RIP. Some ugly truths are surfaced by the case of Major Fishback:
- People who are motivated to do hard things like go to West Point and SFAS sometimes have mental health issues; anecdotally, would say maybe even at a higher rate than the general population
- People who have found their "mission in life" often can be pretty abrasive about it, alienating friends and former colleagues -- especially when it's a "moral imperative" mission like ending detainee abuse
- In the social environment of an infantry platoon and/or ODA, contra what they tell you in the officer pipeline, "just doing the right thing" isn't enough; you have to do the right thing AND sell your guys on why it's the right thing. Fishback clearly failed to do the latter, especially as an ODA commander. Having your guys criticize you as both too timid and too aggressive isn't an indictment of their ability to think rationally, it's a sign you've lost their trust and confidence
- The veteran mental health care system remains generally fucked, largely because the animating force behind the VA is CYA, not a bona fide desire to help patients. If their CYA interests converge with what you need, you'll get great care. If not, you can slip through the cracks, as Fishback did
- On a related note, veterans can be a difficult bunch and VA mental health people are often overworked and cynical. In the case of someone like Fishback who was in crisis and probably not the easiest person to interact with, it is sad but not surprising that his care team was lackadaisical about following up and getting him the care he needed
- People who have found their "mission in life" often can be pretty abrasive about it, alienating friends and former colleagues -- especially when it's a "moral imperative" mission like ending detainee abuse
--------------------
Let's call it "prisoner abuse", please. The word "detainee" should refer to someone who is in temporary custody.
> The word "detainee" should refer to someone who is in temporary custody.
We need a new word for people held indefinitely (technically temporarily, but with practically infinite renewals of a 'limited' term by a compliant judiciary). There will be an expansion of the sort of exigent circumstances used as justification for such treatment.
This seems like a recurring antipattern, as with IP maximalists pushing for 'forever minus a day'[0] copyright terms (which, thankfully, seems to have abated, with works now entering the public domain every year).
> then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told Congress it was a simple matter of bad apples who would be punished, not a systematic problem with new U.S. military policy.
Fischback's story is symptomatic of how the US treats whistleblowers: once you go down that road, you will be alone, shunned, with a meager safety net and with a crippled ability to make a living. For all of the hoo ha about American individualism, organizations are sacrosanct and individuals are devalued: in the courts, in government, in the workplace, and in culture.
> then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told Congress it was a simple matter of bad apples who would be punished, not a systematic problem with new U.S. military policy.
Rumsfeld's story is symptomatic of how the US treats powerful people: once you arrive you will be among friends, your voice will be amplified by the press, with an infinitely wide safety net and no ability of any group to hold you accountable or even make a dent in your bottom line. For all of the hoo ha about American democracy, powerful individuals are sacrosanct and checks on power are devalued: in the courts, in government, in the workplace, and in culture.
**
Seems to me that we both are rankly speculating outside the bounds of the given evidence, no?
Whistleblowing is an essential theme of this article; by stripping it out of my rhetoric, we go spinning off into a generic tangent. While there are broader themes at work here as with anywhere, we're more likely to have an edifying discussion if we focus on the particulars: whistleblowing, the VA, mental health, and what Ian Fishback's case reveals about them.
All I did was bitflip your original statement and then change "individualism" to the equally general term "democracy."
In both cases the final statement is way too broad to be anything but a non-sequitur. A government intent on silencing whistleblowers is indeed a type of organization, but it does not follow that the behavior of all or even most organizations are beyond reproach.
Similarly, while Donald Rumsfeld played a role in the Bush administration, his role was one small part of our entire representative form of government.
To make the argument for either conclusion, there need to be more ideas connecting our final sentences to the ones that preceded them.
The "bitflipped" version expanded the theme from whistleblowers to "powerful people" — that's where I think it fell down.
In both cases there are broad generalizations being made, but in my version I was careful to circle back to the smaller theme. I try to do this consistently because avoiding "generic tangents" is in the HN guidelines:
> Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
In retrospect, rather than relying on context, I could have explicitly qualified the final sentence to clarify that I was speaking of the relative weight of individuals and organizations in US society specifically with regards to the outcome of whistleblowing. I'd like to think there's something I could have done to have earned a more generous reading from you so we don't end up in a rhetorical gotcha game.
Have you noticed the utterly laughable political pardons and ass-covering that surrounded the worst failures of that war?
In any meritocratic society, the political careers of the people responsible would have been over, and a few of them should have at least stood trial for crimes against peace. Even if they were ultimately found not guilty, this is the kind of sword of Damocles that whistleblowers tend to face.
Instead, the only person of import whose career was truly destroyed was Collin Powell.
As JFK said about the Berlin Wall "Freedom has many difficulties and
democracy is not perfect. But we have
never had to put a wall up to keep our
people in -- to prevent them from
leaving us." The American democracy doesn't need to be perfect. The problem is it's been idealised way to much. The reason America is the greatest country in the world (i say that from the UK) is because nowhere else do individuals enjoy such freedom and liberty to pursue happiness . Don't blame democracy, understand it's limitations.
I bitflipped OPs statement, with the idea that if the opposing rhetoric sounds equally appealing then there's a strong possibility that neither of them are nutritious. :)
That may be the case, but from a distance it seems like the US has more of a martial / military obsession than most western countries. Soldiers seem to be treated like saints, the president referred to as "Commander in chief", generals become household names even in peace time, etc. It's way more pronounced than anywhere in the G7.
So it's not a surprise to me that people who speak up against the military are shunned; not just by that group, but by society at large, which venerates the armed forces.
The US owes most of it's economy, assets, innovations and global respect due to it's military, starting from the world wars. Worship of the military is entirely expected, and i might say it works out largely to the advantage of the country as a whole. Remember the US has little history on which to build a culture.
But it does have history that we can use: what are its consistencies over the past couple centuries? Genocides and decimations and coups of democratically-elected leaders. Stealing technology and basically every other transgression the US accuses of China. The nearly ritualistic abuse and/or murder of nonwhite residents (and otherwise) with regularity.
What achievements justify the crimes it commits? For how long can it claim youth as an excuse?
Ah, but the US also produces "The Bachelorette," and McDonald's, so it's really a wash.
The big difference between the US and elsewhere is the hypocrisy. To a greater degree than other societies, the US mythologizes the individual, and so the gap between myth and reality is even wider.
I would like it to be different. I would like the US to live up to its ideals and aspirations.
Concretely, I wish that Ian Fishback had received rewards commensurate with his service and contributions — at the very least a comfortable life.
Oh, when will American Exceptionalism finally die already?
In The Netherlands, our government even setup a 'Whistleblowers house / safehaven' to 'encourage' whistleblowers.
You still get treated like shit, be blackholed, unable to find work, your taxes scrutinized etc.
It is really a deep psychological thing : you acted against 'the group'. Whatever words are spoken or laws are enacted, this is what counts. Has nothing to do with the US.
The sensible countermeasure would be making sure such group doesn't have the power to unilaterally ruin your life if you expose its corruption, or be immune from the consequences of such corruption.
The legal system is clearly not up to that task, and not only in USA.
Regrettably, improving the lot of whistleblowers may be difficult to achieve legislatively or legally — even if a majority of the citizenry approves, the institutions will resist. It may be that the best way to make a difference is through NGOs like https://whistlebloweraid.org/# since at least they don't have to play by the rules of the organization. The US military may not be able to muster proper rewards for someone like Ian Fishback, but it can't stop a charity from at least disbursing aid.
What Rumsfeld meant was clearly that the incidents were isolated, but I can't help thinking when people use this phrase this that the full version is "a few bad apples spoil the barrel." It seems particularly appropriate here.
The phrase is certainly apropos, but I am not sure Rumsfeld would disagree. I believe it's implied that the behaviour of the bad apples will not be tolerated.
I think this is not just about the people in these organizations who are creating the harm, but more specifically how these organizations are propped up by the people (constituents) that support them.
In my view, when a organization has failed because of the people that run them are running them for the wrong reasons, then they only are able to do so by the people that support them. This systemic corruption is only a reflection of the society we create every day by or choices and actions. It will only stop when people change their life styles to be more supportive of others, and less about self-gratification.
I completely agree that the problems originate in the broader culture within which these organizations exist. However, I would use a different emphasis: I would like individuals to be more supportive of other individuals, and to be more skeptical of concentration of power in both private and public organizations.
In this context, that means treating whistleblowers, specifically, better.
Agreed, but we can only support better treatment of whistleblowers, by making different choices in our lifestyles. These corrupt organizations, that try to make whistleblowers the enemy, are propped up by institutions that are created an exist by our choices. I'm thinking about the [ending](https://youtu.be/vZNnDiDSUiI?t=98) of "Three Days of the Condor"
What in the world? He served 9 more years and got into Special Forces after blowing the whistle. Then he left to pursue a PHD and was likely on a path to an easy life. The fact that it all got derailed by what sounds like late onset schizophrenia doesn't mean he was treated poorly.
I think the US generally is especially about this, and I think it explains a lot of behavior we have that may seem odd or nonsensical to outsiders.
There's a Russian photo-blogger I read a bunch of posts by years ago, and he pointed out something about us that I hadn't fully appreciated before: we post notices everywhere. Simple statements and whole pages of legalese junk. All over the place. You can't un-see it once it's pointed out. The Land of the Free was one of only two countries (he'd been damn near everywhere) that he noted as having this behavior of posting signs everywhere telling you what you couldn't do. The other was Australia, which he found to be the only place much like the US in a lot of other ways, too.
Of course, we do it because lawyers say we need to, so if someone does something stupid and gets hurt we can say we "told" them not to, so they'll lose if they sue us. Or so if we decide we want someone gone we can point to a posted rule as the reason even if that's not actually why (and of course posting a rule somehow gives it magic power, versus just deciding on it). Blame dispersal/deflection.
We're also big on tying up responsibility, punishment, and blame all together, in ways that I suspect are pretty damn harmful overall, including economically. Leads to a pretty gross culture of dishonesty, for obvious reasons.
It's not nice to hear, but the reality is, we treat most veterans even worse than this. The VA is an abysmal failure, and its failure, especially in the arena of mental healthcare, is a primary driving factor why many homeless men in the US are veterans. Going to war takes a serious and long-lasting toll on a person, and an even deeper toll when you are someone who allows yourself to consider and struggle with the ethics and morals of war.
This country needs to wrestle with and resolve its treatment of veterans. More than any other nation, the United States has been encaptured by the military-industrial complex, and we treat the millions of people who are driven through this complex as less than dirt, discarding them as husks of their former selves without any recourse or support once they no longer serve that complex. No less a luminary than Eisenhower[1] and Smedley Butler[2] warned us clearly that the military-industrial complex would lead to this, that war is a racket, and that our society was trending in a direction where it was acceptable to utterly destroy the lives of men so that a few may profit.
It is very sad that this is the end, at such a young age, of this man.
I would argue that you cannot paper over the horrors of war with government programs or culture or patriotism or whatever. If you want to go to war you need to be willing to accept you're going to permanently damage a segment of your population. This doesn't mean don't fund the VA or try to improve/reform it, but if your benchmark for a successful veterans organization is a majority of people just simply cope with their trauma with limited impact on their lives.... that just doesn't seem realistic.
Something to think about before you tell your local politicians you support armed conflict. Abstinence works well in this situation.
I was out to dinner with an uncle of mine sometime in the aughts, and there were 2 US Marines eating at another table; because of the national situation at the time, we knew they were about to ship out. My uncle bought their dinner, and they came over and seemed very grateful at the appreciation shown them.
But what really struck me was what my uncle said after they went back to their table. "We're asking them to go over there and kill people." Not "... and risk their lives", but "... and kill people".
They have heads filled with more horrors than you can imagine. I feel so bad for them as I have a few vet friends, most of whom have combat experience from Iraq and Afghanistan. Ive heard all the horror stories and watched the toughest guy I know break down in tears over what he did to people. One friend accidentally shot a child dead and has to live with that until he dies. They all came back different. They all moved away to the country side far from cities. They all know one or more fellow veterans who took their life because they could not live with these horrors. They use these men and women to do their vile dirty work then throw them away when they're done.
The truth is often the opposite of often repeated propaganda. People in the military and veterans are treated as disposable and easily replaceable human resources. Source: I'm a veteran.
an ex-army Vietnam veteran here in Calif. became a lawyer and took a lot of art classes.. he eventually learned to game the VA system and get endless cases of common medicines, plus the hard stuff, which he used vigorously. I found him dead, in filthy conditions, but he seemed OK with it since he made his own choices, and was medicated beyond belief as he died of regular bad health.
I’m not really sure this is a VA specific failure. Lots of people fall through the cracks with mental health care, cliched century old Smedley Butler quotes or not. I’m not seeing anything specific about the VA failing him.
It was in Iraq that he saw troops using "enhanced interrogation" tactics, including breaking prisoners' bones and stripping them naked in the freezing cold.
Where can we read more about this? This must have been a huge International Crimes Court war crime prosecution effort; I'm surprised I missed it in the news. How many years in jail were those responsible sentenced to?
I would encourage you not to go down that rabbit hole. I did so several years back, and wish I hadn't - the level of brutality and plain evilness of rendition and torture at scale (Torture as a Service, you might say) was/is just so utterly horrifying and disgusting. It went on so much in Iraq that they even forgot about people they'd tortured, broken, sexuality abused and left naked on freezing concrete floors in dungeons.
I swear something broke inside of me after reading some of the details - ever since, I don't even watch/read news anymore, because it just makes me so angry and sad. The Americans are supposed to be "the good guys", but agents of the state have performed atrocities on a bewildering scale for decades, and there is absolutely nothing any of us can do about it.
If you are a USA citizen, go down that rabbit hole.
Since 9/11 the USA has been a rouge state, slaughtering hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of people all over the world. It is very hard to figure out the motivation, it is more than money. I am no historian but it seems like the sort of imperialism we have not seen for over a thousand years.
It is urgent that USA citizens reign in their government that is causing so much misery for so many so widely
> The Americans are supposed to be "the good guys"
There is no "good guys", this is pure propaganda, same shit for every other country. It's all about ressources and power, not good and evil. I mean, Guantanamo, "the good guys", yeah, good joke...
Yes, it's a bad joke, but the propaganda works very well indeed. So much so that even back when some of this stuff was in the mainstream news (OK, not the details, but still), hardly anyone cared - because it was the "good guys" doing what "needed to be done" to "keep us safe", and anyone saying otherwise was a "nutter conspiracy theorist".
It's like with eating meat. People don't like animals being held in terrible conditions and butchered, but they deal with it by not thinking about it so they can eat a burger in peace.
I ultimately agree with not going down the rabbit hole, but I don't agree with the hopelessness. I wish I could counter the claim that "there is absolutely nothing any of us can do about it" with some specific actions. I hope someone else opines.
So, best to ignore it, keep consuming, go to Church or say you do, and celebrate Independence Day like it means something, yes? People should be sent down that rabbit hole until they are so sick of it, they actually get off their asses for change and then maybe the US can be a tiny bit better than other countries. "Angry and sad", needs to turn to "furious and motivated".
Your mistake is that you think that what people think matters, while in reality only the laws approved by the rich are enacted. What the poorer part of the society knows and thinks has no influence on anything.
So unless you tought up a scheme in which not torturing foreigners might be profitable for the rich Americans, the information you have has no influence on the future.
You're probably being sarcastic and I completely agree that it's scandalous that those responsible (like Cheney) got away with it, but it was all over the news at the time.
They didn't just, "get away with it", they were promoted to the highest levels of society. "Bloody" Gina Haspel, one of the CIA agents running the torture camps (where she earned her nickname) was promoted by the two subsequent presidents and eventually became head of the CIA! The worst peddlers of WMD/war propaganda in the media were promoted to the highest positions of power. People like Jeffrey Goldberg who is today the editor in chief of The Atlantic. The Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations who supported the illegal invasion and rallied support among his fellow Democrats to ensure that a majority of them voted to support it is now President of the United States.
And on the flip side of the coin, one of the people who blew the whistle on US war crimes in Iraq with the release of the "collateral murder" video (among many others), Julian Assange, has been rotting in a UK dungeon for years.
it is so awful that there are real reasons not to pass the material around in public.. plenty of people here in the USA protested this extensively .. Your good-looking world leader and mine, Vice Pres. Dick Cheney, was the executive in charge here
Thanks for posting this. I want to remember there were people who tried to bring awareness to what we have become. 50 or 100 years from now, the next generation can look back on what happened and I hope they make different choices. IMHO this is a systemic problem with the evolution of our species.
How curious and convenient for the U.S. government that so many of these people who expose their government's espionage, sabotage, murder of women and children, crimes of war, just happen to end up in prison or die at an early age.
> How many actual veterans of the post-911 wars do you know? If the answer is "zero" maybe sit down.
I have several in my extended family, thank you very much. Nevertheless, I object to excluding people from this discussion, whether they live in a country which did not send solders to those wars, or whether they are US citizens who are not directly connected to the military but nevertheless participate in our democracy.
All of my neighbors, and everyone in my friends group, and most of the people I interact with on a daily basis either served in the military or were civilian employees and contractors of the DoD during the most recent war or a prior war. That is part of why I feel so strongly on this issue. I did not serve, although I attempted to enlist I was denied for medical reasons during MEPS. Possibly out of some form of survivors guilt for seeing how horrible the impact of war has been on my friends and people in my community, I consider it the only responsible thing to do to continue speaking out about the reality of our military-industrial complex.
A lot of the corruption in the US government surrounds defense and industry, and it is simply the truth that we treat veterans horribly, many people in the military joined because they came from underprivileged backgrounds and needed a way out, and we send them into horrifying situations and simply discard them when they get home. The GI Bill does not in any way soothe or absolve this nation of the way it treats its veterans or our ceaseless desire for war in the first place.
> ... either served in the military or were civilian employees and contractors of the DoD ...
> ... seeing how horrible the impact of war has been on my friends and people in my community ...
They earned money from it. US wars are first and formost sort of a public works program that's an excuse for paying a lot of people their salaries and creating orders for companies. They are of course created mostly to advance the careers and wealth of people in the echolons of military, but they feed a lot of ordinary Americans. They are mechanism of funneling tax money into the pockets of rich bureaucrats and people that economy doesn't need. How unneeded they are is clearly visible when the war ends and they are tossed to the curb (regardless of the damage they suffered).
> it is simply the truth that we treat veterans horribly, many people in the military joined because they came from underprivileged backgrounds and needed a way out, and we send them into horrifying situations and simply discard them when they get home.
It is not "simply the truth." I point to 6,000 veterans and you point to... what, a story on NPR?
On OC I started a Slack channel on VA issues, thinking they must all be fuming about it. No one joined. I had a Townhall with a lawyer. No one had VA issues; all of their legal questions were about their discharge papers (DD 214) and eligibility for various benefits.
It is simply the truth that the vast majority of vets never see any combat. The tip of the spear is very narrow.
- People who are motivated to do hard things like go to West Point and SFAS sometimes have mental health issues; anecdotally, would say maybe even at a higher rate than the general population
- People who have found their "mission in life" often can be pretty abrasive about it, alienating friends and former colleagues -- especially when it's a "moral imperative" mission like ending detainee abuse
- In the social environment of an infantry platoon and/or ODA, contra what they tell you in the officer pipeline, "just doing the right thing" isn't enough; you have to do the right thing AND sell your guys on why it's the right thing. Fishback clearly failed to do the latter, especially as an ODA commander. Having your guys criticize you as both too timid and too aggressive isn't an indictment of their ability to think rationally, it's a sign you've lost their trust and confidence
- The veteran mental health care system remains generally fucked, largely because the animating force behind the VA is CYA, not a bona fide desire to help patients. If their CYA interests converge with what you need, you'll get great care. If not, you can slip through the cracks, as Fishback did
- On a related note, veterans can be a difficult bunch and VA mental health people are often overworked and cynical. In the case of someone like Fishback who was in crisis and probably not the easiest person to interact with, it is sad but not surprising that his care team was lackadaisical about following up and getting him the care he needed