Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo
Uhm... Skybird - exactly what do you define as "Many"? If 25% of a group suffer an affliction - and thus 75% DON'T get it - why is the term "Many" - ie that 75% (an overwhelming MAJORITY remember) not accurate?
Could it be said that "Many" do suffer? Yes - but it is also - by your own statement - accurate to say that the MAJORITY does not... Therefore if 25% can be "Many" - then 3x that number still qualifies as "many"....
Just sayin...
|
You have to add those 25% to the casualty statistics, as wounded or (delayed) killed. And then you are in the high tens if not low hundreds of tousands for Iraq alone.
Reads a bit different than those numbers they officially publish, does it?! But traumatisation is a serious wound recei9ved, like the loss of a limb, or a shot wound.
I know that US veteran's organisations count with the latter numbers. And of the Germans in Afghanistan, again around one quarter suffers PTSD. It is an issue talked down by the officials as best as they can, becasue it would immediately chnage public percpetion of the war(s) if the real number of casualties would be recognised officially.
And some of these casualties later turn into ticking mines, hidden at home, endangering their own people at home that have turned into enemies for them.
I dealt with these things a bit, in the past, although my immediate experiences was with traumatisation not caused by combat actions, but due to torture (Balkan wars).