You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Col. Lang:
The article contains a lot of raw data about S/Sgt Bales without much context. The title made two points; that he struggled to pay bills and was "passed over" for promotion. The reader is left to divine what those two things mean.
I'd find it helpful if the "passed over" part could be discussed in more detail as it carries potentially serious negative implications for his suitability for the job. Similarly the "struggled to pay bills" idea may also suggest a level of personal instability that could have contributed to the actions that resulted in his arrest.
I don't think the article does him any favors but sure plays into the voyeuristic needs of the reader. More specifically, I don't like where this is going.
What percentage of the ARMY not current on debts and bills and passed over for promotion? An unknown perhaps but perhaps should not be if those in leadership positions have a "grip" as the British military would say!
I'd like to clarify that my comment applies to all walks of life, not just military life. This can and does happen anywhere, and everywhere, and considering the stresses that are unfolding exponentially with greater rapidity, there will be many more incidents like it. Frankly, I'm surprised we don't see more of it in the military.
I have just spoken to a psychiatrist friend of mine whose specialty is psycho-pharmocology to see if he could shed some light on Bales. He has had directly relevant military experience but is a very well-read and savvy guy (pl.: majored at Harvard in Russian literature). He's been following the Bales affair. Here is what he had to say in schematic form.
1. Bales did not 'snap'i.e. erupt in violence suddenly. (Forget the technical term for that). He probably was suffering from post-concussive syndrome due to an earlier head injury in Iraq - which likely was not fully treated. That condition is progressive when the person is physically active.
2. Manifests itself in depression, confusion and impetuosity.
3. It could have been aggravated by that anti-malarial medicine which added an element of paranoia. That could explain the violence targeted at the Afghans.
4. It could have been marginally aggravted by the alcohol depending on what he drank and how much.
5. The apparent planning of the killing, its deliberate execution, its duration, the burning etc conform to this diagnosis. By contrast, someone who snaps would have engaged in relatively brief, scattershot violence.
6. The Colonel's forecast of how the case will be handled is the correct one from the psychiatric perspective
However, let's remember there is a difference between "crazy" as defined by the public and psychlogists, and legally insane.
The legal test is did he understand what he was doing? The evidence -- and in particular bruning bodies to hide evidence -- suggest he did.
The comptoence test (is he sane enough to understand he is at a trial, and can assist in his defense) is more likely in this case. However, once he is medicated enough to stand trial, he will.
A few questions.
Do they take mefloquine in Afghan......malaria is not endemic there.
How many times did he re-up, and should this be taken under consideration.
Col. Lang:
The article contains a lot of raw data about S/Sgt Bales without much context. The title made two points; that he struggled to pay bills and was "passed over" for promotion. The reader is left to divine what those two things mean.
I'd find it helpful if the "passed over" part could be discussed in more detail as it carries potentially serious negative implications for his suitability for the job. Similarly the "struggled to pay bills" idea may also suggest a level of personal instability that could have contributed to the actions that resulted in his arrest.
I don't think the article does him any favors but sure plays into the voyeuristic needs of the reader. More specifically, I don't like where this is going.
Posted by: alnval | 18 March 2012 at 10:52 AM
Yep, Falling Down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eREiQhBDIk
There already is a lot of this going on, but there's going to be much more of it in the years to come, I'm afraid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eREiQhBDIk
Posted by: Morocco Bama | 18 March 2012 at 11:46 AM
What percentage of the ARMY not current on debts and bills and passed over for promotion? An unknown perhaps but perhaps should not be if those in leadership positions have a "grip" as the British military would say!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 18 March 2012 at 12:15 PM
I'd like to clarify that my comment applies to all walks of life, not just military life. This can and does happen anywhere, and everywhere, and considering the stresses that are unfolding exponentially with greater rapidity, there will be many more incidents like it. Frankly, I'm surprised we don't see more of it in the military.
Posted by: Morocco Bama | 18 March 2012 at 03:34 PM
I have just spoken to a psychiatrist friend of mine whose specialty is psycho-pharmocology to see if he could shed some light on Bales. He has had directly relevant military experience but is a very well-read and savvy guy (pl.: majored at Harvard in Russian literature). He's been following the Bales affair. Here is what he had to say in schematic form.
1. Bales did not 'snap'i.e. erupt in violence suddenly. (Forget the technical term for that). He probably was suffering from post-concussive syndrome due to an earlier head injury in Iraq - which likely was not fully treated. That condition is progressive when the person is physically active.
2. Manifests itself in depression, confusion and impetuosity.
3. It could have been aggravated by that anti-malarial medicine which added an element of paranoia. That could explain the violence targeted at the Afghans.
4. It could have been marginally aggravted by the alcohol depending on what he drank and how much.
5. The apparent planning of the killing, its deliberate execution, its duration, the burning etc conform to this diagnosis. By contrast, someone who snaps would have engaged in relatively brief, scattershot violence.
6. The Colonel's forecast of how the case will be handled is the correct one from the psychiatric perspective
Posted by: mbrenner | 18 March 2012 at 04:32 PM
mbrenne
I don't know. As a troop leader this seems overly intellectualized. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 18 March 2012 at 05:45 PM
Col. Lang:
Well said. There's no question about mitigation. There's boatloads of it. Sorting it out as to relevance will be the problem. Not an easy task.
Posted by: alnval | 18 March 2012 at 07:37 PM
The anti-malarials do make you crazy.
However, let's remember there is a difference between "crazy" as defined by the public and psychlogists, and legally insane.
The legal test is did he understand what he was doing? The evidence -- and in particular bruning bodies to hide evidence -- suggest he did.
The comptoence test (is he sane enough to understand he is at a trial, and can assist in his defense) is more likely in this case. However, once he is medicated enough to stand trial, he will.
Posted by: charlie | 19 March 2012 at 10:33 AM
A few questions.
Do they take mefloquine in Afghan......malaria is not endemic there.
How many times did he re-up, and should this be taken under consideration.
RC
Posted by: Robert C. | 19 March 2012 at 11:14 AM
More reportage that he (with other confederates) swindled a pensioner of their life savings and enlisted subsequent to an arrest warrant or summat.
Posted by: tunde | 21 March 2012 at 06:40 AM