Anonymous asked in Pregnancy & ParentingParenting · 1 decade ago

Why so many serial killers ex-military? Why 60,000 Vietnam Vets commit Suicide? Why 35% of woman raped?

Why over 300 Iraq Veterans Commit Suicide? Why over 21,000 Attempted Suicide?

Why are there currently over 200,000 Homeless Veterans? Why has there been more then 1 million Homeless Veterans Since 1966?

How much comission does a recruiter get for preying on naive teens and making them sign up, sometimes lying, saying its the law?

Is this true why so many ex-military become serial killers?

David Grossman, a former U.S. military psychologist who helped develop programs to train new recruits to become more effective killers, said that the key to military training lies in breaking down the natural human aversion to killing in a process he calls "disengagement." Once this aversion has been removed, it never comes back, and can make it easier for former soldiers to become murderers.

"The ability to watch a human being's head explode and to do it again and again -- that takes a kind of desensitization to human suffering that has to be learned," Mr. Grossman said yesterday.

In earlier wars, many soldiers were psychologically unable to shoot anyone. In order to increase the "trigger-pull ratio," the United States changed the basic training offered to all recruits and draftees so they would be aggressively desensitized to killing.

Some observers believe this may be why mass murders have become far more common in the past 50 years.

In the 1970s, some observers believed that the humiliation and social opprobrium caused by the Vietnam War, led many former soldiers to become mentally unstable, and potentially to become serial killers.

2 Answers

  • ?
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    One can understand your revulsions -- strike that -- well...maybe some but not 'everyone'. It is this. Necessity will have its way and mandate: our world is part of a warring planet, ay, a warring universe. Mistakes ensue not necessarily in the preparedness for national defense as much as with not having preparedness and planning architecture with as equal intentions to afford ex-combatants the necessary acclimation, which wisely re-introduces them to normal environs again... Herewith is a predicament in which servicemen are abruptly flung into a crescendo of preparation for war and as quickly into war itself -- a quite radical, violent, and protracted circumstance -- and then, relative to the extreme and opposite difference on return, there follows no safe and sane decrescendo to afford them safe haven.

    I find that nature usually carries by means of deliberation. Explained: as regards oceans and seas, we may observe that long, languishing and slow wavelengths of the waters lapping along a shore line does build up that shore, whether comprised of sand or rock or soils. And there evidences the reverse result wherein there follow fast, short wavelengths -- as does occur amid gale force winds: shorelines and whole cliffs are eroded when this occurs, sometimes drastically. Likewise is this true to the nature of human beings: too abrupt an event shatters and undermines one's very emotional and psychical constitution.

    Now, nothing will rob this world of its penchant for war; thus we must stay in readiness. The error, however, rests with the planners and declarers of war. In the instance of America, we have not yet begun to see the synthesis involved and simply balance needing imported, which wielding would well underpin what we do as a nation, which should fall to Congress, the Presidency, and the Veterans Administration itself to create and administer.

    Incidentally, not few sociologists and politicians before now have argued that if there is a department of war, there must in tandem exist the obverse -- one on behalf of peace. And such an argument is no flaming liberal notion: there are no liberals and conservatives when pinned down under fire; ay, one bleeds in no wise differently from the other, either.

    That such enactment never did occur would beg the question, why? For propriety would certainly point to the Veterans Administration as the best vanguard to champion a Congressional Act. Perhaps unfortunate is the American condition in one great respect: there works far too few employees who have seen war who work in the Veterans Administration. Too many VA employees are comfortable, who see their jobs as mere paychecks, having their weekends off, or simply do not know that there is a question needing asked because they have not withstood sufficient strike and strain in their lives that they might somehow translate theirs into some boon for American veterans.

    No one can convince me that the federal government cannot devise a means by which educated and seasoned men and women once exposed to war -- and the military outright -- who cannot design a modern, humane, and civil program to help steer ex-war veterans from harm's way.

    Source(s): Afterword: respective of our subject here, peace can prove to be as violent as war...
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    you must be a joy to live with dude

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.