Monday, October 26, 2009

MMA Fighter Monson sentenced to work release

'Anarchist' Monson sentenced to work release

http://www.theolympian.com/topstories/story/989895.html

BY JEREMY PAWLOSKI
October 01, 2009

OLYMPIA - Olympia mixed martial arts champion Jeff Monson avoided
jail time during his sentencing today for spray-painting anarchist
graffiti on the state Capitol and a Lacey armed services recruitment
center last year.

Instead, Monson, 38, must serve 90 days of work release while on
electronic home monitoring, a punishment that will allow him to work
to pay off the $21,894 in restitution Thurston County Superior Court
Judge Gary Tabor also ordered as part of Monson's sentence.

Tabor followed the recommendation of Thurston County Deputy
Prosecuting Attorney David Bruneau during Monson's sentencing.

Monson pleaded guilty in July to first-degree malicious mischief and
second-degree malicious mischief for vandalizing the Capitol and the
armed services recruitment center as part of a plea deal in exchange
for the sentencing recommendation.

Monson's next bout is scheduled for Dec. 12 in Alabama, where he will
fight Travis Fulton.

During Thursday's court hearing, Bruneau noted that Monson admitted
to spray-painting an anarchist symbol on the Capitol in a December
2008 interview in ESPN The Magazine. Bruneau said according to the
article, Monson is a "self-proclaimed, avowed anarchist."

Monson's attorney, Legrand Jones said in court that he believes
Monson's sentence would not have been as harsh were it not for the
fact that his vandalism occurred as an act of political expression,
and if not for the fact that Monson is a celebrity in the world of
mixed martial arts. Monson, who appeared in court with his wife, has
no prior criminal record.

Jones said Monson's leaving an anarchist symbol and the words "no
war" on the Capitol in November was "an act of conscience."

"They were political acts," Jones said in court.

Monson said outside court that the vandalism he left at the
recruitment center on Galaxy Drive in Lacey in November shut the
center down for several days. Monson said he hopes that the closure
of the center might have been the time that a young man needed to
change his mind about joining the military.

"I'd like to think something good came of it," Monson said.

Monson was adamant that he hopes his acts of vandalism raised
consciousness of the illegality of the Iraq war and immorality of
sending soldiers off to die in what he said is an unjust war. He said
he does not regret what he did and he is not sorry for it. He added
that he agreed to the plea because "they have a gun to my head,"
speaking metaphorically about the possibility that his freedom could
be taken from him if he did not.

When Monson was asked if he would ever commit a similar act in the
future, he responded, "I don't know what's going to happen."

.

Punk rockers vs. U.S. Army? Not.

[2 items]

Chicago punk rockers Rise Against vs. The U.S. Army? Not.

http://www.examiner.com/x-7025-NY-Concert-Examiner~y2009m10d2-Chicago-punk-rockers-Rise-Against-vs-The-US-Army-Not

October 2, 2009
Lorraine Schwartz

Today Chicago punk rockers Rise Against posted a blog on their
offical site to explain their current drama with WPBZ aka Buzz 103.1,
a Florida rock station.

The band was scheduled to play the radio station's "Buzz Bake Sale",
an annual music festival that traditionally takes place in early
December and features the top modern rock acts of the year. According
to the blog, when the band found out that the stage they were playing
on was sponsored by the U.S. Army's Recruitment Department, the band
pulled out.

Historically, and publicly, the band has voiced disapproval of the
military's recruitment tactics during wartime, specifically the
current war. They felt that playing a stage associated with the
Department would not only be hypocritical, but would be subjecting
their fans to unwanted interference since the Department is intending
on recruiting during the event.

The band goes on to clarify that although the radio station seems to
be trying to convince their listeners that the band is anti-military
altogether, their stance is actually that they are not against the
military or those serving, but are against the war itself. The band
has worked with the USO to allow troops and their families to attend
their recent tour with Rancid for free and in recent times has played
14 military bases, making their support for the men and women serving
very apparent. In addition to entertaining the troops, their
song/video for "Hero of War" attempts to bring awareness to the
internal battles and issues that come with being a soldier during
these troubled times. At their shows this summer, two of which I
attended, singer Tim McIlrath would take a moment to acknowledge the
shocking suicide rate amongst soldiers returning home from Iraq
before playing the song.

Rise Against expresses their gratitude for the troops they've come in
contact with both personally at their shows and through emails. The
blog finishes with an apology to their fans in the area and announced
that they plan on making the show up to them at another time.

To read the entire statement, visit Rise Against's site.
http://www.riseagainst.com/blog/default.aspx?nid=23024 [Also, see below.]

--------

SUPPORT THE TROOPS END THE WAR

http://www.riseagainst.com/blog/default.aspx?nid=23024

10/2/2009

Earlier this year, Rise Against agreed to the play the Buzz Bake Sale
in West Palm Beach, FL scheduled to take place in December 09. We've
played this same show in the past and it's always been a great time,
the crowds are epic, the station has always been gracious hosts, and
we were honored to be asked to headline it for the first time this
year. As the date closed in, we discovered that we were scheduled to
headline a stage sponsored by the US Army's Recruitment Dept. As a
band that has worked in counter-recruitment in the past, we decided
it would be hypocritical and inappropriate for us to headline this
stage. In addition, we were surprised that a radio station claiming
to be familiar with Rise Against thought that we would be ok with the
idea that we would play a show and subject our fans to military
recruitment tactics in a time of war, a war we adamantly and publicly
have opposed since it's bumbled inception. To be clear, this was not
an event to honor the military, this was an event that the US ARMY
was interested in recruiting people at, and we felt that our fans
should be free from that interference at a rock show on a Sunday
night in a time of war. Recruiters are a part of the military that
even many members of the military will admit their distaste for their
documented unethical tactics. We asked if something could be done,
and when we were told no, we respectfully bowed out of the
unannounced show for obvious reasons, and left it at that. We assumed
the station was depending on the financial support of the sponsor and
so we held no grudge.

Thinking that was the end of it, the radio station retaliated. In an
act reminiscent of McCarthyism witch-hunts, the radio station has
come to the unfounded, false and irresponsible conclusion that Rise
Against is "against the army" and, as of this morning, has decided to
spread this misinformation over the airwaves, threaten to not play
songs, and call for a boycott of Rise Against. Listening to the
broadcast, we were surprised at willingness of the DJ's to spin off
of a lie. At no point did they consider the information simply wasn't
true. In addition to a number of lies, they even decided to tell
their listeners that we said "F-U to the army" from the stage at past
Buzz Bake Sales, something that simply isn't true and that we would never do.

To dignify this ridiculous scare tactic, Rise Against supports the
troops and always have. In the past year, Rise Against worked closely
with the USO to allow troops and their families to attend our shows
with Rancid for free. As our economy spiraled over the summer, we
played near about 14 different military bases, making this all
possible. We also continue to work closely with the Iraq Veterans
Against The War who attended and tabled many Rise Against shows in
the last year. We hear from troops overseas on a daily basis through
email and cherish that contact. We learned so much in the time we
spent with all of these individuals and look forward to doing it again.

Again, Rise Against is against the war. Rise Against is not against
the military. It is an insult to the intelligence of Americans to
claim they are one in the same. We know our fans know this, all of
the amazing troops we've met over the last ten years know this, and
that most people can see through the transparent and shameless
attacks by this radio station. How someone can be "against" their
brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers and neighbors and
classmates and the very fans in the front row of our show is beyond us.

That said, we grew up in a time where the decisions and stances that
bands took in their career are the things that defined them, and what
made them special and respected by fans and media alike. Nobody would
have asked Rage Against The Machine to headline this stage. To not
respect the decisions and stances of bands across this vast musical
landscape puts real music and real musicians in jeopardy. To have
radio stations become bullies and threaten the artists they play to
conform with their agenda or else face the consequences is something
that flys in the face of not only the scene, but of this country.
Many of the bands that BUZZ 103 plays on the airwaves carved their
name through the stands that they took musically and politically. We
need to be wary of those who would bully artists into an agenda set
by those who control the airwaves.

If we were to bow to this pressure, we would not be Rise Against.
Shame on you BUZZ103 for even asking us to. Last time we checked,
supporting the troops involves more than just accepting their money
that you need to put on shows. We are sorry to the Rise Against fans
who took BUZZ103s word as truth and had to spend the better part of
the day believing that we are the monsters the DJs made us out as.

We apologize for this obstacle standing between us and our amazing
fans in Florida, we know our fans understand and are confident they
would be much more disappointed if we were to go back on our stance
and follow through with this show. We will be playing that night
elsewhere with a radio station that understands our band and our
amazing fanbase. We look forward to making it up to you soon West
Palm, we know your radio station doesn't speak for you.

Support The Troops; End The War

-Rise Against

.

Giving JROTC a Helping Hand

Superintendent Garcia Gives JROTC a Helping Hand

http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=7413

by Marc Norton
Oct. 05‚ 2009

Superintendent Carlos Garcia's September 18 memo, delivered
triumphantly to school administrators by ardent JROTC supporter
Margaret Chiu, Assistant Superintendent for high schools, is one of
those dirty little secrets that strip the facade from an institution,
revealing the true moral and political bankruptcy at its core.

In this instance, the San Francisco school district's utter obeisance
to the Pentagon is writ large for all to see. Garcia's memo restores
the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC), one of the
Pentagon's favorite military recruitment programs, as an independent
fiefdom within the district, answerable to no one except its military
masters. Garcia effectively guts the "Independent Study" Physical
Education (PE) program for JROTC cadets, crafted by district
administrators over the summer, and hands over to JROTC's
military-appointed functionaries the ability to grant PE credit
willy-nilly just like in the bad old days.

Despite all of the rhetoric about JROTC and "leadership development,"
the district has now demonstrated its complete lack of anything even
resembling leadership, washing its hand of any meaningful oversight
of JROTC when confronted by the Pentagon's demands for raw recruits.
Perhaps this was inevitable. How can a mere Carlos Garcia be expected
to stand up to the Pentagon when even the Change We Can Believe In
President Barack Obama does not seem to know how to react to the
demands of General Stanley McChrystal and his imperial cohorts for
more troops in Afghanistan?

JUST A LITTLE HISTORY

For those who may have missed the battle royale over the last several
years, JROTC is a Pentagon-run program that historically captures
well over 10% of the students at the seven San Francisco high schools
in which it is ensconced. These are mostly 14 and 15 year-olds,
freshmen and sophomores largely recruited on the basis of getting out
of physical education, known to us all as PE.

Of course, the Pentagon is to education what fool's gold is to the
real thing. JROTC really is "one of the best recruiting devices we
could have," in the infamous words of former Defense Secretary and
Pentagon boss William Cohen, who served under President Bill Clinton.

As to JROTC being a real alternative to physical education, the
renowned sports writer Dave Zirin explains it well. "The historic
mission of PE, dating back to the nineteenth century and the
instituting of public school athletic leagues, is to promote
teamwork, fellowship, and healthy habits that will last a lifetime.
To put it mildly, there are few things less healthy than war."

The struggle to remove JROTC and the military from our schools
stretches back into the early 1990s, a struggle which reached
white-hot levels in the last three years, after the school board
voted in 2006 to phase out the program. That resolution set off years
of confrontation, involving mobilization after mobilization of JROTC
supporters, fueled by hundreds of thousands of dollars of downtown
corporate money, and fanned by the propaganda and Big Lies of their
ever-subservient media -- arrayed against the program's opponents,
who command intense moral and political indignation, but precious few
material resources.

THE POLITICS OF JROTC AND PE

When the school board finally restored JROTC on a close and
hard-fought 4-3 vote last May, that bare majority knew that their
work was not done. Without PE credit, JROTC is a dinosaur without
prey, doomed to extinction. PE credit had become very problematic,
due to recent state legislation beefing up physical education
requirements. When the district withdrew PE credit for JROTC in 2008,
in reaction to the changes in state law, JROTC enrollment plummeted
to its lowest levels in decades.

Fearing legal problems if they simply granted PE credit, the
pro-JROTC school board majority mandated the development of a hybrid
PE program for JROTC cadets, an "independent study" program designed
to wiggle around state law on the subject. Over the summer, the
district slammed together this new PE program. There was no
consultation with PE teachers, much less the larger school community,
other than JROTC instructors and some administrators. The program as
constructed certainly has its weaknesses, but the core of the attempt
to make it pass legal muster was the institution of "supervising
teachers" who were to meet individually with cadets enrolling in the
program, and with their parents or guardians, to draft an individual
"independent study" curriculum and plan. These "supervising teachers"
are distinct from the JROTC instructors, who are not trained or
certified PE instructors, and obviously have their own axe to grind.

The district deadline for enrollment in classes was Friday, September
18. But by then, according to most accounts, few JROTC cadets and
parent/guardians had actually met with their "supervising teachers,"
much less drawn up a genuine curriculum plan. Cadets, as in the past,
were recruited to JROTC as the result of a pitch by JROTC instructors
that they would get PE credit, but the bar to implementing this
program as the regulations and the law require was simply too high.

So comes September 18, four weeks after school had begun. The
district is faced with a choice. One choice would be to abide by the
regulations, based on state law. That means that few JROTC cadets
would get "Independent Study" PE credit. The JROTC program would be
thrown into crisis. It would also mean standing up to the Pentagon.

The other choice was to jettison the regulations, state law, and any
sense of responsibility to genuine physical education.

You don't have to guess what choice the Superintendent made.

On September 18, Garcia unilaterally changed the terms of engagement,
as follows:

1- JROTC cadets can participate in "Independent Study" PE
immediately, even if they and their parent/guardians have not yet met
with their "supervising teachers" to draw up a curriculum plan.

2- Cadets and their parent/guardians can "meet" with their JROTC
instructor instead of their "supervising teacher."

3- The JROTC instructors and/or the "supervising teachers" can
conduct "group meetings" or "phone conferences" instead of individual
meetings mandated by the regulations.

4- The deadline for conducting these "meetings" is pushed back to
October 23 -- nine weeks after school has started.

In other words, the fox has been put in charge of the hen house.

Additionally, it appears that JROTC cadets who have been doing
nothing for four weeks can still enroll in the PE program. Apparently
cadets can enroll as late as October 23, and do nothing for nine
weeks. How these cadets are going to make up the required 200 minutes
of PE that they miss each week is a mystery.

"Independent Study" PE is now far from "independent," nor does it
involve much PE. Garcia's memo turns the "Independent Study" PE
program into a joke, except that it isn't funny.

It isn't funny because real physical education is being gutted. It
isn't funny because the gutting of physical education is being done
at the behest of the Pentagon and all that it represents in this age
of endless, endless war.

WHAT NEXT?

The question is, does anybody in the district even care? There are
already too many issues, too many battles, too much controversy. The
district just passed the A-G program, mandating that all graduates
must meet the requirements for admission to California's state
colleges. In this era of massive and growing austerity, that program
also threatens to descend into farce. (Next stop there, the
Curriculum and Program Committee meeting on Monday, October 5.) Then
there are the perennial battles over school assignment, which after
decades of legal and political warfare, have left San Francisco among
the most segregated school districts in the nation. Who can deal with
it all? Why not just hand 10% of our high school kids over to the
Pentagon and let the masters of war take them off our hands?

You would think that the teachers union, the United Educators of San
Francisco (UESF) might weigh in on the side of physical education and
PE teachers. Well, think again. UESF President Dennis Kelly is a
not-so-closeted supporter of JROTC and whatever the Pentagon wants.
The organized opposition within the union, the Educators for a
Democratic Union, has taken a principled stand against JROTC, but
whether or not they have the ability to take up this fight is an open question.

In other words, things don't look so good for opponents of JROTC, or
for supporters of genuine physical education.

But, then, think on this. The school board vote to restore JROTC was
as close as it gets, 4-3. The vote to set up "Independent Study" PE
was also 4-3. And even then it took one man, Carlos Garcia, to rescue
JROTC from possible oblivion on September 18. And, finally, whether
or not the new, improved "Independent Study" PE program will stand up
to legal scrutiny is a question not yet resolved.

That's closer than one might think. That's why the corporate media
has been so, so silent about JROTC ever since the program was
restored at the end of the last school year, instead of riling up the
opposition with clarion calls of victory.

After all, last November, the day after the election, we all woke up
thinking that long-time JROTC supporter Jill Wynns had lost her seat
on the school board, that JROTC opponent Bobbi Lopez had been
elected, and that we had a 4-3 majority in opposition to JROTC. A few
days later, as the absentee vote got counted, Wynns ended up
replacing Lopez in the win column -- Wynns' lead being a mere 5,000
votes citywide. So close, and yet so far.

Next November there is another school board election. Will Lopez run
again, and replace Hydra Mendoza, Mayor Gavin Newsom's best buddy on
the board and a solid pro-JROTC vote? Will Kim-Shree Maufas and Jane
Kim, both part of the anti-JROTC minority, run again and win? Who
else will run? Already, campaign consultant and political hotshot
Johnny Wang, who ran the pro-JROTC campaign last November, is making
noise and looking for customers.

The enrollment numbers for JROTC this year are not yet in, or at
least not yet public. How many cadets are there this year? Have any
significant number of students been scared away because of all the
controversy and uncertainty?

Can the local anti-war movement step up to the plate in a big way, as
it should, and bring to bear its not inconsiderable moral authority
over the school district in this bastion of anti-war activity? There
are anti-war mobilizations coming up in San Francisco on both October
7 and October 17. Will the movement take some time at these
mobilizations, so focused on decisions in Washington, to look to its
own backyard?

The anti-JROTC movement has been reorganizing itself for the fight
ahead under the banner of a coalition called Military Out of Our
Schools. Can this coalition successfully lead this movement in the
next period of time?

Questions, questions.

As the indomitable JROTC opponent Tommi Avicolli-Mecca said to me not
long ago, "the struggle continues and continues and continues ..."

.

Recruiter procedures reviewed in San Diego

[3 articles]

Recruiter procedures reviewed at San Diego Unified School District

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/oct/01/recruiter-procedures-reviewed/?metro&zIndex=175251

By Maureen Magee
October 1, 2009

The San Diego Unified School District may give parents another chance
to opt out of a federal law that gives military recruiters access to
student records.

Administrators are scrambling to clear up confusion over
questionnaires that were sent to parents this year. Some parents
complained the district pre-authorized parental consent, giving
recruiters permission to contact families.

But the forms in question included a cover letter asking parents to
verify enrollment information San Diego Unified had on file, said
district spokesman Bernie Rhinerson. Parents were asked to correct
any mistakes before returning the forms.

However, some overlooked the cover letters and were confused when
they saw pre-answered questions about everything from military
recruiters to migrant work experience.

De'Onte Victorian, a sophomore at Lincoln High School, brought his
pre-checked form to Tuesday's school board meeting to protest what he
thought was a scheme "to get him to join the military instead of
going to college." Some parents also showed up to complain about the
enrollment forms and express confusion over the district's intent.

Interim Superintendent Bill Kowba would like the district to once
again ask parents, "Is it OK to release your child's information to
military recruiters?" Kowba will discuss the matter with the school
board Tuesday.

Under the federal No Child Left Behind Act, school districts must
give the military student contact information unless parents opt out
of the law. Districts are also obligated to inform parents of their
right to opt out of the law.

The questionnaires typically are given to parents every time they
enroll their child in a campus.

"If a parent leaves that (military recruitment) question blank, we
must send their child's information to the military," Rhinerson said.
"The only way a parent would get a form with the yes box checked is
if they checked it or if they left it blank."

Rhinerson said the district may need to "clarify the law to parents.
... But whatever we do has to be consistent with the NCLB regulations
­ we don't want to jeopardize our NCLB (No Child Left Behind) funding."

Some school board members and administrators expressed concern at
Tuesday's meeting that the letters were misleading.

So did activist Rick Jahnkow. Although some parents crossed out the
pre-answered checks, "no doubt many parents didn't realize they could
do this," said Jahnkow, an organizer with the Education Not Arms Coalition.

San Diego Unified sends military recruiters records of students ­
unless their parents object ­ every October. The district vowed to
put that off until it is confident it sends student information only
with parent consent.
--

Maureen Magee: (619) 293-1369;

--------

School Officials Investigate Pre-Marking Of Consent Forms

http://www.10news.com/news/21166363/detail.html

September 30, 2009

SAN DIEGO -- A group of high school students claim they are being
targeted by military recruiters based on the wealth of the community
they live in -- a claim that has prompted an investigation by the San
Diego Board of Education, 10News reported.

10News learned forms were sent out a few weeks ago, and the packet
contained general back-to-school information. However, one question
in particular caught the eye of several concerned parents.

On the form it is listed as questions No. 28, and it asks: Is it OK
to release your child's information to military recruiters?

At a school board meeting on Tuesday, several parents expressed their
frustrations to the board regarding the question.

"We are asking you to protect us by not giving the military our
information until you notify all district parents of their rights.
This is the law," said one parent at the meeting.

Rick Jahnkow of the Education Not Arms Coalition said, "That has
serious implications for students because, ultimately, the
consequence could be they lose their life somewhere."

San Diego Unified School District policy says military recruiters are
authorized to receive a student's name, address and phone number.

Jahnkow said he does not have a problem with the policy, as long as
the parent has the choice to opt out.

"It does not seem right to us when our schools seem to have a
different agenda in mind to push students away from college. We think
this is a matter of justice," said Jahnkow.

Students said the form was pre-marked about their decision to go to
college or join the military based on the location of their school.

For example, they claimed the form for students at Mission Bay High
School was pre-marked "college."

For students at Lincoln High School, where the majority of the
students are minority, the forms were pre-marked "military."

"We feel that especially students who come from working-class
families tend to be recruited more heavily. Those kids would be
tracked towards college, not the military," said

The school district said there is no college or high school
designation on the form. However, they said they are looking into the
matter and have since put a hold on all student information released
to military recruiters.

The district is expected to provide an updated report on their
investigation to the school board next Tuesday.

Parents and guardians have three options if they want to prevent
military recruiters from getting their hands on student records and
information:

Check the enrollment form and check off the box that blocks solicitation
Fill out a district form to stop your student's information from
being released
Submit a written note or letter to the school office

--------

School District Denies Pushing Students into Military

http://www.sandiego6.com/news/local/story/School-District-Denies-Pushing-Students-into/Y-f45Wn5VUqxkWBcCK4eDg.cspx

by: Sherri Palmeri
Email: sherri.palmeri@sandiego6.com
Last Update: 9/30/09

The San Diego Unified School District said on Wednesday that it is
not trying to push students into the military. This comes amid
allegations that administrators pre-marked parental consent forms,
giving military recruiters permission to contact families.

"What we wanted to do as a school district is to validate our data,"
Says Darryl Lagace, Chief Information and Technology Officer at the
San Diego Unified School District. "We wanted to make sure the
information we had on file from students who enrolled in the past was correct."

For the first time, the school district is submitting student
enrollment information electronically.

The district sent home a form with the information that had been
gathered when each student was originally enrolled.

That particular question would be marked "yes" only if the parents
gave permission or if they left the question unanswered. If the
parent did not earlier opt out, by law, the box must automatically be
marked yes.

.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Joining military not a choice for some

Joining military not a choice for some

http://www.kstatecollegian.com/opinion/joining-military-not-a-choice-for-some-1.2034780

By Karen Ingram
October 23, 2009

It bothers me when I hear people speak badly about U.S. soldiers,
particularly ones who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or
even have suicidal thoughts as a result of their service. The usual
argument I hear is something like: "They knew what they were getting
into when they signed up. They didn't have to join the military. They
weren't drafted."

True, there is no draft. People have a choice.

Or do they? I'm sure that, for a great many soldiers, their reasons
for signing up were patriotic. But for many more soldiers, I believe
what ran through their minds was not the choices they had, but the
ones they lacked.

I read an article the other day about a man named Bill Caudle who
joined the Army at the age of 39, the age at which most soldiers
prepare to retire from their military careers.

Caudle's primary reasons for enlisting were desperate ones. He had
lost his job some number of months ago and his wife was recently
diagnosed with cancer. As the medical bills began to pile up,
Caudle's quest to find a job became more and more dire. No one was
hiring, though. Instead, there were more layoffs.

Eventually, he came to the conclusion that the only way to make sure
his wife got the care she needed without bankrupting the family was
to give himself to dear old Uncle Sam for a few years. His wife will
be taken care of, but Bill Caudle will see very little of his family
for the next four years.

This is not an unusual case. I attended a branch of Barton County
Community College in Fort Riley for a while in 2002. One of my
classmates was in his early-to-mid 30s and recently had joined the
Army because his young daughter had been diagnosed with some sort of
terrible, chronic disease that would cost a significant amount of
money for the rest of her life. Unfortunately, I can't be more
specific, but this was seven years ago and memories are prone to fade.

The economy was fine back then, but this guy's job options were still
limited. He didn't have a college degree, didn't make enough money to
pay the medical bills and didn't have good enough insurance to help.

What's a good father to do? He joined the Army. BAM! His daughter was
covered and he was taking advantage of free college classes so that,
when he left the Army, he could get a better job. The only problem
was that this was shortly after the unfortunate Sept. 11 attacks
business, so my classmate signed up knowing he would be sent to Iraq.

I never saw that man again. I wonder what happened to him and to his
daughter. I cannot remember his name, but I can still clearly see his
face. He had the tired look of a man who realizes he is out of
options. I've seen that look many times before.

Many soldiers come from the poorest regions in the U.S. They come
from places where college is unfathomable and the only ticket out of
there is painted olive, drab green.

These are people like my father, who proudly served his country for
20 years, but signed up for the job to escape the fate that awaited
him at home. Choices are a luxury few can afford in the Appalachian
Mountains of Kentucky, where one in five people lives below the poverty line.

So, when I hear people scoff at the soldiers, saying they should know
better or it was their choice to go to war, I get a little sick to my
stomach. If you've never felt the crushing weight of poverty, you
just don't understand.

Sometimes, there is no other choice.
--

Karen Ingram is a sophomore in English. Please send comments to
opinion@spub.ksu.edu.

.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Military Recruiters: Criminal, Abusive or Suspect Activity

Military Recruiters: Criminal, Abusive or Suspect Activity

http://www.veteransforpeace.org/files/pdf/Recruiter%20Abuse%20Full%20Report.pdf

Eight-year Chronological Review of Public Reports as of August 28, 2009

Compiled by Learning Not Recruiting – Toledo, Ohio

.

Does Military Service Turn Young Men into Sexual Predators?

Does Military Service Turn Young Men into Sexual Predators?

http://www.alternet.org/world/142942/does_military_service_turn_young_men_in%3E%20to_sexual_predators_/

By Penny Coleman
October 22, 2009.

"Everyone has the potential to be a sex offender. It depends on how
they have been conditioned."
--

Every day, for four years as a West Point cadet, Tara Krause lived
and worked alongside the men who had gang-raped her.

Still, she managed to graduate in 1982. She served as a field
artillery officer during the Cold War and was attached to the 518th
Military Intelligence Brigade during the Gulf War. In what she calls
"an act of incredible self-destruction," she married a three-tour
Vietnam vet in 1985 and, for the next eight years, lived "the private
hell of his PTSD."

"Suicidal behavior, violence and degradation were common threads of
daily life," she told me. She survived only because when he put his
gun to her head one day, it finally gave her the courage to flee.
"Like Lot's wife," she says, she struggles not to look back.

It's been almost 30 years since the rape, and Krause says she still
"dance(s) the crushing daily struggle" of her own PTSD: "The
nightmares, panic attacks, flashbacks, cold sweats, suicidal
thoughts, zoning out, numbing all emotion and desperately avoiding
triggers (reminders) -- I have become a prisoner in my own home."

Krause is rated 70 percent disabled by the Veteran's Administration
and has been in treatment at the Long Beach [Calif.] VA for the past six years.

For all the work she has done to heal her own injuries, she still has
no answer for the question: "How do you get a group of Southern white
teenagers, all of whom were Eagle Scouts, class presidents, scholars
and athletes, to be capable of raping a classmate?"

The question deserves an answer, and not a simplistic one. A 2003
survey of female veterans from Vietnam through the Gulf War found
that almost 8 in 10 had been sexually harassed during their military
service, and 30 percent had been raped.

Yet for decades, in spite of the terrible numbers, the military has
managed with astonishing success to get away with responding to
grievances like Krause's with silence, or denial, or by blaming "a
few bad apples." But when individual soldiers take the blame, the
system gets off the hook.

And it can be shown that the patterns of military sex crimes are old
and widespread -- for generations, military service has transformed
large numbers of American boys into sexual predators.

So it seems reasonable to ask if perhaps there is something about
military culture or training or experience that can be identified as
causative, and then, perhaps, changed.

The correlation is difficult to dismiss. The majority of veterans
behind bars today are there for a very specific type of crime:
violence against women and children. That fact has held true since
the first Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) surveys of veteran
populations in the nation's prisons in 1981, and there is evidence
that those surveys only identified a much older problem.

The orgy of demonization, however, that both fueled and justified the
disgraceful neglect of veterans in the aftermath of Vietnam makes
this an especially fraught issue to take on.

But -- without making any excuses for behaviors that cause
irreparable harm to those who are victimized -- there is little hope
of change unless the tacit complicity of military institutions and
culture is acknowledged. And that complicity most certainly did not
begin recently.

World War II is remembered as a crucible and a coming-of-age ritual
for the baby-faced boys it turned first into men and then into the
"greatest generation."

The butchery, the civilian atrocities, the summary executions, the
appalling racism and the breakdown of hundreds of thousands of
soldiers have been largely erased from communal memory. And so have
the rapes perpetrated by American soldiers on our female enemies and
allies alike.

In August and September 1944, when the fighting eased, French women
were raped by their American liberators at three times the rate of
civilian women in the U.S. And during the final drive through Germany
in March and April 1945, more than 900 German women were raped by
American soldiers, causing Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower to issue a
directive to Army commanders expressing his "grave concern" and
instructing that speedy and appropriate punishments be administered.

According to Madeline Morris, the Duke University law professor and
military historian who uncovered that lurid fragment of history,
those numbers are almost certainly on the low side.

"Rape is particularly likely to have been undercounted because it is
less serious than murder," Morris explains, "it is reputedly the most
underreported violent crime, even in the domestic context, and it was
perpetrated in the ETO (European Theater of Operations) almost
exclusively against non-Americans."

Those women, especially German women, could not easily have found the
courage -- or the opportunity -- to file complaints.

The memories of rape brought home by World War II soldiers surely
changed their lives forever.

"What does rape do to the rapist?" is a question Krause has struggled
with for 20 years. "Somewhere out there is that Rotarian, happy
grandfather, son-done-good, solid citizen. Does he block it out, does
he remember, does he feel a shred of guilt? Is it truly done with impunity?"

It is important to note that during World War II, according to
Morris' research, patterns of violent crime in the United States'
civilian population underwent sharp changes as well.

"While civilian murder and non-negligent manslaughter rates decreased
7.5 percent from prewar rates, aggravated assault rates increased
substantially (19.9 percent), and forcible-rape rates increased
dramatically (by more than 27 percent) above the prewar average."

Similarly, since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began, BJS
statistics show a 42 percent increase in reported domestic violence
and a 25 percent increase in the reported incidence of rape and sexual assault.

Except for simple assault, which increased by 3 percent, the
incidence of every other crime surveyed -- including violent crimes
overall -- decreased, but once again, mirroring Morris' World War II
data, domestic violence, rape and sexual assault showed daunting increases.

The first BJS survey of incarcerated veterans found that two-thirds
of those veterans had been convicted of rape or sexual assault. In
military prisons as well, the report noted, "sexual assault was the
most common offense for which inmates were held … accounting for
nearly a full third of all military prisoners."

That chilling aspect of soldiers' criminal behavior held true in
subsequent BJS surveys.

In 2000, veterans in state and federal prisons and local jails were
twice as likely as non-veterans to be sentenced for a violent sexual
crime. In the 2004 survey, 1 in 4 veterans in prison were sex
offenders (1 in 3 in military prisons), compared to 1 in 10
incarcerated non-veterans.

Chris Mumola, author of the two most recent BJS reports, points out
that "when sex crimes are excluded, the violent-offense incarceration
rate of non-veterans is actually greater than the incarceration rate
of veterans for all other offenses combined (651 per 100,000 versus
630 per 100,000)."

In fact, when sex crimes are excluded, adult male veterans are over
40 percent less likely to be in prison for a violent crime than their
non-veteran counterparts. The same holds true for property crimes,
drugs and public disorder -- the rates are much higher rates for
adult men without military experience.

"The one notable exception to this pattern," Mumola says, "is sex
assaults, including rape."

The Veterans' Health Administration has adopted the term military
sexual trauma (MST) to refer to severe or threatening forms of sexual
harassment and sexual assault sustained in military service.

Their records for 2007 show that 22.2 percent of female veterans and
1.3 percent of male vets (from all eras) who used the agency's health
services screened positive for MST. That represents a daunting
increase of about 65 percent for both men and women over the agency's
2003 data.

And the small percentage of men is somewhat misleading; the 2007
percentages translate into 45,564 women and 47,719 men whose injuries
forced them to acknowledge their victimization and to seek help from the VA.

Some of that increase can perhaps be attributed to a 2005
congressional directive requiring the VA to improve its rate of
screening returning soldiers for MST, but given that almost 90
percent of veterans don't (or can't) use VA health care services, it
seems safe to assume that the actual numbers are considerably higher.

Those are just the numbers for veterans.

In 2008, the Pentagon received more than 2,900 sexual assault reports
involving active-duty service members. That represents a 9 percent
increase from 2007, a 26 percent increase in combat zones. Almost a
third of those reports involved rape, and more than half involved
aggravated sexual assault.

In a dazzling display of unapologetic spin, the increase was called
"encouraging," an indication of more reports rather than more
assaults. It offered no evidence to back up that interpretation, save
that the department "encourages greater reporting to hold offenders
accountable for this crime."

That seems an unlikely incentive given that only 10 percent of the
2008 complaints led to a court-martial (compared to a civilian rate
of 40 percent). The rest received minor punishments, almost half were
dismissed, and the report acknowledged that 90 percent of sexual
assaults in the military aren't reported at all.

Rape occurs almost twice as frequently in the military as it does
among civilians, especially in wartime.

When a 2008 House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee
subpoenaed Kaye Whitley, director of the DoD's Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO), to explain what the
department was doing to stop the escalating sexual violence in the
military, her boss, Michael Dominguez, principal deputy
undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, ordered her
not to appear.

Only after the department was threatened with a contempt citation was
Whitley made available to the committee. She then sought to reassure
the members that DoD is conducting a "crusade against sexual
assault," and itemized all of the heroic measures the agency was
planning to implement in the very near future -- efforts that
somehow, despite explicit directives and deadlines from Congress, the
agency had not managed to launch at the time.

Tia Christopher, women veterans coordinator at Swords to Plowshares
in San Francisco, holds Dominguez, not Whitley, responsible for
flouting congressional directives.

"I heard him claim that the reason sexual assaults are so high in the
military right now is the hip-hop influence. I don't need to spell
out why I found that so offensive. I fault Dominguez for not
recognizing that it is a leadership issue."

Christopher loves the military and calls it "a really beautiful
machine" when it is working correctly. But she is a rape survivor,
and she feels doubly betrayed by her superiors in the Navy. "They can
respond to other situations, why not to sexual assault?"

Christopher was 18 when she joined the Navy, training to be a
cryptologist. The night she was raped, she had been drinking.

"Underage drinking," she notes, "is a big issue in the military. It
gets you an Article 15, and it's 100 percent guaranteed that you will
be prosecuted for collateral misconduct. It is far more likely that
you will get in trouble for collateral misconduct [from drinking
alcohol] than for raping someone. So I destroyed all the evidence. I
bleached my sheets and scrubbed myself up and didn't come forward
until two weeks later. I wanted to keep my military career, and I
thought I could just get through it.

"But I saw him every day. I mustered with him. He would follow me
into the chow hall and sit across from me while I ate. I stopped
eating, couldn't concentrate, started failing my courses. And I
started having flashbacks, hallucinating. I thought I saw him everywhere."

Christopher finally realized she needed help, but the female petty
officer she first spoke to got her chief involved and, as the report
went up the chain of command, her nightmare just got bigger.

"In my case, there were witnesses. They heard my head hit the wall in
the barracks room, but they were drinking [underage], too."

Her commanding officer promised them all immunity if they agreed to
testify on her behalf, and then reneged on the deal.

"It ended up that they all got in trouble, and [her rapist] got off."
(In 2006, Christopher's attacker was expelled from the military for
another rape.)

"The last few months that I was in the service, I was assigned to X
Division, mopping the stairs, cleaning the heads, picking hair out of
the drains. It was my job to vacuum the different chief's offices,
and these sleazeballs would say things like, 'Hey, Christopher, bend
over when you're sweeping.' Or, 'Hey Christopher, let me see them
titties.' When you come forward about a rape, basically you are just a slut."

Christopher left the military in 2001, and it took her a long time to
get her life back together. She still has panic attacks, flashbacks,
trouble sleeping. But, with help from a women's psychotherapy group
at the Seattle VA, and the rich support from sympathetic colleagues
at Swords to Plowshares, she has developed a lot of coping skills.

After seven years, and some good therapy, she feels strong enough to
manage her advocacy and policy work.

"I've testified before the California state Legislature, and I was
invited to testify before Congress. I speak out about MST as much as
I do so other women don't have to. This is not just my job. There is
no way I would ever give my clients to the media. I remember what it
was like, being fresh out of the service and going through that trauma."

Lisa Pellerin, who has facilitated sex-offender programs for the New
York State Department of Corrections for six years, believes that
"everyone has the potential to be a sex offender. It depends on how
they have been conditioned. When they are in the military, supporting
the brotherhood is the most important thing. Soldiers do what they
feel they have to do because they don't want to be seen as weak or
unable to perform.

"Sexual abuse has always been about power and control. If you are
exposed and desensitized to certain sexual behaviors, they become normalized."

One of the most basic conditioning strategies military training uses
to destabilize a recruit's inherent disinclination to kill is the
inculcation of a dehumanized enemy. Soldiers are taught that "we" are
the good guys; "they" are the "others." "They" are easier to kill
because they are not us. They are also easier to despise. "Others" --
the nips, the gooks, the hajis -- come and go, but ever reliable and
constant is "the girl."

Even in this new 20 percent female military, misogynist marching
rhymes (aka jodies) are still used, and drill instructors still shame
recruits with taunts of pussy or sissy, faggot or girl. Patty McCann,
who signed up with the Illinois National Guard when she was 17 and
deployed to Iraq when she was 20, still feels betrayed when she
remembers her drill sergeant yelling, "Does your pussy hurt?" and "Do
you need a tampon?"

A culture that encourages violence and misogyny, says Helen Benedict,
attracts a disproportionate number of sexually violent men: half of
male recruits enlist to escape abusive families, a history that is
often predictive of an abuser.

But whatever attracts them, and wherever they come from, this is
about a system plagued by rot, and not about a few bad apples.
American veterans embody the inevitable, predictable blowback from
that rotten system.

It is both unjust and disingenuous to focus on what our soldiers have
become without talking about what we have become: A society that
romanticizes its warriors, demonizes its veterans and devalues its women.

"Did I serve my full enlistment?" Christopher says. "No. But that's
because some shitbag sailor who shouldn't have been wearing the
uniform came into my life. Why is that my issue?

"This is a leadership issue."
--

Penny Coleman is the widow of a Vietnam veteran who took his own life
after coming home. Her book Flashback: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder,
Suicide and the Lessons of War was released on Memorial Day 2006. Her
Web site is Flashback. http://www.flashbackhome.com/

.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Community Groups vs. Military Recruiters

Community Groups vs. Military Recruiters

http://www.utne.com/Politics/Community-Groups-fight-Military-Recruiters.aspx

As the economy sputters, community groups offer alternatives to
military service

November-December 2009
by Anisha Desai and Maryam Roberts, from Dollars & Sense

Military recruiters today have unprecedented access to students and
other young people, particularly in poor neighborhoods. There are
generally more Army recruiters at high schools than there are college
counselors, says Elmer Roldan, fundraising director at Community
Coalition in South Central Los Angeles, and there is "a more
aggressive strategy to militarize them than to prepare them for
college." He notes that military recruiters target the best and
brightest students, particularly young women.

So when high school senior Stephanie Hoang started working with the
Oakland, California–based organization BAY-Peace, educating her peers
about the potential risks of joining the military and helping to
build alternative education and employment opportunities, her
truth-in-recruitment work was more than just an internship: "It's my
peers being affected," she says. "[Recruiters] are looking at me and
thinking that I'm the person they want in the military."

In 2008, nearly 185,000 men and women signed up for military
service­the highest number since 2003. Many of the new recruits came
from the groups hardest hit by the economic crisis. The National
Priorities Project report on FY2008 Army recruiting reveals that with
unemployment climbing above 7 percent last year, the steepest climb
in recruiting came from lower-middle-class neighborhoods with median
incomes in the $40,000-per-household range. Black and Native American
women were recruited at high rates: Around a quarter of these
recruits were women, compared to only about 14 percent of white recruits.

"Jobs with stability are rarities," says Ann Lennon of the Carolina
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). "Options are narrowing and
we have people who may have been in the workforce who are now
thinking about going into the military."

Amid ongoing economic instability, community and peace groups are
working to build alternative opportunities. The Carolina AFSC, in
alliance with green-economy groups, is developing sustainable
training and employment opportunities. "People need to know what all
of their options are," Lennon says. "We have examples of people who
have created their own jobs and economies."

AFSC put together a series of questions potential recruits can ask to
help them separate myth from fact in areas such as job training,
funds for education, and posttraumatic stress disorder and other
potential consequences of combat. "The military sometimes makes
promises that it can't keep," Lennon says. "It's important to know
which ones they can."

South Los Angeles' Community Coalition works with students in the New
World Foundation's Civic Opportunities Initiative Network (COIN)
pilot program. Through COIN, youth leaders receive leadership
training and complete paid internships with social justice
organizations, with the aim of keeping talented students in their communities.

Suzanne Smith, former research director at the National Priorities
Project, notes that carrying on two wars is "draining resources from
other areas." The economic crisis provides the perfect moment to
start redirecting funds away from unsustainable military solutions
and into other areas: education, health support for veterans,
community-based solutions to violence and militarism, and economic
development to create jobs outside the military.
--

Excerpted from Dollars & Sense (July-Aug. 2009), an indispensable
journal of economics and economic justice. Nominated for a 2009 Utne
Independent Press Award for political coverage. www.dollarsandsense.org

.

Army sessions aim to prepare students for life

Army sessions aim to prepare students for life

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/61620592.html

09/26/2009
By Michelle De La Rosa

Retired Command Sgt. Maj. Michele Jones captivated Brackenridge High
School students this week as she shared the story of her ascent from
the rough streets of Baltimore to a job working in President Barack
Obama's administration.

"You are the only person who has absolute control of what you want to
do, who you want to be," she told the more than 300 freshmen gathered
in the auditorium.

Jones, who was highlighted as one of 35 of the World's Most
Remarkable Women inEssence magazine several years ago, was appointed
in July as special assistant to the secretary of defense for White
House liaison.

She delivered her high-energy motivational speech this week during a
seminar called Planning for Life, a U.S. Army program that strives to
get students to think about life after high school by giving them
information about nourishing the mind, body and soul.

San Antonio Independent School District officials say it's another
tool to help reduce the district's dropout rate ­ 26 percent for the
Class of 2007, the highest in Bexar County.

For the Army, the $4 million program is an opportunity to give back
to the community, says Kelly Brum, an account specialist with public
relations firm Weber Shandwick and a spokeswoman for the program.

While Brum stresses the program is about community outreach and not
recruiting, the Army is hoping Planning for Life events will help it
establish new relationships in schools and give recruiters exposure
to a wider percentage of the student population, according to program
goals outlined in materials distributed to people who help with the event.

The approximately three-hour seminar reached some 45,000 students
throughout the country last year.

The program was presented at four SAISD high schools this week ­
Brackenridge, Sam Houston, Fox Tech and Highlands ­ and at Churchill
High School in the North East Independent School District.

Darnell McLaurin, a government and community relations specialist for
SAISD, said this is the fourth year the program has been offered at
district high schools.

"They talk more in terms of options and choices," he said. "They
support our philosophy: Choices."

During the "mind" portion of Tuesday's event, retired Lt. Col. B.K.
Haynes told students the grade-point average and college entrance
exam scores they will need to achieve to land college scholarships.
He also pushed the Army's free March2Success Web site, which provides
standardized-test preparation materials.

"Today, we are going to give you this resource that I guarantee if
you use, somebody will give you a college scholarship," Haynes said.

During the "body" portion of the seminar, students learned what a
calorie is and how fast food and soft drinks are bad for them. They
also learned how to do abdominal and upper-back stretches.

Freshman Mariah Torres, 14, said the event was helpful.

"It also gave us the inspiration that we could do whatever we want
and no one can stop us," Torres said.

.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Military Children in Crisis

Military Children in Crisis

http://www.truthout.org/101709C

17 October 2009
by: Stacy Bannerman

A seven-year-old second-grader attempted suicide while his father
was serving yet another tour in Iraq. Seven years old. Seven. His
mother was one of half a dozen military spouses I have spoken with
about soldiers' kids who have attempted suicide during their fathers'
deployments.

When I was seven, it was 1972, and there were 69,000 US troops
in Vietnam. Men were still being drafted and deployed, but not my
dad. So I was spared the circumstances that led a seven-year-old to
try to kill himself.

Three-plus decades ago, parents were exempt from conscription
because of overwhelming concern about the harmful effects of
deployment on children. Today, roughly half of the troops who have
served in Iraq and Afghanistan are parents, many of whom have served
multiple tours. Repeat deployments stress soldiers and escalate the
likelihood of psychological injuries that can last for a lifetime.
There is a small, but rapidly growing, body of evidence suggesting
that the same is true of their children.

The Associated Press reported that "After nearly eight years of
war, soldiers are not the only ones experiencing mental anguish....
Last year, children of US troops sought outpatient mental health care
2 million times, double the number at the start of the Iraq war....
Since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, inpatient visits among military
children have increased 50 percent. ("War stresses military kids,"
July 12, 2009.)

The Veterans Administration's latest research on mental health
issues of troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan shows that "the
prevalence of new diagnoses in early 2008 had nearly doubled from
four years prior in 2004." ("Study reveals sharp rise in diagnoses of
disorders," Stars & Stripes, July 18, 2009.)

The same study revealed that approximately 35 percent of Iraq
and Afghanistan veterans who use the Veterans Affairs health care
system were diagnosed with a mental health problem. That figure
dovetails perfectly with the results of a suicide prevention project
in San Antonio which found that "nearly 35 percent of more than 200
children from local military families needed to be treated for mental
health conditions." (Army Reserve Family Programs website, July 2009)

America's military kids are in crisis, presenting acute,
debilitating symptoms of deployment-related stress, virtual mirrors
of their parents who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The current rates of mental health problems in OIF/OEF veterans
and veterans' children (35 percent), and the trajectories of
escalation from 2003/2004 to 2008 (50 percent), are identical.
Further evidence of the direct, causal relationship between parental
deployment and children's mental health is that when the US "surged"
in Iraq, sending more than twenty thousand soldiers and Marines to
stabilize the country, mental health hospitalizations of military
kids "surged," too.

Should the White House decide to deploy tens of thousands of
additional troops to Afghanistan, there must be a simultaneous
stateside deployment of developmentally-appropriate mental health
care providers to minister to the children left behind; children who
have already carried too much of the weight of war.

Military kids whose parent have deployed are using mental health
services at a rate three and a half times higher than the percentage
of civilian children ages 4 to 17 who seek mental health services,
according to a study by the US Department of Health and Human Services.

If we were a nation at war, rather than a military at war, this
would be an American problem. We are not, so it's a Pentagon problem.
Thankfully, the Army is looking at the effects of multiple
deployments on children, and taking steps to help. But at the
Association of the US Army's annual meeting earlier this month, Col.
Kris Peterson, a pediatrician at the Military Child and Adolescent
Center of Excellence at Fort Lewis, Washington, admitted that there
is a "very large gap" in providing care.

Mental health care resources are spread so thin that soldiers'
kids wait months for psychiatric care, but there's no Department of
Military Children's Affairs, no powerful lobbyists or highly paid
advocates for military kids. They lack the social cachet and
political currency of combat veterans, and there's just no way to
spin a suicidal second-grader into a poster child for patriotism.
Since there's not a Walter Reed to tend the invisible war wounds of
Army kids, there is no potential lightning rod that could galvanize
the people or embarrass the administration.

In the America I grew up in, we wouldn't need one.

That America didn't send soldier-parents to war over and over
and over again. That America wanted to protect its children from the
debilitating effects of a father's deployment. That America believed
- and acted in concert with the belief - that the family unit should
not, could not, would not withstand the burden of having a father in
harm's way for a year, much less year after year after year. That
America would have wept at the thought of a suicidal seven-year-old,
and brought the father home immediately.

In this America, a seven-year-old second-grader attempted
suicide while his father was serving yet another tour in Iraq. Seven
years old. Seven.

.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Combat's positive effects examined

Combat's positive effects examined

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-10-18-researchers-look-at-positive-growth-after-trauma_N.htm

By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY
10/18/2009

WARDAK, Afghanistan ­ Sgt. 1st Class Gregory Frikken says three
combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan have robbed him of precious time
with his family, but have also changed him ­ in some ways for the better.

A sense of personal strength, appreciation for life and love of
family have all been enhanced, says Frikken, 39, who directs
artillery fire for 10th Mountain Division troops fighting here. "I
will never be the same person I was before my combat experiences," he says.

What happens to soldiers like Frikken has led Army leaders to develop
a resiliency program that urges GIs to look inward and discover how
combat may have made them emotionally stronger.

Research appears to show that many people can emerge from traumatic
experiences with greater self-confidence, a keener sense of
compassion and appreciation for life, says Brig. Gen. Rhonda Cornum,
director of the Army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program. Cornum
and other experts call this concept post-traumatic growth.

Although the military focuses attention on troops who develop mental
health conditions in combat, Cornum says, the majority of war
veterans do not suffer post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other problems.

"We never ask if anybody had some positive outcomes. We only ask
about this laundry list of illnesses," says Cornum, referring to a
battery of health questions soldiers face when they leave the combat zone.

She often alludes to her experiences as a prisoner during the Persian
Gulf War. Cornum was an Army captain and flight surgeon in 1991
aboard a Black Hawk helicopter shot down over Iraq. Five of the seven
soldiers died. Cornum suffered two broken arms and a gunshot wound to
the shoulder, was captured with two others and held for eight days.

Her goal is to include a self-assessment on traumatic growth with a
health questionnaire given to soldiers three to six months after they
return from combat. She would also like to include in preparations
before and after GIs are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan short video
segments of servicemembers describing how their personal lives
changed for the better after surviving combat.

The new tools could be put into effect within a year, Cornum says.

Richard Tedeschi, an expert in post-traumatic growth at the
University of North Carolina-Charlotte, is collaborating on the
project with the Army. Even though he calls the initiative "uncharted
territory," Tedeschi says research indicates that soldiers have found
value in their combat experiences. If informed about potential for
post-traumatic growth beginning in basic training, he says, soldiers
might not automatically assume "that the combat experience produces
PTSD and you're kind of doomed."

During remarks at the American Enterprise Institute recently in
Washington, Tedeschi said some servicemembers found the changes in
their lives so profound after combat, they expressed gratitude for
having gone through it ­ even if it cost them permanent physical damage.

"They'd felt they'd changed as people in ways they otherwise wouldn't
have," Tedeschi says. "At the same time, as this trauma separates
them from other people, it also allows them to maybe see themselves
as more human than they ever were before, have a closer connection
with what it means to be a human being ."

Frikken is married with three children, and goes out on missions from
Forward Operating Base Airborne here. He says that nearly 33
cumulative months of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan "have made me
realize to live every day as if it were my last. I take nothing for granted."

The experience forces survivors to "try to figure out 'Who am I now?
... What's my life supposed to be about?' " Tedeschi says. "We
certainly would like to find ways of helping people move in this
direction, because it's a way of mitigating the effects of this trauma."

Tedeschi acknowledges that his concepts are controversial.

Howard Tennen, a clinical psychologist and professor at the
University of Connecticut, says that although post-traumatic growth
may occur in some people, it is difficult to measure. He says
available evidence does not yet support the idea that promoting a
sense of growth will lead to positive outcomes.

Cornum says she finds the concept convincing.

"We never want something bad to happen," she says. "But if there's an
opportunity to learn something from some adverse circumstance, we
certainly want to take advantage of it."

.

Military Recruitment on High School and College Campuses

From the Congressional Research Service:

"Military Recruitment on High School and College Campuses: A Policy
and Legal Analysis,"

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40827.pdf

September 22, 2009

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

A Historic Success In Military Recruiting

A Historic Success In Military Recruiting

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/13/AR2009101303539.html

In Midst of Downturn, All Targets Are Met

By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 14, 2009

For the first time in more than 35 years, the U.S. military has met
all of its annual recruiting goals, as hundreds of thousands of young
people have enlisted despite the near-certainty that they will go to war.

The Pentagon, which made the announcement Tuesday, said the economic
downturn and rising joblessness, as well as bonuses and other
factors, had led more qualified youths to enlist.

The military has not seen such across-the-board successes since the
all-volunteer force was established in 1973, after Congress ended the
draft following the Vietnam War. In recent years, the military has
often fallen short of some of its recruiting targets. The Army, in
particular, has struggled to fill its ranks, admitting more high
school dropouts, overweight youths and even felons.

Yet during the current budget year, which ended Sept. 30, recruiters
met their targets in both numbers and quality for all components of
active-duty and reserve forces.

"We delivered beyond anything the framers of the all-volunteer force
would have anticipated," Bill Carr, deputy undersecretary of defense
for military personnel policy, said at a Pentagon news conference.

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are considered by experts to be an
unprecedented test of the volunteer military's resilience. Its
ability to bring fresh recruits into the force is critical not only
to increasing the overall size of the Army and Marine Corps, but to
ensuring that additional units are available to rotate into conflict
zones. Some Army units sent overseas recently have been deployed at
less than full strength.

As lengthy, multiple combat tours place U.S. forces under enormous
stress, the willingness of young people to enlist has surprised even
military leaders, experts said.

The military is suffering "strains that are tragic in personal lives,
but institutionally the ground forces have held together and are not
broken. They are even recovering a little bit as we speak," said
Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Still, it is difficult to predict how much stress the volunteer
military can take as it navigates uncharted waters, experts said.

"There is no way to tell at what point the Army will break in the
sense of mass desertion, or people unwilling to stay in, or not
meeting recruiting quotas," O'Hanlon said.

Overall, the Defense Department brought in 168,900 active-duty
troops, or 103 percent of the goal for the fiscal year, officials
said. It reached 104 percent of the goal for recruitment of National
Guard and reserve forces.

The quality of recruits also improved, with about 95 percent
reporting that they had received high school diplomas; last year, 83
percent of the Army's active-duty recruits had diplomas, short of the
goal of 90 percent. The active-duty Army this year admitted only 1.5
percent of recruits who scored in the lowest acceptable category on
the standard qualification test; in recent years, that figure had
reached nearly 4 percent.

Carr said strong recruitment was driven by economic conditions that
have made civilian jobs scarce, along with other factors such as pay
increases and investment in recruiting budgets.

The recession "was a force," Carr said, and, "given the unemployment
that we had not directly forecast, allowed us to be for much of the
year in a very favorable position."

Historically, there has been a strong correlation between rising
unemployment and increases in "high quality" enlistments, according
to Curt Gilroy, the Pentagon's director of accession policy.

Carr said the Defense Department spent about $10,000 on advertising,
marketing, recruiters and other budget items per recruit, with the
Army spending more than double that, at $22,000.

"The unemployment . . . left us with more dollars per recruit than
proved to be minimally necessary," he said.

Carr also credited hefty enlistment bonuses for the military's
success, saying 40 percent of recruits received an average bonus of
$14,000, compared with $12,000 on average in 2008. The size of the
bonus varied by service, with the Army, which has the toughest
mission, offering more.

Maj. Gen. Donald Campbell, head of the Army's recruiting command,
said one factor in its success was putting a large number of
recruiters on the streets.

"I think the most important thing that helps us with success, whether
you're talking money, resources, advertising, is having the right
number of recruiters, soldiers on the ground," he said.

In recent years, military officials cited the intensity of the
fighting in Iraq as dampening interest in military service among
17-to-24-year-olds and, in particular, lessening the support of
parents and other influential adults. But Pentagon officials said
earlier this year that the declining violence in Iraq had made young
people more willing to sign up.

Carr said that given the success this year, the Pentagon is cutting
its $5 billion recruiting budget by 11 percent for next year.

.

Services Show Record Recruiting Year

Services Show Record Recruiting Year

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=56209

By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 13, 2009 – The military services' active and reserve
components notched record recruiting numbers and signed up the
highest-quality recruits ever in fiscal 2009, senior defense
officials said today.

It is the first time that all active services and reserve components
met or exceeded their numerical recruiting goals and exceeded their
recruit-quality benchmarks since the start of the all-volunteer force
in 1973, Bill Carr, deputy undersecretary of defense for military
personnel policy, told Pentagon reporters.

While Carr acknowledged that the current economic downturn probably
is having a positive effect on recruiting, he also pointed to the
sterling efforts of military recruiters for the superb results and
noted the military deployed a robust bonus program in which 40
percent of recruits received an average bonus of $14,000.

The recruiting success achieved in fiscal 2009 is even more
impressive, Carr said, considering that 70 percent of today's high
school graduates – the military's target recruiting pool – go on to
college upon graduation. In the 1980s, he noted, only about half of
American high school students went on to college.

A rising propensity for young people age 17 to 24 to be obese, Carr
said, also complicates the military's recruiting mission.

"If we look back to the 1980s, one in 20 young people were obese,"
Carr said, as compared to today's ratio of 1 in 4 young people being
categorized as obese. "And, that creates a tighter constraint as you
seek to find fully qualified recruits," he added.

However, he said, the number of waivers issued to recruits with
medical or conduct issues is trending downward.

Here are the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force recruiting
results for fiscal 2009:

-- The Army had 70,045 accessions, making 108 percent of its 65,000 goal.

-- The Navy had 35,527 accessions, making 100 percent of its 35,500 goal.

-- The Marine Corps had 31,413 accessions, making 100 percent of its
31,400 goal.

-- The Air Force had 31,983 accessions, making 100 percent of its 31,980 goal.

Reserve-component recruiting results for fiscal 2009:

-- The Army National Guard had 56,071 accessions, making 100 percent
of its 56,000 goal.

-- The Army Reserve had 36,189 accessions, making 105 percent of its
34,598 goal.

-- The Navy Reserve had 7,793 accessions, making 101 percent of its
7,743 goal.

-- The Marine Corps Reserve had 8,805 accessions, making 122 percent
of its 7,194 goal.

-- The Air National Guard had 10,075 accessions, making 106 percent
of its 9,500 goal.

-- The Air Force Reserve had 8,604 accessions, making 109 percent of
its 7,863 goal.

Attrition losses in all reserve components are among the best in
recent years, officials said.

Carr also attributed current recruiting success to the "Millennial"
demographic of young people that includes those born between 1978 and
1996. Generational studies show, he said, that these young people –
who've lived during the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the
United States – are more inclined to perform public service.

Additionally, Carr said, Congress continues to provide the Defense
Department with sufficient funding to sustain the all-volunteer force.

Studies also show that young people can make a good living in the
military, Carr said, as compared to their civilian peers with
equitable workplace experience and education qualifications. Generous
pay raises provided to junior officers and mid-level noncommissioned
officers in recent years, he noted, have boosted those
servicemembers' earning capacity.

"It has been a banner year for recruiting," Curtis L. Gilroy,
director of accession policy, told American Forces Press Service and
Pentagon Channel reporters during an Oct. 9 interview at the Pentagon.

Gilroy, too, saluted the "outstanding" performance of the services'
military recruiters. His directorate is a component of the Office of
the Secretary of Defense.

Fiscal 2009's crop of recruits also represents the best quality ever,
Gilroy said, noting 96 percent of active-duty recruits and 95 percent
of reserve-component recruits possessed a high school diploma. The
Defense Department benchmark for recruits with high school diplomas
is 90 percent. Studies show, he added, that 80 percent of
servicemembers with high school diplomas complete their initial term
of service.

Gilroy said 73 percent of active recruits and 72 percent of
reserve-component recruits scored average or above average on the
Armed Forces Qualification Test. The AFQT measures an individual's
math and verbal ability, which indicates aptitude for military
service. The department sets a benchmark of 60 percent of all
recruits scoring at or above the 50th percentile on the AFQT.

"As you can see from these numbers," Gilroy said, "the services have
far exceeded those benchmarks" in fiscal 2009 for signing up recruits
with high school diplomas and those with average or better AFQT
scores. Increased capabilities demonstrated by the majority of the
nearly 300,000 active and reserve component recruits signed up in
fiscal 2009, he added, will result in higher performance in the field
and will enhance readiness.

.

Army, Air Guard Reach End-Strength Goals

Army, Air Guard Reach End-Strength Goals

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=56210

By Air Force Master Sgt. Mike R. Smith
Special to American Forces Press Service

ARLINGTON, Va., Oct. 13, 2009 – Both components of the National Guard
reached their end-strength goals for fiscal 2009, officials announced today.

The Army National Guard closed its books for 2009 with 358,391
soldiers, or 100.1 percent of its fiscal year end-strength goal of
358,200 soldiers. It also met its retention goal by retaining 36,672
soldiers, or 106 percent of its goal of 34,593.

The Air National Guard surpassed its 2009 end-strength goal with
109,196 airmen, or 102.3 percent of its goal of 106,756 airmen. The
Air Guard also retained 17,904 airmen, or 120.1 percent of its goal of 14,904.

Success for the Army Guard, officials noted, meant reducing its end
strength rather than gaining servicemembers. The Army Guard had
368,727 soldiers in March, and it needed to reduce that to a
congressionally mandated end strength of 358,200 soldiers by September.

"Never before has the Army Guard been challenged to reduce its end
strength by more than 11,000 soldiers within six months," said Army
Lt. Col. Ron Walls, chief of the strength and maintenance division at
the National Guard Bureau. The Army Guard reduced end strength while
meeting accession and retention goals. Its 56,000-soldier accession
mission was met with 56,071 soldiers, and 36,672 soldiers were
retained to meet the 34,593-soldier retention mission.

"We had to do a 'full-court press' with the 54 states and territories
in order to ensure we were successful," Walls said. "We ensured each
state could reach their end strength while maintaining retention."

Success came down to "driven, focused leadership and a committed
recruiting and retention force," he said.

Air Force Gen. Craig R. McKinley, chief of the National Guard Bureau,
made it clear that the Army Guard's end strength of 358,200 soldiers
would be met and that it would align with the states' force
structure, Walls said. A series of restrictions was placed on the
recruiting and retention force before the summer, increasing the Army
Guard's quality marks to "unprecedented levels," he added.

The Army Guard also suspended many recruiting waivers or options, and
it restricted incentive programs.

State leaders focused on end strength by placing some soldiers into
duty statuses that better described them, including those enlisted
soldiers with expired terms of service, nonvalidated pay or no
training seat reservations.

"To me, that's the best success story," Walls said. "Never before has
the Army Guard had such pure, ready formations prepared to meet
combatant commanders' needs."

For fiscal 2010, Walls said, the big challenge is constrained
resources. Providing the ability to tailor the force to meet mission
requirements will help the state adjutants general and their
recruiting and retention commanders stay competitive for recruits, he
noted. "They will successfully reach non-prior-service and
prior-service soldiers," he said.

In the states, some 3,700 Army Guard recruiters will face 2010's
recruiting challenges with fewer resources to draw applicants in the
door. Though direct mail, radio and television, local advertising and
sales brochures, giveaway items, and posters will continue, Walls
said, few, if any, new recruiting programs will be offered.

Case-by-case funding will take into account operation tempos,
requirements for certain specialties and parts of the country facing
extraordinary challenges, he said.

The Army Guard will enhance its social media programs and integrate
them with other marketing, Walls said. Depending on actual budgets,
tentative plans are to expand marketing to outdoor enthusiasts,
because research shows outdoor activities rate high among recruits.

Walls said recruiters must accomplish the same mission with
significantly fewer leads, which in the past were generated through
campaigns, but he expressed confidence that they'll succeed. "The
recruiting force is highly trained and motivated," he said. "They
will continue to meet challenges this country places on them.

"The greatest take-away from our success is not the numbers or the
mission, but it's the commitment," he continued. "We continue to have
a long line of individuals who are willing to serve their country."

Air Force Col. Mary Salcido, director of recruiting and retention for
the Air National Guard, said her recruiters made "target recruiting"
for specific jobs their top goal in 2009. The result was that the Air
Guard surpassed its end-strength goal, while adjusting manpower and
reducing shortfalls in specific skills.

Fiscal 2008 was the first time in several years that the Air Guard
had met its end-strength goal. Salcido said in 2009 the Air Guard
adjusted its synergy and efforts to put manpower exactly where it was
needed. She said the recruiting teams quickly created goals and
programs to "precision recruit."

"Recruiting the right people in the right place at the right time:
That's our theme, and that's what we did all year long," she said.

Salcido said advertising, operations, bonuses and incentives were
focused on critical Air Force specialties such as intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance, health professions, civil engineer
specialties, security forces, special tactics and the newest
total-force-initiative missions.

"When you have missions that require a lot of physical as well as
tactical skills -- such as the tactical air control party members --
those are more difficult to recruit," she said. "Your cyber missions
now require higher test scores with a lot of technology and longer
schools; those are tougher to recruit. The bonuses and the incentives
are going that way."

Planning ahead for new missions, Salcido said, Air Guard officials
have reached out to help prepare the states for the future. "We are
trying a little different mindset; we are in full coordination with
the [Air National Guard] functional organizations," she said.

The Air Guard Readiness Center recruiters reached out to the states
to evaluate recruiting programs. She said they "wanted to increase
their return on those investments."

"We put the focus where it should be: that's recruiters and
accountability," she said. "They are doing a phenomenal job. We also
involved wing-level and headquarters-level management."

Like the Army Guard, the Air Guard's budget for advertising and
recruiting programs was cut, so the Air Guard asked state recruiters
what programs should be kept. "We have found it very successful, and
I think the field is very happy," she said about the outcome.

The Guard Recruiting Assistant Program was extremely successful, she
said, bringing in at least 30 percent of Air Guard's new recruits.
And recruiting programs in general initiated considerable interest in
the Air Guard, she said, especially through social networking.

On the advertising side, Salcido said, a "more bang for the buck"
approach helps to ensure that the Air Guard remains known.

Coordination with the Army Guard at events and at recruiting centers
also helps, the colonel noted. "It's a hometown team, and that's what
we are doing," she said.

The Air Guard has about 650 recruiters and retainers across the
nation and at the National Guard Bureau. She called those recruiters
a "furious force" who operate in a high-burnout career field.

.

Military Drug Abuse: It Can't Function Without It

[4 articles]

Military Drug Abuse:
It Can't Function Without It

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september282009/military_drug_use_9-28-09.php

Dr, Phil Leveque Salem-News.com
Sep-28-2009

If the troops are not getting enough sleep and rest that they must
use these stimulants, there is something glaringly wrong with the
guys who wear stars on their shoulders.

(MOLALLA, Ore.) - The Oregonian reported this on Sept. 7, 2009. This
should surprise nobody. Recruits historically are TRAINED to use
alcohol and tobacco from their first weeks in boot camp, at least in
the Army. If it wasn't for the beer tranquilizer in the PX the
rookies probably couldn't survive psychologically the crap which is
shoveled on them.

There's gotta be some psychological escape if even for a few hours.
On hourly(?) breaks, "smokum if you gottum" is almost biblical. Ok,
do they still do that same crap now?

I'm not even writing about that stuff but the army does run on booze.
More about that later.

The Oregonian quotes Col. Erin Edgar, a physician commanding the 28th
Combat Support Hospital in Baghdad in 2006 & 2007. Where the unit
treated 2,332 cases of drug induced heart arrhythmia or fainting
spells. This is not acceptable! And much worse it is only the tip of
a much larger iceberg. Probably thousands more are using these stimulants.

The drugs were caffeine pills and ephedrine pills (junior grade METH)
both of which cause the above. In fact they both are dangerous but
the worst part is that they both are a symptom of pushing the troops
too hard just like my hated Gen. George "blood and guts" Patton did
with my gang in '44 & '45.

If a soldier must use brain and heart stimulants to comply with rear
echelon officers orders, they are being pushed beyond reasonable
limits. It just reminds me of the saying They Are Expendable. This
excessive PUSHING is responsible for the high levels of PTSD.

If the troops are not getting enough sleep and rest that they must
use these stimulants, there is something glaringly wrong with the
guys who wear stars on their shoulders.

It is well known that our troops are being pushed beyond any sensible
limits but I hear the Congress doesn't want to spend more money and
more troops to the Middle East. We will pay billions of dollars for
this wanton disregard for the troops physical and psychological well being.

The present battle zones are possibly the worst, most miserable areas
our troops have ever been in. I can understand why there are suicides
there and after the troops come home.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS has assumed a hollow insidious meaning. It is as
phoney as a three dollar bill.

I just got to the officers! I'll bet a nickel that they are not
giving up on alcohol, tobacco or anything else they want. We enlisted
men hated their guts and their two(?) bottles of booze per week.

Have things changed?? I'LL BET NOT!!!
--

Dr. Phillip Leveque has degrees in chemistry, biochemistry,
pharmacology, toxicology and minors in physiology and biochemistry.

--------

Army blasted for letting drug abusers slide

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-05-20-drug_N.htm

Updated 5/21/2009
By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON ­ Army commanders are failing to punish or seek treatment
for a growing number of soldiers who test positive for substance
abuse, possibly because they don't want to lose any more combat
troops, the Army's vice chief of staff has warned.

In a May 8 memo to commanders provided to USA TODAY, Gen. Peter
Chiarelli said hundreds of soldiers involved in "substance
abuse-related misconduct (including multiple positive urinalyses)"
were not processed for possible discharge. He also noted that many
are not referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program for help.

What "worries me the most is that commanders feel a requirement to
keep their numbers up" for combat deployments, Chiarelli said in a
meeting with top staff officers Monday. He said non-commissioned
officers told him this during visits to six Army installations
recently to examine strain on soldiers and address the record number
of suicides in the Army.

He says identifying and treating substance abuse will help improve
the Army's mental health care and curb suicides, which reached a
record 142 confirmed or suspected cases in 2008.

He found many cases where soldiers tested positive for substance more
than once, Chiarelli wrote in the memo.

At one installation where about a thousand soldiers screened positive
by urinalysis, 373 had failed the same drug test in the past, in some
cases up to seven times, says Brig Gen. Colleen McGuire, head of the
Army's Suicide Prevention Task Force. Other installations reported
similar numbers, she says.

"I am asking you to ensure that soldiers are provided the help that
they need when they need it," he told commanders in the memo, "and
that regulatory requirements regarding the referral and initiation of
separation processing of substance abusers are enforced."

In January, with 24 possible suicides, more soldiers killed
themselves than died in combat. Since March, numbers appear to be
declining, though Chiarelli cautioned against being overly optimistic.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, who introduced a bill to improve military
substance abuse treatment, says she was encouraged by Chiarelli's
action but cautioned against placing too much emphasis on punishment
over treatment.

"Army leaders seem to have finally gotten the message," says McCaskill, D-Mo.

USA TODAY reported a 25% increase in five years among soldiers
treated for substance abuse.

Military drug and alcohol counseling programs were created by
Congress in 1971 after reports of widespread drug abuse among troops
in Vietnam.

The military needs a greater understanding of substance abuse, says
Terri Tanielian, co-author of a RAND Corp. study last year into
war-related mental health and brain injury cases. "I just don't think
we know enough," she says.

Army leaders have launched several efforts to stop the rising number
of suicides, including suicide-awareness training for soldiers and
the suicide prevention task force.

Chiarelli, who oversees the efforts, is personally briefed each month
on every new suicide. He assembles top Army commanders in a Pentagon
briefing room where they receive details of each case by
video-teleconference and discuss lessons learned and possible
intervention strategies.

--------

Troops reportedly popping more painkillers

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-10-20-paindrugs_N.htm

Updated 10/21/2008
By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON ­ Narcotic pain-relief prescriptions for injured U.S.
troops have jumped from 30,000 a month to 50,000 since the Iraq war
began, raising concerns about the drugs' potential abuse and
addiction, says a leading Army pain expert.

The sharp rise in outpatient prescriptions paid for by the government
suggests doctors rely too heavily on narcotics, says Army Col.
Chester "Trip" Buckenmaier III, of Walter Reed Army Medical Center in
Washington.

By 2005, two years into the war, narcotic painkillers were the most
abused drug in the military, according to a survey that year of
16,146 servicemembers.

Among Army soldiers, 4% surveyed in 2005 admitted abusing
prescription narcotics in the previous 30 days, with 10% doing so in
the last 12 months. Researchers said the results may have been skewed
by respondents mistakenly referring to legal use of pain medication.
A 2008 survey has not been released.

"You don't have to throw narcotics at people to start managing pain,"
says Buckenmaier, who pioneered technology that eases the pain of
wounded soldiers.

Recently, at least 20 soldiers in an engineer company of 70 to 80
soldiers at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., shared and abused painkillers
prescribed for their injuries, according to court testimony.

"The groundwork for this toxic situation was laid out through the
continual prescription of highly addictive, commonly overused drugs,"
said Capt. Elizabeth Turner, the lawyer for one defendant in the case.

In response to six suicides and seven drug-related deaths among
soldiers in Warrior Transition Units ­ created for the Army's most
severely injured ­ aggressive efforts are underway to manage
prescription drugs, says Col. Paul Cordts, chief of health policy for
the Army surgeon general. These include limiting prescriptions to a
seven-day supply and more closely monitoring use.

The Army and Marine Corps are testing new dispenser machines. Located
in a barracks, the automated pillboxes emit drugs as needed and help
track consumption, says Army Col. Ike Harper, pharmacy consultant to
the surgeon general.

Pain is the most common complaint of nearly 350,000 Iraq- and
Afghanistan-era veterans treated by the Department of Veterans
Affairs, says Robert Kerns, national program director for pain
management. A study of VA health records estimates that nearly half
of those patients suffer chronic pain, severe enough in about 30% of
those cases to limit daily living.

Most suffer orthopedic injuries from the strain of long deployments,
according to a VA study.

Congress this year directed the Pentagon to develop pain care
initiatives for all its hospitals. And Buckenmaier urges creating a
research center to train doctors in better pain management.

--------

A Focus on the Effects of Dietary Supplements Among Troops in War Zones

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/07/us/07supplements.html

By JAMES DAO
Published: September 6, 2009

KANSAS CITY, Mo. ­ Alcohol and pornography are already off limits.
Smoking is being actively discouraged. What might be next on the
military's list of forbidden vices for deployed troops?

One possible target: dietary supplements used by weight lifters to
increase muscle mass.

Some military health experts say there is evidence that even the
legal over-the-counter forms of such supplements can cause heart
palpitations, loss of consciousness and death among troops,
particularly those in desert climates like Afghanistan and Iraq.

Col. Erin Edgar, a physician who commanded the 28th Combat Support
Hospital in Baghdad in 2006 and 2007, said his unit handled 2,332
cases of soldiers complaining of palpitations or fainting spells.
Twenty percent of those soldiers reported using either prescription
psychotropic drugs or performance-enhancing supplements.

In one case, Colonel Edgar said, a soldier who reported nothing more
than "feeling bad" later died, possibly of a heart attack. Though
Colonel Edgar does not know the precise cause of death, he said the
soldier's room was filled with legal performance-enhancing supplements.

While he is not prepared to advocate a ban on the products, Colonel
Edgar did call for removing them from stores on military bases. "I
just think we shouldn't create the perception of D.O.D. endorsement,"
he told participants at a conference here last week on military
health research, referring to the Department of Defense.

His view did not go over well with some in the audience. A former
Army captain, Charles R. Gatlin, said banning the supplements at
stores on bases would hurt morale without necessarily safeguarding
troops who were already in harm's way.

"All that deployed guys can do in their spare time is eat, read and
pump iron," said Mr. Gatlin, who now works for a veterans assistance
group. "Smoking, drinking and using supplements may not be very
healthy, but neither is a 90-minute firefight."

Ellen P. Embrey, the acting principal deputy assistant secretary of
defense for health affairs, who sat on a panel with Colonel Edgar,
said there were no plans to remove the supplements from base stores.
But she said the Pentagon was reviewing the products as part of a
larger study into optimizing troop performance.

The problem with supplements, Colonel Edgar said, is that they often
contain substances that can make users susceptible to heat stroke.
Many products include stimulants like caffeine or ephedrine that
increase metabolism but also raise the heart rate and blood pressure
­ not necessarily a good thing for troops in combat or a hot climate, he said.

Colonel Edgar, who is assuming leadership of the Army's 18th Medical
Command, said "elite troops," including Special Operations forces,
seem to use the supplements more cautiously and therefore have fewer
problems. He is most concerned, he said, about soldiers who take
excessive amounts of the supplements, which they view as "magic
bullets" that will make them muscle-bound overnight.

.