The Impact Of War: How Departing Troops Say Goodbye To Family

President Obama's announcement of increased deployments in Afghanistan was sure to elicit strong opinions from around the country. Though all Americans are inevitably affected, none feel the burden as much as the troops themselves and their families.

After Obama's speech last night, "NBC Nightly News" briefly interviewed Sgt. Paul Meacham -- who will be deploying in February to Afghanistan -- and his family, about what it means to them.

WATCH:

When NBC asked Meacham what deployment means to his relationship with his son Justin, he answered pragmatically.

"It's terrible to leave your family. It's tough when you're gone from your kid and when you come back he looks at you like you're a complete stranger," said Meacham, who lives in Kentucky. "We miss at least one year out of their life. So, we just try to make the most of it while we're home."

Get HuffPost Impact On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[been2there]

04:30 PM on 12/08/2009

Saying goodbye is the easy part--living for the length of their deployment with the knowledge that "my kid is in Iraq." bubbling just below the surface 24/7 is really hell. We try not to let them know how hard it is, because they need their wits on other things, but it feels like living on a time bomb. My son is just back from his second deployment, and may be sent on a third. He wanted to be in the army, so I want him to have his wish, but I would find it easier to endure if I believed we should be there!

[shutterbabe]

10:43 AM on 12/04/2009

There is no easy way to say goodbye to a soldier. Arms, whispers, tearful eyes, hearts beating too quickly from love and fear is just part of what happens when our brave Troops leave their homeland.

This is the emotional battlefield for families and lovers of those left behind to wait and worry.

My every wish is with the remarkable men and women of our military as we move into another phase of a most ambitious war.

[edgarcaycedoc]

09:07 PM on 12/02/2009

"You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din." My heart goes out both to the troops who are deployed and to those who wait for their return. Having served in the military, I know it is possible to massively deploy in just a matter of hours. Combat readiness is a whole 'nother subject. Come back to us safe.

[proc]

06:27 PM on 12/02/2009

Obama creates another disaster.

[teembee]

05:52 PM on 12/02/2009

But wait a minute! Wasnt obama AGAINST the surge in Iraq? Hmmmmmmm.

[TsaniLK]

10:46 PM on 12/02/2009

Yes he was, but always for the one in Afghanistan. He even campaigned on it, so wheres the confusion?

[Andman0121]

01:47 PM on 12/05/2009

ugh, dont bother. he wont understand

[eirlymeyer]

05:35 PM on 12/02/2009

Of course war is hard. It's not supposed to be easy. The GOP ask questions as if things were supposed to be exact. But let me break something to everyone.....those 30,000 troops, many of them will be called up from National Guard & Marine Forces. These are people that are not even full time military.

But what is more important to note, is the fact that these people who are National Guard Troops, a very high percentage are currently unemployed. So, when they do get called up, they will actually be receiving a full-time military paycheck. So, think about 30,000 more people added to the employed list, in addition to at least 100,000 in resources being employed to support the ramp up in this effort. And those additional resources still come from National Guard forces....forces that are originally part-time.

[Sean 6399]

05:10 PM on 12/02/2009

I just want to thank progressives for their history of warmongering. Ya'll got the ball rolling with Wilson's war to "Make the world safe for Democracy", and now you're keeping it going with the war to "Make the world safe for Afghan schoolgirls".

Without you clowns, identifying pure evil stupidity would be so much more difficult.

[Andman0121]

01:52 PM on 12/05/2009

...HUH? First of all, since you lack historical perspective, I assume you're referring to Woodrow Wilson. Well Woodrow Wilson, a hardcore racist and old-school Democrat (they were called Dixiecrats...try to keep up), would not be considered progressive in American history. LOL and im pretty sure the "ball" was rolling LONG before Wilson took office (see Spanish-American War, etc.). And I absolutely LOVE how you are so against the war in Afghanistan when your ilk were the ones who got us there in the first place! Those people are called Neocons, the exact opposites of Progressives. Soooooooo I hate to have to give you a simple mini lessons into history there and I also apologize if my condescending tone upset your middle school intelligence. Basic American history is a hoot though!

Without YOU clowns there wouldnt be no American history to teach to children who lack understanding of it. So thank you for that.

[hulagirrrl]

05:09 PM on 12/02/2009

War or peace, the business of the armed forces involves separation. They know that, the family grows into it. Look at the Navy, and their long sea times, in a regular twenty year career that can add up to a total of four to five years separation. That is the business they are in.