It will soon be a household name.

Sounds like his case underscores the abuse we've reaped upon our soldiers with constant re-deployments beyond anything even reasonably safe--and a total disregard for TBI and PTSD-related risks.

It won't sit well with the Afghans but the guy needs treatment and very long term mental health confinement--not imprisonment and not the death penalty.

with intensive treatment for traumatic brain injury and PTSD.

The military had no business sending him into combat again, with TBI and missing a part of a foot.

after my brain surgery,it was over a year before my physician would declare me "fit for duty".
The fact that this soldier was deplyed after a known TBI goes against every piece of research out there and was just asking for a fiasco.

http://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=101784

http://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=103900

http://injurytv.com/doctors/articles/tateno.pdf?drname=Dr.%20Leslie%20Holcombe%0AJefferson%20Spine%20Center%0Awww.jeffersonspine.com%0A(703)%20933-9000

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/326643-overview

http://journals.lww.com/headtraumarehab/Abstract/2006/01000/Aggressive_Behavior_Following_Traumatic_Brain.5.aspx

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/706300_12

What I *do* know, however, is that the chain of command that made it possible for a brain-injured soldier to be deployed for a fourth tour is in need of overhaul.

Mr. Bales shouldn't be tried by his own military. Unless, of course, he was actually performing a military action in accordance with duly issued military orders. I don't think that was the case, but I could be wrong. He should, instead, be tried by the Afghans in an Afghan court under Afghan criminal procedure.

But we don't have any confidence in our own system anymore, let alone that of the country we've spent 10 years "liberating," so that's not gonna happen.

Military personnel who are ordered into war zones are not the same as civilians who are in a foreign country of their own volition.

Plus such a precedent would greatly harm troop morale. Military personnel are expected to follow military rules, codes and procedures. If they violate those, they receive military justice. Turning Bales over would give a cynical, callous impression that the military and government don't really care about the troops at all and are willing to 'throw them to the wolves' for political expediency.

Prime example - the kidnap and rape of a Japanese girl in Okinawa by US servicemen in 1995

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Okinawa_rape_incident

US troops weren't fighting anybody in Okinawa in 1995. Afghanistan in 2012 is a different story.

and the people who sent him back over there the third time after TBI and PTSD are the ones who should be tried.

In my personal opinion that is.

it's his fault the guy had back to back deployments. Who is really responsible here? The guys at the top, IMO.

upon his third deployment to Vietnam he chose Canada, still there and wouldn't come back here for anything.
Carter gave him his papers and he refused them on the grounds it was an illegal war and the fact, they, due to politic, didn't have enough men and were sending him back for the third time. No regard for his life in any of these deployments.

...to be held accountable for his actions.

From all that I've read, Mr. Bales deserves my sympathies. I'm not suggesting that he shouldn't be held accountable for his actions, but he should be held accountable to the degree that he was in control of his senses, etc.

Sometimes there are tragedies in this world, with no possibility for justice. Perhaps this is one of those times. I do not want Mr. Bales tried in an Afghan court. It's not because he is who he is...but because he is an American soldier. Does that make me any less inclined to grieve over the Afghan people that he killed? No. It's a horrible, horrible, sad thing that happened. But sometimes there simply are no good answers.

should be tried in Afghanistan by the people there, not by the US military.

Everything else would just be a technicality.

Under US law the jurisdiction for all troopers is the UCMJ, regardless of geographic location.

handing female soldiers over to the Afghan authorities for refusing to cover their face? That's just one example.

If US troops fall under Afghan jurisdiction then they're subject to Afghan law.

wear a headcover when dealing with the Afghanistan public. And since the Afghanistan Ministry just recently requested TV news anchors to wear head scarves, I don't think it's a law.


Don’t forget your hijab, soldier! American servicewomen encouraged to wear headscarves in Afghanistan
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/31/dont-forget-your-hijab-soldier-american-servicewomen-encouraged-to-wear-headscarves-in-afghanistan/#ixzz1pb2DYJW2


Is Afghan TV anticipating Taliban return by stressing hijabs, less make-up?
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2012/02/15/is-afghan-tv-anticipating-taliban-return-by-stressing-hijabs-less-make-up/

You're comparing US troops willingly blending in with Afghan culture to handing servicemembers over to Afghan authorities for failing to follow Shiara law?

one claiming that US service women would be prosecuted. Not if there's no law.

Do you have a source for that?

Are you arguing that Afghan laws and the Afghan judiciary system is a reasonable one, one that you would willingly subject yourself to?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/14/afghanistan-womens-rights-rape

Afghanistan passes 'barbaric' law diminishing women's rights
Rehashed legislation allows husbands to deny wives food if they fail to obey sexual demands

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1056.html

Just scanning this..

- Possessing non Muslim religious material is considered evidence of proselytizing, the maximum penalty of which is DEATH.

- Converting to another religion is punishable (again) by DEATH.

Why don't you just admit your suggestion was a horrible one? Never mind, please. Continue this charade.

It must have been an agreement we made with the local government. Do you feel US forces should be subject to Afghan law? Perhaps we can use tax payer dollars to fund camouflage burkas.

He is one of our soldiers, that we sent over there time and time again until he broke. He needs to be handled by our military.

back to their countrys for trial?

In those places you have POW's (who can be handled by either) and you have criminals who are handled by Iraqi and Afghan police.

Believe me when I tell you that whoever it may be would much rather deal with the Americans. When local national forces mistreat prisoners it does not make international headlines.

After the Article 132 hearing, if enough evidence is found...they should proceed to a courts martial, present all evidence and allow the jury to decide!

He did a horrible thing and, come on, he knew it was wrong. He has to be locked away for a long long time. A damned shamed that he alone will pay the price for it and not those who let him slip through the cracks and sent him again to a merciless seething hot spot -- and gave him a weapon!

Americans...I'd want him tried here in our courts. I would not accept him being returned to Afghan for their version of justice.

what the pentagon is saying about him...not like that Muslim who shot up that fort about 2 years ago...he was dark, so we shouldn't believe that he had emotional/mental issues...naturally.

Can you show me where the Pentagon is saying anything to try to exonerate the white guy?

its also unclear as to the exact curcumstance he went back. My thoughts tend to be with the dead children and innocent human beings that were blown away.

but I think I can now.

I would like to see a complete and fair examination of Bales, with competent treatment is he is found to be incapable of controlling his actions. If that means he walks a free man in a few years, so be it. If he is found to have been sane, he needs to face a criminal trial.

I would also like to see a thorough investigation of who sent him back into combat and why. It may turn out that the military was only responding to politicians who insisted on a ten year year war with no draft.

I think there is no question of turning him over to the Afghans - I don't think he'd receive either justice or mercy.

justice or mercy?

I don't think we have the knowledge and/or political will to do any good in Afghanistan. It's better just to walk away.

Bales, life in prison.

to make any judgment. And, since none of us knows any more than I do, I'd suggest the same for everyone in this thread. This matter needs additional investigation, which is exactly what will happen. Assigning responsibility for the death of those 16 Afghanis should be the goal of that investigation. When more information is available, I'll have a clearer opinion.

in what I suspect happened:
1. Bales should be sent to a hospital.
2. The psychiatric team at JBLM that evaluated him and decided to sent him back for his 4th tour should be sent to prison. They are currently being investigated because the chief psychiatrist has been giving lectures about the high cost of PTSD diagnoses. The unit has been rediagnosing soldiers who have been diagnosed with PTSD, the result of which is the soldiers are not entitled to benefits.

One man whith traumatic brain injury and an MRI showing the damage was also rediagnosed.
This is the team that would have evaluated Bales.

He was given the impression that he would not be sent to his 4th deployment and as he put it - almost overnight they changed and said I had to go.

The question remains - was it the psychiatric team that decided to change diagnoses or did it come from higher up?

What details do you have on his psychiatric evaluation that you want his evaluator sent to prison?

None, right?

What details do you have on his TBI back in 2010? Was it a minor concussion or was it a serious injury that he still suffers from?

You have no idea, right?

2nd ID does NOT "deploy almost overnight." They're not equipped for rapid deployment.

based upon the activities for which the psychiatric team is under investigation, I believe they should be sent to prison. Rediagnosing PTSD into something non-compensible in order to save money should break several laws. Fraud, malpractice etc.
(I posted an article about that for you to read. There were several other articles listed that were important too.)

I did say - what I suspect happened, which I based upon what I read in the paper. This is from his lawyer, John Henry Brown in the Seattle Times (those injuries were the tbi and foot. I don't want to violate copyright laws): "Those injuries and "other reasons" had led the soldier to believe he was not going to be sent to Afghanistan after three previous deployments in Iraq.

Dr. Richard Adler, a Seattle forensic psychiatrist who specializes in PTSD, has been brought in by the defense team. Adler said Thursday that the soldier apparently had undergone a screening for a "concussive head injury" at Madigan Army Medical Center before his most recent deployment in December. Browne said the staff sergeant had sought some counseling, but he did not have the details.

"He did not want to deploy," Browne said in an interview. "In fact he was told he was not going to go. Then, really almost overnight, that changed."

The Seattle Times is covering the story about the psychiatric team investigation and Bales as well. Google Seattle Times and you will see a long list of related articles on the right of any of the articles. I do believe these stories will intersect at some point.

You do not know the details.

First question. Would agree that it is his attorney's job to do everything he can to shift blame elsewhere?

WHO examined Bales? And by the way, the PDHA "Pre Deployment Health Assessment" is typically performed by your unit's Physicians Assistant. It's a questionnaire you fill out online and it contains questions pertaining to your physical and mental health. If you give answers that are potentially problematic, the system automatically flags your I.D. and mandates a consult with the PA.

So what answers to Bales give? IF he gave answers that could indicate a problem, who was the PA who interviewed him? What did they discuss?

What details do you have about the severity and the current prognosis of his TBI and foot?

Since you're grabbing your torch and pitch fork demanding people be thrown in prison, I'm just assuming you know the answers to the above questions.

in this thread are hypothetical as all the facts have not been revealed to anyone. I stated my opinion as you have stated your opinion.
I am quite familiar with the attitude expressed by the chief psychiatrist. More and more doctors are assuming this role. They see themselves as financial gate keepers at the expense of their patients. When patients are harmed, the physician who has directed care - or non-care as the case may be, is behaving in a criminal manner and should be treated as such. I believe soldiers who had their diagnoses reversed by this team have been harmed.

Whether or not that team intervened in Bales case remains to be seen. It is worth investigating.

Per hearing where his fitness to stand trial will be part of it.

If he is found unfit to stand trial, treatment until he is.

If he is a trial where all the extenuating circumdpstances will have to be entered. Yes defendant number two is the army and what happened here.

Since SecDef put foot in mouth for political reasons this should not be a death penalty case.

In the big picture he may have very well killed the mission. But that is another story.

Oh and regardless, hearings on Ft.McChord psych NEED to happen. I support Senator Murray on this.

No excuses for killing 16 people, and any man who kills women and children like that should never be free to walk in society.

... sorry, I'm not buying the "I don't remember anything" bullshit. More like, I remember what happens to mass murderers.

I have every faith that this guy will get a serious punishment - he has queered the Afghanistan war beyond redemption.