By The Stars & Stripes recently published an article in regards to the suicide of a Soldier in Iraq that if all the facts in this story are true is very troubling:
For Army Spc. Brushaun Anderson, there was no escaping his torment.
The senior noncommissioned officers who ruled his life at a remote patrol base in Iraq ordered him to wear a plastic trash bag because they said he was “dirty.”
They forced him to perform excessive physical exercises in his body armor over and over again.
They made him build a sandbag wall that served no military purpose.
Anderson seemed to take it all in stride. Until New Year’s Day 2010, when the once-eager 20-year-old soldier locked himself inside a portable toilet, picked up his M4 rifle, aimed the barrel at his forehead and pulled the trigger.
Anderson left behind a note lamenting his failures in the military, and some soldiers in his unit immediately said that Anderson had been driven to kill himself by leaders bent on humiliating him. [Stars & Stripes]
You will need to read the entire article to get the full context of what happened in this case.
First of all, I have never believed it was a good thing to remove Soldiers from their parent unit that they trained with back at home station and give them to some other random unit. Apparently SPC Anderson’s Infantry squad was attached to the Field Artillery unit to provide security. Why doesn’t the FA unit provide security for themselves? When I was in Iraq that is what the FA unit I worked with did. Removing Soldiers like that from their home station unit breaks the support chain they are accustomed to when issues arise and replaces it during a stressful deployment situation with new leaders that young Soldiers are not familiar with. SPC Anderson had issues and according to this article the leadership of this unit was not approachable and just dished out humiliating punishment. It is just amazing to me that a First Sergeant and Commander would both just stand back and laugh at Soldiers doing humiliating corrective training. I would never even laugh out Soldiers doing punishment after being court martialed much less corrective training because it is not funny and shouldn’t be something to be laughed at.
The wall of sandbags they had Soldiers make for corrective training that had no other purpose than to humilate the Soldiers tasked to work on it is another example of why the leadership of this unit should be ashamed of themselves. This goes all the way up to battalion leadership because I’m sure they had to have known about this giant wall of sandbags as well. Additionally according to the S&S article the battery commander for this unit issued no Article 15′s the entire deployment and was the only commander in the battalion to do so. I have seen this before where unit leadership would rather do in-house corrective training instead of issuing out Article 15′s because of some perception that giving out Article 15′s makes a unit look bad or what I seen most often that the unit leadership is just too lazy to do the necessary procedures and paperwork to give out an Article 15. The way I have always looked at is that Summary Article 15′s are a great tool for commanders because it is they way to punish the Soldier that gets the infraction documented, sends a strong message to the Soldier, the Soldier gets legal counsel, and the punishment is not crippling to the Soldier’s career. I am not sure how much corrective training incidents like this have to do with the Army’s increasing number of suicides, but this is a perfect example of very poor leadership that apparently some in the Army think is entirely acceptable considering no one was held accountable for what happened.
4:55 pm on June 15th, 2011 1
Q. All right, mister, what do you think you’re doing? You call this a room? This is a PIGSTY! I want you to straighten up this area NOW! YOU ARE A DISGUSTING SLOB! STAND UP STRAIGHT! TUCK IN THAT SHIRT! ADJUST THAT BELT BUCKLE, TIE THOSE SHOES!…Twisted SISTER? WHAT is THAT? Wipe that smile off your face. DO YOU UNDERSTAND!? What is that? A Twisted Sister pin?! ON YOUR UNIFORM?! What kind of a man are you? You’re worthless and weak! You DO nothing, you ARE nothing, you sit in here all day and play that sick, repulsive ELECTRIC TWANGER! I carried an M-16 and you, YOU carry that, that, that…GUITAR! WHO ARE YOU? WHERE DO YOU COME FROM? ARE YOU LISTENING TO ME? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH YOUR LIFE?!
A. I wanna die!
/short answer is suicide is a tragedy. However, it is the most personal decision one can make. If we are not in control of our life,what are we? Should we try to save them? Is it anyone’s business? Not sure. I guess it’s more of a philosophical dilemma…
7:40 am on June 16th, 2011 2
LaPorte, I was going to agree with you when I first started reading the article. The punishments listed reminded me of my tour of duty in Korea eight years ago. Wearing a trash bag was kind of like having to wear class As at the gate at Camp Casey and remind everyone going out not to drink if they were underage. The sandbag wall reminded me of the sandbags that had to be placed on the sides of a steep road on camp to help channel water during monsoon season, and had to be removed before winter so that they wouldn’t foul up the snow plows. There was always somebody that had extra duty during that period of time to take care of it. This seemed like a case of somebody who couldn’t adjust to military life.
Then I read this line: “The platoon’s top enlisted man, Sgt. 1st Class Phillip Devos, was granted wide leeway to run the show, and he reveled in the power, declaring himself ‘Supreme Allied Commander¬–Babil,’ noncomissioned officers told Stars and Stripes.” and I knew how the rest of the article was going to go.
I’ve deployed twice and each time I’ve managed to have a sociopath like SFC Devos over me in some fashion. First it was my troop commander in Iraq, who treated ran the troop with an iron fist and treated everybody from the 1SG on down like we were all PV1s. He held clear double standards between himself and the rest of the troop and proceeded to lead his soldiers recklessly and nearly got soldiers killed due to his negligence, yet for some reason our marginal SCO thought that the sun rose out of this captain’s ass. Nevertheless, the NCOs, and a couple of LTs worked tirelessly to circumvent him and marginalize his power so that the mission could be accomplished.
On the second deployment, it was my platoon leader that would turn out to be the sociopath. My PL was a WO-1. 99.9% of the Warrant Officers that I’ve worked with or met over the years have been top-notch soldiers that represent “all that you can be” in the Army. I, of course, had to get the lemon. His behavior was similar to that of my previous troop commander: double standards, berating NCOs in front of their soldiers, reckless behavior, negligence, disregard for the welfare of his subordinates, ect. Like last time, we NCOs banded together to marginalize this guy in order to accomplish the mission. Also, we had a good company commander who recognized what was going on and moved the WO1 to a non-command position.
Unlike the poor bastard in the story, I never had to deal with three at a time and there was alway somebody to go to when things got out of control. The fact that nobody in his chain of command was removed from command or disciplined in any way further compounds the problem. I don’t see how this differs from him being killed in an accident due to command negligence. This sends a signal to everyone around them that this kind of behavior is endorsed by the Army. Those that don’t like it (like me) are getting out. Those that enjoy the thought of singling out and constantly abusing a soldier to prop up a self-inflated ego will remain. This is the kind of army that the chain of command is signaling that they want, and it is the kind of army that they will most definitely get.
8:11 am on June 16th, 2011 3
“berating NCOs in front of their soldiers”
Double standards and trying to humiliate your men…I have an interesting anecdote about this which, to the best of my knowledge, has never been printed anywhere. A very well-known Canadian commander during the Korean War once tried to berate one of his commissioned officers in front of the soldiers. He accused him of having been an instigator and participant in the drunken fracas that took place the previous night. The subordinate looked at his commander and said, “With all due respect, Sir, you’re full of shit. I’ve never touched a drop of alcohol in my life”. I got the story firsthand from the teetotaler (he’s nearing 90 and he’s never had a drink in his life).
PS. Those guys should have been charged, convicted, and sentenced. Hazing, even when it is done so under the guise of reinforcing esprit de corps, has no place within the ranks.
10:38 am on June 16th, 2011 4
#2
thanks for the long write up. I actually read it.
Yeah I think the suicide happened because the platoon was in an isolated outpost, consisting of some 40 men. There was no other NCO or officer the abused soldier could go to for help. No one with enough authority was around to see what was going on and intervene. Had the hazing been going on in a larger base, I”m pretty sure no one would’ve committed suicide.
I”m sad the 3 will probably go on with their career in the army and probably actually get more promotions than peers. I’m a bit happy that the pictures of the 3 were posted in the article. Too bad someone had to lose his life for that to happen.
12:57 pm on June 16th, 2011 5
As much as the article makes it sounds like the leadership in that unit were a bunch of sh!tbigs…unless you were also at that 40-man outpost…it’s hard to say what really went on out there.
Were the statements made by the other soldiers unbiased accounts of what took place? Or maybe…did some of those soldiers have their own axes to grind?
The truth is probably somewhere in between what the soldiers said – and what the leadership said.
2:43 pm on June 16th, 2011 6
According to his note book entry, Anderson had been having similar troubles at other units.
SO, it wasn’t that unit that stood out. So, he was having trouble being all he could be, it would seem.
I have had “trouble” soldiers. They exist. I never had one pull the trigger on himself.
You can usually see when a soldier is near to breaking, if you are pushing him/them.
I don’t trust the S&S to report much of anything. A reporters job is to get attention.
I have had piss-poor soldiers and I’ve had piss-poor leaders.
There have been a handful of “leaders” that I thought were deserving of having the trigger pulled on. But none, I must repeat that NONE, that ever made me think that *I* should check out. I am not that weak.
Maybe Anderson was. If so, he shouldn’t have been in uniform.
We had a troop in Iraq that was playing with a knife and “they” took his weapon away. It was all BS. Then they tried to put him on my guard force. Without a WEAPON! I gave that a no-go. Then they said they would give him back his weapon without the firing pin!! No-go from me.
My point is that if Anderson was thought to be at risk, the command would have taken action. No officer wants that kind of attention. No matter how piss-poor the officer may be!
Obvious conclusion: Anderson was not thought to be at risk.
Do I trust the statements of the soldiers? Not at all. I’ve seen soldier lie, when it suits them.
So Anderson eats a bullets and now the entire leadership are a bunch tormentors and worse.
Sorry, I don’t buy that.
If they were, he would have been more likely to shoot one of them. I know I would have.
Obviously Anderson had problems. From his own notes, he had them at other locations with other units.
Could his death have been prevented? No. Not in this PC environment. A leader can’t simply state that a soldier “don’t feel right”. Must have documentation! Corrective action is often used rather than writing a Bad Counselling statement.
I once had a troop that was chronically late. I made him wear an alarm clock around his neck while in the shop. (he later got busted at an airport for saying something about a bomb) Bad apples are there.
I get no pleasure that a man takes his own life. But I also do not look at his leadership and point my finger at them.
I had some bad leaders. If the situation had arisen that I could have taken them out, I would have had to think real hard about it. But it takes a certain kind of individual to think that life is not worth living and take themselves out. But there are a few in every group. I don’t understand it.
No one can make you feel worthless. That is something that only the individual can allow to happen. No outside force can cause that.
I once had a “mental health Q&A sheet”. I had returned from four years in Korea, back to Campbell. They didn’t like my answers. Turns out it was only one answer. I was “single”. So I got an extra interview with some obese female behind a desk. Q: Ever felt like killing yourself? A: No. Statement form said female: That’s unusual. Most of us do from time to time. My thought: WTF!!!
Q: Ok, have you ever thought about killing anyone else? A: yes. Q: Why? A: Usually when they ask me stupid question.
(My appointment with the Doctor was about two weeks later.) My NCOIC was VERY Gental with me. Not that he had much of a clue of the situation. The point being, NOBODY wants that kind of attention brought on them. We shipped a female back to hood, because we thought she couldn’t handle it. No leader (or piece of chit in a leadership position) wants that kind of attention.
Anderson did it to himself and for his own reasons, which we will never know. His responsibility and his actions. The only pity I feel is for his friends and family. Not that he cared about them —-
Anderson had problems. But he had options other than taking his own life. He did what he wanted to do.
4:41 pm on June 16th, 2011 7
I’m pretty sure suicides don’t happen in isolation. I also doubt that soldiers today are posted to a war zone long enough to go from soild psychological health to suicidal.
This does not excuse bad behavior on the part of his leadership. I have no idea about that. I’m just saying – somneone committed suicide and a good number of roots as to why run beyond his being deployed.
5:19 pm on June 16th, 2011 8
#7,
Systematic and sustained mental and physical abuse of the kind he was subjected to will push an already unstable person over the line and bring a more solid individual to it.
6:52 pm on June 16th, 2011 9
@6,
More of the eat nails and sh!t bullets crap, or the “I walked 5 miles to school in knee deep snow, uphill both ways”. Tough talk doesn’t work because soldiers are humans and humans are neither uniform nor machines. Take the macho talk elsewhere, nobody is listening.
@8,
Pretty much dead on. Whats clear is that ~something~ was going on out there, and whatever is was caused a soldier to go over the edge and kill himself. Now whether he was already at the edge or not is irrelevant, part of being a leader is to know your soldiers and to know when their close to the breaking point. You push you troops hard to make them stronger and more capable of handling combat, you don’t push them just for fun or as some sort of punishment. Corrective training is supposed to be focused on correcting the incorrect behavior not at humiliating or belittling the soldier.
Also its pretty clear who was responsible for pushing the soldier over the edge.
“An Army investigation into Anderson’s unit following his suicide concluded that he had been hazed on multiple occasions and subjected to “cruel, abusive and oppressive treatment.”
Anderson’s battery commander, first sergeant, platoon sergeant and squad leader were found responsible for his maltreatment, according to documents obtained by Stars and Stripes.”
Having personally dealt with an ego maniac for a SGM that nearly caused me to go homicidal (not joking here, I had to go through mental eval over this). Its a long story but suffice to say in the end the command got involved to toned the guy down, everyone’s lives improved and things got better. These people ~do~ exist in the Army and they tend to get promoted quickly, their tyrants to their troops but seem to sh!t gold apples to their seniors. They need to be reigned in before they get people killed.
There is a difference between being tough and being tyrannical. Tough love is about making the soldiers harder and stronger, more capable and instilling confidence that they can overcome any obstacle. Tyrannical behavior is about belittling and humiliating soldiers perceived as weak so as to subjugate them and give the leader a rush. The first is accepted and sometimes encouraged, the second tries to masquerade as the first but has radically different goals. If those leaders really cared about that soldier they wouldn’t be humiliating him.
7:21 pm on June 16th, 2011 10
“You push you troops hard to make them stronger and more capable of handling combat, you don’t push them just for fun or as some sort of punishment. Corrective training is supposed to be focused on correcting the incorrect behavior not at humiliating or belittling the soldier.”
Yes, excellent points.
7:23 pm on June 16th, 2011 11
…Hell, you make excellent points in your whole post.
7:39 pm on June 16th, 2011 12
Someotherguy, I walked twenty years in that snow. Dismiss it as “tough talk” if you wish too.
Go back and read the article. Read what he himself wrote.
As I said, I had good leaders and bad. I had good soldiers and bad ones. That is just what happens when you do it a while.
Bottom line: no leader or Piece of chit in a leadership position would allow what you seem to think happened to happen. It is not in their own self interest.
And to agree with you, as I stated before, I did have leaders that brought on thoughts of murder. But not suicide. There is a difference and it is within that individuals character.
So go back and read his notes about his previous unit experience. Oh and you listened and it seems I touched a nerve.
I knew there would be somebody that would say what you said. We are always so quick to believe the news. We never get tired of looking for victims do we.
The military is not for everybody. Nothing to do with being “tough”. It is a mental thing, as you should know.
8:33 pm on June 16th, 2011 13
@12 I’m still hearing “walked 5 miles to school in snow uphill both ways”. Serving “20 years” doesn’t change anything nor does it lend any weight to your argument.
I can refute your entire argument with personal experience as I’ve HAD those bad leaders that go on power trips and belittle soldiers. I’d had tough leaders, and I appreciated them as they made me into a better stronger me. They enabled me to land a successful career after I hung up the uniform. I’ve also had the bad ones that get addicted to the power rush from humiliating soldiers and somehow convince themselves its “for their own good” or “they deserve it”. Thankfully I had support and was able to get them fired and / or relieved for cause. Little protip, good leadership leads by example, if their a hard a$$ then they will follow their own rules and follow the regs to the letter. If their just a tyrant then they’ll ignore their own rules and eventually convince themselves their above the regulations. Once that happens you document every time they break the regs, tape record the things their saying about the command and their general disrespect for their troops and other authorities. Be patient, keep your head down and when its time drop copies of all that stuff into a O6′s lap by using their open door policy. O6′s tend to extremely politically sensitive, a junior leader doing the things those guys were doing out at the FOB could potentially destroy the O6′s career, they don’t like that. And because you got in the first strike, the offenders won’t be capable of harassing you or otherwise screwing your life over. They’ll be reassigned and things will get better.
And I agree that some people aren’t “cut out” for military life, but that has nothing to do with this discussion so stop trying to make it about the soldier. He was a soldier, most likely an average soldier. Got screwed with by his leaders because they thought he was weak and they could get away with it. They were right, he was weak and didn’t report their sh!t to the nearest O6. Another protip, O5′s and below are relatively worthless for fixing these kinds of issues. An O3 is going to stick by his 1SG who’s going to stick by his platoon sergeants. The whole “unified NCO corps” and “NCO’s stand together” idea. An O5 is going to stick by his CSM who’s going to stick by his 1SG and so forth. O5′s also have less to lose career wise should a small unit incident explode in their faces. And O6 is the lowest level that can reasonably fix a chain of command issue.
Which brings me to my last point, this was a chain of command issue. The squad leader and platoon sergeant were out of control. The 1SG should of been the one to real them in, he failed to do this. The commander is the one ultimately responsible for the actions of leaders in his command, he was complicit and an actual source of the problem. The battalion CSM / Commander both looked the other way in an attempt to keep their record clean and make the battalion look good. They failed to take notice of an unhealthy command climate which ultimately resulted in pushing a soldier of the edge. There is no doubting this, its already been finalized in the investigating officers report. No amount of “spit blood and guts” macho BS can over ride the findings of the investigation.
For the “touching a nerve” this is because as a soldier I was fcked with because a poor leader thought I was “weak”. As an 18yr old FOB soldier I didn’t realize that there are rules and restrictions to what junior leaders can do. It took a better leader to teach me how to stand up to those bastards and resulted in me getting the bad leader transferred to another section. Since then It was my personal quest to get rid of such sh!t bag NCO’s. Their a detriment to the long term capabilities of the force. Soldiers see how the sh!t bag is acting and assume that since no one is stopping them then it must be right to treat juniors that way, and thus the sh!t bad NCO is breeding more sh!t bag NCO’s. And that is exactly what was happening here, the platoon sergeant was teaching the squad leaders to act inappropriately. Eventually pinning stripes I took it to ensure my own soldiers had good leadership and that sh!t bags who had survived to the senior ranks wouldn’t be able to pull crap with my own guys. I made sure my guys exceeded the standards in everything they did and if they were struggling somewhere I took the time, often off duty to teach them what they needed to know. I was personally responsible for turning a soldier everyone thought was a dirt-bag “problem” soldier around and molding them into a successful soldier who eventually pinned on stripes.
You do all this by being hard, but fair. The fair part is extremely important, you ~MUST~ treat all soldiers equally, all rules apply to everyone equally. You don’t give “punishment” you give “corrective training”, there is a difference between the two. That fcking “wall of shame” is proof positive that these guys were wrong as two naked boys in a barn. The fact that they ordered it quickly “torn down” after the suicide is proof that they ~knew~ they were wrong. When a leader is wrong and knows their wrong yet continues to be wrong then you have a serious issue with them. And then you have the testimony’s of the other officers who saw the wrongness and brought it to the attention of the commanding officer, who himself did nothing and even approved of it. So now you have command approval and reinforcement of knowingly wrong behavior. There is no excuse for this, no way to get around or talk around how wrong they were.
So please, continue telling us storied about walking five miles in the snow uphill both ways. Its completely and utter BS and you know it. They were wrong and now your supporting them being wrong.
8:56 pm on June 16th, 2011 14
Retired GI,
“So I got an extra interview with some obese female behind a desk.”
The dirty little secret of psychology, teaching, and social work, is that it is mostly run by females who use their values as the standards for well-adjusted individuals… making many innate male behaviors out to be abnormal and deviant.
Two million years of hunting and fighting skills are suddenly considered sick and perverse… and, instead of channeling these urges for success in modern society, many women with the power to do so try to abolish them… and replace them with with softer and more personally-comfortable feminine behaviors and values.
As many duties of parents have been increasingly replaced by “professionals” and behavior modification has shifted from discipline and reward, to medication and zero-tolerance punishment, there should be no surprise at the feminization of young American males.
Retred GI, if only you had understood this at the time, you could have given her a femino-centric answer concerning you “feelings” and how you strive to repress unhealthy aggression while building better emotional interdependencies… blah, blah, blah.
You would have walked out with a ten-star review and a recommendation for immediate step-promotion to general.
5:44 am on June 17th, 2011 15
Someotherguy, serving 20 years doesn’t change anything? Only someone that didn’t would say that. Twenty years of experience in ANY field, be it politics, teaching, bar-tending, Opera or the Military certainly does change my comments from one that didn’t serve twenty or from those that didn’t serve at all. Again, you SHOULD know that. You are very bitter from your experience. But you got people fired. Which seems to have been your goal. You had success. Why so bitter? I had some success at pointing out supposed leaders failings. I’m happy with that success.
Now, back to Anderson. You clam the Squad leader was bad. That’s one. You clam the Platoon Sergeant was bad. That’s two. You clam the First Sergeant was bad. That’s three. You clam the CO was bad. That’s four.
Then you go after the Battalion level leaders. To include the CSM. Dude, we ALL know that the CSM never knows what is going on. He is simply a figure head for the NCO corp. Get real.
So his entire chain of command were a bunch of tormentors? Got it!! WOW.
Then you say, in paragraph two, “stop making it about the soldier”. Well, that is what this story is about. The soldier, and could his actions have been prevented. That is the SUBJECT. So clearly I can not “stop making it about the soldier”. The soldier took his own life. It is ALL about the soldier. It was his actions. According to you, he had no hand in this. It had nothing to do with him. According to me, it is all about him.
You STILL ignore his last notes. You still WANT it to be only about the command. Forget the soldier. Right?
Back to the NCO corp. You must have served in the 70′s. I can tell you for a fact that in the 2000′s, NCO’s do NOT stick together. It is all about political correctness these days. I would have liked it if the NCO corp did stick together more in my time. I watched as a squad turned a Platoon Sergent against his and their squad leader. In case you don’t know, the squad leader works FOR the platoon sergeant. It would have been funny if it weren’t so sad.
Now, getting away from your personal vendetta, for a moment, by the way you’re pretty good at telling stories of walking in the snow, up hill, both ways yourself. Good job!
You say that I’m supporting the Leadership. I never said that. I said look at the soldier.
Anyone who has read my comments thru the years here 2007 > now, can tell you that I am VERY down on Officers. Most of the officers I knew, to include warrant officers where pretty damn good at one thing. Setting at their desk and taking credit for what their soldiers did. Oh and down-grading awards on individuals they didn’t know. And signing driver interview sheets on individuals they had not interviewed. And losing extension papers or just “forgetting” to sign them.
If you want to get an officer to work with you, find out who he is sleeping with or get his boss on his a$$. Then you will have a good Officer.
NCO’s are another story. I was one. There are bad ones. Some good ones. NCO’s don’t get near the training that they need. You move up thru the ranks and then get some stripes. Most NCO “schools” are next to worthless. Most of the “instructors” at these schools are equally a waste of skin. I had to wake one up at BNOC after I completed my presentation. I have that kind of voice.
So, perhaps you can tell that I’m not all about how great the “leadership” in the military is. I have felt like pulling the trigger on at least two CO’s, one Warrant officer at Hood who was a real D A. Make that two. A couple of platoon sergeants in Iraq. A handful of “soldiers” in Iraq as well.
I have also had the pleasure of having one CO in Bosnia and one in Korea that I would have done whatever it took to save, if needed.
My point is that suicide is about the soldier. Anderson had a history that he himself pointed out in his notes.
If you don’t want to acknowledge that, I can’t make you.
I’m sorry your service went badly for you. There were years when my service did not go as I would have liked either.
One of the reasons I liked service in Korea back in the 80′s and 90′s was that you only had a bad leader or troop for a year. Then they left while I stayed on.
Service in the war areas today is generally for one year and then home. (yes you will come back I know)
Anderson couldn’t wait the months he had left? If the supposed “torment” was that great, I would have murdered my tormentors. Then I would have life left to tell my story. Anderson didn’t. He had a loaded weapon! I assume a combat load. That’s like seven, 30 round magazines!
I’d be interested in his story if he had done that.
I don’t buy that his command is responsible for his actions.
And I’m pretty much as anti-command as it gets.
That Anderson had problems is obvious. That he had problems with this command is also obvious. That his command is somehow the exception and evil, is not so obvious.
You would have me believe that at least six individuals in various levels of leadership were incompetent at best and tormenting child-men at worst.
I would have to see that to believe it. Since I can’t, I don’t.
Anderson’s suicide was not in their best interest. Men look out for what is important to themselves. Anderson’s health was important to them.
If Anderson wanted to get back at them, by killing himself, he had bigger problems than his command.
6:44 am on June 17th, 2011 16
Sergeant Major Preston and Big Army strongly disagree with Retired GI.
6:47 am on June 17th, 2011 17
Retired GI: Everyone in the entire army has to watch this video now.
So, since 2007 suicide prevention has been a HUGE deal at the highest levels.
8:02 am on June 17th, 2011 18
16 so big Army thinks it was the commands fault. They disagree with me. Like that’s the first time.
17, Suicide Prevention has been a HUGE issue since (for me) 1992. What do you think that Q&A with that obese female was all about.
Her first question was “have you ever thought about killing yourself”. 2007, I don’t know. But from 1992 until I retired it was always a HUGE issue. The reason I had the extra interview was because I was not married, therefore I had no “support group” therefore I was seen as a suicide RISK. I didn’t make it any easier on myself when I expressed my VIEWS on marriage as a “support system”. I relied on bartenders quite a bit myself.
That is way I don’t buy that Anderson’s command was at fault. They were HIGHLY aware of suicide PREVENTION. We had classes on it.
They drove him to suicide? Bull chit! I don’t even see it as a possibility.
I’ve had some real suck-a$$ leadership, BUT if ANYONE was thought to be at risk, their weapon was GONE. Later, so were they.
12:10 pm on June 17th, 2011 19
In today’s zero-tolerance game,
somebody must get all the blame.
But the truth of this event
is that always some percent
are just wackos who off themselves ’cause they’re lame.
Face it.
The guy was a funk-up to the point where corrective action didn’t work and the only thing left to do was keep him out of the way… because a much-needed azz-beating was not an option… and funking with him kept all the productive people from going crazy just watching the guy operate.
This isn’t right… but it is understandable.
If you haven’t seen this phenomena in action between kindergarten and adulthood, it is because YOU were the constant funk-up loser being funked with.
Most, due to Geek Pride, don’t kill themselves… but some do. Too bad.
The ones who don’t kill themselves frequently find themselves working in a service industry while pestering their skeptical coworkers with exciting stories of their special forces exploits.
There are other ways of dealing with this… and better leadership might have been able to minimize his impact on attitude and morale of other soldiers and avoid (or postpone) his suicide…
…great leadership might have been able to put him on the correct path and make him, at least temporarily, productive…
…or, maybe, they did the military a favor… weeding out a loser before he had an impact on readiness… which might have cost the life of a true soldier.
Whatever the case, I’m not joining the pity party too quickly here… and I am inclined to side with the leadership of a “remote patrol base” that requires everybody to be on the same team rather than a guy with a history of being a whack-job… with a history of being a screw-up…
…and…
…the final nail in the coffin…
…a dirtbag with a hygiene problem that all sorts of instructions, counseling, corrective action, abuse, torment, etc., had no effect on.
That pretty much says it all.
Stinkers must die.
Better if by their own hand.
6:39 pm on June 18th, 2011 20
Fobbits=Garrison, not field.
8:30 pm on June 18th, 2011 21
I’ve know a variety of men and women who ended up as suicides. They were all like Shawn Matthews. They had a lot of baggage (don’t we all?) and they were delusional on their good days (well we all need to work on some parts of our personality).
Not that they weren’t “good people”–in fact none of them showed any suicidal or anti-social signs that I recognized until the day they killed themselves. Which doesn’t mean much because I wasn’t trained like some of you and all of the deaths except Shawn’s (who I only knew from his blog and a few emails) took place in the 80s before it was popular to talk about suicide prevention…
This one is totally on the guy who killed himself. We all have a tough life. We all get picked on. We all don’t whinge and whine and blame other people. It’s selfish and thoughtless to commit suicide, one’s family is alway horribly affected by this.
8:45 pm on June 18th, 2011 22
It has a new meaning these days: Forward Operating Base. In other words – a base that’s forward of the bases where the rimps are sitting back in the rear taking it easy and not worried about getting shot.