Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Army Suicides This Year Exceed 2012 Combat Deaths in Afghanistan

Posted 1 year ago on Oct. 24, 2012, 10:26 p.m. EST by john23 (-272)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

70 Comments

70 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Wondering if some of these soldiers were murdered, as cover up regarding things they have seen.

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

No. It is a serious issue and that kind of wild un-based conspiracy theorist accusation is just downright rude and ignorant to those that unfortunately took their own lives and to their friends and families.

[-] 3 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Unfortunately, Those that control the US, couldn't care less if people live or die, as long as they get what they want.

Do you trust everything MSM/government tells you? Do you believe there are no MSM/government subject blackouts?

[-] -2 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

No I don't blieve everything the media or government tells me, however, since I choose to inform myself form multiple sources regarding topics of importance in this country, I choose to apply something called COMMON SENSE.

Logic, common sense, rationale thinking, being informed are what is good for the US. Not wild paranoid accusations.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by MaryS (678) 1 year ago

Wow. You strike me as being a little rude and insensitive yourself. While you may know something about this, may even be in the mental health field, what gives you, who just joined this month, the right to be condescending to people who have been here a year who you don't even know? Geez. Get some damn manners and come back later.

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Thank you Mary, for post.

Best Regards, Nevada

[-] 2 points by MaryS (678) 1 year ago

oh well, pushed my buttons a little. She hasn't gotten far enough along in her psych courses to play well with others.

[-] -1 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

because it is just common sense. Did you read that post??? Nothing but conspiracy theories. Time on this forum does not equal intelligence or that person knows more than someone else.

To me, to make wild accusations about people that were in some sort of serious mental state to take their own lives, and this person tries to attach some anti-government agenda to it, is just downright wrong.

This person is turning another tragedy of war into something it is not, removing the issue from what it really should be about. The mental health of our loved ones in the military, and what effects these wars have had on their lives.

[-] 1 points by MaryS (678) 1 year ago

Yes I read the post but also have been reading Nevada's posts for a year and have never seen anything that wasn't thoughtful. When a person begins a sentence with "wondering if"-- it's not an accusation, it's a question. The first step of being informed is to question everything you hear. Now, these deaths are outrageous and heart-wrenching and very few people here that I've ever seen would be insensitive to that; quite the opposite.

[-] -1 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

To me, to even think or try to begin a conversation about that is insensitive. Disguising disgusting accusation with innocent sounding wording is wrong.

How's this for an example? "wondering if people are really unemployed, or the Republicans made it up so Obama wouldn't get re-elected"

[-] 1 points by MaryS (678) 1 year ago

I wouldn't put it past Republicans to make up anything. I can't talk to you if you don't know the difference between an accusation and a question. Questioning the government and the media IS common sense and we do it on a regular basis here. If you want to rant and rave against them, you'll have some takers.

[-] -3 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

I know the difference, and sometimes questioning is implying accusation. Nevada was implying that not all suicides were actual suicides but government sanctioned murders of soldiers. That isn't a question.

Sorry you can't tell the difference between using common sense to question or accuse, and using un-based unintelligent agendas to question and accuse.

Questioning government is our right. Just use some common sense. That is why most people think OWS are a bunch of crackpots.

[-] 4 points by MaryS (678) 1 year ago

I don't think "most people" think OWS are crackpots, just those who refuse to think outside their little box. If you are indeed a psych student one of the first things you're going to learn is not to assume anything up front about people. And if you are military or know someone who is, then there are counselors who can help you redirect your anger appropriately.

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Hey Mary,

Please see above posts.

If Jen wants to be informed----Jen will be busy.

[-] 3 points by MaryS (678) 1 year ago

Lol, like, for weeks..:)

[-] -1 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

No really most people do not like OWS. If you talk to people outside of this forum or OWS events about it...they really just think we are crackpots or dirty hippies. Which really, with conspiracy theorists around, I can't blame them sometimes. In reality, OWS is more like 1% of the 99%. Maybe one day it will grow but for right now that is how it is.

Well MaryS, maybe Nevada should defend themselves from me and what they intended by their remark. Your defending someone that you don't know their intention either. So you are just as bad "assuming anything up front about people"

This was their response "Unfortunately, Those that control the US, couldn't care less if people live or die, as long as they get what they want."

Instead of an intelligent, comprehensive, and fact based response, Nevada chose to respond with more borderline conspiracy theorist mumbo jumbo.

I will not give you the satisfaction of knowing if I am a Psychologist, Psychiatrist, military, or military family. Maybe I am all of the above, who knows.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (27764) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

What needs to happen prior to the investigation ( as they move slow ) - a ban on the use of drones in civilian areas needs to be called for immediately - as well as banning use on non-military targets - evidence of actual hostilities by identified hostiles being carried out at the time of the Drone strike in a "non-civilian area" must be shown.

There is no acceptable excuse for loss of innocent civilian life due to Drone strikes.

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Agree.

[+] -4 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 1 year ago

Unfortunately, OWS has forged a tight link with conspiracy theorists. Even worse, good intelligent forum users like Builder are falling in their trap as well.

[-] 3 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

conspiracy theory

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (27764) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

aAHha ha ha hahaha . . . caught him playing the game he protests so often - and so often incorrectly at that.

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

This has been an interesting thread.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27764) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Yes - I can see that it really struck a chord with you. As it should strike an inquiring chord with everyone. War is hell - but why are so many of our soldiers killing their-self ? Something seriously stinks.

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Shocking Atrocities

[-] 0 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I remenber many many years ago reading an article in "Psychology Today" about Vietnam vets and the illness du jou8r they suffered PTSD. What the article said was this "PTSD" could also be called "severe feelings of guilt." and that while there was no cure a good treatment would be for the sufferer to devote himself to preventing Vietnam like wars from happening again. Good advice for these guys.

[-] 2 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

PTSD is a complex condition that is not just about "guilt". It can relate to a lot of issues. Even soldiers that do not do anything horrid can get PTSD. Being stationed on a base for a year while it gets bombed every few nights can give you PTSD. Trouble sleeping, nightmares, emotional problems. Certain stressfull situations can give you PTSD, it does not need to be war related. Accident victims, victims of rape and sexual abuse, verbal/physical get PTSD. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Research and understand the condition better.

Though someone with PTSD could focus on something positive in their life that gives it meaning and purpose, and if that is protesting future wars to "prevent vietnam wars from happening again" then cool.

[-] 0 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

The article was specific about Vietnam vets and their "traumas" ("severe feelings of guilt.") which often resulted from quite horrible things they did to other human beings.

[-] 1 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

True, but in general PTSD encompasses more than just feelings of guilt, even in Vietnam. I am pointing out things regarding PTSD to properly educate people about it, so people can understand it better and not think all vets are crazy and that they have a legit problem.

[-] 0 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Okay. So we are talking about two different things.

[-] 1 points by Jencats (20) 1 year ago

I think I was just trying to build on what you were saying.

[-] 0 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 1 year ago

I'm missing something then. Maybe I need some more coffee. Anyhow I gotta head out for work. Take care.

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Thank you Bush-Cheney RepubliCons and 1% War Profiteers!!

May payback be THE bitch from HELL!!

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

Iraq has WMD's

Said by Bush, Cheney, the Clintons, and Biden.

Iran wants to build a nuclear weapon and must be stopped

Said by Obama and Romney

Yeah it's only the republicans!

[-] 0 points by Nevada1 (4458) 1 year ago

Rapelicans.

[-] -2 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Both-Same RepubliCon campaign Strategy. Again!

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

It's sad that you can't actually come up with a fact to show my comment is wrong.

It's because my comment about Iraq is 100% true.

Never said they're the same. I just said they both work for war and Wall Street.....

Did you ever wonder why they're sponsored by billions of dollars from corporations?

[-] -2 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Don't you wonder why they came up with a Citizens United to use against this first black POTUS!!

Of course you do, it's part of the Anti-Obama, Pro-RepubliCon campaign!

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

Except he's getting tons of Super Pac Support just like Mitt Romney is.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/pro-obama-super-pac-outraises-romney-counterpart-again/

You sound like VQ

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Romney is getting Big oil, big agri, big finance money, Karl rove and Koch money. Pres Obama is getting mostly indiv contributions, very little (compared to repubs) from big finance wall st, & big oil.

To push the fallacy they are financed by the same people serves the 1% plutocrats and betrays your partisanship.

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

No, he's not. http://www.opensecrets.org/

Republicon Plant!!

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

80 million in super pacs to 130 million

lesser of 2 evils lol

http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/summ.php?cycle=2012&chrt=V&type=S

From your link

You sound exactly like VQ by the way

Also the article I posted might be more recent. Oct 19

But the Oppose Obama is topped versus the Oppose Romney dept. But Obama is winning the pro-Ad Support.

http://projects.wsj.com/super-pacs/

Just noticed all 3 of these links, including the one you posted have different numbers. Interesting.

WSJ link updated 4 minutes ago it says. Lets go with those numbers.

[-] -1 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

Unicorn, 3 O'Clock!!

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Cause the Murdoch (Fox) owned WSJ historically conservative Wall st Journal ain't partisan right?

Just like you ain't partisan.

If Pres Obama wants to win the election (so he can end the repub created war on terror, & begin the elimination of all nuclear weapons) then he must take political contributions and use superpacs.

Those are the rules that repub appointed judges set with the Citizens United ruling. To not do so would be to allow your right wing wackos take more power and screw the 99% and create more wars.

WE must protest to undo the money in politics problem repub appointed judges created.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

it's according to FEC filings. You can get the numbers from the FEC.

You sound like WSmith

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Forget who we sound like.

Stick with the facts. Your defending of the conservative partisan WSJ is not a surprise.

The numbers I've seen indicate that Pres Obama and the dems get most of their money from Unions, Lawyers, Celebrities, and individual contributions. In fact HISTORIC levels of individual contributions.

Romney is getting much of his money from Big oil, Big wall st Finance, Kochs, Adelsons, other billionaires other big corp 1% plutocrats. All the organizations OWS stands against.

OWS stands with Unions who stand with Pres Obama.

Your anti dem partisan campaign attacks are dishonest.

I don't know who you think you're kiddin but you AIN'T kiddin me!

[-] -2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

And his being a black man is a big part of the citizens united effort, as well as the ALEC written/repub effort at voter ID/suppression in 40 states.

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

His being black adds lube, makes things slide into place easier.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Hello.

Racist bastards!

[-] 0 points by WSmith (1989) from Cornelius, OR 1 year ago

This is what it has come to in the inner poli-world.

http://vimeo.com/52134909