Started By
Message

re: Which War Would Result In The Most Severe PTSD For Soldiers?

Posted on 5/3/17 at 9:59 pm to
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
51480 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 9:59 pm to
Soviet POWs were executed when returned after the war.

For all the words written about the Pacific battles, you had WW1 battles that lasted five times or more as long and had more artillery on both sides.
Posted by lsucoonass
shreveport and east texas
Member since Nov 2003
68486 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:05 pm to
This is true and many Slavs fled to Canada during that time frame
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64795 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:09 pm to
quote:

WW1 and it isn't even close.

More so than WW2 in the pacific?


If you look at the fighting in the Pacific in WWII, you'll see it's very similar in style to WWI trench warfare. But what sets WWI apart is that unlike the Pacific where battles tended to last days or weeks, in WWI battles lasted months and swallows up men by the hundreds of thousands. And in top of this, imagine this was your world....



Posted by bamafan1001
Member since Jun 2011
15783 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:17 pm to
Well other wars in that period weren't options in the OP.
Posted by TigerFanInSouthland
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
28065 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:20 pm to
quote:

But what sets WWI apart is that unlike the Pacific where battles tended to last days or weeks, in WWI battles lasted months


Well to be fair, a lot of major battles in the Pacific technically lasted a couple months with most of the major action happening in the span of weeks. It's the extreme loss of life that sets WWI apart.
Posted by el Gaucho
He/They
Member since Dec 2010
53120 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:21 pm to
the meme war was pretty tough on some of the posters around here
Posted by TigerFanInSouthland
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
28065 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:23 pm to
quote:

There have been countless nasty sieges throughout history.


There were two major sieges in WWII, Nanking and Leningrad. And idk if you can even count Nanking as a siege because that was closer to a massacre than anything else. Now, Leningrad was most definitely a siege in the definition of the word and it lasted almost the entire war. Cannibalism was rampant in Leningrad.
Posted by CelticDog
Member since Apr 2015
42867 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:27 pm to
Some battles were horrific, but for optimized PTSD, I nominate
the day raids from Siciliy to Italy.

You are told that after 25 missions, you go back to England. you do the 25.
so many planes and guys are shot down, they need you.
You have to do 25 more.

Some guys did 75 missions.

My dad was wounded on mission #26.

he later volunteered for glider pilot for Normandy, with the 82nd airborne.

ended up with two purple hearts, two silver stars, 10 bronze stars, countless distinguished service medals and a distinguished flying medal for Normandy.

I have watched Catch 22 a few times. The very idea of catch 22 goes to PTSD.
After mission 25, Lt Yosarrian is not allowed a mental excuse because he's scared. The psychiatrist says, if you were not scared, I would think you were crazy.




Posted by SCLSUMuddogs
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2010
6899 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:31 pm to
German forces raped and murdered everywhere they went in Russia. They despised slavs, and communism. The march on Berlin was payback for German atrocities in Russia
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
261652 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:31 pm to
WW1. Constant shelling for days, weeks on end. Airplanes coming into battle, the advent of tanks, machine guns cutting down whole units across cratered fields. Weeks in knee deep muddy trenches.

The constant shelling would destroy a man's mind.
Posted by Soup Sammich
Member since Aug 2015
3301 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:33 pm to
quote:


What are you talking about? Let's leave WWII out of this since all leaders of all sides made their priorities and principles clear to their citizens. They knew what they were fighting for, and even the biggest pacifists to this day agree that WWII was necessary. 

WWI though, no one had any clue what they were fighting for. Sure they knew their countries had alliances and beef with some other countries, but there was nothing clearly formed here. It was as murky as us fighting communism and Charlie in Vietnam.


You are right about WW1. I shouldn't have lumped it in with WW2. But the same point still stands in that my opinion, PTSD would seem like it would be worse for the soldiers in Vietnam or WW1 than it would be for soldiers of the second World War. I know in every war there is soldiers that suffer PTSD and their is terrible shite they see in every war. But I would believe it would be worse for soldiers that didn't want to be there or didn't know why. Just my opinion though plus I wasn't there for any of them.
Posted by TigerFanInSouthland
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
28065 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:33 pm to
I love the story about Patton slapping the shite out of that soldier in the field hospital in Africa or was it Sicily?

quote:

When Patton asked Kuhl where he was hurt, Kuhl reportedly shrugged and replied that he was "nervous" rather than wounded, adding, "I guess I can't take it."[15] Patton "immediately flared up,"[13] slapped Kuhl across the chin with his gloves, then grabbed him by the collar and dragged him to the tent entrance. He shoved him out of the tent with a kick to his backside. Yelling "Don't admit this son of a bitch,"[15] Patton demanded that Kuhl be sent back to the front, adding, "You hear me, you gutless bastard? You're going back to the front."[15]


Haha he just didn't get the whole PTSD thing.
Posted by Catman88
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Dec 2004
49125 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:34 pm to
Civil war. You would die painfully if you even looked at a bullet wrong.
Posted by biglego
Ask your mom where I been
Member since Nov 2007
76547 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:35 pm to
quote:


Well other wars in that period weren't options in the OP.



Ah good point.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64795 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:37 pm to
quote:

Well to be fair, a lot of major battles in the Pacific technically lasted a couple months with most of the major action happening in the span of weeks. It's the extreme loss of life that sets WWI apart.


True. And another thing about WWI was how even when there were periods of "quiet" between battles, there were still daily losses on a steady basis. The British even coined the term "wastage" to describe men lost under those circumstances.

And then there was the artillery. Before major battles there would be day upon day of unceasing artillery bombardments. The scale of these barrages in WWI dwarfed anything seen in the Pacific, or even Europe other than perhaps some of the major Soviet artillery preparation barrages.

I guess the best way to describe WWI is to say it was a slow meat grinder that never ceased from 1914 until 1918. It was an unrelenting hell.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64795 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:47 pm to
quote:

WWI though, no one had any clue what they were fighting for. Sure they knew their countries had alliances and beef with some other countries, but there was nothing clearly formed here. It was as murky as us fighting communism and Charlie in Vietnam


I'm going to have to disagree with you on this. Each side saw wild support for their cause, especially early in the war. Recruiting stations across Europe were swamped with men rallying to the flag of their respective countries.

Russians were fighting to help their fellow Slavs in the Balkans.

Serbian troops fought for their nation's survival.

French troops were fighting to save France and avenge 1871.

Austrian troops fought to avenge their fallen heir and punish those damn Slavs.

German troops fought for the honor of their Fatherland.

Ottomans fought to save their dying Caliphate from the encroaching British.

British soldiers fought for tiny Belgium.

And American troops later fought to make the world safe for democracy and avenge the Lusitania.
Posted by Jobu93
Cypress TX
Member since Sep 2011
19229 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:48 pm to
Thank God for the Spanish Flu.
Posted by Nawlens Gator
louisiana
Member since Sep 2005
5838 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:52 pm to

Little Big Horn

Posted by Crusty Juggler
Member since Jun 2013
351 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 10:57 pm to
Those points can all be boiled down to one thing: national identity. It's the same as Nam. National identity is the most bullshite way to get people into a war.

WWII was much more than that. It was total reformation of the world as a whole and ideas spreading and eliminating the other train of thought that was present. It was a war of ideas, not nationality. It was to wipe out fascism, communism, democracy, and any group seen as genetically inferior or harmful.

They were all very concrete on specific reasons they were going to war in WWII. WWI was all bullshite and all the troops realized it in the end. This realization WWI was total bullshite led to WWII. WWI is still difficult to understand why it happened, as is Vietnam, but even the dumbest of people can grasp the reasons behind WWII.
Posted by Xenophon
Aspen
Member since Feb 2006
40965 posts
Posted on 5/3/17 at 11:02 pm to
From a purely PTSD perspective, it's WW1. The shelling alone is what led to PTSD studies.
first pageprev pagePage 7 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram