World Affairs Board - View Single Post

antelope · 03-22-2005, 17:07 PM

I think a large segment of those who entered the military prior to 9/11 did not take the possibility of going in combat seriously, this is especially true among those in support roles. When faced with combat these individuals seem much less prepared mentally to handle the experience. With woman disproportionately represented in this demographic I would expect higher rates of post traumatic syndrome among those who face combat stress.

In general military studies find that ALL people suffer the effects of "battle fatigue", "shell shock", or "post traumatic stress" and that in general there is a well mapped and medically understood progression of mental breakdown that can be correlated with real hours spent in real combat. The percentage of those that suffer battle fatigue has in general risen in modern time, especially during Vietnam. The reason for the rise in battle fatigue is related to a few factors. First the sheer amount of real hours a soldier spends in combat or in near combat conditions has tended to rise in modern combat since a lot less time is spent moving to the battlefield. Soldiers can be brought into battle relatively fast compared to days of yore when 99% of your time may have simply been marching there. As a result of modern medicine and safety equipment soldiers are for more likely to survive battle and return again for more battle. This therefor increases the amount of actual combat a soldier can survive thereby ushering him further down the metal process of battle fatigue. In days of yore few people physically survived enough hours of combat for battle fatigue to become a widely observed issue.

Some interesting thoughts on battle fatigue: Studies show that those with some combat but not a lot of combat tend to be the most mentally well adjusted. People with no combat experience tend to not take security and other safegards seriously. Those with some combat take these issues very seriously. With increasing combat however the safegards are taken less seriously and those with extreme hours of combat perform worse than those with no previous combat experience when it comes to soldier safegards. It would appear that "combat experience" appears to be of much value among soldiers new to combat but it appears to actually be a negative to soldier performance in time (not what is commonly believed). Those with an extreme amount of combat tend to be a danger to themselves and those around them. This group also is over represented when it comes to valor awards, which appears to some extent a result of fatalism that inhibits once instincts at self-preservation.

The human mind tends to progress in this fashion based on hours of combat: (Iwish I had the hours in combat chart---You would be surprised how rapidly people go through this)

No combat: I am special. Nothing will happen to me. I am not worried much about digging fighting positions etc. (At this point leaders need to force soldiers to perform their tasks and follow up)

Some combat: I am special. Things happen to people that don't do what I have been trained to do. If I do what I have been trained I will be fine. If I don't I could be hurt. (Soldiers at this point perform well in battle and do all things they were instructed to do. They tend to be your best soldiers.)

Some more combat: I am not special. Death in battle is a result of random factors but I can improve my odds by doing things as I have been trained. (These soldiers perform as well as the best soldiers but their mind is starting to be filled with doubts about their survival.)

Higher levels of combat: I am not special. Death in battle is an entirely random event. I do what I'm told because that's what we do but my heart isn't into building defensive positions and text book maneuver because it really doesn't make a difference. (These soldiers often are now senior NCOs and looked up to as a result of their experience. They are however often a danger to themselves. Their disdain for "the book" although trumped up to "experience" is often a result of advanced mental breakdown. These people often are not noticed as battle fatigue victims but they are.)

Extreme levels of combat: I am not special. Death is no longer random. Everyone will die. (These soldiers are heavily represented in the ranks of long war Medal of Honor winners. They tend to have no regard for their own lives when moving on the battlefield. They ignore even basic soldier safety skills. Few people live to this point. Those that do usually end of suffering "nervous breakdowns" or "shell shock". People at this point best serve the military in positions where they no longer face or are less likely to face actual enemy fire like in TOCs).

03-22-2005, 17:07 PM	#4 (permalink)
antelope Regular Join Date: 12-27-04 Posts: 99	I think a large segment of those who entered the military prior to 9/11 did not take the possibility of going in combat seriously, this is especially true among those in support roles. When faced with combat these individuals seem much less prepared mentally to handle the experience. With woman disproportionately represented in this demographic I would expect higher rates of post traumatic syndrome among those who face combat stress. In general military studies find that ALL people suffer the effects of "battle fatigue", "shell shock", or "post traumatic stress" and that in general there is a well mapped and medically understood progression of mental breakdown that can be correlated with real hours spent in real combat. The percentage of those that suffer battle fatigue has in general risen in modern time, especially during Vietnam. The reason for the rise in battle fatigue is related to a few factors. First the sheer amount of real hours a soldier spends in combat or in near combat conditions has tended to rise in modern combat since a lot less time is spent moving to the battlefield. Soldiers can be brought into battle relatively fast compared to days of yore when 99% of your time may have simply been marching there. As a result of modern medicine and safety equipment soldiers are for more likely to survive battle and return again for more battle. This therefor increases the amount of actual combat a soldier can survive thereby ushering him further down the metal process of battle fatigue. In days of yore few people physically survived enough hours of combat for battle fatigue to become a widely observed issue. Some interesting thoughts on battle fatigue: Studies show that those with some combat but not a lot of combat tend to be the most mentally well adjusted. People with no combat experience tend to not take security and other safegards seriously. Those with some combat take these issues very seriously. With increasing combat however the safegards are taken less seriously and those with extreme hours of combat perform worse than those with no previous combat experience when it comes to soldier safegards. It would appear that "combat experience" appears to be of much value among soldiers new to combat but it appears to actually be a negative to soldier performance in time (not what is commonly believed). Those with an extreme amount of combat tend to be a danger to themselves and those around them. This group also is over represented when it comes to valor awards, which appears to some extent a result of fatalism that inhibits once instincts at self-preservation. The human mind tends to progress in this fashion based on hours of combat: (Iwish I had the hours in combat chart---You would be surprised how rapidly people go through this) No combat: I am special. Nothing will happen to me. I am not worried much about digging fighting positions etc. (At this point leaders need to force soldiers to perform their tasks and follow up) Some combat: I am special. Things happen to people that don't do what I have been trained to do. If I do what I have been trained I will be fine. If I don't I could be hurt. (Soldiers at this point perform well in battle and do all things they were instructed to do. They tend to be your best soldiers.) Some more combat: I am not special. Death in battle is a result of random factors but I can improve my odds by doing things as I have been trained. (These soldiers perform as well as the best soldiers but their mind is starting to be filled with doubts about their survival.) Higher levels of combat: I am not special. Death in battle is an entirely random event. I do what I'm told because that's what we do but my heart isn't into building defensive positions and text book maneuver because it really doesn't make a difference. (These soldiers often are now senior NCOs and looked up to as a result of their experience. They are however often a danger to themselves. Their disdain for "the book" although trumped up to "experience" is often a result of advanced mental breakdown. These people often are not noticed as battle fatigue victims but they are.) Extreme levels of combat: I am not special. Death is no longer random. Everyone will die. (These soldiers are heavily represented in the ranks of long war Medal of Honor winners. They tend to have no regard for their own lives when moving on the battlefield. They ignore even basic soldier safety skills. Few people live to this point. Those that do usually end of suffering "nervous breakdowns" or "shell shock". People at this point best serve the military in positions where they no longer face or are less likely to face actual enemy fire like in TOCs).