I see the why of what you are doing and I, like I am sure many vets, appreciate it. That being said, it still gets a bit old when all I see on TV, in the Movies, Media, etc...are vets who are jacked up, especially when a majority of the ones on the news turn out to be fakes. The comment was not meant for you directly, it was more aimed the media in general and we tend to get portrayed as either victims or borderline criminal thugs, it just gets old and part of it I think is due to the fact that so few people know anyone in the service, have joined the service or take the time to read on it.
The overwhelming majority of vets come out of the service fine, I know I am going to take heavies for this but it has to be said-TBI is being diagnosed for anyone who falls down now, MST? Terrible that it happens at all but it is not anything like the rampant numbers that the media portrays. PTSD? It is such a wide array of symptoms that I find it hard to say that because someone has PTSD they won't be ok either via treatment, that the Signs and Symptoms were very mild, etc....yet it often is played out as being debilitating for life.
I want the folks who need help to get it but it does us no favors when we get portrayed in the manner we often due and it is usually due to ignorance in the press, at the TV Stations or in Hollywood.
Again, thanks Mr. Trudeau, just me griping about the media in general and wish more journalists and other members of the media would read "Stolen Valor" to give some perspective.

It was thoughtful of Garry Trudeau to take the time to explain what motivates and inspires him in his work and I thank him for that. Again as I previously said any thing that widens the public’s knowledge of the sacrifices that people in the armed forces make on our behalf is a worthwhile enterprise.

There are many professions with high levels of stress that can produce debilitating side effects. They include police, fire, emergency personnel, medical staff’s in trauma units, even some professions unrelated to violence such as business can cause dramatic nervous collapse and I have witnessed it. But we usually unlike troops don’t think of these people as victims.

Serving troops and veterans have a job and all pay a certain price in doing that job. But they are not debilitated victims, as some would have us believe for what I believe are their own motives. Instead, they are people just like you and I who may need some help and understanding but not pity.

Many if not most on Tom’s forum are more aware of the inside details of military training and preparation for deployments than myself. My information comes indirectly via the presence of my boy in the service. His view is that stress (in his case aggravated by a lack of sleep) is inevitable but it is exacerbated by the insufficient preparation of the troops. He believes that generally their training is totally unsatisfactory and lacks severity, hardness and rigor. He firmly believes that the armed forces are not demanding enough in training to toughen body and mind for the potential of deployment tension and combat. It would seem that if this is true then the armed services have some explaining to do about their standards of preparing troops for service and how that contributes to PTSD and other stress conditions.

I don't usually read Doonesbury. The subject matter is usually heavier than I'm used to seeing in comic strip form.

But, for whatever reason, I was drawn into following the Melissa character. I think it's because the character tells a story that I never really heard told in the Army (outside of court-martial testimony, that is). I like how the storyline explores how the female Soldiers change the culture of their units and how they perceive and react to those changes.

When deployed, I noticed that what few female Soldiers I saw projected more influence than normally enabled by their rank or billet. Some wielded this influence effectively, some didn't. But, with the MST story, Melissa shows how both edges of the sword cut. I like how, even though it's a veteran's story, it isn't all positive. The tone of her reactions and speech rings true.

And, the truth is, many victims of MST don't really recover. I don't have any statistics, but if I did, I'd have a lot of doubt regarding their accuracy. How do you define a 'recovery' from MST? What defines a confirmed report of an MST? After having seen a couple of these cases first-hand, I can say that these are definitely under-reported.

I guess it's kind of funny on a different scale: The only character out of the whole strip I really paid attention too was the female Soldier, just like those other guys sneaking looks in the DFAC. I'm sure she wouldn't be surprised, huh?

between highlighting the important issues veterans face, such as ptsd, tbi and mst, and creating stereotypes of those veterans? It seems like everything in the media is either rah rah, we support our troops nonsense or stories about how messed up veterans are.

Trudeau is right, but his northeastern liberal audience is likely to take his message the wrong way. I get the feeling his cartoons engender in his crowd feelings of pity and worse, "otherness." As if we're starving Africans. Nonetheless, I have a sneaking suspicion that this same liberal guilt motivates left-leaning pols to spend more money of veterans benefits and the VA, so I'm not complaining!

as he is one of the few national voices who is aware not just of the ongoing conflicts the nation is engaged in, but of the courage, humanity and sacrifice of the volunteer military. Congratulations also on his ability to tell these critical stories without a political agenda. I think that these strips over the past 10 years collectively represent the finest work of his career. The fact that he has not yet won another Pulitzer during this time is simply puzzling.

Now, does he paint with a broad brush or sometimes gloss over fine distinctions? Of course he does... he is writing a %$#'ing comic strip!

(this last sentence is designed to be read in a screaming Lewis Black voice)

There are some really meaningful portrayals of warfare in the comics medium, and it goes a lot further than Bill Mauldin or Beetle Bailey. Joe Kubert, himself a WWII veteran, worked on a strip called "Tales of the Green Berets" during the 1960's. The series was inspired by Robin Moore, who even wrote a couple of strips. Kubert is probably best known for his long-running tenure on another series-- "SGT Rock." He recently revisited Vietnam with the stark graphic novel "Dong Xiao: 1965." He did the story as pencil sketches to express the ambiguity in the memories of the men who were there and retold their story. It's powerful stuff.

Emmanuel Guibert, who recently died, also made some unique contributions. Though French, he befriended an American expatriate who stayed in France after the war. The resulting story, "Alan's War," is a unique story in that it's a story about an American told from a very un-American (but not anti-American) perspective. He also did a book on Afghanistan, titled "The Photographer."

There are lots of other great titles. Those are the ones that stood out from my reading. But war has always been a subject of serious treatment that comics writers and artists have felt isn't "too heavy" for the medium. It makes for a unique presentation when they make a sincere attempt at it.

this blog.

Just sayin'.

It seems pretty obvious how the military could strengthen the body. How, though, does one strengthen the mind? I can think of answers to the question - "stress innoculation," etc - but I'm still reminded of WW II statistics on how long (ie, not very long) it took soldiers to become combat ineffective. What are you (or your son's) thoughts on this?

They already have their own blog--this one. They are major contributors.
Best,
Tom

(Apologies for not using the indented "Reply" function - I can't seem to make it work)

What training, if any, though, resulted in the ability of WW II submariners to withstand the tremendous stress they were under? (IIRC, submariner was the most dangerous "occupation" to hold during WW II, or if not, then one of the top three, the other two being bomber crew and infantry. (Please correct me if I am wrong.)) Perhaps it was not the training but the fact that submarine crews were self-selected - it was entirely a volunteer endeavor. Or perhaps it was the group cohesion (per Shils and Janowitz) produced by serving in cramped quarters? Obviously I'm merely generating speculative hypotheses, but I'd be curious as to your thoughts, as well as to, returning to my central question, how can the military *really* strengthen one's mind?

Garry Trudeau, and I've been a fan for the whole time. He is among the best political observers of our era—he does in a few panels what George Will usually fails to do in a lengthy op-ed—and he's no enemy of US military personnel. In fact, he's a friend, but maybe not the kind of friend a lot of what we always used to call "military assholes" want. Trudeau doesn't wave the flag or sing hosannas to the military; what he does is capture the essential military condition, and he does so in a sympathetic way. He does not spare the numerous Colonel Blimps to be found in our military; like Mauldin, he's a friend to enlisted personnel and officers who still understand they're human.

Garry Trudeau, good for you.

in 2004, and boy, there was a lot of crying and hugging.

To lessen the trauma and/or drama of war,

1. Have a purpose and win with all-volunteer force
2. Have family and support base
3. Have a job and move on with life

I'm not sure what to write and may lapse into the Jack Kerouac style of free thinking. First, something controversial. I think that IQ has allot to do with PTSD - given two soldiers exposed to nearly the same experience. This became apparent in the waiting rooms of the VA and in some group meetings discussing the efficacy of prescribed drugs. There you can see older veterans of some accomplishment in life supporting young veterans of the Gulf War. Younger OEF veterans who come to the VA for medical care other than mental health are different. They are often aloof and/or hostile.

You can still encounter WWII and Korean War veterans informally counseling Vietnam and later veterans on how to find their way to VA resources. There is a warmth there that makes you feel good. On the other hand, the VA here in Eastern North Carolina is inadequately staffed with mental health professionals and they appear to have difficulty relating to veterans. The few older psychiatrists seem to be able to draw the Vietnam and Gulf War veterans out. The few truly low IQ veterans are largely unreachable and appear to be getting their "insights" from the Internet. There is no way for the casual observer to know why any of these folks are seeking help, but it is clear that their fellow veterans appear to be their best resource.

That says that "family" and family support is what is important. Family can be defined as your unit, your relatives, and your hometown support network. That's the context to which I refer. If a soldier feels that he/she belongs to a brotherhood of soldiers with a common purpose, that's a family. If your extended family of relatives is caring and welcoming, that is a positive factor combating PTSD and physical injuries. The hardest component is the hometown network.

When I returned from Vietnam, my Mom received calls from people we knew, but with whom we did not have dinner on the weekends. These men wanted to see me. It turned out that they were all WWII combat veterans. They were also quite successful in their civilian pursuits. So I would go over to their homes to visit. Each time, I felt that I was being accepted into an unheralded brotherhood. It was more, "how do you feel," as opposed to "how many did you kill?" These men were an ocean tug captain, a paratrooper, a Marine, a mountain division soldier, and others. They said that they saw a new maturity or they expressed satisfaction that I had taken care of my men. It felt good.

Those questions don't pass between the veterans I meet at the VA, but there is that warmth. The tragedy is when you encounter younger veterans who are shut down and unreceptive to the approaches of the older veterans. These folks are angry and that forms a contrast to veterans of the Gulf War who are not that much older. I have no insight as to why they are so angry and will not speculate. Safe to say, they did not find the support of the various families I've tried to describe.

As the veteran experience becomes more unusual in our society, the broad support vanishes - similar to when other veterans came home from Vietnam, and did not get my quiet reception. For their homecoming, they got hostility and false allegations about what they did in the war. Today's returning veterans come home to civilian peers with no understanding of their recent experiences. If they get out of the military, they have no one to talk with. If they stay in, they are too often exposed to a garrison military which is apparently unable to retain the family spirit, that brotherhood of combat. At least in the Army, it does not appear to be an internal goal. It's as though there are too many boxes to tick prior to redeployment.

And yes, it is different for SOF units and personnel. In general, having been screened and qualified, they want to stay together. These are relatively small organizations. Even if you transfer to a different team or a different specialty within the community, you still are likely to know those with whom you serve. Their missions demand their intellectual and physical focus. They are unlikely to be plagued with unnecessary, mandatory classes. Their maturity allows them to support one another within their closed society. They think about and read about everything. I believe that they see themselves and their experiences in context. AND, they themselves select what they get into and can exercise greater control over the outcome. Can they later exhibit PTSD - yes. But, they likely have better tools to deal with it.

The current all volunteer Army has been accepting people they normally would not. I think that these less than ideal enlistees are more likely to have PTSD problems than those who have met a higher standard. Lastly, when we leave Afghanistan and it morphs into its natural state, many soldiers are going to ask, "Why did they ask me to fight there if we were just going to leave?" More importantly, "What did my buddy die for?" For some those are merely questions requiring complex answers. For others, of lesser intellect, they are going to be damaging questions without answers.

Today, the best place for support is within the Service and within the unit. Unfortunately, they appear to be intellectually ill-equipped to competently support their soldiers. This is exemplified by the performance of our Wounded Warrior units in both the Army and the Marine Corps. It is a little late to wait until these folks find their way into the VA system.

Not politically correct, but I have been wondering whether the (apparently) large number of PTSD cases from our two current wars (which don't match the intensity and lethality of WW2 or Vietnam) is partly due to the fact that the young generation today is simply not as "tough" physically and mentally as their parents' and grandparents' generations. Many, especially with the kind of training and conditioning advocated by ES3, will come out OK. But many others in this MTV culture perhaps are too "delicate" for what the military is putting them through (I recently saw a TV news story about a soldier with PTSD who was a supply clerk in a big base and never went outside the wire). I have no scientific or academic support for what I'm theorizing...it's just a thought as to whether generational differences play a role.

Duration is a big difference. If you look at divisions that saw combat in World War II, I think the longest exposure was 14 months. And remember that our whole involvement was just 45 months, with very little combat in the first of those 9.

A second big difference is who carries the burden. In our post-9/11 wars, basically 1 percent of the population carries the burden of combat, compared to the wholesale mobilization of World War II.

Also, the quality of leadership matters.

Best,
Tom

That unit fought in North Africa, Italy, and through France into Germany. Their missions included Operation Torch, Operation Husky, Operation Overlord, the Battle of Hurtgen Forest, and the Battle of the Bulge. The division lost: 3,616 KIA, 15,208 WIA, of whom 684 died of their wounds. That is over a division of casualties. So, the number of men who survived and fought for the entire period is small, although many wounded returned to their units to rejoin the fight. In WWII, the division had 5 commanders, one of whom lasted only a month.

So it's hard to compare those veterans to todays. Afghanistan and Iraq are unique to our experience in that you are committed for a year, return home for a year, and redeploy for a year. While a WWII veteran could have been shelled all night or overrun, our actions today are largely patrolling and convoys. Stress, but a different kind of stress. And yes, Depression Era kids were tougher.

The pattern of the WWII Marines in the Pacific more closely resembles today's rotations in and out of combat, but their combat was far different. It was vicious and continuous until victory and withdrawal for rest and retraining. Then, they hit the beach again. Their casualties were extreme in the face of a dug-in, fanatical enemy whose code was not to surrender. Surely they were tougher and fewer returned home. My reading suggests that the Army saw the same fighting, but did not do as well.

With the exception of the professional soldiers in the Vietnam War, nothing equates to the bizarre pattern today's soldiers face. And they are neither as tough nor as well-trained as the WWII soldier. I suspect that the Marines are as well-trained owing to their strong traditions.

Compensation & Pension, http://www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/compensation/

@RVN SF Vet, what about your own experience? Did you serve the entire war and were you in prison/re-education camps? What was the PTSD rate for your ARVN/RVN peers, those left behind and those who emigrated to the U.S., Europe or Australia? Did you receive a pension or treatment after 1975? How would you compare your experience in country in fighting a war in your own backyard and raising a family? Was your tour of duty one year or 13 months?

Tom, please show any reference to leadership quality making a difference in PTSD occurrence or post-war problems.

PTSD is real and deadly. The incidence of PTSD has been increasing over the years and remains a controversy because the VA can't get rid of its backlog. Read "Stolen Valor" and the author's reference to post-Vietnam PTSD and how that came about.

I'd like to thank Mr. Trudeau for his very entertaining take on the wars. Many times on the ops floor we would share a chuckle over your cartoons. I'm just astounded how you get so many of the little things right. Keep up the good work.

Hunter, the post you put up was more along the lines of treatment and things like Army Centers of Peformance and ethics and morals training really do not do much for innoculation. They are good things to have but are not going to help prep a kid for the hardships of combat. I disagree on the factors mentioned that help counter PTSD as being nebulous. Training and Equipment are pretty tangible things and lets be honest, the kit is great but the training sucks. Take the 11Bs in the Army, they should be small arms Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) but yet they only get trained on their rifles, AW guys get trained on their 240s or 249s but not on the other weapons and so on and so on. A grunt should know every weapon from pistol to heavy machine gun that is in their respective branches armory and yet we do not do that and hence cheat our guys of basic competence in their fields. The training the guys are put through in boot is a joke, Co-Ed even more so, the military is to afraid of offending people, pushing people to their limits and/or actually preparing them for war. Hackworth talked a lot about how poorly the army did this back in Vietnam and Korea, if he were still alive he would throw his hands up in the air and give up if he saw what they were doing. Realistic and harsh training is good prep for the real thing, if a kid is used to having explosions going off all the time, the stress of haing a loaded weapon and maneuvering with other elements while engagin targets, while real war sounds go off around him and the instructors down men with realistic looking injuried that they have to treat and evacuate, etc...etc...the stuff the Army does for the most part is so canned that it is a waste of time and all they do is set their soldiers up for failure. The troops need the confidence that comes from training in their skills in a realistic fashion.

FG42, I do not think it is the generation, the kids will meet the standard you set but the bar is set so low that a boy with no legs could hop over it. I think it always goes back to the same old things with this problem-leadership, money, training. I have had the chance to see every branch to include every SOF unit and the differences between some are staggering. I think the Army is still at the point that they would prefer safe over realistic, even after a decade of war and I get angry when I see once vaunted units that are little more than regular Army Infantry with tabs and 11Bs who should be Infantry Gods are poorly trained due to the factors I mention above.

Get rid fo co-ed boot camp
Make all the boots the same for the Army, Benning is much different than the others
Raise the physical standards, include pull ups, man carries, stress shoots, timed ruck marches, O Courses, etc... into it
Get rid of gender norming but not by lowering the overall standard.
Get rid of "goals" for groups and just treat everyone like a bloody American
Get rid of the zero defect mentality
Ger rid of treating troops like children
Empower the NCOs
Empower the JOs and Mid-Grade Os
Keep troops and NCOs and Officers in the same units for more than a couple of years, if possible let them homestead or copy the Brit Model even.
Increase funding for Combat Training (sites, travel, etc...)
Increase funding for Ammo
Increase funding for TCCC on the conventional side
Look to the WWII German Model and the USMC Model for NCO and Officer Training. I know, the Germans were bad guys then but those bad guys inflicted a 4 to 1 ratio of casualities almost to the end of the war and a lot of that had to do with leadership and how they trained them. "Frontsoldaten" is a good read on this. The USMC just does a great job in my view on prep for their leaders.

A lot of this would not be hard to do if the funding and support were there and think about how much a billion dollars towards this would go as compared to buying 5 F-22s. What gives you more bang for your buck?

Mr. Ricks,
I know leadership can help prior to the conflict by providing the things mentioned above but is there anything to support that during the conflict it can help innoculate the troops? Or is it more of a confidence thing in their leaders that allows them to be less stressed?
I think that one thing that is often ignored and you point out is that most of the guys in the military are often involved in many combat tours and only a small percentage of Americans are involved. It is pretty common to see guys on their 4th, 5th, 6th or more combat tours. Combat stress is cumlative and could be a major reason for increased numbers.

As far as I'm concerned Doonesbury was the only one that got it right when the subject was the little field exercise called the Gulf War. Garry Trudeau is the Ernie Pyle of my time. I believe he carried it foward to these times

"Innoculate them"? Damn...what if doctors with needles freak me out? or Drill Sergeants that like to slam trainies against the wall, Or wrecked eqiupment and dead soldiers at 3am during a 12 hour "training" convoy? Or an explosion at the wrong time on a training range and Thank God the soldiers in the hospital didn't die, they were only blown to pieces. Seen it, done it, been there, got the scars, Army training Sucks because the soldiers are babied and the training is too soft???? ESIII you just pissed me off. Dead and wounded soldiers in training aren't worth a damn in combat if their not there, you think their buddies are better because of it?? I know you're going write 500 words in response but I don't give a damn. It could be a better an you brought up some other ways to make it so, but "Innoculate them?" Damn...

...for soldiers from other countries?

Soviets, British, Italians, French, Japanese and Germans after WW2? The Germans and the Japanese and the Italians lost. Did their soldiers face these problems is similar numbers?

The NVA and the VC after years of fighting in Vietnam?

What about the Iranians and the Iraqis?

What about hints of PTSD from the Civil War and WW1?

One thing I wonder is if regimental systems and units comprised of people from one area fare better after the fighting since they remain close to others who shared the horrors. One could make the case that military life until recently has been a collective experience. Also, true that vets in other societies and times enjoyed more public recognition of their service.

Are PTSD and related issues related to fragmented societies and isolated veterans?