August 19, 2010, the Fourth Stryker Brigade, Second Infantry Division of the US army rolled across the southern Iraqi desert into Kuwait.
This event wouldn’t normally garner much attention. Troop movement between a US occupied country to a US ally is hardly a front page occurrence. However, as these men headed southwards they marked the final withdrawal of US combat troops from a seven and a half year struggle that has filled more column inches than any other event, and will perhaps come to define the decade.
A war that starts when you are twelve years old has an odd place in your consciousness. You conversely feel like you know very little about the war in Iraq, but have a guilty gut feeling that you should be more informed. Therefore, you latch on to statistics and gobbets of information. The US has spent over $900 billion on the war. $9 billion of that is completely unaccounted for. Nearly 4,500 troops have been killed in combat, and over 31,000 troops have been physically injured. But in a sense the bigger picture is easier. It allows us to hide behind facts and figures with the arrogance of intellectual understanding. Therefore, the opportunity to interview an Iraq war veteran posed an interesting challenge – admitting the personal out of a war that was purposefully marketed as impersonal and which the media portrayed as a battle of politicians.
Scott Lurker served in Iraq from September 2003 to September 2004 after joining the army two years earlier. He is unequivocal and unashamed of his reasons for signing up. “September 11th was the catalyst for me. I felt a wave of patriotism and I wasn’t really doing anything with my life. But I didn’t act on these feelings until 9/11.”
Scott’s feelings are easily dismissible while we stand nearly a decade later with the safe distance of time and European geography. For most Americans 9/11 was, understandably, a watershed moment, of the same magnitude as the US Revolution, the abolition of slavery, Pearl Harbour or the Watergate scandal.
The President declared – “We will remember every family that lives in grief. We will remember the fire and ash, the last phone calls, the funerals of the children.” Only 19 percent of the population stated that a war with Iraq would be the “wrong decision”. From this, Scott’s motives have an admirable purity in attempting to create rational action from chaos.
After the necessary eighteen months of basic training Scott left for Iraq. “I was a Bradley Linebacker Crewmember” he proudly announces. According to official explanations of this rather confusing title, the role “primarily works on a tank capable of neutralising air targets through firing missiles and other ammunition.” So it was that only two years after the attack on the Twin Towers Scott found himself in one of the most vulnerable sections of the army.
However, it was vulnerability of a political nature that many in the army soon had to fight off as the fruitless search for WMDs became an international embarrassment. “When I went I got to see certain things, we just had to get past the whole weapons of mass destruction issue. It’s what we got done there and what we accomplished.”
Scott is proud of what he and his colleagues in the army achieved. He does not wrap himself in the American flag. He doesn’t attempt to defend the political hierarchies that sent the army to Iraq. And he doesn’t voice the saccharine American clichés of “war on terror” and “fighting for democracy” that have spoiled over the last few years.
Instead, his pride is rooted in deeply personal reasons. “When we crossed the border from Kuwait into Iraq we were met by a swarm of children and all the stuff people were talking about didn’t matter so much. I came to the conclusion that if we made their future brighter then the army’s mission had meaning. We helped build schools and clinics and gave them a better standard of living.”
This positive ideal was soon to be tarnished for the US army when, in the Spring 2004, the media got hold of photos of Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse. The army hierarchy found itself on the back foot when confronted with evidence of army personnel dragging prisoners by leaches and appearing to punch handcuffed detainees.
Scott remains clear-headed and straight forward about the scandal. “There were people out there who did lousy things. It never made me ashamed to be a soldier. Guys did things they shouldn’t have. But it shouldn’t reflect on the army as a group.”
But he remains realistically optimistic about the US’ success in Iraq, arguing “Winning the war is only half the battle. Restoring civilian life is the next part we are at now… I have heard from my friends still out there that it has improved.”
In September 2004 Scott returned from Iraq, worked “reluctantly” in army recruitment (preferring instead his former combat role) and then left the forces two years ago. It is this period of transition from army life to civilian existence that often presents the most difficult challenges for both individual soldiers and the defence institution.
A 2008 study by a medical research organisation based within the US Defence Department found returning troops were often affected by a range of mental health issues. Over a fifth of soldiers screened a year after returning from Iraq suffered post traumatic stress disorder, depression or anxiety, three times the figure for troops returning from Afghanistan. Troops could also suffer from alcohol reliance, aggression and “family functioning” problems. The study concluded that soldiers “are not very likely to seek professional help if they have a mental health problem” and that “they are concerned that they may somehow be treated differently if they do.”
Scott is philosophically upbeat about his transition. “You get used to it. It is a big change in lifestyle…I think I adjusted pretty well.” However, he does admit “I developed a few bad habits. I would get a bit jumpy with unexpected noises, but not as bad as they show in the movies. When I am in a new environment I still find myself looking around and checking the place out. And I don’t sleep very well in new places. Apparently I shout in my sleep as well.”
After leaving the army Scott wasn’t sure which career to follow. “I tried my hand at a couple of jobs. I got into sales, but that was terrible because of the recession.” Instead Scott ended up at Rutgers University in New Jersey and, like over a half a million veterans, receives educational benefits from the Department of Veterans’ Affairs. “I thought I might as well go into school because it was on the army’s dime.”
Although Scott has formally left the army he is convinced that it still informs his decisions today. “It’s a question of identity. What I learned and what I did will always be part of me. The combat mind set is different. You can never forget the battle mind set.”
He also argues that there are elements of army life that stick with him. “People just don’t grasp the urge to return. You feel guilty because your comrades are in battle. It’s all about keeping an eye on your battle buddies.”
But Scott has no misgivings about the decisions he made. “I don’t have regrets at all. It was a great experience and I would do it again. If I hadn’t gotten married I would probably still be doing it.” In a country where opinion polls consistently find that more than half the population hate their job Scott’s proclamation of no regrets is a bold and refreshing statement.
It has become easy to rhetorically dismiss the US army. At the will of their political masters they lost public standing. At the will of opposition Iraqi forces and insurgents they lost nearly 4,500 troops. And at the will of Wikileaks they have justifiably lost elements of trust that were already waning. But it must be remembered that while we can and should criticise armies as institutions and chains of command we must not let our misgivings become personal attacks on those who serve with good and honourable intentions.
It may sound like a cliché, but it is a message that has often been caught up in the debates surrounding the war of Iraq, defence spending and such political motifs as “I support the troops.” It is a simple idea, but we ignore it at our, and the soldiers’ peril.