Rumor: Returning soldiers are potential menaces

© 2009 By Michael Swickard, Ph.D.

“During a period when veterans were big news, every time an ex-soldier got himself in a jam the fact that he was a vet was pointed out in the headline. An ordinary killing or assault seldom rated the front page, but if it involved a jealous veteran or a battle-fatigue case, it could be sure of a prominent play… But the sad fact was that such headlines gave added impetus to the rumor that always appears in every country after a war — that the returning soldiers are trained in killing and assault and are potential menaces to society.” – From Bill Mauldin’s 1947 book, Back Home.

Dateline April 2009 — Many veterans are upset with a Homeland Security report that included these words: “The return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone-wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”

Current veterans are furious. But the prejudices against veterans have gone on for generations, including during WWII. The popular notion now is that at the end of WWII a grateful nation welcomed its warriors home with open arms.

In his 1947 book, Back Home, Bill Mauldin points out that when the war ended, most of the frontliners were still overseas. The pictures of girls kissing soldiers constituted mostly rear echelon military men. When these frontliners finally came home, much of the thrill of victory had worn off and people were just going about their business unless the returnee was a relative.

Mauldin notes that many WWII veterans were treated badly. This was decades before Vietnam. Revisionist historians have concocted a popular notion of WWII that is not true.

Mauldin’s Back Home is his description of the ways veterans were done dirt among other topics. Mauldin’s father and grandfather were warriors, and he was born in New Mexico. His brother’s family still lives in southern New Mexico. Mauldin enlisted in the Army in 1940 before Pearl Harbor and was initially a machine gunner. He spent the war in the European Theatre of Operations, specifically in Italy. He served his country for five years.

Along the way he transitioned from Infantry to being a cartoonist for the military newspaper, Stars and Stripes. But he never lost his love for the frontliners who were depicted in his cartoons. He received a purple heart from a shrapnel wound and in May 1945 found out he had won the Pulitzer Prize for cartooning. He wrote books and was a political cartoonist the rest of his life.

Our nation in the late 1940s was very glad to win the war, but after the danger of Hitler and Tojo ended, there was a subtle change such that veterans had trouble getting their old jobs back, since employers, according to Mauldin, had already trained the fill-ins and did not want to have to retrain the vets. Further, the GI Bill did not initially provide enough money for college and housing for married veterans was almost impossible.

Treating current and future veterans as liberators

How past generations treated their veterans may not matter as much as what we do now with our veterans and future veterans. Today, as you read this, a child is born in your hometown hospital. Twenty or so years from now, that child might join the military and be the next generation of our nation’s protectors.

That long line of protection started with George Washington and the men of the Revolutionary War and will end when no one will serve our country’s military. This will happen if we abuse members of our military.

If our returning frontliners are greeted with the suspicion of being a menace to society and must endure the rumors they “tortured” rather than liberated the Iraqis, we will no longer have any volunteers. Then we, as a nation are lost.

Without our military nothing else of our country will remain.

Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.

Comments are closed.