Comments on: A psychological rift in the perception of war

By: Mat delfave

Mat delfave — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 04:11:16 +0000

Dunno about the UK, but in the U.S., I suspect an all-voluntary and “co-ed” army, now primarily made up of the “less afluent”, may be changing the traditional military in many ways we haven’t even realized yet.

By: vaughanbell

vaughanbell — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:28:09 +0000

Thank you for that. Typo now fixed!

By: mrlizard123

mrlizard123 — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:23:19 +0000

I would think that killing the enemy remains is taking things just a little too far and is possibly a sign of existing mental illness…

By: drew hempel

drew hempel — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 10:52:56 +0000

Not to be mean but this is a Western bourgeois bias. Freudian psychology was used by the Nazis when Germans weren’t supporting the war — ironically, obviously since Freud had to flee. But this media reporting on psychology of war is disingenuous because the newest development of war is that more civilians are killed than soldiers. I mean the sanctions on Iraq were a form of warfare that killed at least 1.5 million people — mainly kids and old people — and this went unreported in the West. Afghanistan is no different with the starvation there a byproduct — a tool of the war. So to say that soldiers now get metals for helping other soldiers rather than killing people — I mean it’s not even a war in Iraq. Just like Vietnam – these are genocidal acts — not warfare. Also more soldiers now commit suicide after returning then die in warfare.