It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'One in five US servicemen has brain injury'

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   

'One in five US servicemen has brain injury'


www.telegraph.co.uk

The psychological toll of America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has touched one in five servicemen and its consequences will be long-lasting, a study suggested yesterday.
The Rand Corporation, a leading research operation, said that 320,000 soldiers suffered brain injuries on the battlefield, while more than 300,000 suffered mental disorders on returning home.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.blacklistednews.com




posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I thought this a very important story about our soldiers. This is a staggering number IMO. All these guys and gals coming home with brain injuries and mental disorders.
I wonder how well the government is going to help these soldiers out once they return home. Withe Vet benefits being slashed, I don't see the outlook being good. This should be very concerning to both the soldiers and their families.
I hope those of us in the medical field will be able to provide the help that they need.
Another thing this points out is the long term effects of these injuries and psychological consequences. think about this when it comes to John McCain who was actually held as a POW for many years. Don't you think he has some long term effects from his ordeal? The fact that this guy may be in the White House is really disturbing to me. He has a short fuse as we have already seen in many instances. To give this guy ultimate power would keep the US in our current state for quite awhile IMO. I do not think it would be the best thing for us at this time. I am sure he has a lot of pent up anger that he wants to get out.

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Looking a bit deeper - it also represents 1 in 5 service members who will never be law abiding gun owners in the country they defended.

www.newswithviews.com...

www.govtrack.us...


CX

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I think there are pros and cons to having vetarans full stop in power.

Yes, military experience can be a valuable tool when dealing with defence issues, then again there can be benefits to not being all "gung ho" and wading into every conflict going. Some vets are so set in thier ways, they won't be swayed by "civillian input".

Then again, Bush dodged his service didn't he?....look at how he's acted since he got in


As far as McCain is concerned, it would be interesting to find out whether or not he had any kind of treatment after his time as a POW?

If so, would this constitute the same kind of treatment for a mental disorder that we are discussing here? If it does, should he be allowed to run for president at all?

Combat related PTSD has such a broad spectrum, with symptoms ranging from the very mild to very severe. Like someone here has said, a stay in a POW camp could harbour some resentment for some people?

Then again, you could apply that theory to anything on the political agenda. A presidential candidate could have had a run in with the cops in the past, this could mean he could make things difficult for cops if he got into power.

If McCain did receive treatment as a POW survivor, theres a good chance it could have been PTSD related. So he may be fine now, and able to run for president, but does that mean that vets who recover from PTSD can reapply for a gun?

I doubt it, but you know what i'm getting at.

I'd like to see how they decided that vets with PTSD could'nt own firearms. Is there a criteria of symptoms that you have to display before getting the ban, or is the label of "PTSD sufferer" a blanket statement for a ban?

The reason i ask is because some of the symptons of PTSD can include depression, anxiety, hyperviligance and a whole range of other symptoms. However, i know civillians with no link to the forces whatsoever with these same sypmtoms. Does that mean they'd be banned from owning a gun too?

Before you know it, the gun ban will aply to everyone who has ever had an anti-depressant from the doctor.

Don't get me wrong, i CAN understand why some vets with PTSD should not be allowed a gun, but not every sufferer is the same.

I also know PTSD sufferers that i'd trust more with a gun than half the legal gun owners, law enforcement and military personnel. Many would love to participate in sports involving firearms, and thier PTSD does not hinder this, however they are now restricted.

Anyone find it funny that they are banning vets with PTSD from owning guns, yet they are giving soldiers PTSD counselling and sending them back into combat!!! Thats not my opinion, i was told that by a guy who is head of "Combat Stress - Ex-Servicemans Mental Welfare Service" here in the UK.

Thats right, use the vets whilst there are wars to be fought, no matter how screwed up they end up.......then crap on them from a great height once they are out!

Edit to add: IMO, when you look at the way they are taking away the rights of the people of the US, i think the gun ban for vets is just a way of making sure that the people who know how to use a gun to it's best ability, have'nt got one when the SHTF.

Martial law will be easy if the people who know how to use a firearm.....haven't got one.

CX.



[edit on 20/4/08 by CX]


CX

posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Not sure if it's been discussed on ATS before, but this find is worthy of a thread on PTS i think......

John McCain's suicide attempt and his resulting PTSD

An interesting read. Especially when thinking about voting for a future president.

CX.



posted on Apr, 20 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by CX
 

Thanks for the link. Too bad PTS is no more. Definitely a good read as you said. I agree that people thinking of McCain should read it. I will be passing that along.


KMFNWO:

Yeah. I wonder who decided on that rule and what considerations were taken when they came up with it. I guess they will do whatever they want to our vets. even if it includes taking rights away. More sad though is the lack of health benefits.



new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join