Posted on Nov 19, 2018
Americans must share the consequences of our wars
116K
642
193
287
287
0
In 2014, I shared the story of an encounter I had on an airplane with a United States military veteran named Tim. He had overheard a fellow passenger suggest that the challenges facing some veterans after 9/11 were “fake news” and unlike during the Vietnam era. “America supports its veterans,” the woman said. Tim then shared his experience after serving in the Marine Corps in Afghanistan. He tried college, but it never stuck. He was battling with Veterans Affairs, and he was unable to find a job.
But then Tim said something that gave me goosebumps. “Worse than all that, now at home, I feel anonymous,” he told told us. Home among the very people who sent him to fight and kill our enemies, Tim feels invisible. For years, our elected leaders have debated strategies to end our wars after 9/11. However, only a brave few have acknowledged that until the costs and consequences of war are equitably shared by all Americans, our wars will drag on, military conflict will remain too painless a pursuit, and the experiment of an all volunteer military will fail us as a nation.
Three truths inform this proposition. First, our wars after 9/11 are not initially funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Instead, the $5 trillion and growing cost has been largely paid on credit. Second, an exceedingly small number of Americans have directly shouldered the burden, and those who do serve are increasingly not representative of the citizenry. Finally, the assumption we have a ready pool of volunteers is becoming a myth. An estimated 70 percent of American youth are ineligible to volunteer, and the willingness of high school students to consider military service is at a record low. This could explain why the United States Army missed its recruiting goals this year for the first time since 2005.
Most agree that a military composed entirely of volunteers is superior to a conscripted force. However, many also acknowledge that this type of system is beginning to show cracks. Some of those cracks stem from fielding military members separate and apart from those who benefit from a safe and prosperous nation. The worst fears of those who architected the all volunteer military included a concern that because only “some” would shoulder the burdens of war, then war as an instrument of foreign policy would become too easy. They also feared that when those who fight come home, they would be cast as a government problem.
More than four decades and several wars later, I would describe these fears as prophetic. Since 1973, the United States has used military force on more than 220 occasions. Alternatively, in the 45 years prior when a draft was the law of the land, the United States leveraged military force as an instrument of foreign policy on just 24 occasions. Some of this contrast can rightfully be attributed to an complex global security situation, but it is also likely true that when you do not have to pay the bill, and when it is not your child being compelled to fight our battles, war is too easy.
Why do those who volunteer come home and cite lack of connection to civilian society? It is because after 17 years of war, we have discounted the foundational assumption sustaining the all volunteer force that those who benefit from the military service of others incur a moral obligation to those who serve the cause of defending our nation. Today, while a laudable segment of Americans remain committed to the concerns of veterans, the majority is not. Last year, less than 1 percent of charitable contributions in the United States went to veterans organizations. By comparison, Americans gave to animal welfare charities at five times that level. Most Americans are against reinstating the draft. Consequently, it is time to have a conversation focused on mechanisms to equitably share the burden of current and future wars with all members of our society.
I can offer a likely provocative start to that conversation. Congress should enact law requiring companies generating revenue from federal defense contracts to make annual philanthropic contributions to organizations that serve veterans and their families, equal to 1 percent of total operating profit generated from those contracts. Congress should enact law requiring colleges to make financial aid available to veterans, equal to 1 percent of the federal funding received annually by each institution. Those colleges must also admit students connected to the military, equal to or exceeding 1 percent of the total student population. Furthermore, Congress should enact law requiring all households to pay an annual military tax of $15. This would fund a national veterans trust designated to public and private programs serving the needs of military families.
After 17 years in Afghanistan, our elected leaders must demonstrate the courage to introduce policy requiring all Americans to shoulder the costs and consequences of war. In the absence of courage, war as a tool for diplomacy will remain far too easy a pursuit, our battles will drag on without end in sight, and veterans like Tim will remain anonymous.
Michael Haynie is a veteran of the United States Air Force, vice chancellor of Syracuse University, and executive director of the Institute for Veterans and Military Families. The views expressed in this column are his alone and not the views of RallyPoint.
*This article originally appeared on the Hill.
But then Tim said something that gave me goosebumps. “Worse than all that, now at home, I feel anonymous,” he told told us. Home among the very people who sent him to fight and kill our enemies, Tim feels invisible. For years, our elected leaders have debated strategies to end our wars after 9/11. However, only a brave few have acknowledged that until the costs and consequences of war are equitably shared by all Americans, our wars will drag on, military conflict will remain too painless a pursuit, and the experiment of an all volunteer military will fail us as a nation.
Three truths inform this proposition. First, our wars after 9/11 are not initially funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Instead, the $5 trillion and growing cost has been largely paid on credit. Second, an exceedingly small number of Americans have directly shouldered the burden, and those who do serve are increasingly not representative of the citizenry. Finally, the assumption we have a ready pool of volunteers is becoming a myth. An estimated 70 percent of American youth are ineligible to volunteer, and the willingness of high school students to consider military service is at a record low. This could explain why the United States Army missed its recruiting goals this year for the first time since 2005.
Most agree that a military composed entirely of volunteers is superior to a conscripted force. However, many also acknowledge that this type of system is beginning to show cracks. Some of those cracks stem from fielding military members separate and apart from those who benefit from a safe and prosperous nation. The worst fears of those who architected the all volunteer military included a concern that because only “some” would shoulder the burdens of war, then war as an instrument of foreign policy would become too easy. They also feared that when those who fight come home, they would be cast as a government problem.
More than four decades and several wars later, I would describe these fears as prophetic. Since 1973, the United States has used military force on more than 220 occasions. Alternatively, in the 45 years prior when a draft was the law of the land, the United States leveraged military force as an instrument of foreign policy on just 24 occasions. Some of this contrast can rightfully be attributed to an complex global security situation, but it is also likely true that when you do not have to pay the bill, and when it is not your child being compelled to fight our battles, war is too easy.
Why do those who volunteer come home and cite lack of connection to civilian society? It is because after 17 years of war, we have discounted the foundational assumption sustaining the all volunteer force that those who benefit from the military service of others incur a moral obligation to those who serve the cause of defending our nation. Today, while a laudable segment of Americans remain committed to the concerns of veterans, the majority is not. Last year, less than 1 percent of charitable contributions in the United States went to veterans organizations. By comparison, Americans gave to animal welfare charities at five times that level. Most Americans are against reinstating the draft. Consequently, it is time to have a conversation focused on mechanisms to equitably share the burden of current and future wars with all members of our society.
I can offer a likely provocative start to that conversation. Congress should enact law requiring companies generating revenue from federal defense contracts to make annual philanthropic contributions to organizations that serve veterans and their families, equal to 1 percent of total operating profit generated from those contracts. Congress should enact law requiring colleges to make financial aid available to veterans, equal to 1 percent of the federal funding received annually by each institution. Those colleges must also admit students connected to the military, equal to or exceeding 1 percent of the total student population. Furthermore, Congress should enact law requiring all households to pay an annual military tax of $15. This would fund a national veterans trust designated to public and private programs serving the needs of military families.
After 17 years in Afghanistan, our elected leaders must demonstrate the courage to introduce policy requiring all Americans to shoulder the costs and consequences of war. In the absence of courage, war as a tool for diplomacy will remain far too easy a pursuit, our battles will drag on without end in sight, and veterans like Tim will remain anonymous.
Michael Haynie is a veteran of the United States Air Force, vice chancellor of Syracuse University, and executive director of the Institute for Veterans and Military Families. The views expressed in this column are his alone and not the views of RallyPoint.
*This article originally appeared on the Hill.
Edited 7 y ago
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 94
Excellent article. I totally agree. It I go one step further. We need national service. Not a draft but a selection by every young American of a national service agency to support and work in for two years upon graduating high school , no exceptions. They could choose service in the armed forces of their choice or service with a number of other causes including FIRE, POLICE, VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA, PEACE CORPS, APPALACHIAN CORPS , CIVIL WORKS CONSTRUCTION ETC. The carrot would be that you would get the GI BILL if you chose the military.
(0)
(0)
My career spanned the years from Vietnam to the Post 911 era. My feeling is that it is not so much that America supports it's Veterans, it just does not condemn them and it thanks them.
BUT
There is much too little after the parade.
The VA, created "for those who have borne the battle" has, in it's 150+ year history, failed to focus on and conquer the signature disease of war, PTSD. Indeed, the 2010 VA Treatment Guidelines for PTSD were horribly ineffective. They were drug based, had a less than 5% success rate (based in the clinical trial data and the VA's own data), hated by much of the Veteran population (only 18% completed a 12 week drug regimen), and often not even followed by the VA doctors themselves. The new 2017 guidelines focus on counseling but the VA has too few Veterans trained in that area. Locally, one of the counselors is a non-veteran who hardly speaks English and is know for dispensing Zoloft like candy. Mind you, this is 150 years after the creation of the VA and PTSD is a signature disease of war
and therefore fully and completely in the VA's area of responsibility.
Florida has one of the highest populations of Veterans, and homeless Veterans, and ranks 49th in mental health care (which includes substance abuse). Florida prides itself on being "Veteran Friendly" and is in many ways, but being 49th in mental health care is out of sync with that claim.
I'd like to postulate that after World War II, we knew how to bring the boys home. We knew how to bring them back into society. Somewhere after that, maybe before and certainly around Vietnam we forgot and / or tossed it aside. Whenever, however, we lost it.
We have now superficially substituted yellow ribbons and parades and retreats and one day a year "stand-downs" for real and ongoing support in too many places and for too many things. Additionally, there still lurks an underlying disrespect and / or mental health prejudice on the part of a few. For example, I have to wonder why it has to be pointed out, for every shooting, whether the person was a veteran or not. What is the point of that? Remember, media cannot tell you what to think, but it can put in front of you what to think about and thus shape your thought process.
I believe the best solutions will not be through Government, but can be aided by them. I believe current programs can be adapted to better assist Veterans, and I believe there are and will be gaps in any program that can and must be solved privately.
"Gee that was a nice parade! ...now what?"
- a veteran
BUT
There is much too little after the parade.
The VA, created "for those who have borne the battle" has, in it's 150+ year history, failed to focus on and conquer the signature disease of war, PTSD. Indeed, the 2010 VA Treatment Guidelines for PTSD were horribly ineffective. They were drug based, had a less than 5% success rate (based in the clinical trial data and the VA's own data), hated by much of the Veteran population (only 18% completed a 12 week drug regimen), and often not even followed by the VA doctors themselves. The new 2017 guidelines focus on counseling but the VA has too few Veterans trained in that area. Locally, one of the counselors is a non-veteran who hardly speaks English and is know for dispensing Zoloft like candy. Mind you, this is 150 years after the creation of the VA and PTSD is a signature disease of war
and therefore fully and completely in the VA's area of responsibility.
Florida has one of the highest populations of Veterans, and homeless Veterans, and ranks 49th in mental health care (which includes substance abuse). Florida prides itself on being "Veteran Friendly" and is in many ways, but being 49th in mental health care is out of sync with that claim.
I'd like to postulate that after World War II, we knew how to bring the boys home. We knew how to bring them back into society. Somewhere after that, maybe before and certainly around Vietnam we forgot and / or tossed it aside. Whenever, however, we lost it.
We have now superficially substituted yellow ribbons and parades and retreats and one day a year "stand-downs" for real and ongoing support in too many places and for too many things. Additionally, there still lurks an underlying disrespect and / or mental health prejudice on the part of a few. For example, I have to wonder why it has to be pointed out, for every shooting, whether the person was a veteran or not. What is the point of that? Remember, media cannot tell you what to think, but it can put in front of you what to think about and thus shape your thought process.
I believe the best solutions will not be through Government, but can be aided by them. I believe current programs can be adapted to better assist Veterans, and I believe there are and will be gaps in any program that can and must be solved privately.
"Gee that was a nice parade! ...now what?"
- a veteran
(0)
(0)
I served from 1969 to 1973 during the Vietnam Conflict. I served as an AF ER medic. it is the most detested and despised conflict! And as accused, we killed lots of kids, women, and the aged. As Lt. Col. Grossman offers in "On Killing", we are not naturally inclined to kill other humans. I am a retired clinical psychologist and professor. I conduct research on combat trauma and provide clinical consultation to vets in my area w/o cost. Also see TJ Brennan and Finbarr O'Reilly personal account of combat in "Shooting Ghosts". The psychosocial adverse impact of war and combat is extensive and impacts the soldier, his family, and society. To me, it is the method of last resort.
20 vets/day kill themselves. Most who do are not being followed at a VAC? The suicide rate among active duty, even non-combatants is climbing.
Whether a "regular or conscripted", the trauma is intolerable!
Rich
20 vets/day kill themselves. Most who do are not being followed at a VAC? The suicide rate among active duty, even non-combatants is climbing.
Whether a "regular or conscripted", the trauma is intolerable!
Rich
(0)
(0)
Some people believe that every American should serve for two years. In principle, that sounds good. In practice, however, the Armed Forces don't need that many recruits. The Armed Forces also aren't reform camps or self improvement programs for people who are unfit for military service for one reason or another. It is an honor to serve in uniform, whether people realize it or not. The military should enlist only be best people it is able to attract. Those who answer the call should be recognized for performing service that others were either unwilling or incapable of performing.
(0)
(0)
There is an old saying that I always understood, and one that is still true day: 'TO HAVE PEACE, PREPAIR FOR WAR." The military observes this one very well.
(0)
(0)
I agree most of us are forgotten, Like thoses from the KOREN war.
Exsept for a few thing's some of them where drafted.
Now we all volunteer for our Military service.
In Korea very few women farced direct combat or where K.I.A..
Now it is common thing.
One other thing that is different most of us better V.A. hospital's to go to.
Then The so called justice system seems to be against current and former military people.
There are alot pf us that have FOR LACK of a better term Mentale problems.
For example some one starts a fight with A combat vet. The next thing you know the one that started it in getting the crap beat out of him, and the vet does not remember a thing or very little of it.
guess who goes to jail.
Then the juge or other people that do not have a clue think. That just becuse we are trained to fight, We can turn it on and off.
When in fact most of us can not.
This is anther resion we have problems in Schools and at some job's.
Also just genral problems dealing with every day life.
I my simple opion that is why we seem to have so meny that do Drugs and Drink themselfs out of what they have left.
some can put it in a box. Then put it away.
Exsept for a few thing's some of them where drafted.
Now we all volunteer for our Military service.
In Korea very few women farced direct combat or where K.I.A..
Now it is common thing.
One other thing that is different most of us better V.A. hospital's to go to.
Then The so called justice system seems to be against current and former military people.
There are alot pf us that have FOR LACK of a better term Mentale problems.
For example some one starts a fight with A combat vet. The next thing you know the one that started it in getting the crap beat out of him, and the vet does not remember a thing or very little of it.
guess who goes to jail.
Then the juge or other people that do not have a clue think. That just becuse we are trained to fight, We can turn it on and off.
When in fact most of us can not.
This is anther resion we have problems in Schools and at some job's.
Also just genral problems dealing with every day life.
I my simple opion that is why we seem to have so meny that do Drugs and Drink themselfs out of what they have left.
some can put it in a box. Then put it away.
(0)
(0)
Then let’s try something like the movie starship troopers. No joke I’m serious look at what was gained if you volunteered to serve. Make it worth serving your country and give some pride back to those who did sacrifice more than normal people in the country.
(0)
(0)
I have lived this ( the Marine that initial the article started with) for the last five and a half years. It's not to mention, if you have a job, you are basically like poster child for the company, " Company XYZ Supports our Troops". As a veteran, you're used as a grandstand to show appreciation, but the company's won't let you grow with them. I'm in a living hell right now with my current employer. Not only is there a problem advancing, but also , I feel the effects of having PTSD , from some type of discrimination. Yes, I chose to defend the country, but I didn't choose to be treated like I don't matter or invisible, as stated in the article.
(0)
(0)
Since, a Federal Court has recently ruled requiring males register for the draft to receive grants, I wonder how long our representatives in Washington will take to dismantle Selective Service or amend the law to require all to register at age 18.
(0)
(0)
I can appreciate the insights received in conversation from the gentleman on the flight, but many in my own circle feel that disconnection between their military fellows and the civilian population. I feel that way because of several traits I see lacking in the civilian world. I have heard the words mission critical while working in the civilian workforce. I had to laugh hearing that since what we were doing at the time was so not critical to the success of that business it wasn't even funny. I see a distinct lack of loyalty amongst civilians, ready to shank each other in a heartbeat for a nickel more an hour at dead end jobs. I have observed a lack of fellowship even in organizations that purport to be founded on such principles. Until some of those traits are shared by both military personnel and civilians that send them into conflict, there can be little in common. The military folks win the wars, and the civilians lose the peace. They lose the peace because they are not invested in maintaining it. Until they are, they will never share the price of their failure.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next


Syracuse
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) - Afghanistan
Congress
IVMF
Military Family
