Understanding our wartime experiences...

[JMA]

Mark,
A trip to the morgue or slaughterhouse is not sufficient - we do it all the time with new and old technicians and LEOs. The absence of blood and disgusting smell makes the morgue a walk in the park. Even physically shooting a cow in the head and then cutting it open to bleed out is no big deal.

Let's say you watched and helped remove over 4,000 dead people a day in Goma in 40 degree temps. Totally disgusting, but nothing you take personally. Now, come in to work at 0600 and find a young Marine with a single .357 round to the head - a young man you personally knew - that picture never leaves your mind.

No book nor training can prepare a soldier for that day. In 91 they sent us a shrink from Brazzaville to see if we were dealing with the situation. I retrieved him in our Boston Whaler and in true form, the Zairois were blazing rounds in every direction. I think I made it half way across when the shrink insisted I take him back

My hat is off to medics and firefighters.

OK Stan, I'm with you on this but would like to leave the door open for those with ideas for preexposure 'conditioning' to sound off.

My point is that as long as this 'exposure' does not inhibit the soldiers ability and/or willingness to engage the enemy aggressively and with purpose and that any adverse effect (if any) is felt some time after the exposure is probably why we did not bother ourselves about it.

Yes also to the difference between their dead and our dead... and civilians (with the Israeli proviso "if not combatants, certainly not civilians" considered). As you (I'm sure) appreciate it all gets rather complicated, depending on the 'who, what, when where, how'. Each of us have our own level of squeamishness in this regard... and once again does it adversely effect the soldiers ability to function and if so what (if anything) can/should be done about it?

Yes the emergency services people see some sights! Wonder if they do anything about it?

[carl]

OK Stan, I'm with you on this but would like to leave the door open for those with ideas for preexposure 'conditioning' to sound off.

Is there any preexposure training done now anywhere that combines live fire, burning vehicles with animals in them, shattered animal bodies, explosions, simulated casualties and manuevering (sic)? I will defer to you guys if it would do any good but I am just curious if it is being done.

Yes the emergency services people see some sights! Wonder if they do anything about it?

When emergency services people show up they have something urgent to do and stay busy until it is done. When their task is completed they leave. Most of them sign up for that work because they like the action and probably have psychologically prepared themselves beforehand. That doesn't mean they won't be affected by the more extreme things but the combination of almost always having something to do on the scene and suitability for the work may be important to dealing with regular exposure to bad things.

[carl]

JMA:

McDonough's words you cited are very important. They say that not only is the leader responsible for the men at the time he has command, he is in a sense responsible for their well being years into the future. By that I mean the ill effects of unrestrained descent into savagery may not be felt until a time in the future, maybe well into the future, and the leader can protect his men from those effects by making them comport themselves in ways they may not want to comport themselves at the time.

Is that responsibility for the future, as I see it anyway, stressed in officer training do you know?

[JMA]

JMA:

McDonough's words you cited are very important. They say that not only is the leader responsible for the men at the time he has command, he is in a sense responsible for their well being years into the future. By that I mean the ill effects of unrestrained descent into savagery may not be felt until a time in the future, maybe well into the future, and the leader can protect his men from those effects by making them comport themselves in ways they may not want to comport themselves at the time.

Is that responsibility for the future, as I see it anyway, stressed in officer training do you know?

Under the Brit regimental system the regiment acknowledges it has a duty of care towards their fellow members. Some more so than others and young subalterns eagerly look forward to returning the their parent regiment to command a company and as a long shot command a battalion. Today's troopie or squaddie (as they call them) maybe a corporal or sergeant when the first return and if they make it to command a battalion may be a sergeant major. One should not underestimate the strength of the regimental bonds that develop within these British regiments.

They tend to look after their own.

Para quits over troop treatment. A WAR hero Para chief is quitting the Army in disgust over the “appalling” and “shoddy” treatment of troops, it was revealed yesterday.

Then they do this stuff:

The Parachute Regiment Afghanistan Trust

The Parachute Regiment Charity

Note: Lt Col Tootal's action falls under the category of moral courage.

[carl]

JMA & Stan and anybody:

One of the things Marlantes mentioned in the first chapter of his book was remote control warfare, drones shooting Hellfires and killing people while being controlled by people literally on the other side of the world. He said something about those people not having a transformative psychological experience and this causing a psychic split. Is he worrying about something that isn't there? Maybe that is as jarring an experience as infantry combat but I have never read that drone drivers suffer problems as do people in face to face combat. I don't know but do artillerymen and sailors suffer from psychological troubles as much as men who kill people they can see and see as individual people? That would be an analog to drone drivers perhaps.

He also mentioned American long range aircraft aircrew having problems because they could fly combat missions and afterward go home to their families for dinner. That concern may be from only viewing recent American experience. Almost all our air fighting has been done by expeditionary forces on a limited tour of some kind. If you look at other countries, South Vietnam for example, it was normal for pilots to live at home and while flying combat missions, for years.

(If you want to provoke a storm of letters to the editor in Stars and Stripes, run an article suggesting Nevada based drone drivers are exposed to as much stress as guys downrange.)

[Fuchs]

One of the things you can study on a Bundeswehr university is IIRC psychology.
Maybe this combination yields some useful theories based to the Northern Afghanistan combat experiences.

[JMA]

One of the things you can study on a Bundeswehr university is IIRC psychology.
Maybe this combination yields some useful theories based to the Northern Afghanistan combat experiences.

And access to this data is gained how?

If so will there be a language barrier?

[JMA]

When emergency services people show up they have something urgent to do and stay busy until it is done. When their task is completed they leave. Most of them sign up for that work because they like the action and probably have psychologically prepared themselves beforehand. That doesn't mean they won't be affected by the more extreme things but the combination of almost always having something to do on the scene and suitability for the work may be important to dealing with regular exposure to bad things.

I suggest that one should look at what these 'emergency services' people do to people do to prepare their new guys for the sights and sounds that await them.

Remember too that there is a mix of experience in these 'teams', not all, like so many military units, are straight out of training with no operational experience.

Big difference!

[carl]

I suggest that one should look at what these 'emergency services' people do to people do to prepare their new guys for the sights and sounds that await them.

Remember too that there is a mix of experience in these 'teams', not all, like so many military units, are straight out of training with no operational experience.

Big difference!

Great point, that I didn't think of, about the mix of experience on teams. A new police officer is paired with an experienced officer for months before they are on their own. I don't know how the fire dept and EMTs do it but I imagine they are similar.

In my limited experience the police do nothing at all specific to prepare the people for sights and sounds beyond war stories related during training.

[JMA]

Great point, that I didn't think of, about the mix of experience on teams. A new police officer is paired with an experienced officer for months before they are on their own. I don't know how the fire dept and EMTs do it but I imagine they are similar.

In my limited experience the police do nothing at all specific to prepare the people for sights and sounds beyond war stories related during training.

Here's an example of this from the Aussies:

“In August 1942 the 39th and 53rd Battalions of the Australian Militia, composed of 18 year old conscripts, collided with a Japanese brigade advancing south across Papua New Guinea’s Kokoda Trail. The 53rd battalion turned and ran. The 39th battalion, which a few weeks earlier had received an influx of experienced officers and NCO’s, stood its ground and over the next month fought the Japanese to a standstill. This action is regarded as a test in laboratory conditions of the impact of leadership on fighting performance.” - Serve to Lead

Then from that great source of wisdom, Von Schell in the booklet 'Battle Leadership' (available from the Marine Corps Association for $9.95):

At the beginning of a war new troops will be recruited and trained in all countries and naturally will enter into combat later than the active troops - frequently months later. If we give these inexperienced troops a backbone of experienced soldiers and experienced commanders their efficiency will be tremendously increased and they will be spared heavy losses.

This is so obvious that the question must really be why it has not been addressed before everywhere.

[carl]

You know now that I think about it, airlines do the same thing, putting experienced pilots with new guys. In fact I think there are regulations governing that, though it has been so long since I've been in the airline world I don't know for sure. You never ever put two pilots new to an airplane type or airline ops together if you can help it.

[Steve Blair]

Another thing that can be overlooked is how you mix those new troops with veterans. There's a fair amount of evidence that doing this mixing while a unit is in combat is a bad idea if it can possibly be avoided (drawn from World War 2 comparisons of practices in Europe and the Pacific by US forces and Vietnam).