Crazed Veterans Spark Nationwide Crime Wave
Posted on 01/13/2008 6:06:24 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
Crazed Veterans Spark Nationwide Crime Wave
That's the theme of a front page article in today's New York Times: "Across America, Deadly Echoes of Foreign Battles." The article reports on what must have been a major effort by the Times to comb through news reports from across the country, identifying and tabulating instances where servicemen who returned from Iraq or Afghanistan were charged with some form of homicide. The Times summarizes the results of its research:
Town by town across the country, headlines have been telling similar stories. Lakewood, Wash.: “Family Blames Iraq After Son Kills Wife.” Pierre, S.D.: “Soldier Charged With Murder Testifies About Postwar Stress.” Colorado Springs: “Iraq War Vets Suspected in Two Slayings, Crime Ring.” Individually, these are stories of local crimes, gut-wrenching postscripts to the war for the military men, their victims and their communities. Taken together, they paint the patchwork picture of a quiet phenomenon, tracing a cross-country trail of death and heartbreak.
The New York Times found 121 cases in which veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan committed a killing in this country, or were charged with one, after their return from war.
The Times article goes on just about forever--it is nine pages long on the web--but it consists almost entirely of anecdotes about a handful of the 121 alleged crimes. The stories are indeed sad, and some of the soldiers and veterans involved no doubt did suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Still, the Times' approach is astonishingly unsystematic, especially since the paper takes seriously the idea that the U.S. military may be responsible for the supposed crime wave:
At various times, the question of whether the military shares some blame for these killings gets posed. When it is not recounting stories of crimes committed by servicemen, always from a point of view sympathetic to the idea that service in a theater of war was a contributing factor--"plagued by nightmares about an Iraqi civilian killed by his unit, [Mr. Sepi] often needed alcohol to fall asleep"--the paper waxes pretentious:
Decades of studies on the problems of Vietnam veterans have established links between combat trauma and higher rates of unemployment, homelessness, gun ownership, child abuse, domestic violence, substance abuse — and criminality. On a less scientific level, such links have long been known. “The connection between war and crime is unfortunately very ancient,” said Dr. Shay, the V.A. psychiatrist and author. “The first thing that Odysseus did after he left Troy was to launch a pirate raid on Ismarus. Ending up in trouble with the law has always been a final common pathway for some portion of psychologically injured veterans.”
Now put yourself in the place of a newspaper editor. Suppose you are asked to evaluate whether your paper should run a long article on a nationwide epidemic of murders committed by veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan--a crime wave that, your reporter suggests, constitutes a "cross-country trail of death and heartbreak." Suppose that the reporter who proposes to write the article says it will be a searing indictment of the U.S. military's inadequate attention to post-traumatic stress disorder. Suppose further that you are not a complete idiot.
Given that last assumption, I'm pretty sure your first question will be: "How does the murder rate among veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan compare to the murder rate for young American men generally?" Remarkably, this is a question the New York Times did not think to ask. Or, if the Times asked the question and figured out the answer, the paper preferred not to report it.
As of 2005, the homicide rate for Americans aged 18-24, the cohort into which most soldiers fall, was around 27 per 100,000. (The rate for men in that age range would be much higher, of course, since men commit around 88% of homicides. But since most soldiers are also men, I gave civilians the benefit of the doubt and considered gender a wash.)
Next we need to know how many servicemen have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan. A definitive number is no doubt available, but the only hard figure I've seen is that as of last October, moe than 500,000 U.S. Army personnel had served in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Other sources peg the total number of personnel from all branches of the military who have served in the two theaters much higher, e.g. 750,000, 650,000 as of February 2007, or 1,280,000. For the sake of argument, let's say that 700,000 soldiers, Marines, airmen and sailors have returned to the U.S. from service in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Do the math: the 121 alleged instances of homicide identified by the Times, out of a population of 700,000, works out to a rate of 17 per 100,000--quite a bit lower than the overall national rate of around 27.
But wait! The national rate of 27 homicides per 100,000 is an annual rate, whereas the Times' 121 alleged crimes were committed over a period of six years. Which means that, as far as the Times' research shows, the rate of homicides committed by military personnel who have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan is only a fraction of the homicide rate for other Americans aged 18 to 24. Somehow, the Times managed to publish nine pages of anecdotes about the violence wreaked by returning servicemen without ever mentioning this salient fact.
I've got a suggestion for the editors of the Times: next time, why don't they undertake a research project to identify all murders and other forms of homicide committed (or allegedly committed--no finding of guilt necessary!) by people who are, or recently have been, employed by newspaper companies? They could write a long article in which selected crimes allegedly committed by reporters, editors and typesetters are recounted in detail, accompanied by speculation about whether newspaper employment was a contributing factor in each case. No need to wonder whether reporters, editors and typesetters commit homicide at a rate any different from the rest of the population--a single murder is too many!
Here's another idea: the Times' story on veterans' crimes repeatedly focused on the role of alcoholism, which the paper associated with the stresses of military service. How about a survey that compares alcoholism rates among reporters and soldiers? Just on a hunch, I'll wager a dollar that the alcoholism rate for reporters is higher.
It's bad enough that the New York Times smears our military personnel when they are serving overseas. Can't they at least leave them alone once they return home?
Actually it appears that veterans are not pulling their weight in committing murders here in the US, although, according to the article, they own guns. Hmmm... much work needs to be done.
Stalone is coming out with a new Rambo movie........which only work if VV are psycho killers.
Crazed Veterans Spark Nationwide Crime Wave
I guess the fedgov needs to disarm the vets, just to be safe.
Good luck with that little project.
The NYT will be out of business in five years. Few will cry.
I went to Catholic H.S. in NYC and it really was a delightful paper in the day, if a bit lefty. I remember sitting in the cafeteria before class, having a coffee and reading the sports and editorial pages (pre-op/ed days). I haven't changed that much, they and the Boston Globe have both become so teeth-achingly politically correct that only tone-deaf moron could bear to read them any more.
You can add Bill Kristol or Johnathan Goldberg or Tom Sowell, the overall tone of the rag isn't going to change. It's not that they're lefty, it's that they are mind numbingly boring. The cognitive dissonance required to believe the liberal left agenda makes you a bore. It's almost as bad as The Nation. They still think the Rosenbergs were innocent. And Alger Hiss was framed. Get over it.
When Hillary becomes president she can issue a pardon for the Rosenbergs like Dukakis did for Sacco and Vanzetti, but as in the case of S&V, they'll still be guilty as Hell.
As stated before....that 90 pound PC hired badass split tail LEO SWAT’Y down the street keeps all my tools for me till I need em anyway.
Coincidence? I think not.
If they keep pushing disarmament that will be the least of their problems.
Deja Vu all over again.
And that would be which one....?
Now suddenly when the cops take them on there is "fire and maneuver" and flanking movements on the cops. The next thing you know, they'll be ripping off the military for mortars and claymore mines! I've always felt that the biggest difference between me and the thugs that would help me to survive would be my training which although unused and dormant for many years is always still right there. Now I'm not so sure.
It wasn't nearly as subtle back then. It was in your face and viscous as hell.
You have any documentation for that or is it another urban legend?
It is also time to NEVER EVER buy one of their newspapers
You are right. What’s more, if we wanted to end the gangs, we could. If we wanted to end people coming across and strengthening MS13 and the like, we could. We have RICO laws. We have immigration laws.
We have a president and other political figures who want this nation so damaged, that they can run ruffshod over the U.S. Citizens to implement their goals. Solid citizens wouldn’t allow them to. And so it is that our nation must be torn down.
I firmly believe this is about sovereignty and the sanctity of our national identity.
Nobody but nobody would be stupid enough to allow what is taking place, if it didn’t fit into a percieved game plan.
Globalism and a unified single government for the Americas is on the fast track, and you and I and our nation stands second behind those goals, if not third or fourth.
"All the news that's fit to pick-up dog shit with"
We’re all about ROI.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.