How many military suicides are you willing to accept as "normal"?

[sad sally]

For the second year in a row, more American soldiers—both enlisted men and women and veterans—committed suicide than were killed in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Excluding accidents and illness, 462 soldiers died in combat, while 468 committed suicide. A difference of six isn't many by any means, but the symbolism is significant and troubling. In 2009, there were 381 suicides by military personnel, a number that also exceeded the number of combat deaths.

No surprise when you read things like this:


By The Seattle Times Editorial Board - Monday, August 22, 201
The U.S. Army should continue pressing for answers, but more importantly solutions, for why its suicide rate has nearly doubled during a decade of war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That point was underscored by Seattle Times reporter Hal Bernton’s sobering account of Staff Sgt. Jared Hagemann, a 25-year-old Army Ranger who was sent to combat zones eight times.

His body was found in late June at a training area at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Since the first of July, five soldiers from Lewis-McChord have died of apparent suicides.


Okay, there's no draft; enlistment is voluntary. But imagine being 25 years old and having been sent to combat eight times. What in the hell is this country doing to its military? This insanity needs to stop - soon, very soon. The linked article below is from Jan 2009; two more year of multiple deployments added on to the stretched, stressed military.

http://militarygear.com/asp/2009/01/31/statistics-effects-and-the-realities-of-multiple-deployments/?du

Of the 1.64 million service members who had been deployed for OEF/OIF as of October 2007, we estimate that approximately 300,000 individuals currently suffer from PTSD or major depression and that 320,000 individuals experienced a probable TBI during deployment (p. xxi).

These figures taken with the above place estimate levels of PTSD today in soldiers and veterans of our nations modern wars at 23%.

The data on multiple tours was quite disturbing, due the fact that soldiers and veterans who have more than one deployment have significantly higher rates of mental health problems. Quoted directly from the horses mouth, the Mental Health Advisory Team (MHAT) V, the military’s own research arm reports,

Soldiers on multiple deployments report low morale, more mental health problems, and more stress-related work problems. Soldiers on their third/fourth deployment are at particular risk of reporting mental health problems (MHAT V, 2008, Sec. 2.2.2, No. 8).

[dmallind]

1. whatever the rate of the overall population is I guess

The raw numbers aren't that helpful. If military suicides/military headcount is greater than overall adult suicides/adult poulation, then there may be a problem to address in military training or mental health care. I'd expect a slight rise in ratio I suppose - it can obviously be higher stress than most jobs, and while I know not all military (or even most) are in armed combat roles, firearms access is pretty widespread.

[Hosnon]

4. Good place to start. nt.

[FreeJoe]

18. Rough Numbers

According to Wikipedia, the suicide rate in the US is 17.7/100,000 males and 4.5/100,000 females. (Wow, I didn't realize that men committed suicide at roughly four times the rate that women did!). Also according to Wikipedia, the US Armed Forces have roughly 1,240,000 men and roughly 200,000 women. Based on those numbers, you would expect the total number of suicides of armed forces personnel to be about 230/year. That's about half of what the OP says we are seeing.

Does that mean that we have a problem? Probably. I'd want to look at the numbers further. There may be other corelations with armed forces members beyond gender that need to be considered - income, age, and marital status all come to mind. In the end, I'm willing to bet that the current numbers still indicate a fairly serious problem.

It would also be useful to see how the armed forces suicide rate today compares with the pre-war rates and how those rates correlate with the general population over those time periods.

So basically, I agree that we need to look at the stats, but my cursory check says that there is probably a problem.

So why don't journalists do these basic statistical comparisons and put them in their stories? They don't know how? They think it will confuse their readers? They think it will weaken the case they want to make? They think the raw numbers are more sensational? I see this all the time. The other day, I saw a story on the most stolen cars in our greater metropolitan area. It looked very much like a list of the most popular cars in the area. Obviously, if practically everyone drives a Ford truck, a lot of Ford trucks will get stolen. That doesn't tell me whether the risk that a particular Ford truck will be stolen is more or less than the risk for a typical car. OK, I'm ranting now. I'll be quiet.

[dmallind]

27. I tend to agree here

It's not just journalists either. People who certainly know stats far better are guilty too. Can't remember how many times I've seen medical reseacrh that concludes people with trait or behavior X have a Y% greater chance of getting Z. Does that mean I should radically change my life to avoid X? Well obviously it depends on what the probabilty of getting Z is in the first place. For example if drinking alcohol gives me a 200% greater chance of getting a specific cancer that I would otherwise have a 0.00001% chance of getting, does it really matter that I continue boozing and now have a 0.00003% probability of that cancer? Well by definition no it's 99.99998% likely to make bugger all difference (yes the math's right, because even as a teetotaler I'd still have the 0.00001% chance). Telling me I should give up drinking in that case is like thinking if I buy 3 Powerball tickets instead of 1 I should quit my job and borrow $200k to buy a Ferrari because I have a 200% greater chance of becoming a multimillionaire.

But back on topic. What we see then is a suicide rate approximately twice that of the norm. I suspect the military are younger than the norm (lower suicides), healthier (lower suicides) and more minority (somewhat surprisingly, lower suicides) than the norm too. Taken together that exacerbates the difference you demonstrated, quite probably significantly. Race alone should move it the other way. Blacks commit suicide at a rate less than half that of whites (5.3/100k to 11.9 - why would be a fascinating question) yet are vastly overrepresented in the military (26% compared to 14% of population). If we corrected for all the demographics that 2X military suicide rate would I think be much higher.

What is the problem? No clue frankly. Highly competitive macho culture that cannot accept failure? Very high stress job duties? Stigma of mental health issues? Could be all or none - but hopefully sociologists and psych experts are trying to find out.

[sabrina 1]

2. It is so tragic what has been done to the troops. Sending them

back into those hellholes over and over again is a crime.

But the left is now in support of forever war so don't expect the kind of outrage we used to see when a Republican was responsible.

How could anyone be normal after seeing what these soldiers have seen, and/or doing the kind of things in order to survive, that they normally would never do?

Where is the Anti-War movement gone? No one ever really did care after all. It was all just politics.

[zalinda]

5. If a tree falls in the forest...

Media doesn't cover protests any more unless it becomes violent. And then there are those who support Obama and are okay with him keeping troops over there.

What we have done to our military is criminal. We pay them practically nothing. We scrimp on their medical care. We scrimp on their military supplies. But, we pay contractors HUGE amounts of money to do what the army used to do for very little money, and they have no ethical standards to adhere to. So if a contractor kills the locals for sport, the military gets the blame, and are told to shut up, or they may get a little friendly fire of their own.

So they come home and they have no money, their house may have been foreclosed on, they have no job prospects, and they have the threat of going back to the war zone hanging over their heads at all times.

And, for some people, it's okay since a Democratic President is doing it.

zalinda

[sabrina 1]

6. Well, the media never covered war protests no matter how big

they were. Still, we knew about them. Now, very few even talk about these wars and the other ones we are getting involved in. Maybe if Repubs take over again, the anti-war left will re-emerge. But it won't have the same credibility. For me anyhow.

Look at this thread eg. Back when Bush was president it would have been filled with outraged comments by now.

Oh well, in some ways and on some days, it all feels pretty hopeless.

But thank you for keeping the topic alive.

[zalinda]

10. My stomach is in knots all the time.

I go from depression to rage on a daily basis. I can't believe that some people who call themselves Democrats are okay with these wars. All the innocents that are dying on a daily basis. All the people who are starving and homeless, not only in this country, but around the world, who could have their situations changed, if it wasn't for all this fucking wars.

This planet COULD support everyone, we could find a way to live well. This is not the middle ages, we are supposed to be intelligent people, and yet there are still wars. I think that the people who declare a war, should always have skin in the game. Either they or their children should have to fight. Maybe then the wars would stop.

All this money for war. People dying, people starving, people without homes, people killing themselves to escape, when will it ever change?

zalinda

[LooseWilly]

16. Maybe it'll change when the leaders (the managerial class) has that skin in the game as mentioned.

Re-instate the draft and do away with ALL deferments.... ok, that'll never happen.

Revolution?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. "Revolution?"

You want to stop violence with violence?

[gratuitous]

25. There are many ways to revolt that don't involve violence

And, indeed, when you're talking about revolting against the High Church of Redemptive Violence, our national religion, you are going up against the entity that has cornered the market on using violence as the means to its ends. It requires intelligence, creativity, and the discipline to ignore naysayers both within and without, and to proceed along a very long path that has been trod successfully by others who have gone before.

There's no such thing as a final victory, unfortunately. Violence as its own means and end is nothing if not persistent.

[sabrina 1]

28. I understand how you feel, Zalinda.

As far as those declaring war, I couldn't agree more. Those, like Bush/Cheney who wanted war so badly, should have been riding on the tanks, leading the troops into Baghdad. And I also think that those who support war should be taxed to pay for it. Those of us who oppose them, should not be asked to contribute to something we are so opposed to.

Those two things would end the support we see here all the time, when the cowardly leaders were required to put their bodies where their mouths were, and the flag-wavers had to pay out of their own pockets.

Even sadder now is to be called a 'Qadaffi lover' by the LEFT as we were once called 'Saddam lover' by the RIGHT for opposing these criminal, murderous enterprises.

But don't give up, there really are more good people in the world than bad. They just aren't in charge, yet! :-)

[Amonester]

13. I hope the media will cover the occupation of Freedom Plaza, DC.

If it was me, I'd like to see it start today. Alas, the wait is for six long weeks away.

On the subject of comments, MHO is that, posting outraged rants on the internet is OK, since they help cement camaraderie and solidarity, but as far as their efficiency in stopping all wars is concerned, the end result (so far) is obviously non-existent. All the outraged posts in the world failed miserably, so far. That is, unfortunately, a fact that must be acknowledged.

It is human to tire of going from one failure to the next and never see any improvement a decade later (or so). Most people generally start to give up, little by little at first. Usually, it's not just 'give up' but also 'give up hope' for any real achievement in that matter to ever take hold in 3D life.

Now. The other thing is, again IMO, that it is also important not to make the problem become worse. Everybody should be well aware, by now, if they are paying a little bit attention to 'the big mouths' on 'the otheR side' that they want to attack Iran, and if they get the power they won't even lie about their motives for doing so this time; quote: "to take their oil as payback for victors" - d. (666) tRump, and since launching wars of aggression is now of no consequence whatsoever. :mad:

So, it is very important that the President and his team must stay for a second term. (Hoping he will listen IF something "bad" happens, because "the cRiminals on the otheR side" will never 'listen' to anyone but their crazies like trump, mc$ame, at nausea.) And no, not voting (or else) for the President is not a solution to any problem, and especially that one. If DUers have realist alternatives, please post them.

The troops cannot be made victims of an even worse Iraq/Afghan clusterfuck (Libya isn't). NEVER. Do. Not. Let. it. happen.


Let's try PEACE in http://www.october2011.org">Freedom Plaza, D.C.
It's YOUR turn. The PTB MUST LISTEN.
Organize. Inform. Act. Achieve.

[sabrina 1]

14. Libya will be. But I'll leave that for now.

I too hope the media covers Freedom Plaza. I also hope there will many of them around the country.

Agree with most of what you said, and it's a sad thing to have no good choices, but imo the focus and energy should go mostly to Congress, to keeping the real Progressive Dems and electing more of them. No more Dinos, then it won't matter who is in the WH. People will probably vote for Obama, not very enthusiastically, but I doubt they will be donating as they did last time, either their time or their money. That is better spent on Congress where we have a better chance of influencing them.

[Amonester]

15. If Libya will be, then they 'asked for it' and US Troops can....

(if in any number, even 'small', or none...) then be brought back home by applying the proper 3D-life pressure (Freedom-Plaza 2.0 style, and others). Europeans can choose to have their own and stay if they want, but that's for them to decide and it's for another day (later). For now, I celebrate the end of the brutal regime and hope for the best for all Libyans because that's what most of them seem to want. Let them have a 'shot' at 'trying' freedom, and see what happens.

Agree for what you said about Congress. Still, Obama staying in the WH is a lot better (by orders of magnitude, if not successfully primaried by someone with equal charisma), at least for the US 'image' in the rest of the world. The man is appreciated, as is Mrs. Clinton. I can't imagine the damages any teaRoari$t ticket would create in that matter, really. The previous one doesn't need a worse 'successor' on the world 'stage', and most of the world doesn't know much about Congress, if not at all.



Also on edit, K & R the OP.

[sabrina 1]

24. 'They asked for it'

So typical of the West to believe they are so superior to African and ME nations that they should be the arbiters of how they resolve their internal conflicts.

Saddam deserved it also. But we on the left didn't think Bush was right to 'liberate' the Iraqis. Double standards on both sides of the political spectrum. Too bad we don't just stick to principles, it's so much easier as far as remaining consistent.

How do you feel about Karamov in Uzbekistan btw, one of the most brutal dictators in the world right now, a man who boils his dissenters in oil and delivers their bodies to their families to make sure they get the message, and who mows down his own people in the street who dare to peacefully demonstrate against him??

We know how the Western powers, the same ones who are now 'liberating the Libyans' feel. They fully support Karamov. The US, so humanitarian of them I must say, supply him with millions of our tax dollars to help him stay in power.

Please, tell the 'humanitarian' fairy tale to Fox news viewers. This is all about Libya's resources and those people are going to be occupied for decades, unless they find a way, as they forty years ago, to throw out the Colonialists once again. I feel so sorry for them.

[Amonester]

30. "How do you feel about Karamov in Uzbekistan" Here's how:

I feel as bad about it than you do, even if I admit not knowing even 1% of what you know.

The question is more (to me) what should I actually do about it but I honestly don't know yet. Maybe I'll bookmark this thread and come back to it around Oct. 6, if something can be done about it then. Thank you for mentionning it. As for the Libyans, I can only wish them the best in the future, and they will be the ones to decide what it will be. Not us.

That's all I can do. Post my opinions and read other opinions, until October 6. Then I'll decide what to do.



Am nobody's enemy here. Know who Real enemies R.
Organize. Inform. Act. Achieve.

[sad sally]

9. Neither the President, Sec of Defense nor Congress want to address military suicides

They just want to keep wars going...

TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2011

Still doing nothing to address military suicides

The things that I have done that I regret
The things I seen, I won't forget
For this life and so many more
And I'm trying to find my way home
Child inside me is long dead and gone
Somewhere between lost and alone
Trying to find my way home

by Jason Moon who served in Iraq and his new album is Trying to Find My Way Home

The Secretary of Defense is supposedly responsible for overseeing the military (and above that office would be the president's). So why wasn't Robert Gates judged on his inability to lower the suicide rate? Why isn't Leon Panetta being asked monthly by Congress about the suicide rate and what he's doing to address it?

Why hasn't Barack Obama noticed the situation and grasped that the military doesn't seem able to address it and therefore brought in a civilian with suicide prevention training to implement a new program to address suicide within the military?

Nobody wants to do anything but, if put on the spot by being asked a question, pretend like they're just shocked and saddened by the suicide rate. Throw out a bunch of meaningless words and everyone nods and moves on to a different topic.

Congress needs to be offering oversight, the president needs to be addressing this.
http://thecommonills.blogspot.com/2011/08/still-doing-nothing-to-address-military.html?du

[jschurchin]

3. Less then 10 a year.

And even that is probably too many.

[PufPuf23]

7. I am staunchly anti-war and of the Vietnam generation.

My childhood and family friends were killed in Vietnam but more have been suicided or lead post-Vietnam lives of self-destruction by drugs, auto accidents, or crimes). I estimate that well over 50% are already dead (and I am just short of 59).

I was slightly younger and was well over 300 in the 2nd draft lottery (1971).

Most of my time 66-70 was in or near San Francisco (with my parents 400 plus miles away) in boarding school.Because of my heart/mind and those met, I was politicized then and strongly anti-war since.

My choices age 18 were to register at my rural home or in Contra Costa county, CA. The Draft was not fair. Registrations in Contra Costa -- one of the better counties in the USA for non-religious COs -- had maybe a 15% draft rate while while about 75% at home -- I would have registered in Hoopa, CA -- , if fit, were drafted, volunteered for economic reasons, or forced into the military by minor law enforcement problems (bar fighting, pot, and the like -- county jail or join the Army).

What we have now is an economic Draft and Draft as a means to citizenship. For profit mercenaries are another issue. IMHO a real Draft into public services or military for all Americans is wise for many reasons.

Plus the USA MIC is way too huge and a long term risk more than protection. Military is the absolute worse and inefficient use of natural resources and human lives; is hell on the environment; and is theft, corruption, and social/cultural destruction.

[sad sally]

8. The military industrial complex runs the world today.

Its tentacles have reached into almost every politicians pocketbook and the dark queen of evil is all over wall street; they pull the purse strings that instigate so-called revolutions, what we're led to believe are terrorist acts, and ultimately start wars so they guarantee their need and place in the world.

Add to the mic's destruction of men and women is the CIA. President Truman's words: "I never would have agreed to the formulation of the Central Intelligence Agency back in '47 if I had know it would become the American Gestapo."

[lonestarnot]

11. Warmongers just consider them dispensable pawns, expired products

used for continuous production of the wars based on lies for dough. 4 and 5 deployments should be criminal! End the fucking wars bastards!

[Supersedeas]

26. Chickenhawks have bigger 'oilier' fish to fry

[Starry Messenger]

12. recommend.

[duhneece]

17. I'm grateful we are getting these statistics

I'm glad people are paying attention and care.

When my husband, who lost both legs at Chu Lai Vietnam, committed suicide in 1998, I wrote to the Dept of Defense and Secretary of the Army to ask what kind of figures they kept on veterans who committed suicide. I asked about combat vets vs non-combat vets, about combat vets who lost limbs vs combat vets who didn't lose body parts and was told no figures were kept...at all...to track suicides.

I ache when I think of the pain that is so bad that death sounds like relief. God bless us all.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[grahamhgreen]

19. Kick. Can we leave now?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

20. Saw this and had to ask hubby via text how army treats suicide

He replied, "anti-suicide classes 1/yr. teach us to watch each other for signs & who to take ppl to see. big issue. lders responsible for missed signs"

Of course he's been out for almost 2 years now but I can't see Obama's DOD caring less than BUsh and loosening the prevention policies. I will say the support he has gotten for the issues he's been dealing with has been very good. No balking from the system. He's not suicidal but we've had some difficult things to deal with. He hates having been to war but he is also fiercely proud to have been a soldier. It's a paradox I cannot understand or explain so I just cuddle him a lot.

[sabrina 1]

29. Thank you for your comment.

It's a paradox I cannot understand or explain so I just cuddle him a lot.

That is so true, and he is very lucky to have someone as understanding as you are, which I am sure he knows. :hug: to both of you!

[Blue Owl]

22. I hope the President reads this and learns

n/t

[LWolf]

23. None. nt