Dear Anni:

This topic was addressed by Jack Rachman some time ago. He prepared an exceptional review of the literature regarding fear among bomber crews during the Second World War. See:

Rachman, S. J. (1990). Fear and courage. (pp. 1-34, 165-196). New York: Freeman.

With kind regards,

Philip Saigh

Dear Anni:

This topic was addressed by Jack Rachman some time ago. He prepared an exceptional review of the literature regarding fear among bomber crews during the Second World War. See:

Rachman, S. J. (1990). Fear and courage. (pp. 1-34, 165-196). New York: Freeman.

With kind regards,

Philip Saigh

Hi Anni,

I'm thinking that the answers lie in what their role was in that deployment. For those pilots who have been engaged in operations that have resulted in collateral civilian deaths, the fears are likely to be different from those who have, for example, engaged in aerial combat. The former may be morally challenged by their actions (i.e. fearful of what they have become as a consequence of their actions) whereas the latter may have experienced more of a direct threat to their own life which may have activated their fear network.

Regards,

Anne Macdonald

Once in the air, aside from navigational aspects, I would postulate that thing that most concerns any military pilot is a missile. That missile will activate the aircraft's MAW, Missile Approach Warning system. Secondarily, depending on the nature and geography of the conflict, would be the standard radar that detects incoming aircraft. 

As might the case with any deployed soldier, is always the call from mundane duties to action. If you're waiting, it is a level of hyper-vigilance unknown to most. It is this hyper-vigilance that becomes a problem, because it kicks into high gear our already "look for the negative" nervous system. 

After the deployment, it is a matter of whether or not there is any debriefing and rehab time to bring the nervous system back to normal. If not, then it remains on, and the system will make up danger.

Add to that the possibility of what Ann said, actually engaging in fatal mission work that might bring about moral wounding and high levels of shame.

I have done some work with vets who became emergency responders, because it's the way they keep their system engaged, because it's been "on" for so long that it is the new normal. Not to discount wanting to serve, that is what I have learned. 

During WW1 and WW2 the greatest fear for aircrew was being burned alive.  In both conflicts this was tragically all too common.  In present conflicts it is probable that this is less of a concern since successful abandonment of a combat damaged aircraft is much more likely than it was in the earlier days of aviation warfare.

A major fear now is being captured after abandonment since many pilots and aircrew suffer appalling mistreatment and are often murdered after capture.  Lynching of aircrew was common during WW2.  During the saturation bombing of Germany and Japan any aircrew were summarily executed by enraged civilians and the military alike but most were incarcerated according to the Geneva Convention.

Aircrew today are likely to be involved in actions against an enemy that does not operate under any acknowledged international law and are in grave danger of being killed if captured. 

Hi Anni,

A resourse you might try is contacting the Air Force to see what information they have researched & how helpful it is to pilots experiencing symptoms after returning home.  I don't know about Danish military systems; however, in the US, you can go online to complete a request for information about a topic, in your case, Air Force pilots and their greatest fears.

Good luck!  It sounds like a very interesting topic & one w/very little research done outside of the military.

Hi Anni,

A resourse you might try is contacting the Air Force to see what information they have researched & how helpful it is to pilots experiencing symptoms after returning home.  I don't know about Danish military systems; however, in the US, you can go online to complete a request for information about a topic, in your case, Air Force pilots and their greatest fears.

Good luck!  It sounds like a very interesting topic & one w/very little research done outside of the military.

Pilots like any other service personnel may suffer from post traumatic stress...but I do not understand what they may be 'scared' of.  As a War Veteran I was not scared of anything post combat, however certain scenarios would place me on a high level of alert...some would create flashbacks and other stimulus harsh dreams.  

Could you send me some of your research as my fellow war Veteran and myself have been researching issues around deployment and re-integration back into peacetime life of Army Personnel, and I would like to see your research.  We postulate that any research about combatants should include the 'Voice' of a combatant, other wise it is too easy for non-war experienced researchers to interpret data from a civilian point of view.

Kevin

I agree that research about combat should include the voice of a combatant but we should not believe that simply because someone has experienced combat that they will have a 'better understanding of it'  War veterans often cannot link the severe psychiatric problems they have to the actual experiences.  The understanding is brought from the clinicians and cares looking after them.

I have attached a brief history of combat induced PTSD in a ppt. presentation.

Take a look at Valentine Belfiglio's page on RG, he has some very insightful papers on PTSD.

I have to differ on the point that war veterans may not have a better understanding of war...but I do accept that they may need assistance from a veteran therapist who has also had the experience of war...otherwise, like in research at times,  you have a civilian interpretation, based on a client/participant who (sometimes) cannot link their ailments to their experiences...those who have not experienced war have no idea what it is like to be experienced in war...one point many do not understand is that a soldier is placed in a position whereas he does not want to kill (in his military mind he is killing his own kind...Brothers), but is forced to.... otherwise he will be killed or worse his Brothers may be killed...the basis of understanding that phenomenon is based in experience only...

That's easy - ask them. If they trust us they'll tell us, otherwise we'll have to continue with our clever speculation without ever putting ourselves in harm's way.

ahhh John a postmodernist outlook...good to see...place the 'Voice' of the pilots into the research...many of the papers about war and PTSD I have read seem to collect the data from a distance (survey, structure questionnaire/interview) and then interpret the data from further away (quantitatively) an interpretation that does not have the voice of a war veteran within its midst...Class of 82

Kevin

With all due respect you are talking about the views of one group of individual combat veterans.  I have spoken to many combat veterans with an entirely different view of "killing their own kind", as you put it.  I do not have a civilian interpretation, I have a lot of close experience with the military and while I have no combat experience I have met many, including my own late father who had.  

The fears and psychiatric injury experienced by some combat veterans is very similar to those who have been in severe accidents or non combat disasters.    Many combat veterans, in fact by far the majority do not experience severe PTSD.  Those who do have very often experienced severe trauma at a much earlier part of their lives, including child abuse or neglect for example.  Understanding that contribution to the psychiatric injury of combat veterans and other with PTSD is essential. 

PTSD and other forms of long exposure trauma are very complex and an individual's personal experience of war is no panacea or assistance in understanding the complexity.  It is indeed true that combat veterans obtain a great deal of comfort from close association with what you describe as their brothers.  I have witnessed this for sure with my own eyes, having spent years among combat veterans and those who survived long periods in POW camps in dreadful conditions.  

There is no substitute for the inclusion of personal experiences in a study of trauma among veterans but it is not the case that others will have "no idea", as you put it.  It is only by combining the experiences of service personnel, police officers, emergency services personnel, aid workers, journalists, spies and others who face 'battle fatigue' alongside those of the psychologists, therapists and psychiatrists that we will crack this problem.

If any within that team do not understand because they haven't been personnally involved we will never make any progress in this most urgent of missions. 

If you gave Kevin's 'voice' to a group of veterans (Falklands, Northern Ireland, first Gulf War) who were overmedicated residents in a psychiatric unit with complex-PTSD how quickly would they recover to the point of discharging themselves to get back, self-motivated, to their former lives? Even in the case of one veteran treated for seven years, it took less than three hours. The unit was Ty Gwyn (North Wales) the residents included 'intractable cases' from Combat Stress, (the UK veterans mental health charity) and nobody I saw got more than one session. The session was a tightly-run repetition of telling me what happened until the memories were recovered, the horror made sense and they realised they were good people after all. The unit closed in 2005 and Combat Stress refused to let me teach them what I did or run research there (they still refuse) and now continue to 'treat' and 'help' veterans confident they will not recover. The comedian Chris Rock proclaims that for doctors "The money is in the medicine" which tells me why so many veterans are not given their voice. One such voice would be "This is not helping", another would be "What do you know?" and privately saying "I'm not telling you that, you won't get it". So for 10 years I've known the value of 'voice' and the threat it brings to those earning a living, a reputation and a role in society by debating the complexities of something that in reality they do not understand and are not very good at. So I wonder what we'd hear if we gave 'voice' to those mental-health professionals who discuss 'complexity' rather than 'incompetence'. I really do...

It is absolutely true that there is much incompetence in the treatment or combat induced PTSD.  The use of medication for instance over the long term is a scandal and certainly those suffering PTSD need to be able to speak out.  The earlier the intervention,  the more effective the result.  

Many PTSD victims harbour the suffering for years and cannot talk about the pain they endure.  They need to be given a voice and they need a therapist who understands the effects that severe trauma has on the person. This is just as important as having been in combat.  There may be no substitute for combat experience but there is no substitute for an understanding of the human psyche either, that is why both are needed.

The culture of soldiers, police officers, emergency workers and other subjected to immediate and long term trauma has contributed to the severity of the conditions.  Being a tough guy, laughing at 'gallows humour' keeping a stiff upper lip and all the other macho crap makes PTSD worse, not better.

Soldiers and others with traumatic stress conditions need to express their fear, their disgust, their shame as soon as they can.  They need support from their close friends and professionals alike and they need a proper fully paid for service to provide for them.  

The British establishment has a disgraceful record in supporting its former service personnel that is centuries long.  Soldiers have always been left to fend for themselves when the fighting is over, that is the fault of successive governments and the military themselves.  It is not simply the fault of mental health professionals who 'do not understand'.  As a former mental health professional I may not have had combat experience but I have seen things that haunt me in the dead of night, I have seen suffering, and experienced it. It is not only in battle that you can witness horror!

All those who work in ultra stressful conditions be it combat or rescue should be given a voice and it needs to be their voice, not the mental health professionals version of it and certainly not the 'regiment's' or the rufty-tufty hard man's.  Sufficient government money should be paid to support and treat them not those who seek to make money out of them.  

Well said Barry. So Anni's question will be answered by recruiting people willing to 'hear the voice' of her air force pilots in supportive communities that are fully-informed of the myths in the culture that persuaded them it was a good idea to go war. That probably excludes most researchers and clinicians invested in the status-quo. I'll go with that.

Barry, this is the case of misunderstanding between combatants and none combatants.  When we are sent to war propaganda plays a part in creating the illusion that the enemy is not human (otherwise many soldiers (soldier = all combatants from all services in this reply) would not kill...if they informed us that the person we were going to kill was Mr Jones with 3 children one of which is autistic and his wife is having a nervous breakdown and he doesn't really want to be there it would put us all in a place not conducive to killing.

I have heard many researchers state 'I have spoken to many combat veterans...' and when I ask them how they know they were veterans, they say because they told me so.  The veterans I talk to in my research have to produce their service record, service number and I check this off with military records.  I also meet twice a year with over 1000 War Veterans, run workshops, seminars and conferences for war veterans, veterans and their families.  How do you evidence the person talking to you is in fact a war veteran?  I have had close experience with women who have given birth but I really have no idea what it is like to have a baby, and if I need to know anything about having a baby I do not ask anyone who has not had a baby...the same stands for all research.  I ma sorry to hear your father has passed...he will be in Valhalla.  

I love this idea that the fears and psychiatric injuries experienced by combatants is very similar to those who have been in severe accidents or non-combatant disasters...how do you know?  To really know this one who think one had to have experience of both to make that sort of generalised comparison.  I counsel trauma victims (childhood sexual abuse, physical and mental abuse), and with soldiers and veterans with PTSD, and their families who suffer with vicarious PTSD.  I have experienced some of the symptoms of PTSD but chose to go no where near the medical model.  There are fundamental differences between the two cohorts (one as already stated being forced to kill to survive, another is feeling the terror of the battlefield, seeing the horror of the battlefield, and at the same time being instigational to the terror and horror.  No Barry by talking to those who were really there you would find out nothing except the most superficial information about the experience of war.  Did your Dad talk at length about his experiences?  You see I do not and many of my friends do not, and even when we are together we do not...because we do not need to.

  "Understanding that contribution to the psychiatric injury of combat veterans and other with PTSD is essential."  I apologise I do not understand this...War is what contributes to the psychiatric (and it can be simply psychological) injury...what we ought to be learning from combatants is their experiences, hear their Voice, and not leave it to individuals who may misinterpret excellent data due to thinking they know what it is like to be a soldier in battle (or simply what it is like to be a soldier).

Firstly I think people get confused when they see "PTSD" as a stand alone illness...it is not it is a construct of many common mental health disorders, and the personal experience is the absolute key to understanding the complexity as if you add in a non-combatant's view on the experiences of a combatant, are you just simply making it more complex.  It is time the scientific world stopped believing in their own rhetoric that individuals with mental health problems are in no position to inform professionals about how or what they are feeling...Rogers (1957) places the expert as the person who has endured the experiences and not the person talking to them about those experiences.

I do not gain any comfort from being with my Brothers, except I suppose as a relief from the discomfort I feel when I am away from them.  I think your statement about cracking the problem is misplaced...you will never crack the problem...what you can do is talk to war veterans on how they manage their symptoms...because they will never go away unless in the fog of alcohol or narcotics (prescribed or illegal), and the guys I speak to do not want their experiences forgotten, they just want to control when they have them.  Progress is being made in the clinical research groups of the NIHR (NHS).  We were commissioned last year to set up a veterans cohort that would be an advisory group on research projects, assist in collecting data (veterans interviewing veterans), and collaborators during the interpretation stage.  This has been a successful project that funded was removed from...simply because civilians in the know at the NHS did not realise the importance of this project.  We are now in talks with Hampshire County Council for a similar project.

We are not an exclusionist group we are an inclusion driven group...the problem we have is not that we won't let them in, it is they do not want to come in because what they hear is not what they want to hear.

I think that I mentioned that a combatant trained in psychological therapy  (my credentials are BA (Hons) Psych; MSc Couns Psych; PhD Candidate socio-psych) is of the most important.  An example I will share with you is a therapist approached me to link her to veterans in need of therapy.  I obliged when my appointment book overflowed.  they came back to me months later and said she was not going to work with veterans again.  I asked what had happened...they said all was well until the 12 week when the vet came in and said 'I have had a fuc*ing great week'...the therapist (with 16 years experience of traumatised clients, and well known locally) said the vet continued to swear and use profanities even after she had told him to stop.  I simply said that had they thought about the first eleven weeks the vet was getting to trust them, and therefore using 'societies' way of communicating...and then on the twelfth session showed the trust in them by feeling safe enough with them to become themselves...

Barry I have never felt fear or disgust or shame post battle...are you saying that I should just make it up to feel better about myself?  I have never been a tough guy...etc etc this is what is wrong with the research society is that they make assumptions based on myths and stereotypes developed by themselves, instead of simply asking a combat veteran...it really is that simple...however I have come across resistance like this for many many years.  I approached this area of misunderstanding when asked to be an Academic Consultant to Lord Ashcroft's Transition Review, and it was only the civilians on the committee that didn't get it...just simply did not get it...

It is only in battle that you witness battle horror...and the difference is in battle you have only two outs...love what you do or dissociation...or convince yourself of both...there is no escape...none...no hope except prayer to those who do not pray...the mental health profession have to stand up and say 'We do not understand...please help us to understand' and if they do not they are part of the problem...I admire your allegiance to the mental health family...but that does not help the guys I come across who do not want to die, but just cannot take being misunderstood anymore...some I help to overcome those feelings and some I do not...

Also the culture of the military is now being accepted as being a unique culture...and not a sub-culture of society as are the Police, Fireman etc etc... so comparison does not work inter-culturally.  The soldier has no choice, he has to go to war when asked, he has to carry out things that civilians just would say no and call a member of the union...no such outs for the military...and if you are thinking well they could go absent without leave then you will show that you really do not know the culture of the military.

What needs to happen is for the research community to stop taking the easy way out through quantitative only approach...there needs to be Veteran Led Research or more collaborations with researchers - this is on the increase)...and the mental health profession has to admit it does not know, and cannot know what it is like to be a war veteran, and therefore they will need assistance in the treatment of war veterans with mental health issues...but alas it is my personal opinion that they are too precious and insecure to do this simple thing...therefore we war veterans will always be misunderstood...and therefore all the research's validity is reduced...and as the mental health profession is guided by research, they too are part of the problem...

Anyway thank you for your comments this had given me a good half hour break from my research...much needed...

Kevin, you might be interested to know of a now-retired London fire brigade officer who became traumatised digging at Ground Zero following the 9/11 attacks. He was told by his psychiatrist he had the largest score on a PTSD scale he had ever seen. I saw him once in 2008 since when he's recovered (he says "cured") and asked me what I did. When I saw the changes I offered to train him in the same method. Last year he was preparing to be mobilised to Afghanistan as a Reservist before the withdrawal. I did what you suggested and listened, listened, listened... but I'm an ex-firefighter too so I don't think you'll be all that surprised.

There is a picture of a fire fighter in the ppt presentation I attached earlier.  The photographer reported that this man did not appear to notice him even though he looks as if he is staring at the camera.  Several photos were taken but the fireman did not flinch throughout.  

All the photos in this presentation that I gave at a conference a few years back have the same haunted expressions and one soldiers is physically damaged by PTSD. (Selyes General Adaptation Syndrome) 

I was a P/T firefighter too in my mis-spent youth, nothing ever life threatening but plenty of excitement.  

Thanks Barry, I'll take a look. Yes, the excitement both seduces and intoxicates so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised at the extremes we go to compared to those who refuse to get dragged in.

It seems that what I have said has been misinterpreted along the way.  I am not saying that Combat related PTSD is the worst in the the world...all PTSD is not good (and I cannot think of anyway anyone can measure PTSD...in my experience it is not measurable unless you are fully ensconced in the positivist paradigm)...what I am saying is this:  No one can empathise with combat related PTSD unless you have experienced war...and maybe the best people to offer assistance to a fire officer (or police officer; or any other officers) that experienced 9/11 would be a fire officer who had experienced 9/11 and was trained in therapy...not likely on the face of it...but the next best would be an ex fire person with similar experiences...

What I am saying is there are no 'similar' experiences in the civilian world as active service on a battlefield...there isn't anything that I have come across that gets any where near... this is not a swinging dick competition...my suggestions are for the benefit of my Brothers who suffer with combat related PTSD...those who spend years and years with the accessible therapy programmes (some for up to 10 years - and yes post therapy they feel better for a while) supplied by charities.  they then come to me, some travel 100 miles each way...and the reason they give is that I understand...

I am not a positivist so I do not believe that any mental illness can be measured against others...only against itself...if it is my writing style that has caused individuals to misinterpret what I am saying then i apologise... 

Kevin

I agree there cannot be any experiences akin to being in combat but any violent life threatening experience must come close.  No experience can compare with being a hostage, a disaster victim, an abused child or a carer looking after a terminally or severely mentally ill loved one.  You are quite right, all of these are equally as bad as being in combat, it is not a contest, or swinging dick competition as you colourfully describe it.  Many who have suffered these adverse life experiences are very severely damaged indeed.

PTSD needs to be addressed individually.  While there may be DSM and ICD classification categories in reality no two cases are the same.  Many millions of soldiers came through WW1 apparently unscathed either physical or mentally.  Poor old Private Eaglefield suffered the most extreme kind of shell shock manifesting itself in physical damage caused almost certainly by trauma induced corticosteroid overload. Vast numbers of combatants were somewhere between the two extremes.

I only have one caution when talking about support coming from brothers in arms.  It is still believed by far too many that macho behaviour underpins a military career.  No showing of emotions, unless it is anger and aggression, no crying etc.  Some soldiers, and I have heard them, think that 'gallows humour' offers support, that laughing and joking about the mayhem of war is a panacea to its horror.

You too must have heard this Gung Ho garbage.  It is this contradiction that many with no combat experience do not understand.  "War is the sum of all evil" were the wise words of General Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson.  We should teach all children this rather than the old lie Dulce et Decorum est Pro Patria Mori.

Anni, to address your question more directly, I see the responses you have had falling into two categories: i) the medico-scientific one that relies upon the literature, and ii) the person-centred one that relies upon experience. I adopt both in my research so I train 'peers' (someone that is readily identified with by rank, role and responsibility) in a person-centred method that can be quickly learned and then report the changes according to measures from the medico-scientific literature.

I am about to run a research project with firefighters in the UK. The pilot project saw a firefighter trained to listen with extended interest for as long as it took the participant to tell and re-tell their story (average 90 mins) to completion. When the participant decided they were finished they left. In every case improvements were obvious from an e-mail, even without calculating scores. The formal analyses supported the changes and a full project will commence in January 2016. With regard to your question, what they were 'afraid of' was not anticipated, rather it had to be discovered, and it was evident from their narrative. If this is true for your fighters/bombers there is nothing to do beyond asking them to tell their story and awaiting an answer, one that I believe is most easily discovered in the company of a trained-and-trusted peer.

Anni

If you look up Edgar Jones on RG  you will see an excellent paper on the Royal Air Force term Lack of Moral Fibre which was used to stigmatise aircrews in WW2.  I think that this mentality did not die out with the end of the 2nd World War and that the Gung Ho mentality is still prevalent in the military.  Fear of letting the side down is still a powerful 'incentive' in military culture. 

Remember that fear is not the only aspect of post-deployment dysfunction. Loss, grief and guilt reactions fall into a different line of symptom development. What has been called "Moral Injury" has a third line of symptoms. These are not specific to Air Force personnel. Air crews are not the only persons with opportunity to develop trauma reactions - drone "pilots" have some unique and sometimes awful experiences.

Thanks Jerry. You've prompted me to point out that another way to interpret our tendency to reduce posttraumatic reactions to just one (e.g., afraid of) is to admit to a game of distracting each other from the collective failure of our disciplines. In other words we're really not very good at what we do so we absorb ourselves in a deception of alternating simplicities and complexities that avoid that truth. If you are an exception to this you will know many who are not and likely aware of your success being envied, disbelieved and ultimately ignored. Otherwise, this discussion, 100 years on from the Shellshock-era, would not be taking place.

If you have information on armored vehicle crews and their post-deployment reactions, that's probably a good place to look for possible leads. Same for military truck drivers. In general, sitting stationary inside a moving vehicle could lead to a sense of heightened visibility to others. Being more visible on or above the battlefield typically is not considered a good outcome, but it often is unavoidable.

For some aircrew, confined spaces may be an issue. Some crew members on the B-52 bomber serve in a windowless space, and during combat missions, they are aware of the anti-aircraft cannon fire and missiles fired at their plane. For fighter pilots, who typically have greater visibility when flying missions, they could feel anxious in any situation that feels threatening and is accompanied by restricted visibility.

In transport aircraft crew, many of their missions occur at night to minimize the risk of taking enemy fire. Having been in the cockpit of a C-17 flying into Afghanistan, I can definitely say there is a feeling of vulnerability, something like "get me off this slow-moving plane so I can move around on the ground." My response may be unique to Army veterans (who are more comfortable on the ground), but if aircrew share that reaction, then they could feel anxious in (comparatively) slow moving vehicles, maybe even public transportation, when the situation could be a hazardous one (e.g. a slow moving crowded bus in an unfamiliar neighborhood).

Your question mentioned air force pilots, but don't overlook the Army and Navy helicopter pilots and their flight crews. 

Well Anni you certainly have hit a nerve with some folks with your question ,which I think is fascinating... but I notice that a majority of the responses are from the British Isles while you are looking into Danish Airforce Pilots... so again raises a question... is the reaction or possible concerns of an Airforce Pilot similar across international boundaries.... Despite my not having any military experience, my father was in the Battle of the Bulge under General Patton... Captain of the 42 Armed Division... & yes those in tanks had slightly different symptoms or reactions.... as well as being hesitant to talk with us non-military folks. I am currently involved with Boston College and University of Southern California on MST... and do believe it is healthy to have Voices from all sectors.... I have had wonderful success with the National Centers on PTSD to help sort thru some of these issues... I have also had great results from reaching out to the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado..... would encourage you to look at both the National Center for PTSD here in the States as well as Air Force Academy... at least for the US version of this story.... I do find differences just between US and Canada in my own research... so would encourage an International Lens with your work.... Good Luck... great topic!

Dulce et Decorum est Pro Patria Mori not in my mind...as a war Veteran I would assume that those who start Wars and do not engage in the horrors of war are the ones who think or believe in that saying.

The difference between a soldier on the battlefield and those who have experienced 'any violent life threatening experience' is that the person who experiences violent life threatening experience usually do not have to step over dead friends and carry on placing themselves in violent life threatening experiences without break and without hesitation (in a way we place ourselves in a position of life threatening danger whilst offering life threatening danger)...another difference, off the battlefield, is that the danger is aimed at the person only, whilst on the battlefield one is placed in a position where you have to kill (I have never met any War Veteran who has said they joined up to kill folk) even though you do not want to...because if you do not, you (or worse one of your mates) will be killed...not only is one placed in that position once but for the duration of the battle...you have to go on and on doing what you do not want to do...you see most of my Brothers see the Argentine military as Brothers in Arms, however we are placed in a situation where we have to kill our own (Argentinian Brothers)...and they are placed in a position where they have to kill their own (us), whilst those at home cheer and celebrate the death of human beings.

That still does not include the fickleness of Brother Death in war, artillery, aircraft delivered ordnance, sniper and blue on blue action.

I do not expect those who have not experienced war to understand the closeness that we give to those we kill...and during the battle we convince ourselves that they are not human beings (also assisted by propaganda), however after the war is over we are expected to become normal (stereotype) of 'Heroes' (whatever that is), and that lays heavy on the mind.

I gave a talk at the annual BPS conference and it was suggested by a delegate that we must have felt really good when we saw the reception we received when we returned (flag waving, cheering and chants of Heroes)...my answer was that it was the saddest I had ever felt, because it simply reminded me of those who were not there to experience this sight alongside us...those we left behind.

I have experienced some life threatening experiences in civvy street...and my heart rate stays the same...I do not get stressed...as compared with my experiences on the battle field they are not life threatening to the same degree...and in a way they seem trivial (I am not saying that life threatening experiences are trivial) compared to the stress, anxiety, confusion I experienced post-war...during the war?  My unit did their job and did it really well, and many now sleep safely in their beds...

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf" - Grenier or Orwell (depending what you believe) and for that I am proud...I am shamed by what I was made to do by those who benefited politically or financially...from the safety of their beds...

So I still believe that there are no experiences within the paradigm of 'civvy street' that compares to the experience of war...