Traitor in the midst

[Idiot-Finder]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_o n_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq

What do you think will happen next?

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

At 5/11/09 01:46 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_o n_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq

What do you think will happen next?

most likely a Military Tribunal and maybe the Death Sentance.

[Grammer]

Does it qualify as treason if he just went psycho, but wasn't working for the enemy?

Either way it's a demented place to go on a rampage, the building that post-traumatic stress disorder is treated. Who does that?

[Jesus-Owns-X]

At 5/11/09 01:46 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_o n_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq

What do you think will happen next?

Respawn penalty

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

At 5/11/09 02:16 PM, Grammer wrote: Does it qualify as treason if he just went psycho, but wasn't working for the enemy?

Either way it's a demented place to go on a rampage, the building that post-traumatic stress disorder is treated. Who does that?

doubt it you can posibbly get the death penalty for desertion in the US military so this could totally qualify.

[aninjaman]

He will be arrested and put in a psychiatric ward.
What are we supposed to discuss?

[Elfer]

At 5/11/09 02:16 PM, Grammer wrote: Either way it's a demented place to go on a rampage, the building that post-traumatic stress disorder is treated. Who does that?

Somebody with PTSD, evidently.

[Jizzlebang]

Most likely that he's got PTSD than being a traitor. A death sentence would be illogical.
You can't kill a crazy person if you caused it and failed to detect it.

[Christopherr]

Military courts are a bit tougher than regular courts...

Don't assume he'll get off with the crazies.

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

At 5/11/09 07:07 PM, Christopherr wrote: Military courts are a bit tougher than regular courts...

Don't assume he'll get off with the crazies.

yeah its true you can get court martial for sleeping with another mans wife.

[aviewaskewed]

At 5/11/09 07:07 PM, Christopherr wrote: Don't assume he'll get off with the crazies.

I think it depends a lot on how wide of a "cause" this case potentially becomes. This absolutely on the surface looks more like a legitimate case of PTSD manifesting in a horrible and tragic manner vs. something "traitorous" or traditionally criminal. I don't see where the military courts are going to be able to hard ass this guy really unless they want to risk a backlash where people are going to say they're insensitive to, and improperly handling psychological disorders.

[LazyDrunk]

Does post-traumatic stress excuse the letter of law? I'm fairly certain military code recommends the death penalty, but I can't seem to find the exact passage..

If his only justification is "I was sad" then he, rightfully, should face a nice firing squad.

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

At 5/12/09 09:51 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: If his only justification is "I was sad" then he, rightfully, should face a nice firing squad.

if the death penalty is used I think the Lethal Injection would be best

[TheMason]

Don't confuse the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) with the Court Martial process.

Yes the UCMJ is rather archaic. For example not only is adultry a violation of military law but so is fellatio (blow jobs) and sodomy (anal) even with your spouse.

However, the guy will be entitled to a fair trial with an appropriate defense. He can even hire a civilian attorney to represent him instead of a JAG. While this will most likely qualify for a capital murder trial...who knows how it will turn out. While I doubt he will walk...he may be found to be innocent by way of insanity. In which case he would serve 'time' in a mental health hospital.

That he is a three-tour vet and was referred to the clinic means he already has a good basis on which to build this defense.

[TheMason]

Oh...I should've weighed in on the whole 'traitor' bit. I don't think this qualifies as 'treason'. Pre-meditated murder maybe, but with the PTSD background there is a good chance that this would prevent military prosecutors from going after a treason charge.

[AngoraFedora]

I'm not sure what will happen next with this individual case, but I would like to see President Obama get specific about what he plans to do to "protect those that serve..." I personally find it interesting that he used the word protect, when the military protects the civillians. I would have preferred the word treat, as it speaks to the idea that, yes, there is a problem that needs dealing with, as opposed to "protecting" those from harm as an over-protective parent in denial. Protecting them from having mental issues? I'm not a parent, but good luck.

It sounds to me like he will perhaps expand social services to outreach to those soldiers suffering with PTSD. I have suffered from PTSD (unrelated to military service) and I say that because I have an idea of the sort of treatments used. They are not easy. They are not cheap. Good luck getting the extra dollars for that as well as finding people willing to do the necessary and painful work to combat those inner demons.

At the same time, we can't rely on all these social programs to deal with internal issues. Yes, we need others to deal with emotions and issues, or maybe we don't. It all depends on the personal needs and overall willingness of the client. (I say client because I have a partial social work background).

On a side note, (please correct me if I'm wrong), I know there are certain mental disorders that will disqualify you from military service. PTSD is scary, and it's not exactly something that makes a person stable emotionally or mentally. I think it's interesting that an institution won't accept people with certain psychological disorders, when there is statistical evidence that this institution exposes people to experiences that will affect them greatly for the rest of their life.

[Ericho]

I guess it's a good thing he didn't kill himself, as we can get some answers as to what was going on and why he did it. I mean, potentially, it would make sense that something like this could happen at least once.

[aviewaskewed]

At 5/12/09 09:51 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: Does post-traumatic stress excuse the letter of law? I'm fairly certain military code recommends the death penalty, but I can't seem to find the exact passage..

Since it's a legitimate mental disorder? Uh...yes?

If his only justification is "I was sad" then he, rightfully, should face a nice firing squad.

It's far more then that and the fact that you would even say something like that shows you couldn't be bothered to do a little basic research on the subject and therefore you really shouldn't be making an opinion about this.

This is not a situation where we're talking about a very vague "insanity plea" we're talking about a legitimate psychological disorder that has appeared in soldiers, SOLDIERS, (it appears in other cases too yes, but the relevance for this discussion is that it afflicts soldiers) since at least WW1. We should execute this guy for having seen horrible things in the service of his country? For his mind being unable to take the strain? Really?

What he did is horrible, my heart goes out to those families, but if anyone is even remotely interested in true justice here, this man MUST be psychologically evaluated. If found to have PTSD he needs to be taken care of properly. Bad shit happens in war, bad shit happens because of war.

[Grammer]

At 5/12/09 04:55 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 5/12/09 09:51 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: Does post-traumatic stress excuse the letter of law? I'm fairly certain military code recommends the death penalty, but I can't seem to find the exact passage..

Since it's a legitimate mental disorder? Uh...yes?

He may have a reason for what he did, but he doesn't have an excuse. The letter of the law is still going to come down on him. Hard. As it should.

[aviewaskewed]

At 5/12/09 06:23 PM, Grammer wrote: He may have a reason for what he did, but he doesn't have an excuse. The letter of the law is still going to come down on him. Hard. As it should.

I mean should we be executing somebody with a mental disorder? I think not. Sorry I was unclear. He isn't excused, he shouldn't get to walk away from this thing, but he should be getting treatment and not just treated like any other criminal since the disorder is something of a mitigating factor here (should he have it, which the article strongly implies he does).

[LynchedJohNNY]

Speaking of PTSD a few military buddy's and I are working on a theory that the Government actually either magnifies the amount of soldiers who suffer from it or is the sole cause of it because of the medicines and vaccines they use on our soldiers.

It's no secret that the Army has experimented on it's soldiers in the past so if you like the sound of this argument what I ask you has happened to it? Did they stop using our soldiers as Guinea pigs or did they get better at hiding it?

[Idiot-Finder]

He's charged.

[Grammer]

Apparently this dude wasn't in the mental condition to have a gun. CNN reported he was referred to the same place he shot up, but he didn't go until he was ready to open fire...

[TheMason]

At 5/12/09 04:55 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: This is not a situation where we're talking about a very vague "insanity plea" we're talking about a legitimate psychological disorder that has appeared in soldiers, SOLDIERS, (it appears in other cases too yes, but the relevance for this discussion is that it afflicts soldiers) since at least WW1. We should execute this guy for having seen horrible things in the service of his country? For his mind being unable to take the strain? Really?

What he did is horrible, my heart goes out to those families, but if anyone is even remotely interested in true justice here, this man MUST be psychologically evaluated. If found to have PTSD he needs to be taken care of properly. Bad shit happens in war, bad shit happens because of war.

At 5/12/09 06:23 PM, Grammer wrote: He may have a reason for what he did, but he doesn't have an excuse. The letter of the law is still going to come down on him. Hard. As it should.

I've got to say, I'm on the side of the Mod here and he is absolutely correct in what he says. Last year the Pentagon considered awarding the
Purple Heart for PTSD. Why?

By sending a soldier to war you subject a person to real-life horrors.

* Watching friends torn to shreds by an IED.
* Watching civilians torn to shreds by suicide bombers for voting, being from another tribe or sect of Islam.
* You are seperated from your spouse and kids...their lives go on while your's is spent in stressful montony punctuated by intermittent incoming mortar or sniper fire on your barracks, chow hall, latrine, etc or an IED while on patrol. Meanwhile children are taking their first step, saying their first word, graduating from kindergarten/JHS/HS/College, having first grandchild or even competing for Miss America.
* Meanwhile bills stack-up, the spouse gets frustrated that s/he is carrying the burden alone on their shoulders. And you're over there feeling impotent because you cannot do anything to help. You feel like you're shirking your responsibilities. Everytime FOX, CNN or that bitch Nancy Grace is on the TV flapping their gums about the latest missing child (a tragedy they're exploiting...BTW)...you're freakin' out because you're not their to keep your daughter safe.

There is just so much...and this guy did three tours ranging from 12-18 months. He spent more than three years in this war-time environment. His father was on CNN saying this was his life...probably all he knew. So he's cracking after seeing shit no one should see (which he is seeing because some sense of honor/duty compelled him to serve his country) and they've taken his gun away from him. This means he is probably on his way to a discharge, his career is over. So now one of his 'rocks' that defines who he is and provides a touchstone for his self-esteem...is if not gone already, it is now seriously imperiled.

View said something that really connected with me: "...bad shit happens in war, bad shit happens because of war." [emphasis mine]

This is one thing I don't think civilians understand, and why I think it is a good thing he will be tried in a military court. He will still have jury, but a jury that is truly of his peers.

[TheMason]

At 5/12/09 01:06 PM, AngoraFedora wrote: On a side note, (please correct me if I'm wrong), I know there are certain mental disorders that will disqualify you from military service. PTSD is scary, and it's not exactly something that makes a person stable emotionally or mentally. I think it's interesting that an institution won't accept people with certain psychological disorders, when there is statistical evidence that this institution exposes people to experiences that will affect them greatly for the rest of their life.

There is a difference to having a mental illness before coming into the military and developing one after joining. First of all you have to consider that the military is going to put a person into conditions that put a strain on one's mental health. Just as you want your soldiers as physically healthy/fit before being put into an environment that will take a toll on their physiology you want them to be similarly mentally fit. The reason is so that one can deal with the strain better.

And just like underlying physiological weaknesses can only be revealed after putting the body in extreme stress...so can underlying phsychological weaknesses be revealed. So shit like this will happen.

Now, if a person develops a mental illness in the course of his service there are several things the military has to consider:

* Is the mental/physical illness enough to substantially reduce his ability to perform their duty?
* Will the mental illness pose a threat to other servicemembers?
* Loss of an experienced soldier if that person is retired.
* All the money/effort spent on training the soldier.

In all honesty I think the discussion should rest less upon vengeful justice and more on what the military (and society in general) can do to assist those servicemembers with invisible injuries.

[aviewaskewed]

At 5/13/09 03:37 AM, TheMason wrote: I've got to say, I'm on the side of the Mod here and he is absolutely correct in what he says.

Yes, the gold aura and my innate greatness ALWAYS makes me correct. :)

It's a joke fuckers, one I couldn't resist. So sue me, just remember I don't have any money.

[Xemras]

So a soldier who kills his own men is a criminal, but when he kills civilians indigenous to the region he's stationed he's a hero?

[Dante-Son-Of-Sparda]

hes not really a traitor, but people who go AWOL and flee to canada do.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 5/16/09 02:04 AM, Xemras wrote: So a soldier who kills his own men is a criminal, but when he kills civilians indigenous to the region he's stationed he's a hero?

Define "kill civilians"

It's a sticky situations overall and you should at least specify

[KeithHybrid]

Do they still do the firing squad thing?