Pentagon Won't Ban Tobacco Products In War Zones

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Pentagon Won't Ban Tobacco Products In War Zones stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

PAULINE JELINEK | 07/16/09 12:19 AM | AP

What's Your Reaction?
Afghanistan Us

WASHINGTON — Smoke 'em if you got 'em. The Pentagon reassured troops Wednesday that it won't ban tobacco products in war zones. Defense officials hadn't actually planned to eliminate smoking – at least for now. But fear of a ban arose among some troops after the Defense Department received a study recommending the military move toward becoming tobacco-free – perhaps in about 20 years.

Press secretary Geoff Morrell pointedly told a Pentagon news conference that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is not planning to prohibit the use of cigarettes, chewing tobacco or other tobacco products by troops in combat.

"He knows that the situation they are confronting is stressful enough as it is," Morrell said, noting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "I don't think he is interested in adding to the stress levels by taking away one of the few outlets they may have to relieve stress."

Gates will review the new study to see if there are some things than can be done to work toward the goal of having a smoke-free force some day, Morrell said.

"Obviously, it's not our preference to have a force that is using tobacco products," he said, noting health concerns and the high cost of caring for health-related problems.

The study, commissioned by the Pentagon and the Veterans Affairs Department, recommended that the military start making incremental moves toward becoming smoke-free. The report by the Institute of Medicine suggested the services could start by banning smoking at military academies, then among recruits. It said the VA and Pentagon should eliminate use of tobacco on its facilities and the military should stop selling tobacco products at its commissaries.

The military and VA have been working for years to reduce smoking among soldiers and vets through a number of programs. The Pentagon laid out a plan in 1999 to reduce smoking rates by 5 percent a year and reduce chewing tobacco use to 15 percent by 2001 – and still wasn't able to achieve the goals.

"Tobacco use declined overall from 1980 to 2005, but there has recently been an increase in consumption, possibly because of increased tobacco use by deployed troops," the study said.

Story continues below

The military hasn't placed a high enough priority on reducing tobacco use, according to the study, and that while smoking has declined in the U.S., it remains higher in the military than in the civilian world.

In 2005, a third of members of the active-duty military smoked compared to a fifth of the adult U.S. population, the study said, adding that it "has been implicated in" higher dropout rates during and after basic training, higher absenteeism in the military and other problems.

Criticism of the proposals spread across the Internet and among troops.

"Our troops make enough sacrifices to serve our nation," said Brian Wise, executive director of the advocacy group Military Families United. "They give up many of the freedoms civilians enjoy already without being told they cannot partake in yet another otherwise legal activity."

Spc. Charles Rodriguez, 23, said he started smoking long before he joined the Army and that his pack-a-day habit doesn't affect his physical fitness. His Army instructors during basic training made him quit, but he quickly started up again, Rodriguez said in an interview outside of Fort Campbell, Ky.

During his last deployment to Iraq, Rodriguez found a lot of time to smoke while troops were patrolling or just hanging around the base. He said one of his friends who doesn't normally smoke would join him for a cigarette during the deployment, just out of boredom

Said Rodriguez, "There's nothing else to do and they're cheap over there."

___

Associated Press writers Kristin M. Hall in Oak Grove, Ky., and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.

(This version CORRECTS the spelling of Rodriguez.)

WASHINGTON — Smoke 'em if you got 'em. The Pentagon reassured troops Wednesday that it won't ban tobacco products in war zones. Defense officials hadn't actually planned to eliminate smoking &nd...
WASHINGTON — Smoke 'em if you got 'em. The Pentagon reassured troops Wednesday that it won't ban tobacco products in war zones. Defense officials hadn't actually planned to eliminate smoking &nd...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
315
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last » (7 pages total)
- Daly I'm a Fan of Daly 19 fans permalink

smoke screen - with all the opium around, we have bigger problems

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:30 PM on 07/16/2009

I despise cigarette smoke, support most public smoking bans, and EVEN I think banning smoking for combat troops is stupid. Being in a combat zone cannot be any healthier...let 'em smoke as long as they are respectful to those troops who don't.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:24 PM on 07/16/2009
- pinkyboo I'm a Fan of pinkyboo 22 fans permalink

Absolutely and I do not think you should force people into nicotine withdrawl when they are armed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:26 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

No different than keeping a Lion from eating for weeks, only to soak yourself in blood and tease the beast while in it's cage. YES, it would be that bad.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 PM on 07/16/2009
- TexasDem0 I'm a Fan of TexasDem0 36 fans permalink

At night, you can see a lit cigarette for a mile.
Do you want to sit in a bunker with a fool giving your position away, providing a target for a sniper?

A non-smoker can smell cigarette smoke from a distance.
Do you want to be on a patrol with someone who has given away your presence in the area?

Is it stressful to be forced to endure someone else's cigarette smoke?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:37 PM on 07/16/2009
- shespeaks I'm a Fan of shespeaks 39 fans permalink
photo

A story top of the fold in Stars and Stripes had the same headline, large: "smoke 'em if you got 'em".
It freaked everybody out. However because the ban would be so slow and long-term, it wasn't a story then, and the fact that it's not a story now isn't a story. If you know what I mean. To RiverofSpart...be more worried about the healthcare costs from them getting their legs blown off.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:23 PM on 07/16/2009
- CarmanK I'm a Fan of CarmanK 41 fans permalink

Leave those guys and gals in the military alone. They need a break !! Stop wasting our resources on this nonsense in a time of war.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 07/16/2009
- TexasDem0 I'm a Fan of TexasDem0 36 fans permalink

The addiction of the smokers should outweigh the rights and health of non-smokers?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:39 PM on 07/16/2009
- ScaryBob I'm a Fan of ScaryBob 7 fans permalink

"his pack-a-day habit doesn't affect his physical fitness"

LIAR.

But if they want to smoke while they are getting bombed and shot at, I say go for it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 07/16/2009

Actually that dude's in Kentucky now. Of course, if people didn't smoke in Kentucky a. there would be no revenue and b. there would be nothing to do except make meth.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:10 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

They can't drink, they have little sexual outlet, why not keep the smoking lamp lit?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 07/16/2009
- TexasDem0 I'm a Fan of TexasDem0 36 fans permalink

Because the majority of people do not smoke.
Because it affects the health of everyone around them.
Because it can disclose your position.
Why not let everyone snort cocaine?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:41 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

I just don't get how this idea ever got off the ground in the first place. We trust these men and women to preserve our liberties and to keep us safe. They can smoke if they want to. I will pay for a few packs if it helps them cope with their job!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 07/16/2009
- duh I'm a Fan of duh 2 fans permalink

I got a huge laugh out of the idea that someone thought they ought to ban soldiers in war zones from smoking because it might be bad for their health.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 07/16/2009
- liberal54 I'm a Fan of liberal54 2 fans permalink
photo

Thanks for saying it, I thought the same thing (even though I'm one of those "holier than thou" people who quit smoking 22 years ago and think EVERYONE should quit smoking).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:27 PM on 07/16/2009
- TexasDem0 I'm a Fan of TexasDem0 36 fans permalink

Or those holier than thou advocates of smoking.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 PM on 07/16/2009
- TexasDem0 I'm a Fan of TexasDem0 36 fans permalink

Have you ever been in a war zone?
I have, and I detest cigarette smoke now just as much as I did then.
I find it naive to ignore your health anywhere, including in a combat zone.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:50 PM on 07/16/2009
- pons1595 I'm a Fan of pons1595 8 fans permalink
photo

http://www.cababstractsplus.org/abstracts/Abstract.aspx?AcNo=20053199979

Title: The cigarette manufacturers' efforts to promote tobacco to the U.S. military.

This article describes findings from review of tobacco industry documents regarding promotion of tobacco to the military, and efforts to influence Department of Defense policies regarding the use and sale of tobacco products. The documents reveal that the industry has targeted the military for decades....The industry used distinctive promotion methods such as in-store merchandising, sponsorships, and even brand development to target the military, both in the United States and abroad during times of conflict. Legislative activity to protect tobacco promotion to this vulnerable population was carried out in response to smoking policy changes proposed by the Department of Defense. The tobacco industry has contributed to the high prevalence of smoking in the military and among veterans....In times of war, tobacco has been a tremendous morale booster to the soldier, and a great source of pleasure and satisfaction. Armies ceased fire to trade it during the Civil War (a most civil thing to do). In World War II, the soldier often extracted the cigarette from a K-Ration packet and threw the ration away. In every war, cigarettes are a currency and are bartered for all sorts of booty.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 07/16/2009
- dagdavid I'm a Fan of dagdavid 10 fans permalink
photo

Let them effing smoke, for God's sake! Cigarettes are not as deadly as a bullet from Afghan rebels. These guys put their lives on the line, give them whatever they want.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 07/16/2009
- libsRus I'm a Fan of libsRus 18 fans permalink
photo

Totally agreed.

http://warmongerblog.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:47 PM on 07/16/2009
- TexasDem0 I'm a Fan of TexasDem0 36 fans permalink

Including a smoke free environment?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 PM on 07/16/2009

Let em smoke, drink, do bong, toke, drink gasoline, eat MacDonalds, etc.
They deserve to enjoy what little freedoms they have while serving their country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 07/16/2009
- method I'm a Fan of method 6 fans permalink

Let's not go too far...at least not with McDonalds. That food is hideous!...seriously though, smoking is a stree relief for some and they should be allowed to smoke cigagrettes that is. I can't agree with the bong and of course not drinking gasoline. However smoking pot on downtime, why not.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

I think it's hilarious that of all the vices listed, the ugliest is McDonald's. This is one of those situations where it's sort-of a joke, and sort-of a frightening reality.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:37 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

Why would you be opposed to bongs but smoking pot is OK?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:48 PM on 07/16/2009

Smart decision. It's hard enough to quit when nobody's shooting at you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

we ARE talking about smoking cigarettes, right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

yes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 07/16/2009

Don't ask, don't tell...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 07/16/2009
- tanya1111 I'm a Fan of tanya1111 100 fans permalink
photo

And let them drink when they get back.... Saw a 20 year old just back from Iraq that could not order a beer.... that is just uncool... old enough to fight, not for beer???? Veterans should get a pass...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 07/16/2009
- plzgetreal I'm a Fan of plzgetreal 8 fans permalink

I have advocated a national drinking age of 18 for over 40 years now for exactly that reason.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:14 PM on 07/16/2009
- gh0st I'm a Fan of gh0st 2 fans permalink

Huh...I would have taken the approach to not allow teenagers to go into war zones, but to each his own I suppose.

Really doesn't make a lot of sense that the kids at the local community college should be able to get plowed every night because their buddy is risking his life. Allow combat vets to drink regardless of age, that seems logical. Lower the drinking age because...yah, can't wrap my head around it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:28 PM on 07/16/2009
- JShankel I'm a Fan of JShankel 114 fans permalink
photo

It's funny, tho. Most people stop caring about the 21-year-old drinking age shortly after they turn 21 :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:02 PM on 07/16/2009
- Laserbeam I'm a Fan of Laserbeam 48 fans permalink

I don't agree with plzgetreal that the drinking age should be lowered to 18, but having said that, I think your idea of giving under-age veterans a pass from the drinking law is a great one. I would fully support that.

If you can die in the service of this country, at least you should get a legal beer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:30 PM on 07/16/2009
photo

The issue with underage drinking is a matter of maturity and responsibility. Our soldiers have proven that they can handle themselves in situations that would make most of us crap our pants. Keep the drinking age what it is - raise it, if anything - but soldiers and veterans simply have to show a military I.D. and they can drink, smoke, or do whatever they see fit. We trust them with the defense of our nation - having a beer is small potatoes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:41 PM on 07/16/2009
- mredder4 I'm a Fan of mredder4 30 fans permalink

Smoking should not be considered stress relief. And I smoked for 11 years, so I know what it's like. It's just deferred damage. You'll pay for it later in life. In the fatalistic army where you might be dead tomorrow, that might be fine, but it should still be discouraged by the government, which is the entity most likely to have to pay to treat all those smoking-related diseases in these future veterans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:00 PM on 07/16/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next › Last » (7 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect