When we hear that the U.S. Army is spending $117 million to toughen up combat troops mentally, we certainly don't expect the ancient Spartan regime of blood soup, reed beds and whippings to inure one to pain. Yet we might not guess a program of "emotional resiliency classes," either. But the money is being used to train 1500 sergeants to teach precisely that, making them de facto psychologists. FoxNews.com reports, writing, "The new $117 million dollar program is based on the research of Dr. Martin Seligman, chairman of the University of Pennsylvania Positive Psychology Center, who has been consulting with the Pentagon and whom the Army calls 'Dr. Happy.'"

Now, growing up in New York City, "Dr. Happy" has a ring of familiarity to it. Wasn't he that undocumented pharmacist who operated near the corner of 5th Avenue and 125th Street? Could be, it's just a short lateral move to academia.

FoxNews.com also writes:

According to Army spokesman Gary Tallman, the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program is "designed to build resilience in soldiers, family members and Army civilians by developing five dimensions of strength: physical, emotional, social, spiritual and family." 

"Resilience can be defined as having the ability to grow and thrive in the face of challenges and bounce back from adversity," Tallman told FOX News.

It could also be defined as the ability to manage problems without running to the therapist.

The Army is pursuing this program to help soldiers combat not just the enemy but also depression, stress and suicidal thoughts. And, for sure, nothing can be more stressful than staring death in the face on a faraway battlefield. Yet I'm skeptical of "psychology" and its remedies. It's a bias I developed upon seeing time and again that few psychologists' explanations of man's behavior have corresponded to most everyone's sense of man's nature. Moreover, when hard science can settle a matter, it usually indicates that laymen are better psychologists than psychologists. Just consider, for instance, how the field insisted for decades that boys and girls were the same except for superficial physical differences and counseled naive parents to that effect (paging Dr. John Money). But then in the 1990s, brain research and a greater understanding of intrauterine development proved this false, thus vindicating tradition. That's a pretty big "Oops."

Of course, there is such a thing as human psychology; that is, people do operate by certain principles. The problem is that modern psychology doesn't seem to have a very good grasp of what they are. Yet many will claim Dr. Happy's program has merit, and I don't care to argue about details. There is a bigger picture here.

The Army claims that one-fifth of returning combat troops suffer from "mental health problems," and this isn't surprising. For one thing, the psychologists' handbook, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, should soon be as big as the Houses' health-care bill I think, as psychology suffers from what I've dubbed "Disorder Creation Disorder." This is the unquenchable desire to diagnose ever more of what we formerly called sins and frailties as diseases or conditions of the brain. It widens psychologists' market beautifully. In fact, soon all of us will be mentally ill. I expect to spend my retirement in a rubber room.

It also seems that how the psychological frailty of troops is portrayed has more to do with the spirit of the age than scientific advances. My father was a prisoner of war in Germany during WWII, and he certainly saw his share of action. I remember a story he told us about seeing the front of a buddy's head blow off by a piece of shrapnel. Yet his generation didn't fixate on "psychological problems"; they did their duty and soldiered on.

Contrast this with the image of the troubled, unstable, tormented Vietnam veteran. Now, before anyone gets insulted, I said "image" for a reason. I realize that most Vietnam veterans are stout-hearted men who answered the call and then carried on. However, the image also exists for a reason. Vietnam was the first war of touchy-feely, post-Christian, free-sex-and-hard-rock America. People saw tremendous "psychological problems" not only because some men had in fact softened, but also because they were looking for those problems. The weak grew in number and projected their feelings even onto the strong.

More significantly, they came to expect these psychological problems to be the norm, and that expectation became first known and then a reality. It's much like the mother I knew whose son had been diagnosed with "A.D.D." Some time after therapists had given the boy a book on how a child thus labeled behaved, his mother took it away. Why? She said that, surprise, surprise, he started to copy the behavior of the child in the book.

Today our civilization has become a spoiled child, and this softening has left nothing unscathed — not even the military. And if you want some insight into this, read the comments under the FoxNews.com article. Some of them have been left by soldiers and veterans and vindicate my assessment. One writes:

I about fell out when I heard about "stress cards" in boot camp. I got out of the Army in 1990 and I managed to make it through my term without having to resort to "stress cards" or any of that other insanity. . . . What idiot came up with those stress cards? Do they think the Taliban or Abu Sayyaf will stop shooting at you because you show them a little pink card with Hello Kitty on it that reads, "Please stop shooting at me. It lowers my self esteem"? For all anyone knows, setting soldiers up in a preschool environment like that contributes to PTSD [Post-traumatic Stress Disorder] by removing them from their coloring books and sheltered world and dumping them into combat. I don't know if I want to reenlist now or not.

In case you don't know what he's talking about, the Army has long issued "stress cards" that soldiers can produce if they're, well, like, you know, man, feeling stressed, and then the drill sergeant has to give them a break. I also read once (although I can't confirm it) that the Army was allowing women to wear sneakers during basic training because they got too many injuries in combat boots. Well, I don't suppose it matters. We all know that any Taliban they ran into would be chivalrous anyway.

Another ex-soldier writes:

I'm not sure classes will help. I've been deployed and I recently got out of the Army. We spent several days a month on classes that were meant to teach us how to prevent suicide, prevent drug and alcohol abuse, prevent human trafficking, prevent stereotyping, prevent racial profiling, prevent divorce, spouse abuse, child abuse, etc... We only went to the firing range once during the last year I was in the Army, but we watched a ton of prevention presentations in air-conditioned auditoriums.

Then, an officer illustrates the consequences of this, writing, "I once met a Private that was a product of that environment. He burst into tears when I asked if his arm was broken when he failed to salute."

Lastly, yet another soldier points out that some men use the Corporal Klinger routine (of M.A.S.H. fame) and feign psychological problems to avoid being deployed. He also says that many soldiers have psychological problems when leaving the military for a simple reason: they had them when they went in.

This brings us to the main point. The civilian pool of candidates just isn't what it once was. If parents fail to instill obedience in children, if the young never learn to follow orders at home, how amenable will they be to doing so in the military? If parents don't instill discipline, young people will certainly be stressed when it's required of them by the drill sergeant. And if kids are coddled, catered to and shielded from failure (trophies for everyone!) and thus aren't toughened up, of course they'll crumble in a military environment. We have become a stress-card society.

I wonder what General Patton would say.

Selwyn Duke is a columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush Limbaugh Show, at WorldNetDaily.com, in American Conservative magazine, is a contributor to AmericanThinker.com and appears regularly as a guest on the award-winning, nationally-syndicated Michael Savage Show. Visit his Website.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

danwhitehead1 said:

	General Patton - - - - - - and all the other soldiers of his grit would probably first throw up and then lose his temper in complete disgust. Once again, and as always, Mr. Duke has told the complete, unvarnished truth. The "liberal" left scum will never be satisfied 'til this nation has been completely castrated.
	report abuse vote down vote up

August 21, 2009
Votes: +1

Thomas Paine said:

Be careful to impose your thoughts on Patton Patton would be disgusted with todays Fascist leaders. Fighting wars for nothing more than Fascist profits would disgust General Patton. Trading with Communist China as we do today would discust the General. Just ask his Nephew Larry McDonald former President of JBS. He knew the real George Patton. The disgust would be at the atheist fascist at the top. Not the poor unsuspecting freedom loving patroit at the bottom.

report abuse vote down vote up

August 22, 2009
Votes: +0

danwhitehead1 said:

	Thank you Thomas Paine - - - - - - Correction humbly accepted.
	report abuse vote down vote up

August 22, 2009
Votes: +1

Paladin said:

	... What is the correction? No one said that Patton would like today's wars or today's fascists. But he also didn't like weakness. So he wouldn't like today's weak soldiers either. Remember, he once slapped a soldier who started crying and basically told him to be a man.
	report abuse vote down vote up

August 22, 2009
Votes: +1

still free said:

Retirement might be cushy after all! Thank you, Mr. Duke, for another great article. I too look forward to my retirement in a rubber room. That is, of course, if Obama-care does not pass. Because we know that if it does pass, anyone over 60 will be "treated" by a Dr. Kervokian type and all acceptable organs will be harvested. Do you think that last medical service will be "free," or will the attendant costs be passed on to the Estate?

report abuse vote down vote up

August 22, 2009
Votes: +0

danwhitehead1 said:

Just to clrify - - - - - - It wasn't the soldiers I was criticizing anyway. What I meant was that General Patton and those great and fearless warriors of his now gone breed would have first thrown up and then become angry because of what the "liberal" left (a group that I thoroughly loathe and despise) has done (in concert with the force of an out-of-control, rogue fedgov). I think Mr. Paine thought I was criticizing the soldiers. Anway, he's right; I really had no right to presume to know Genreal Pattons thoughts.

report abuse vote down vote up

August 23, 2009
Votes: +0

danwhitehead1 said:

	I've always wondered - - - - - - if that story of General Patton slapping a soldier is really true. It sounds just like the kind of lie that the gutless, cowardly scum of the "liberal" left would puke up in an attempt to criticize/smear the man (the bottom of whose shoes they could not lick if they stood on a high mountain).
	report abuse vote down vote up

August 23, 2009
Votes: +0

Paladin said:

	... Dan, Paine said that we should be careful about imposing our thoughts on Patton but he did just that. He said that Patton would be upset about these fascist wars. OK, I don't necessarily disagree. But we know that Patton would have disliked today's weakness even more. It's silly to say that he would have reacted to STRESS CARDS with anything but contempt.
	report abuse vote down vote up

August 25, 2009
Votes: +2