Locked, Loaded and Looney - New York Times
As the Army’s suicide rate hits record levels in the Iraq war…
Here is another example of how the leftwing media lies by omission and context at the same time.
Parse the sentence: “Suicide rates….in the Iraq war…record highs… ”
The takeaway the propagandists writing this piece hope that unwary readers receive is that, thanks to the pacification in Iraq, more Army members than ever before in history are committing suicide, and this is a terrible problem that demonstrates how horrible the Iraqi pacification is for our soldiers..
That is, of course, bullshit of the purest ray serene.
In the first place, we are talking about a grand total of 28 suicides in the Afghan and Iraqi theaters combined. Second, the current Army suicide rate is the highest in the past 26 years, not in history, and the overall rate of 17.3 per 100,000 is not much greater than the suicide rate for all Americans at 11.1 per 100,000, and less than the rate for US males at 17.7 or white US males at 19.6.
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
Stats be damned.. my buddy in the army has told me that one of the big secrets is how many people have capped themselves over there (and trust me, he’s no liberal propagandist). Not to mention the increased suidice rates we see from returning vets…
As terrible as it is, I can’t say that it surprised me that the suicide rate would be higher among soldiers fighting in a war. War is incredibly stressful and even our soldiers who are well-trained and highly capable are going to have difficulties. In addition, returning war veterans must acclimate themselves to civilian society and that can also be difficult.
Rather than gloating over this, I wish the medi would call for more help for soldiers who are suffering from stress.
Though as you point out, the rate isn’t all that high and the actual numbers are small enough that random variation can cause big changes in the percentage.
EI
Im glad that you have an acceptable level of suicides.
Left wing looneys on the rampage once again.
Well ME, I don’t trust you. Either you, or your buddy are making up “big secrets”. There is no big secret. The suicide numbers are what they are. Even the NYT doesn’t question the numbers, they just try to spin it to be the worst ever.
happywash, what exactly is your plan to reduce the suicide rate? Bill didn’t call it acceptable. He called the NYT on their dishonest reporting.
Well, since you put it that way, of course I do. Because, unlike yourself, I am rational, and I understand that desirable things have costs. It is my job as a rational person to weigh the costs against the benefits and decide what is acceptable.
Which is why the whole “If it saves one (child, soldier, life) is such utter horseshit. So is dumbassery about “acceptable levels of suicide,” as if any level is unacceptable. Yes, there will be suicides among those fighting to defend us in foreign theaters, even if those levels are lower than males here at home not in the military. But would I forgo a military defense entirely to prevent, say, six suicides? (A horseback guess about suicide rates in a peacetime vs. wartime military….)
No, I wouldn’t. And if you would, you are an idiot.
One thing not mentioned here is the fact that to meet recruiting goals, the armed forces have lowered many standards with regard to age, physical condition, mental issues, etc…Why is that not mentioned? If you put unstable people in an unstable environment, you would expect lots of bad things to happen. BTW, when we start the war with Iran, more and more sub-standard recruits will be filling the ranks. Doesn’t that make you proud? it shouldn’t.
What are waiting for then?
How profound. Did you think that up all by yourself?
Iran is already at war with the US but most here haven’t figured that out yet.
First, cite please. I don’t believe your unsupported “facts.”
Second, just think what the standards would be like if the left - that’s you, friend - got its wish and managed to impose a military draft!
28 suicides - which perhaps represents at max six more than would occur in a peacetime military - are not “lots.”
How proud you must be to hate the country - America - that has given you so much. Perhaps you should emigrate to Iran, so you could help them defend themselves against our “aggression.” You know, sort of put your dick where your mouth is.
Yeah, we got linked from Salon.
How proud you must be to hate the country - America - that has given you so much. Perhaps you should emigrate to Iran, so you could help them defend themselves against our “aggression.” You know, sort of put your dick where your mouth is. - the sophmoric words of Bill Quick
Bill you are a moron - and i would like to see someone cite something, anything. as it stands everyone is just lobbing their desire and hate. grow the f*ck up!
“Our brave fighting dsoldiers” are a prop used by Conservatives for political purposes.
Period.
That’s music to my ears, Bill. But, do be careful - Clayton’s ‘creature’ might still be lurking about!
I’ll bet you couldn’t explain what you just wrote if your life depended on it. Is school out for the day already?
Dear ubfuckwit:
I realize that a lefty of your age isn’t very conversant with this internet/HTML thingy yet - given that your head is wedged too firmly in your fundament to try something much newer than push-button phones and Vietnam-war logic - but would it be too fucking much to ask you to read my original post, and note the two supporting cites therein?
You imbecilic dumbass.
ibfamous is clearly upset by all this lobbing and is going to take the high road with a citation, right?
Nice. Who’s the moron?
I’ll take that bet.
How much $$ you want to ut up?
Does you life depend on it?
No. (good point)
We’ll all just have to live with the fact that it’s true.
How proud you must be to hate the country - America - that has given you so much. Perhaps you should emigrate to Iran, so you could help them defend themselves against our “aggression.” You know, sort of put your dick where your mouth is.
But no mention of how your glorious idiot in chief has created the massive mess. Not a word from you about that, huh? You shrill at loyal americans (me) and not a word about your worship of an imbecile. If you got your job wrong time and time again, you would be out of a job, no? For you to not appear foolish, you must start at the beginning and defend the invasion. if you cannot defend the invasion of a soverign nation, then STFU! Calling loyal citizens names to distract you from your witless devotion to the administration says to me that it is you who should go where they have kings and monarchs - not a democracy. Your president has ruined the reputation and treasury of YOUR country - and all you can do is yell at me? Recruiting goals are not being met consistently, recruits are allowed to have many issues which would have in the past kept them from being accepted, unstable people are being handed weapons and bads things will happen. If you have any semblance of loyalty to the country and constitution, you have not shown it with your words and ideas. You have shown the planet that you will walk lock step with Bush to the end of time - probably killing your own family if W said to. We call folks like you robots for good reason - its because YOU have no reason, only devotion to Bush.
You babbling ignoramus. This site has been in the forefront, loud and long, in its massive criticism of GWB’s flaps and flops, mis-directions and non-directions, in his pursuit of the War on Terror and the Iraqi pacification in particular.
And we’ve been doing it for nearly four years.
Loyal Americans (it’s capitalized, snotwit) think we are “starting a war” with Iran?
Smart, rational folks call you ninnies deranged because, well, you’re nuts. And, really, not very bright, either. Really.
Alright, Robert, I’ll bite. Here’s a question for you. Let’s say our “Our brave fighting dsoldiers”* are some kind of prop for political purposes, whatever that means**. Do Liberals not use “Our brave fighting dsoldiers” as some kind of prop for political purposes?
*I’m repeating your use of quotations here rather than simply quoting you. Why do you use quotes here?
**The phrase “A prop for political purposes” is quite vague and could mean just about anything the reader desires. Maybe that was your intention? To say something without any definite meaning?
Damn, Bill. I keep forgetting I can’t go back and edit my own comments for silly grammatical errors and such. Clayton, is there anyway that feature can be implemented? If it already is, my apologies.
I’ll “ut” up ten cents, which is no doubt more than your prospective explanation will turn out to be worth, but so be it.
Now explain what you think you mean by:
Conservtives care about the military, not the people who makeup the military.
Every chance they get to reduce funding for Veteran’s benefits (so they won’t have to rase taxes on their real contituents) they will do so.
But they do have the yellowest magnets on their cars than anyone.
If you read the New York Times, MotherJones or the like, you can get the impression the Army lowered standards, because that’s what their headlines scream. If you look at Defense Undersecretary Chu’s remarks to reporters contesting that claim, it’s a different story.
The Army divides all passing scores on its vocational aptitude test into four categories, cat one being the highest, and four the lowest. Congress set a limit of 25% of recruits from category four, but the Army has limited it to 2%. They have adjusted that upward to a whopping 4% from cat-4.
All the services grant waivers for prior felony and serious misdemeanor convictions, based on individual circumstances. For all the services, the waivers increased from 6,000 to 8,000, out of 300,000 recruits signed up annually.
Those two changes were reported breathlessly by the NY Times and repeated by MotherJones, as a reduction in recruiting standards, when it’s nothing of the sort.
For those who don’t know what a cite is, here’s one for Undersecretary Chu’s remarks:
http://www.army.com/articles/item/2155
Lovely. Where do I start?. How about this? The military is the people that make up the military. Tanks don’t drive and fire without people. Planes don’t fly and fight without people. Do you have any idea how silly your statement is?
Here’s something for you to chew on. Do you think a seasoned soldier or Marine thinks he or she needs to be cared for? The only thing our military people want from you, Robert, and everyone else in this country is to believe in them and their mission. That’s what support the troops means. They can take care of themselves just fine, thank you.
This is absolutely senseless.
Really? Smoke this:
FactCheck.org: Funding for Veterans up 27%, But Democrats Call It A Cut
So much for that.
Gibberish. Try again. On second thought, don’t bother.
Loyal Americans (it’s capitalized, snotwit) think we are “starting a war” with Iran?
Smart, rational folks call you ninnies deranged because, well, you’re nuts. And, really, not very bright, either. Really.
And again, nothing of any substance. Nothing. You rant because of my grammar? that’s it? that’s all you got? Maybe that explains your devotion to Bush and his henchmen? Anything other than playground taunts are too sophisticated for you to consider. Keep it real simple and elementary. Ok, I get it now. And BTW, the neocons desperately want a war with Iran AND Syria. If you read at all - not Archie comics - then you would already know this. You, and those like you, are witness to the ruining of our great nation, all for the love of all hat and no cattle ‘Lil bush’. How very sad for you and your family.
What’s the issue. Both stories state that its a record in 26 years in the first pargraph, the WAPO in the title.
Its 99 deaths across the army, 28 in Iraq and Afghanistan and the stories refer to a record Army wide, not just in Iraq. They compare it to a 2001 low of 9. Big difference when you cherry pick, right?
The nationwide suicide rate is 11.3, small difference from 17.3? The Army rate is over 50% more, since when is that small?
Why not pick some of the smaller numbers on the rate list like non-white males, 9.3 or the young (15-24), 10.4% or Hispanic at 5.3%
This is pitiful.
Maybe that explains your devotion to Bush and…
Any particular reason for repeating yourself after having been told that the Proprietor is not a Bushie?
(if you had been reading this site longer than one lousy day, you wouldn’t be making this mistake)
At one time the VA made home loans not just guaranteed them. At one time the VA made small business loans. At one time the VA paid for private pilot training since it is required to get commercial pilot training. At one time the GI Bill paid all tuition and books as well as giving a monthly stipend for college. This All changed under Jimmy (the geek) Carter. This explains why Vets dislike the freak.
Nope, he’s got this:
You see Tom, with those words, you’ve shown that, in addition to being nuts and not very bright, you haven’t done your homework.
How true (you didn’t really mean to say that, did you?)
It sure is. These statistics are worse than useless for a number of reasons. Here’s a question to illustrate: What is the Army suicide rate compared to other professions?
I visit this site quite a bit. I don’t post in it very much, but I do read what you folks have to say. I appreciate the proprietor not being a loyal ‘bushie’, but the population who posts here are normally on the war monger side of the issues. That said, the whole issue here is one of making sure we have the most prepared and trained soldiers as possible. If the suicides are increasing, and these are only the ones we learn of - there are more than we are told, that should be a concern if you also value a strong fighting force. That position is not partisan. it is sensible. Rather than stating any concern for those brave men and women fighting for the USA, my commenter had nothing useful to offer except name calling and jabs. A childish reaction to a post. And yes, I meant what I wrote concerning the ruination of our country. It is happening before our eyes. By most estimations, it will take at least 20 years to rebuild lost trust and relationships around the world. All for what? In my opinion, it is the devotion to Bush which has brought this to our nation. The nation must back the constitution - not an individual. For most posters here, it appears to me that they want a king, not a democracy. That to me is sad. See I can make a point without resorting to playground rants, can you?
Alfred centauri
” The only thing our military people want from you and everyone else in the country is to believe in them, and their mission”
WRONG PAL.
The one thing the Military people wants from Americans is to HONOR their duty by giving them a mission they can accomplish. You people on the right keep on asking the Army to carry the water for your failed policies. You comment alone reflects that tendency of passing the buck of responsibility so typical on the Right.
Your mental gymanstics are incredible. The Army people that has seen all the mistakes by Rumsfeld, and the Neo Cons, fully understand the price to be paid in their blood; when your so called “mission”, becomes mission impossible. Or do you seriously believe that this latest surge will give Iraq the political compromises needed to get any peace? The Army can’t make Iraqi Shiite, Sunni, and Kurds stop fighting among themselves. The Army surge can’t force Iraqi politicians to make the compromises Bush talked about as the very reason for the surge.
The best the Army can do is to try to hold violence back for the duration of the surge. And then what Right wingers????? NO PLAN B AS USUAL. Only spin and calls for more time.
What’s your plan for AFTER the surge???? Who holds the gained terrain??? Who forces the compromises on the Iraqi politician??? Who stops the thousand year old hatred among Shiite and Sunni????
……… OH I forgot, as usual in the Right WIng mind is….. The U.S. Army of course, they can do it all !!!!!! Hey, with an Army like that, what do we need idiot Right Wing Politicians in the first place …. All we Americans need to do is get a Chimp from the zoo to come up with some “mission” for the Army, and have them win the war for you, regardless if the so called “mission” can be realistically be accomplished or not.
Hey, at lest the Chimp will work for peanuts and will provably be smarter than Bush.
I stopped reading right there. What part about believing in them didn’t you get? What part about believing in their mission didn’t you get? Do you not see that your very words nicely served to prove my point?*
*That’s what’s called a rhetorical question
OK, but then you said:
Then why did you post? What did you expect? Let’s review. You said: “I visit this site quite a bit”. Then, it follows that you have seen responses to posts like yours. You do the math.
Then why did you post? What did you expect? Let’s review. You said: “I visit this site quite a bit”. Then, it follows that you have seen responses to posts like yours. You do the math.
Because every once in a while I find a sensible citizen who is interested in opposing views and comments. You remind me of the father who simply yells at his kid - no empathy, no reasoning - just loud, obnoxious ranting. If you want a blog where everybody salutes your point of view, where everybody is waiting on your every word, where its my way or the highway, then you got it. Rant away! Your position reminds me of bush in that he can only hear what he expects, and wants, to hear. No opposing views, no nuance, no facts he is not prepared to accept. yeah, I guess it make sense that you would follow him over any cliff. Geez, you make me so sad. I really touched a nerve in you, huh?
Compare:
And…
My “glorious idiot in chief?”
Jebus, could you at least try to keep your bullshit straight?
And if you don’t like the tone here, you know where the door is.
I’m closing comments on this post, as I usually do when Salon links. I can only tolerate so much lame bullshit and stupidity from the left on any given day, and this is way over my limit.