Upset over a breakup with his girlfriend, Tennessee National Guardsman Rusty Rumley went to his former girlfriend's apartment building and killed her mother and current boyfriend as well as a neighbor and friend. Rumley later took his own life. (Richmond Times-Dispatch)
An Iraq war veteran who was given a bad-conduct discharge in 2006 told police he tried to rape an Auburn University student her before he shot her, according to documents read in court Monday as several thousand of her peers gathered for a memorial service. (Army Times)
All too often, we're seeing media stories like these, of terrible crimes committed by current troops or by veterans of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. My heart goes out to the families of the victims. But I am also deeply concerned that as coverage of these incidents increases, the 1.6 million Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who have returned home from war will have to bear the burden of Rambo stereotypes.
In today's 24-hour news environment, a few incidents can all too easily be made to seem like a new trend. In January, The New York Times ran a sensational piece about the supposedly elevated homicide rate among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. This kind of cheap-shot reporting stigmatizes a generation who deserve to be proud of their service. From veterans and experts, the Times received a lot of well-deserved flak. Rather than seek out the shocking news hook, the media should be addressing the real issues.
One issue is misidentified and untreated mental health issues. At least 30 to 40% of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, or about half a million people, will face serious mental health injuries. But significant barriers to treatment remain, especially for troops whose mental health injuries have been misdiagnosed as 'personality disorders' by the military. These untreated mental health issues can and do lead to unemployment, homelessness, domestic violence, substance abuse, and suicide.
The other issue is our lowered standards for entrance into the military. This issue has a direct bearing on one of the stories I quoted at the beginning of this article. Despite a 2002 felony conviction of conspiracy to sell stolen firearms which carried a two-year sentence, Rusty Rumley was allowed to enlist in the Tennessee National Guard with a federal criminal record. His prior service in the Army also indicated a red flag: having gone AWOL shortly after joining, leading to discharge.
It's unclear why Rumley was allowed to enlist with this kind of a record, or whether Rumley received a waiver for his past misconduct. But since 2004, the Army has increased its use of waivers for 'serious criminal misconduct.' Of the Army's active and reserve recruits in FY2007, 12 percent were granted waivers for criminal convictions, including felonies. These new waivers are part of a troubling military-wide pattern. We're spending $5 billion a year on recruitment and retention, but lowering standards in terms of age, education, and aptitude. There's no way to lower standards without increasing the risk of "bad apples" - and we're starting to see those effects already.
According to the Army, however, these waivers aren't a problem. Although it's true that many people who entered the military using moral waivers are succeeding, many others are not. Lower-caliber enlistees are much more likely to drop out in their first year. And a recent report by the FBI and the Army's Criminal Investigation Command links looser recruiting standards and more criminal waivers to an increase in gang-related activity in the military.
The core problem here is that this war has been fought without the kind of shared sacrifice made during previous wars. Less than one half of one percent of Americans have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, compared to the 12% of Americans who served during WWII. We've responded to the troop shortage by putting an unfair burden on the force we have: multiple, extended combat tours; inadequate dwell-time between deployments; abuse of Stop-Loss orders and the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR); and overextension of the National Guard and Reserves.
But telling the American people that war requires real sacrifice isn't a popular talking point. Politicians who want us to continue our presence in Iraq need to talk seriously about how we're going to maintain our troop levels and our troop quality. Those who support a rapid drawdown of our forces in Iraq need to discuss how we're going to rebuild the military that's been pushed to the brink by five years of a two-front war on the cheap. And no matter where you sit on the political spectrum, we need to do a better job of caring for the veterans of these wars when they come home.