Chris Kyle's death seems to confirm that "he who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense
by AWR HAWKINS
Here's the tweet:
1. Chris Kyle was an American hero of the highest order. And he used the sword because he was in the military, where his job was to keep America safe.
2. SEALS who served with Kyle said that using the gun range for persons with PTSD made sense. It put them around things with which they were "familiar" and was therefore a "very comfortable" environment.
God bless the family of Chris Kyle.
I could not and never would vote for that man and the people of his home state should be so ashamed that he came from there and that they ever elected him for anything. I cannot believe that there are people that actually support his warped and so ridiculous ideas.
However, he owes Chris Kyle's family, as well as the family of the other victim a huge apology and to shut his mouth and keep those kind of remarks to himself. Who cares what he thinks about anything any longer.
Ron Paul keeps making stupid statements in the area of national security and defense. He remains as ignorant in that area as the most "progressive" anti war types. That includes in the area of US history were he ignores actually what the Founding Fathers went through when they were running the government like the undeclared navel war with France, wars with the Barbary pirates, War of 1812, and indian wars supported by Britain and Spain on the frontiers.
Is that for real? It doesn't make any sense. Even if he believed such a thing, to write it is bonkers. Is Paul going senile?
Elizabeth: Ron Paul hasn't been operating with a full deck of smarts for a long time. Never understood the obsession some had with him since his view of the world was an incoherent one at best. His allure seems to have been select issues for select non thinking groups that were for US disarmament or unsustainable isolationism, drug legalization, or anti Federal Reserve/fiscal restraint but without a real coherent policy to achieve any of those objectives or thought out consequences of those policies if implemented. Bombastic but shallow was my impression of him on his "core" issues above.
John, agree with that so much. Elizabeth, yes, he did write it and what is worse is that he means it; he has zero to no tolerance for our military members as he feels they are killers, etc. He would be one of those like a college professor at the College of Charleston that emailed my daughter that she was a "baby killer" when she got back to work after a tour with the Air National Guard in Iraq. The College did repremand him, but the damage is done. Ron Paul has a larger audience and this is much worse.
Ron Paul is a product of the anti-Vietnam War protestors (part of my generation) and he has gone to the far extreme; sad. Glad his son does not lean that way to that degree. He has to love his father but this has to be embarrassing.
Linda, I really need to check on what was posted before I post. I had comments on my post on Chris Kyle's death & Ron Paul's tweet. He voted for the war in Afghanistan, even though he was against it, for political reasons and Ron Paul supporters think of him as almost saint-like with only the purest of motives for this country. Yes, I agree he owes Kyle's family an apology. He owes all our soldiers an apology.
My posted comments about his asinine & heartless tweet:
Just "lovely". Chris Kyle was an American Hero. Does this apply to all our brave soldiers we've sent to Iraq & Afghanistan, too? Well, maybe not so much Afghanistan, Ron Paul signed on to that war for political reasons. Jerk!
Ex-aide calls Rep. Ron Paul's foreign policy views 'pure lunacy'
By Cameron Joseph - 12/27/11
"...Paul does not believe Israel should exist, that the United States should not have gotten involved in World War II, that the government might have known beforehand about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and that he planned to vote against the war in Afghanistan before changing his mind for political reasons..."Ron Paul was opposed to the War inAfghanistan, and to any military reaction to the attacks of 9/11. He did not want to vote for the resolution. He immediately stated to us staffers, me in particular, that Bush/Cheney were going to use the attacks as a precursor for 'invading'Iraq. He engaged in conspiracy theories including perhaps the attacks were coordinated with the CIA, and that the Bush administration might have known about the attacks ahead of time. He expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration.""
This post was modified from its original form on 05 Feb, 7:43
Sandy, I had gone to his Tweet and it was posted there. Now he could have had someone else post the comment, but like all else, if you have a Tweet page, Facebook page, etc., you are responsible for what is posted so whether he posted this or not, he is responsible and it is reprehensible.
Little confused as wasn't sure if you doiubted he wrote it or what. Since you posted this article by Cameron Jospeh I then believe you are agreeing that Ron Paul did write this.
Those that are behind him, if you read comments, etc. are people that are pure pacifists and do not want war of any sort, want the US to remove itself from all involvement with other countries in the world and not to involve themselves in anything other than possibly humanitarian work but even then they are hesitant as they don't want us to alter, in any way, the activities of other countries. The are what I consider the extremists of the Independent Party or one of the other parties that would support isolationism.
Paul has tweeted since that comment and has not renounced it.
Rand would be smart to cancel his Dad's tweet account.
Linda, I don't know why I confused you, but Ron Paul's tweet (& I do believe it is his) is totally in keeping with a lot of his other senile comments he's made in the past.
Elizabeth, that would be a great move on Rand Paul's part...if only he could really do that.
Sandy, not a bit thing, I misunderstood until I read it again. Sorry.
I agree with both of you regarding Rand Paul; the poor guy. I suspect that Ron Paul is really dealing with senility and that is not sarcastic at all; he has lost touch with reality.
I think like many comments Ron Paul makes he has trouble really saying what he truly means.
When I read this what I get is that taking a depressed soldier to a shooting range was not the best idea of help. This is true. It was not a good judgement call but done with the best of reasons. Chris Kyle was a great Seal, but not a guidance counselor or more.
Ron Paul could have done a lot more by not commenting, but with him that usually never happens and as usual he doesn't understand why he is misunderstood. I think his heart is in the right place but he is extreme and will be retiring soon. At least he hasn't damaged our nation as much as some who will still be making laws. Keep praying.
By Ben Shapiro, 4 Feb 13
In the aftermath of Ron Paul’s despicable tweet today slamming US Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle, murdered on Saturday while helping a fellow soldier learn to cope with post traumatic stress syndrome, Paul’s son, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has told Breitbart News exclusively, “Chris Kyle was a hero like all Americans who don the uniform to defend our country. Our prayers are with his family during this tragic time.”
Thank you, Rand Paul. And God bless you, Chris Kyle.
Margaret, how do you know that Chris Kyle's methods haven't helped other soldiers with PTSD? There are plenty of conditions where this type of approach has been helpful.
Prolonged Exposure Therapy (PET) is one of the leading treatments being used to treat PTSD. Kyle used a type called vivo exposure. It is endorsed by the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs.(http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/prolonged-exposure-therapy.asp)
"Real world practice. Exposure practice with real-world situations is called in vivo exposure. You practice approaching situations that are safe but which you may have been avoiding because they are related to the trauma. An example would be a Veteran who avoids driving since he experienced a roadside bomb while deployed. In the same way, a sexual trauma survivor may avoid getting close to others. This type of exposure practice helps your trauma-related distress to lessen over time. When distress goes down, you can gain more control over your life."
Sadly & tragically, this soldier murdered Chris Kyle and his friend before giving it a chance. He lost control before he could work towards gaining control. There have been so many soldiers who have suffered from PTSD and have committed suicide. This was Kyle's way of helping.
This post was modified from its original form on 05 Feb, 10:06
This post was modified from its original form on 05 Feb, 10:13
Actually, Margarat, according to several articles I read after this one, it was just what is recommended as it allows them to be in a area where they are comfortable as they readjust from being in active conflict. Apparently this was considered the right judgement call for the situation. I would also say that fellow soldiers, from what I am told, make the best guidance counselors as they have been there and have the best understanding of what the soldier has gone through; especially in the case of Seals, special forces, etc. I read 3 different articles, 2 of which were written by psychologists that work with the military personnel when they return; none of them felt this was a wrong move.
I am sorry but I can find absolutely no excuse for Ron Paul's comments. Irregardless as to whether or not Chris Kyle should have tried to help this guy or not, there is no excuse for the comment. There is not much that can be misunderstood by his comments...."he who lives by the sword dies by the sword" is pretty self-explanatory and totally inexcusable. It is just like those that call our returning military members "baby killers"; same thing and wrong. Margaret, sorry, but I just don't see where there is room to interpret this comment any way but the way he said it. The comment made no reference to whether or not Chris Kyle should or should not have been helping a fellow veteran, etc.
I might add that I just read another article where a veteran that served with Eddie Roth has brought some new light into this. Here is the link: http://www.infowars.com/us-marine-questions-narrative-behind-chris-kyle-murder/
This man claims that he served with Routh and that his job in the Marine Corp was a mechanic and that he never was in active combat and that rather than PTSD, he showed no signs of this and actually was a drug user. It will take time to sort this all out, but seems that there are all sorts of stories coming in.
The real issue, though, regarding Ron Paul is that he made his typical ignorant comment and it was out of line; he owes Kyle's family an apology.
Sandy, thank you for this information. I have been reading the same thing. I think you were directing your comments to Margaret and not Elizabeth, but yes, this is what I have been reading as well.
Linda, I just finished reading your link @ infowars after reading your synopsis of it. If this Marine is correct... why?...what was the motive...the reason?
Yes, I saw my error and changed it from Elizabeth to Margaret.
by TONY LEE
Paul had earlier tweeted, "Chris Kyle's death seems to confirm that 'he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.' Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn't make sense."
In a Facebook post meant to clarify the tweet, Paul wrote, "As a veteran, I certainly recognize that this weekend's violence and killing of Chris Kyle were a tragic and sad event."
"My condolences and prayers go out to Mr. Kyle’s family. Unconstitutional and unnecessary wars have endless unintended consequences," Paul wrote in his post. "A policy of non-violence, as Christ preached, would have prevented this and similar tragedies."
My reason for writing what I did was based on the Vietnam vets I have known and worked with for about 20 years. The worst one was the one none of the guys would give a gun to. I am talking about Seals, Marines and sailors - they all knew each other.
I'm glad to know there is more info. coming out on this. Drugs as we all know can make people do awful things to themselves and others. It seems like that would be a better explanation of what really happened.
God bless them all. They work under such difficult situations.
FIrst, I appreciate the intent of this apology to the family.
Second, only Ron Paul can take a good thing, his apology, and turn it into another out of line or erroneous statement. "My condolences and prayesrs to out to Mr. Kyle's family. Unconstitutional and unnecessary wars have endless unintended consequences...". How was this unconstitutional? Congress voted to in favor of it which makes it constitutional. He is looking at the wrong president and the wrong situation, Libya was unconstitutional, yes, Iraq as constitutional. Unnecessary only in his and others that do not want to look at the facts; however it was very much necessary. We had to 1) determine the truth about WMD and they found the proof of this and if the UN had not played games with Hussein and drug their heals, sent in ineffectual people to inspect, etc., we would have got there before Hussein secreted the majority out of Iraq and 2) were we to allow him to continue commit massive murder, killing innocent men, women and children and throwing them in the mass graves that our soldiers found? It seems that this was very necessary to me; I would hope that if the U.S. were ever to have such a tyrant (maybe we do) as our leader, that other countries would come to the defense of the innocent men, women and chldren in this Country.
It is wonderful and I agree that "a policy of non-violence, as Christ preached," would be wonderful in a pefect world where human nature has no place, but that is not the case. His feelings are great, however we have to live with reality. I also know that Christ would want us to do all we can to come to the aid of those that are being treated so inhumanely and that he would judge us lacking if we did not offer that support.
Appreciate his desire for a perfect world, we would all desire that, but reality tells us something different and there is where Ron Paul and I go different directions.
And once more, the comment he made does not fit the situation and was uncalled for; glad he apologized but wish he had stopped with the apology.
Since it has been noted that Rand Paul might be a presidential candidate in 2016, I'm sure the moment he saw daddy's comment he dialed him up and "splained" to him that his remarks could get him into political quicksand in 2016. And, although Rand himself didn't make the statement, there are many out there, including me, that believe Ron Paul to be a conspiracy freak, dislikes anything military and is trying to blame PTSD on this shooting. If, in fact, he was on drugs of some sort - Ron Paul also believes that we should legalize some drugs. Therefore, Ron Paul, who isn't going to be around to run again in 2016 (she says with her fingers crossed) is a nutty as a Baby Ruth candy bar and should never be taken seriously.
He not only owes the family an apology he owes the Navy Seals an apology.
Perhaps Rand Paul should lock him in the basement until after 2016.
"My condolences and prayers to out to Mr. Kyle's family." That's what he should have said in the first place, but at least he finally he did say it, but, yes, he should have left it at that. It really isn't much of an apology adding on those comments. Ron Paul would have us not helping others around the world and would leave it entirely for them to handle. That is not Christ-like. As only one example, how does he expect women in Afghanistan to defend themselves & be treated as any human being should be? Do we turn our backs on the ugliness of the world completely if we have the ability to help?
Helping others was something Jesus did on a daily basis. He was constantly approached by people, but He always found time to stop what He was doing to help those in need.
Luke 10:30-37 and Luke 18:18-25
Ron Paul does not know what he's talking about on so many things. Mr. Constitution gets even that wrong at times.
Well said Sandy -- very well said!