Count the witnesses to know the need to address PTSD

According to ICasualties.org, the current death count for US forces in Iraq is 4,402 and for Afghanistan, 1,103.

Given the fact a company can be ten more, 5,503 would mean there would have been about 55,030 witnesses.

To get a better understanding of what these witnesses see, look at the number of IED attacks coupled with the numbers of amputations from Vietnam to Afghanistan to Iraq.

Squad - 9 to 10 soldiers. Typically commanded by a sergeant or staff sergeant, a squad or section is the smallest element in the Army structure, and its size is dependent on its function.

Vietnam War
Casualties:
Hostile deaths: 47,359

Non-hostile deaths: 10,797

Total: 58,156 (including men formerly classified as MIA and Mayaguez casualties).

Highest state death rate: West Virginia--84.1. (The national average death rate for males in 1970 was 58.9 per 100,000).

WIA: 303,704 - 153,329 required hospitalization, 50,375 who did not.

Severely disabled: 75,000, 23,214 were classified 100% disabled. 5,283 lost
limbs, 1,081 sustained multiple amputations. Amputation or crippling wounds to the lower extremities were 300% higher than in WWII and 70% higher than in Korea. Multiple amputations occurred at the rate of 18.4% compared to 5.7% in WWII.

How many US Military amputees are there due to the Iraq War?
1,091.

The 2009 United States Military Casualty Statistics report, published by the Congressional Research Service, states the amputee population in the US Military forces due to Operation Iraq Freedom (OIF) consists of 1,091 servicemembers. This number represents 85% of the total servicemember amputations occurred between 2001 and 2009. More than 50% of the amputations were caused by improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

How many IED attacks have occurred in Afghanistan?
18,319.

According to an article posted on The Washington Post website, from 2004 to February 2010 about 18,319 IED attacks took place in Afghanistan. Such attacks are on the rise in the country since 2008, while, in the same year, Iraq IED attacks started to decrease. Solely between January and February 2010, 721 attacks have already occurred.

The real issue we need to focus on, is not just the deaths in combat, but the numbers of the wounded that needs to be counted when trying to figure out how many veterans will end up needing help for PTSD.

The most common question when veterans are evaluated for disability, addresses anyone they knew killed in action. Too often witnessing wounds are ignored. Imagine seeing someone you were in a vehicle with one moment, having their leg or arm blown off the next. Imagine trying to pull them out of a burning vehicle. Then imagine you were not in the vehicle with them but in the one behind them escaping the blast or in the vehicle in front of them that just missed the bomb. Instead of 10 witnesses, there are twenty, thirty, forty more. Each one having to live with that memory etched in their mind and then, then having to face the fact it could have been them or very well could be them the next time. Then imagine going home, making it back to family and friends, parties and celebrations, while you remember what you just left.

Civilian psychologists use either one out of five or one out of three susceptible to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder after traumatic events. There is a clear indication that despite the military's best efforts in preventing PTSD, they are running about the same averages as the rest of the population. Unlike the rest of the population, they are supposed to be "trained" to prevent PTSD and be "resilient" enough to "get over it" instead of being trained to recover from it after the fact.

The attitude of the military has been one of train them to do anything and they will do it when ordered to. This was translated when the troops were under orders to not kill themselves. Yes, that actually happened several times out of frustration because no matter how much money was invested in coming up with programs, the suicide and attempted suicide rate went up instead of down. They should have focused on healing after as soon as possible instead of preventing the inevitable human chain reaction.

If PTSD is already digging into them the added stress of repeated redeployments, which the Army study had shown to increase the risk of PTSD by 50%, not only prolongs the damage done, it adds to it during a time when they could have been healing and recovering. Mild PTSD can often be almost fully reversed but the longer it is allowed to fester the less the chance of reversing it becomes. Vietnam veterans proved this because for far too many, help was not available, the wound was allowed to cut deeper into them as the reality of life back home added to their stressors at the same time they were wondering what the hell was happening to them.

Talk about resilient! These men and women ended up going on to get educations, jobs, start families and take over almost every service organization in the country, but managed to run a lot of companies. All of this without help from the communities they lived in simply because no one had a clue or cared to even learn. Yes, they committed suicide, ended up homeless, some had serial marriages and a long list if failed career moves. Yet at the same time many ended up still wanting to give back and went to work in law enforcement and firefighter jobs. When you consider how long they went from combat to care, it is amazing so many of them are still able to heal even a fraction of their pain, but they are. Many of them have found peace with the fact they will be on medication and in therapy the rest of their lives to remain stabilized but they are living lives again. They don't like the odds of the alternative suffering in silence, too proud to ask for help.


Add into the above how many had to kill in combat. How many will be among the one to have their futures challenged by their past and how many will be suffering instead of healing? How many will become statistics of suffering we study ten or twenty years from now? The best indication of this is the numbers we already have. We know what Vietnam produced and we still see many suffering instead of healing, families still trying to come to grips with what came home with their own veteran, just as we are seeing today in Iraq and Afghanistan veterans and their families after multiple tours of duty and very little support. The National Guards and Reservists forces receive even less support from their communities detached from what they went through and uninterested to learn out of fear they may learn what they do not want to know.

All of this indicates that while the military attempts to produce super Soldiers and Marines untouched, they have failed at the task to provide the best case scenario for the survivors. The numbers we're seeing now are only the beginning because as the operations in Iraq wind down and Afghanistan gears up, the veterans of each will increase as will the price they pay for the "success" of the campaigns. The numbers from Vietnam will be trumped by today's wars. The question is, "Will the survivors win or lose the peace?"