearch projects prove you wrong as far as the wars of modern times are concerned, the era when such counting projects were started to detemrine how wides-pread the issues in fact are.

Your family history is just this: your family history. A handful of individuals. And this should counter the weight of numericla findings from a statistic covering army staff from ten years of war, for example? If you thinbk that, then the whole purpose of why statiszics are doine has escape you so far. I could throw in the history of my family and two grandfathers, their fathers and brothers, and a history of war ravaging all of Europe and over hundreds and hundreds of years. A family history and a continental history that is slightly different from what you claim for America. Even beyond their physical injruioes, about which they never made much words, I know that my grandfathers carried inner scars, and certain mental handicaps derived from that. So do most soldiers who fought on any side in that war, or those after that.

If you want to claim those statistics are wrong, you have to show them to be wrong, methodologically. In other words you must run an accoridng reserchg yourself and check the methodology of it, and then present it and disucss why your statistic defeats the other. There were quite some researches done ion various countries, since '91, and even since Vietnam, as a matter of fact first such attempts already were done in Korea and WWII, though not with the pressing will like in recent years. On my own part, I got my first input on such data from a doctor who for some time was my direct boss when I helped in a medical aid project during the Balkan wars, a doctors' initiative that brought heavily traumatized - I would say: almost destroyed - torture victims from the Balkans to places in Northern Germany, Holland and Denmark for therapeuitical treatmnent. Very hard job, I must say, very stressing. I have highest respect for people working on such things all day in and out, and I think you inevitably get damaged yourself more or less if you do it too long. I was still studying, but had good contacts to get that job, and some other reasons why I was allowed to help there. My boss in that was a former Bundeswehr doctor, and expert for (especially war-induced) traumatizations. He had done two historical analysis and studies on PTSD in wars since WWII for the Bundeswehr, which unfortunately at least back then were only internally circulating, and were not allowed by the ministry for public release. Name was Helmut Boehring, if somebody knows of according studies being released since the mid-90s and under this name, let me know.

Sorry, I trust him and trust data statistically researched in the past 20-30 years in several countries and by several different researchers and projects, slightly more than you. What you say about the people in your family, may be correct for right these persons. But your family is just this:; one family, it is no representative sample in itself, not even a specially big one. You, your father, your grandfather, you said. For other families' experiences and internal history, you cannot speak. Statistics can speak for greater samples and populations. That's what they are being done for.

If you think statistics must not be trusted, I recommend you never take any pill and accept enver any injection the doctor subscribes to you. Because all medical research is - statistically founded. Empiry. Heck, all science business bases on that. ;) Don't let down statistics too easily just because you do not like what they tell you. Check their methods for flaws, but when you find none, then take their data for what it is.

BTW, there is more such research available via internet. Google is your friend.

[August]

Skybird the only statistic I need is that nearly all of those 15 million men came back home and got on with their lives and did so successfully. They got married, they got civilian careers, they had kids and they lived full and happy lives as are the great majority of our soldiers who have served in every war before and since. How can you call that a sad story?

You seem to be under the impression that a little adversity in ones life means nothing but sadness and failure thereafter. Well sorry but most people thankfully do not see it that way.

[Nippelspanner]

Skybird the only statistic I need is that nearly all of those 15 million men came back home and got on with their lives and did so successfully. They got married, they got civilian careers, they had kids and they lived full and happy lives...

Getting married, becoming a father, running a civilian career etc. does not automatically say you are happy and/or dont have to fight with PTSS for the rest of your life and suffer to a certain degree...

[August]

Getting married, becoming a father, running a civilian career etc. does not automatically say you are happy and/or dont have to fight with PTSS for the rest of your life and suffer to a certain degree...

Nor does it mean that a former soldier is by definition unhappy and nor does it mean that war is the only source of unhappiness or PTSD but degree matters here.

As they say "Life sucks then we die". Now you can sit through life feeling sorry for yourself or you can get on living it. The overwhelming majority of people who go through war do the latter and somehow still manage to do so quite happily.

[mapuc]

Isn't it something we want to believe that is was so? That they just continued as nothing had happened?

I have and had relatives and friends father, who lived through WWII and the story I have been told by them give me the impression that most of them didn't take brain damage.

As my working colleagues father once told me(was in 1989).

We celebrated the end of the war and the day after we spitted in our hands and started to rebuild our country(England)

But I do know, from science program that many soldier and civilians got some kind of PTSD and had to live with it a very long time after the war was ended.

Markus

[Nippelspanner]

Nor does it mean that a former soldier is by definition unhappy and nor does it mean that war is the only source of unhappiness or PTSD but degree matters here.

As they say "Life sucks then we die". Now you can sit through life feeling sorry for yourself or you can get on living it. The overwhelming majority of people who go through war do the latter and somehow still manage to do so quite happily.

I never said that soldiers are automatically unhappy? And I dont think Skybird did. From my experience with soldiers (I have been one myself btw), they suffer a lot from PTSD (Its PTSS here, so dont wonder...). Ive seen people change dramatically after a tour in Afghanistan. Of course, those are just my experiences but again: I never said they all are destroyed afterwards, of course not.

Now you can sit through life feeling sorry for yourself or you can get on living it.Suffering from PTSD has nothing to do with "man the heck up and get your crap together, life goes on!".

Not that easy, unfortunately.

[Skybird]

Damn. I was wondering, and thus rereading the thread - and just relaised that I forgot to put in the link about that report by CNN about the study from earlier last year that I mentioned. Completely my own fault, but explains maybe why August ignores it so strictly.

The CNN article mentioning the one study I was after I again did niot find again, they have plenty of articles about NCC from the past few years. However, there is so much more interesting material as well. I admit I only flew over most of it, checking abstracts, methods, samples, and conclusions.


Vietnam veterans (sample 108 thousand) face an almost doubled risk for developing dmeentia in later years when having suffered from PTSD from combat action. Summer 2010.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/PSYCH/5297/yoa90112_608_613.pdf

Changes in brain structure and loss of grey matter in neo-cortex due to combat stress exposition and following severe PTSD in Vietnam and Gulf war veterans.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/PSYCH/5297/yoa90112_608_613.pdf

Literature survey on PTSD in Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom:
http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1044&context=gjcp

I remind of my own estimation I gave earlier, that soldiers effected from combat PTSD numercially range from 1:6 to as many as 1:4.

http://winoverptsd.com/wp/persian-gulf-war-veterans-ptsd-rates-are-similar-to-vietnam-and-iraq-combat-vets/

http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/newsletters/research-quarterly/v22n2.pdf

http://www.ispub.com/journal/the-internet-journal-of-mental-health/volume-6-number-1/the-war-at-home-consequences-of-loving-a-veteran-of-the-iraq-and-afghanistan-wars.html

The last article mentions (in 2009) the number of troops having done more than one tour in AF or IR to be around 420 thousand, and then plus x, x being those having done one tour so far. Most research done on how many people become victims of PTSD, range from 15-30%, extremes even go as high as 50%, which is a number I do not trust, however. When now taking the mean of my own estimation, as many as 1 in 4 or as few as 1 in 6 falling victim to PTSD, I would have a mark of 20% (1 in 5). Estimating those doing their first tour to be 80.000 for the comfort of pushing the total number of troops having been part of AF and IR to be roughly half a million, that would mean that 100.000 veterans returned home while suffering various degrees of PTSD. The official number for wounded soldiers in these wars is approaching 40 thousand, and it excludes PTSD patients.

[Skybird]

Has my previous posting been deleted...???

[Skybird]

Sigh. Forgot to hit the transmit button. Had it in another window still. This post goes before the other with the links, just above.

Skybird the only statistic I need is that nearly all of those 15 million men came back home and got on with their lives and did so successfully. They got married, they got civilian careers, they had kids and they lived full and happy lives as are the great majority of our soldiers who have served in every war before and since. How can you call that a sad story?

You seem to be under the impression that a little adversity in ones life means nothing but sadness and failure thereafter. Well sorry but most people thankfully do not see it that way.
My two grandfathers came back from war and had families and an income, too. Still, the one had nightmares destroying his nights for the rest of his life, and at christmas he hid at home because the sight of christmas trees made him break out in tears, for it made the city look like memories of burning villages in Russia. At the same time, he gave hell to his little daughters, there was a lot of sadism and violence involved in the household - a feature of his character that should not have been present before the war. The other grandfather of mine lost one eye, most of one lung, one leg. He was very kind by heart, and very well meaning. And sometimes, out of the blue, broke down and cried. On the street. In a shopping mal. At work. At the table, with cake and coffee served.

You take the surface and do not look beyond, and that is a big mistake, August. And you seem to think that a man's meaning of life is not so much about happiness and being at peace with himself, but as you indicated give the impression of falling into the traditional norm of having social life and being successful in a job. I hear the Protestant or Calvinistic working ethics ringing bells in the background, but maybe I'm wrong there. Anyhow, I think this view on life is short-stretched, imho. We owe nobody for as long as we do not live at the other'S cost or disadvantage. I do not know whether life has a meaning or not. Maybe it is all just meaningless and useless. But I pragmatically think that it might be a good idea to try to experince happiness and love and get loved for the short moment of time that we are here. At least it seems that even if this also is in vain and meaningless, it at least does not add to any harm done. Business careers - let some water run down the wirver, and even these famous business careers will not even be remenbered by anyone anymore. It all is in transition. Nothing stays. Evertyhing is transitory. Fame, prestige means nothing.

That successful job life is not the criterion of health nor does it say anything about the state of a soul. You can be successful in a job and earn reputations in social life and found a family - and still be broken, empty. As you know I was running a meditation course for several years. About the emptiness of modern life I could tell you by quite some examples of people that I actually knew face to face, and which led them to me. Some came for curiosity only. But some came for more existential pain of theirs, or a deep-felt hunger for "more" of something that our society's standards cannot satisfy, they were searching, and sometimes desperately so. This, and other stuff I got myself occupied with in the past, spiritual crisis, death and hunger for a sense and meaning in life, has convinced me that often the appearance of the ordinary world, the row of tiny houses with correct garden and fresh-washed white doors, often hide mure suffering, fear and despair, than the first impression when looking down that street seems to tell.

This longer sermon to show you why your reference to those millions you seem to know so well does not impress me at all. In a way, you seem to me as if still living in the military mode that I mentioned before: giving the appearance of you and the gang being strong, shiny, invincible, bullets repelled by your skin, soul untouchable, fate cannot harm you, and everybody functions according to the ordered parameters. Well, I exaggerate a bit, but well - you get the idea.

Earlier I mentioned that the military is a closed parallel society, and is valuing traditions and the appearance of man being strong and invincible as a mechanism by which men cope with the inherent edge they walk on when making killing an getting killed their life's focus and profession. It is not just like any job. It needs coping strategies to cope with the threatening abyss behind it all. Boasting and acting extroverted, are part of that. It's also part of that that the naivety by which shiny promises and glorious reasons of their superior leaders why they go tot war, get swallowed and indeed believed in a very uncritical attitude, often. The trust and respect payed to "authorities", indeed illustrates a stellar amount of naivety, often. When one could get crippled or killed, and kill others, one wants to be sure that one does so on behalf of the good and the light and the right and the beautiful. Of course one believes in the fairy tales the criminal gangster in politics tell you over why they send you to war. And if the lying becomes obvious, and new reasons get invented, and excuses after the war replace the original arguments before the war, then even this often gets swallowed and accepted all too willingly. Because Mapuc has it absolutely correct where he said:

Isn't it something we want to believe that is was so? That they just continued as nothing had happened?

Very well noted, mapuc. Make war an ordinary thing. Give it the impression of normality. Problem is: war isn't like just any ordinary thing. It is a situation of extremes, and chaos and the lack of order previously known.

Normality. Man cannot live without the illusion of having at least a minimum of control over his fate, the world. Soul does not bear this, it wants a justification, the impression of normality, of being in sufficient control to prevent the worst striking us any time. Without this illusion, you indeed have to face that harm can struck you just any second, and that everything is uncertain, and your existence makes no difference in the face of a cosmos that always keeps its silence and never answers your questions and pleas. And that is more than many, very many people can bear.

August, stop talking about 15 million people that you do not know at all. You cannot look into their insides, and what is going on ion their hearts and minds. The literature of war traumatization however is empirical much more robust than you wild claims. In well-done statistics, the numbers come from actually counting, using established methods to secure the sample'S representativity for the total population, and if you want to laugh about these numbers, you have to prove them wrong and show where they are. We do not talk about a random poll, non-representive. We talk about medical and psychological research being done. It can be done in wrong and distorting ways, yes, and science is not invulnerable to being abused by intention or incompetence. I think this is not what has happened here. You said you need only one statistics, yours. But that is no statistics, you have none. That is not even experience of yours. It's just a wild claim about people you do not know. Sorry, but more it is not.

EDIT:
I copy this in here, to get back to the original order in which I had posted these two long posts.

Damn. I was wondering, and thus rereading the thread - and just relaised that I forgot to put in the link about that report by CNN about the study from earlier last year that I mentioned. Completely my own fault, but explains maybe why August ignores it so strictly.

The CNN article mentioning the one study I was after I again did niot find again, they have plenty of articles about PTSD from the past few years. However, there is so much more interesting material as well. I admit I only flew over most of it, checking abstracts, methods, samples, and conclusions.


Vietnam veterans (sample 108 thousand) face an almost doubled risk for developing dmeentia in later years when having suffered from PTSD from combat action. Summer 2010.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/data...12_608_613.pdf

Changes in brain structure and loss of grey matter in neo-cortex due to combat stress exposition and following severe PTSD in Vietnam and Gulf war veterans.
http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/data...12_608_613.pdf

Literature survey on PTSD in Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom:
http://epublications.marquette.edu/c...4&context=gjcp

I remind of my own estimation I gave earlier, that soldiers effected from combat PTSD numercially range from 1:6 to as many as 1:4.

http://winoverptsd.com/wp/persian-gu...q-combat-vets/

http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/...erly/v22n2.pdf

http://www.ispub.com/journal/the-int...stan-wars.html

The last article mentions (in 2009) the number of troops having done more than one tour in AF or IR to be around 420 thousand, and then plus x, x being those having done one tour so far. Most research done on how many people become victims of PTSD, range from 15-30%, extremes even go as high as 50%, which is a number I do not trust, however. When now taking the mean of my own estimation, as many as 1 in 4 or as few as 1 in 6 falling victim to PTSD, I would have a mark of 20% (1 in 5). Estimating those doing their first tour to be 80.000 for the comfort of pushing the total number of troops having been part of AF and IR to be roughly half a million, that would mean that 100.000 veterans returned home while suffering various degrees of PTSD. The official number for wounded soldiers in these wars is approaching 40 thousand, and it excludes PTSD patients.

[Skybird]

I never said that soldiers are automatically unhappy? And I dont think Skybird did. From my experience with soldiers (I have been one myself btw), they suffer a lot from PTSD (Its PTSS here, so dont wonder...). Ive seen people change dramatically after a tour in Afghanistan. Of course, those are just my experiences but again: I never said they all are destroyed afterwards, of course not.

Suffering from PTSD has nothing to do with "man the heck up and get your crap together, life goes on!".

Not that easy, unfortunately.

^ Yes to all that.

[August]

I never said that soldiers are automatically unhappy? And I dont think Skybird did. From my experience with soldiers (I have been one myself btw), they suffer a lot from PTSD (Its PTSS here, so dont wonder...). Ive seen people change dramatically after a tour in Afghanistan. Of course, those are just my experiences but again: I never said they all are destroyed afterwards, of course not.

And I never said there weren't those who have experienced difficulty but if you'll look back in the thread you'll see that Skybirds original premise was that there is never a happy ending from war. I think I have amply proven that this is not the case.

[Skybird]

My premise is that by results war create for all affected people, it always is unjust, unfair, and kills more innocents and civilians than "guilty" ones or combatants, and thus war never can be said to have had a happy ending. One can hardly say that WWII has had a happy end, after 60 million deads and millions of families having had losses and hundreds of citiesy and villages shattered. Nor can you say that about Korea. Vietnam. Gulf 91. Afghanistan. Iraq.

Those having played any role in it, may feel relieved that it is over and that they survived, they may be glad that their families suffered no losses, if it is so.

But the whole and total thing that war is, never has happy ends in total. There are always far too many innocent victims, and there always has been to much chaos ruling and too much horror taking place.

And that includes war witnesses who afterwards seem to live an apparently normal, ordinary life. Who can look into them? You only see the surface, their conformity with the social rules and conventions. Their insides, you cannot judge. To say that war did nothing to them after they went through it, is a bit like like claiming that in a neat and tidy street with friendly houses none of the inhabitants has haemorrhoids. - Maybe you just don't want to look closer.

[August]

One can hardly say that WWII has had a happy end, after 60 million deads and millions of families having had losses and hundreds of citiesy and villages shattered.

It had a far, far happier ending than if the Germans and Japanese had won that war and don't you forget it.

But the whole and total thing that war is, never has happy ends in total. There are always far too many innocent victims, and there always has been to much chaos ruling and too much horror taking place.

War, like any human endeavor, is a collection of individual stories, some sad, some not, but for you, a person who has never served his country in any way, to claim that you know the minds of untold millions of people is simply ridiculous.

And that includes war witnesses who afterwards seem to live an apparently normal, ordinary life. Who can look into them?

Exactly, certainly not you, yet that is exactly what you are doing when you claim that no one can ever have a happy ending after a war. I look at what these people have made of their lives. The laughter of my friends, uncles and grandfathers is not fake, it is not effected nor forced. Yet of course you think you know better, well sorry I will just not reject real life examples over your usual dark, Nihilist prognostications of doom.

[Skybird]

Okay, you are right, and statistical research and actual countings have it all wrong. It's a new form of math, but I think I understand the basics now. Sorry for having bothered you. Will not happen again. After all, beliefs weigh heavier than verified facts - I finally must mark that in thick red letters in my book.

[August]

Okay, you are right, and statistical research and actual countings have it all wrong. It's a new form of math, but I think I understand the basics now. Sorry for having bothered you. Will not happen again. After all, beliefs weigh heavier than verified facts - I finally must mark that in thick red letters in my book.

You can't rely on books to give you common sense Skybird.

[MH]

Exactly, certainly not you, yet that is exactly what you are doing when you claim that no one can ever have a happy ending after a war. I look at what these people have made of their lives. The laughter of my friends, uncles and grandfathers is not fake, it is not effected nor forced. Yet of course you think you know better, well sorry I will just not reject real life examples over your usual dark, Nihilist prognostications of doom.

Ahh you know sky is a drama queen but you are actually looking at the same issue from opposite angels and you both are right.
Yet those functioning people may have lot of things going in their heads or simply pushed deep into corners of mind..that is good case scenario.
Those are the people who can deal with the issues but there are others who cant.
Simply if not for army service their life might be better and happier...
This is somwhat similar to a traumas people experience in civilian life....for some it ruins their lives while others cope.


.........

[Skybird]

You can't rely on books to give you common sense Skybird.

Agreed. That's why I don't do that, but demand empirical checks. And that is what all this is about.

And here is now one wise sentence for you, as a direct reply to yours: you cannot gain credibility and respect for your beliefs by just insisting that you believe so and so. Believing is not knowing.

Empirical experience is knowledge.

And the empirical database is such that your beliefs already were crushed and shown absurd the very moment you entered in this debate. Statistics - describe bigger populations. Your uncles and my grandfathers - are just individual biographies.

One does not judge the state of dentition of all people in a nation's population, by looking at the teeth in one's own family. And when gathering data of a representative sample, one does not take people's self-description of what they think about their teeth, but one does it in a standardized format: one has a dentist checking out their set of teeth according to specified parameters.

One does not leave it to beliefs, hopes, intuition and having a certain feeling in the stomach.

[August]

One does not judge the state of dentition of all people in a nation's population, by looking at the teeth in one's own family.

Nor is one qualified to make authoritative judgements because they once read The Idiots Guide to Dentistry, and I at least have my families experience, and that of my friends, and my students and many, many others to go by.

[Skybird]

Nor is one qualified to make authoritative judgements because they once read The Idiots Guide to Dentistry, and I at least have my families experience, and that of my friends, and my students and many, many others to go by.

"Students". And "many others". That certainly qualifies for a representative sample of the total population of war-experienced ex-combatants that is to be assessed on the matter of PTSD.

August, you are simply unknowing on certain methodological topics, you illustrate that all the time in this thread. That alone would not be anything to be criticised, not everybody know evewrtyhiong and has learned everything. But you even boast with your naivety and make your knowledge gap appear as a glorious virtue and claim that your precious personal view proves all data wrong that you do not like, no matter how empirically overhwhelming and methodologically robust it may be in case of many of such researches done. You simply ignore it, intentionally, which also is a common habit of yours when getting locked in a thread. Professional experience of doctors and therapists havign worked in this field, having had access to according ammounts od patient's files and biograohic datasets - all not needed, all relevant, becasue you already know it all better, due to your uncles and students and 15 million others that you do not know at all and never talked to. I think I must not further explain why I find this absurd, or must I?

Damn, I got a stiff neck from always needing to look up to your monumentally elevated position from which you see it all so much better. Well, readers here are not stupid and can judge themselves who has the more qualified and numerically stronger fundament for his opinion forming on this matter, so no need for me to stay around in here forever.

[August]

so no need for me to stay around in here forever.

Nobody is holding you back. Get your nose out of Der Speigel and your butt out of your mom's basement, go out in the world and start interacting with real human beings. You might learn a thing or two not covered by your books.

[Nippelspanner]

Oh, do we have to get personal because we are out of valid arguments now, August?

:down:

[August]

Oh, do we have to get personal because we are out of valid arguments now, August?

:down:

Or maybe that one can be nice for only so long in the face of breathtaking obtuseness. Like I told you in my last reply to you (which you ignored): "...if you'll look back in the thread you'll see that Skybirds original premise was that thereis never a happy ending from war. I think I have amply proven that this is not the case."

Now you can agree or disagree or even continue to ignore but it's not my fault if your pal refuses to see reality.

[Skybird]

Oh, do we have to get personal because we are out of valid arguments now, August?

:down:

Don't worry, didn't I told you August and me are old pals? For him it is quite normal to become personal when he has run our of arguments and has no grounds to turn to. Just step aside when now he may start to throw mud at you too, since you had no stakes in this confrontation: it is not about you. It's a many years old antipathy between August and me, so, so better just stay out. ;) :up:

[August]

Don't worry, didn't I told you August and me are old pals?

No we're not old pals. I once called you that and you got all fake outraged like you always do when people don't accept your judgements and pronouncements.

For him it is quite normal to become personal when he has run our of arguments and has no grounds to turn to.

No, when I repeat myself several times and you still continue to ignore what i'm saying then I might get a little testy but don't mistake that for running out of arguments. You haven't dis-proven my first one yet nor will you.

[Penguin]

but for you, a person who has never served his country in any way


I helped in a medical aid project during the Balkan wars, a doctors' initiative that brought heavily traumatized - I would say: almost destroyed - torture victims from the Balkans to places in Northern Germany, Holland and Denmark for therapeuitical treatmnent.

I think Skybird did a much greater deed to society than many of the German conscripts did during their service, who just wasted their time, drinking and waiting until it's over.

Sky's line of thought about war looks coherent to me: there is no happy ending to war because war by itself is no happy event - just like their is no happy ending to an accident, which in the best case leave people unharmed, but life would be better without. (Don't mistake my last sentence for a pipe dream of a pacifist, who I am not)

The percentage of persons with soul scars from a war, is much harder to evaluate than the percentage of people with body wounds. People have a normal live, but maybe snap in certain situations, some just live with their scars without anybody noticing. From my experiences with survivors of WW2 (military and civilian), nobody got out without scars to the soul. Which does not mean that they could not life a happy live and be loving persons.

[Hottentot]

I think Skybird did a much greater deed to society than many of the German conscripts did during their service, who just wasted their time, drinking and waiting until it's over.

Aye, it's like our eternal subject of how you should spend your time being conscripted. Most men I know (me included) think it's a big deal and individual choice, but as someone who chose the civilian service, I too have met my fair share of chest thumpers and all their stuff about patriotism and manhood and all that.

From them I like to ask this question: "I helped and after the obligatory service have continued helping the visually impaired people of this country by doing my service at the Guide Dog School. What did you do?"

[Skybird]

No we're not old pals. I once called you that and you got all fake outraged like you always do when people don't accept your judgements and pronouncements.



No, when I repeat myself several times and you still continue to ignore what i'm saying then I might get a little testy but don't mistake that for running out of arguments. You haven't dis-proven my first one yet nor will you.

What is so striking about you is that you accuse others of what you in fact practice yourself.

It's called projecting what you do. That is a psychoanalytical defence-mechanism by which people keep reality away from themselves, and make others responsible for their own deficits.

Most people in this forum are not dumb. You may be able to deceive yourself about the limited range of your claims. But many people reading in here are quite aware of what I said, and what you said, and how it compares.

[Skybird]

Sky's line of thought about war looks coherent to me: there is no happy ending to war because war by itself is no happy event - just like their is no happy ending to an accident, which in the best case leave people unharmed, but life would be better without. (Don't mistake my last sentence for a pipe dream of a pacifist, who I am not)

Yes, that ^. I tend to be very uncomproimising about war, and thinbk of it in absolutely no half-hearted terms.

That'S also the reason why I am very hesitent to support a war. But want it to be totally uncompromised and totally determined if there is a war that I see as a need. You go all the way, or you don'T start walking at all. If that is too much asked of people, they better should not be in favour of a war. In the wars of the past 40 years wehere the Western powers got involved, compormise anmd hesitation were allowed, and about the ,motives we better do not even start talking. As a consequnces, these wars got lost, either militarily, or by turning them poltiically into strategicx defeats afterwards.

I hate our soldiers being wasted for such doing. And by "our soldiers" I mean the American and British soldiers as well as the German, Spanish and Polish ones. The flag is not important for my argument.

[MH]

From them I like to ask this question: "I helped and after the obligatory service have continued helping the visually impaired people of this country by doing my service at the Guide Dog School. What did you do?"

This question is very individual for specific couturiers...in Fin army probably not so much.
In USA it is a matter of whom you ask and what his/her political views are on the subject or/and what was his/her job in the army.
I personally hope for a day when army service will not be needed here.

[Hottentot]

This question is very individual for specific couturiers...in Fin army probably not so much.

I realize that. That's why I'm not running around these international forums asking the same question, unless someone directly starts thumping his chest at me and saying the same stuff some (a small minority) of our lads do.

Most of my friends chose the armed service. Or, if I've understood them correctly, rather went with it because it is the usual way and there was no reason they wouldn't. Some chose it because they wanted to get away with 6 months of service instead of the 12 which is one possible lenght in the army, but the only lenght in the civilian service. These days, that it. Back in mine it was 13.

I respect that. As I said, big deal. Everyone has to do it one way or another and we are all in the same boat there.

What I don't respect is having my contribution in the service and after it belittled by a person who sat in a hole in the mud for 6 months and yelled "shot, shot, burst" at the empty forest, fantasizing about being a war hero.

[August]

What is so striking about you is that you accuse others of what you in fact practice yourself.

It's called projecting what you do. That is a psychoanalytical defence-mechanism by which people keep reality away from themselves, and make others responsible for their own deficits.

Most people in this forum are not dumb. You may be able to deceive yourself about the limited range of your claims. But many people reading in here are quite aware of what I said, and what you said, and how it compares.

So when you oh so self righteously claim that there can never, ever be a happy ending from war then you post statistics that you admit claim only a relatively small percentage of vets ever experience problems that's just me projecting? :roll:

Personally the only one getting defensive here is you, like you always do when people don't accept you as the unimpeachable expert in all things that you think you are.

[Schroeder]

What I don't respect is having my contribution in the service and after it belittled by a person who sat in a hole in the mud for 6 months and yelled "shot, shot, burst" at the empty forest, fantasizing about being a war hero.
Strange, it's the same over here but just in the other direction. I get belittled for having been in the military...:shifty:

[Hottentot]

Strange, it's the same over here but just in the other direction. I get belittled for having been in the military...:shifty:

Any specific reason for that? I mean, I sure have heard of some less than admiring attitudes towards the military in various foreign countries. We are, for example, often adviced not to put any references of our army service to our CVs if applying to jobs abroad because it might be understood the wrong way. But in general, why would you get belittled for it?

Edit: Now that I think about it, I'm fairly sure that Penguin has enlightened me on this subject in the past, but I'm nevertheless interested in hearing this. Seeing all the stuff I have heard due to my choice, the idea feels absurd from my point of view.

[August]

The percentage of persons with...

Sorry I missed this but as I have said. Skybirds original premise and the whole reason for our disagreement is he feels there can never be a happy ending to a war.

Well aside from the fact that the end of any war is a happy event all I have tried to get through his thick skull is that no matter how many statistics he cites none of them are mention anything close to 100%. Less than that means by default that yes there are some happy endings in war.

[Schroeder]

@Hottentot
Well, those who do civil service usually do something that has a direct effect on someone, like helping in an old people's home or similar stuff. They often don't see the necessity for any form of military anymore and see it just as a huge waste of money (hey, we "won" the cold war after all so there is no direct threat anymore). To them there will never be a need of armed forces again because we don't have a direct threat right now and so they don't see the service that a soldier performs and the sacrifices they make even in peace time. There is no direct effect a soldier has in peace time, especially not when there is no direct threat pointing towards one's country. There is only an indirect one of keeping combat readiness up and standing vigil for the case where protection against an outside aggressor might be needed again however likely or unlikely that might be at a time.
They can't understand why someone would be "dumb enough to join an institution where you get yelled at, have to sleep with 6 guys in one room, get your rear end kicked (not literally but you know what I mean ;) ) and don't do anything useful at all".

On the other side I also now some military veterans who belittle the civil service guys calling them wimps and such BS....
Actually I think we've all served our country in one way or another and there is no "superior" way of serving. I don't belittle those who chose the civil service as I think they did society a great service but I also expect not to be belittled because I chose the join the armed forces.

[Nippelspanner]

Strange, it's the same over here but just in the other direction. I get belittled for having been in the military...:shifty:

Back in the good times, I was standing at the Berlin Zoo station, waiting for my ride home while wearing uniform and my blue beret with a nice aesculap staff... so... Even a complete Idiot could tell: "Hey, that´s a MEDIC"...

But what happened? A stupid jerk walked by and insulted me, not too quiet, as a "murderer" and "rapist".

I was speechless :dead:

Germans enter full-retard-mode quickly when it comes to uniforms and mitlitary at all. Still wearing blinders, Im afraid... :nope:

[August]

It's a dirty rotten shame when vets are not treated with the respect and love they gave their country. You all have my sympathies.

[Nippelspanner]

Really appreciated!

[August]

Really appreciated!

We have a greeting for vets in my country that goes:

"Thank you for your service to our country"

But since we're not countrymen instead let me modify that a bit and say:

Thank you for your service to the country of my Grandfather. :salute:

[Hottentot]

To them there will never be a need of armed forces again because we don't have a direct threat right now and so they don't see the service that a soldier performs and the sacrifices they make even in peace time. There is no direct effect a soldier has in peace time, especially not when there is no direct threat pointing towards one's country. There is only an indirect one of keeping combat readiness up and standing vigil for the case where protection against an outside aggressor might be needed again however likely or unlikely that might be at a time.

Ah, that I can understand. An argument I've heard from my not-so-bright fellow civilian service guys. Another one being "Lolz if there will be war, it will be with Russia and they will NUKE US OMG!!!!!!"

I have been actually waiting for someone to answer that question of mine: "I made sure you could do what you did." That's what I would say in their place. Then we could actually have a proper discussion and not idiotic "Mine is better than yours" arguing. Sadly I have yet to meet anyone who could offer me anything apart from empty rhetorics with lots of magic words like "fatherland", "manhood", "duty" and such thrown in for a good measure. Heck, I've even had the "Winter war" thrown at my face once (and fortunately only once, because I nearly died of laughter after getting behind the nearest corner). Words with meaning that become completely meaningless when they are being used as substitutes for real arguments.

Personally I would have more respect for these individuals if they actively took part in military after their service, much like I have continued taking an active part in the guide dog scene after mine. You know, if they participated in training, even made a career in the army, or at the very least somehow kept up the skills they learned there.

But they don't, though that's not entirely their fault. In the worst case they are people who have surfed through the obligatory service and believe that this entitles them to talk down on everyone else for the rest of their lives. "Rest of their lives" meaning also the time when they are about 70, overweight, and haven't shot anything but their mouth in 52 years. When a person like that tells me that my service hasn't done anything good to this country, I simply can't take it seriously.


Actually I think we've all served our country in one way or another and there is no "superior" way of serving. I don't belittle those who chose the civil service as I think they did society a great service but I also expect not to be belittled because I chose the join the armed forces.This.