8
8
0
Health
Africa
Responses: 45
15
15
0
The folks at USAMRIID are the foremost experts in infectious disease and wrote the book on countering bio warfare (which essentially follows the same principles as fighing a disease epidemic). They are perfectly suited to tackling this mission.
(15)
(0)
1LT (Join to see)
I might be in the minority here, but I feel like sending the military to fight Ebola isn't the military's role.
Every branch in government has a specific function, and this I believe operates outside of the military's scope. Not to mention, my personal opinion is that I don't think the president has the authority to mobilize the military to combat this without congressional approval.
Every branch in government has a specific function, and this I believe operates outside of the military's scope. Not to mention, my personal opinion is that I don't think the president has the authority to mobilize the military to combat this without congressional approval.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
1LT (Join to see), I disagree.
a) Humanitarian relief is a component of Wide Area Security (WAS) operations (formerly known as SASO). WAS is a doctrinally accepted military function. Just because what you are doing in such an op does not include shooting badguys doesn't mean it doesn't contribute to national defense.
b) Humanitarian relief operations are not combat ops and therefore do not need congressional approval.
a) Humanitarian relief is a component of Wide Area Security (WAS) operations (formerly known as SASO). WAS is a doctrinally accepted military function. Just because what you are doing in such an op does not include shooting badguys doesn't mean it doesn't contribute to national defense.
b) Humanitarian relief operations are not combat ops and therefore do not need congressional approval.
(3)
(0)
9
9
0
I heard this story an hour ago and just shuddered. Foreign policy at its worst, thanks again Mr. President. BTW will you be donning a suit to come over and visit the troops? How many congress members will we be expecting on the "fact finding" junket circuit?
(9)
(0)
MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca
Thermite plasma COL Vincent Stoneking, SFC (Join to see) - remember "The Rock"? :-)
(2)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
COL Vincent Stoneking
Sir, per the movie Outbreak, fuel air explosive. Directly to your question, HEAT...better if you can get everyone infected in to a single tank.
Sir, per the movie Outbreak, fuel air explosive. Directly to your question, HEAT...better if you can get everyone infected in to a single tank.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
I think it is a good decision to send some highly qualified U.S. military personnel to the "Ebola fight." As long as they have the medical expertise (and LTC Paul Labrador says they do), the military can likely bring not only that expertise, which is no small thing, but they can also bring the strength and discipline of the U.S. military.
(7)
(0)
SFC Clark Adams
The primary issue is one of social /culture in the affected nations, they lack the governmental assets and societal responsibility to practice proper sanitation and public health standards. Our Soldiers CANNOT change these nation's behavior or attitudes. The required infrastructure isn't there to properly contain these diseases. We as the American Army can take on the mission and in the short term address immediate needs, but we will never change attitude of corrupt inept leaders and ignorant superstitious populations. Yes I also feel that our poll driven media savvy POTUS is trying to take the eyes off of his abject failure in Southwest Asia. Three thousand to fight a disease one thousand to fight a war (oops, Counter Terrorism Operation), you make the call.
(0)
(0)
A1C Kenneth Crocker
i feel they could do some good but they arent being issued the proper equipment for the job the arent being given hazmat protection. are they being issued chem gear instead and is it capable of handling it has it been tested. could any one verify? and on top of that i thnk it should be a joint task force mission with millitary doctors not grunts im just not seeing alot of logic in this and our millitary is known for planning and preperation suddenly thats just thrown out the window in my opinion its more an ill concieved pr stunt by the obama administration and possibly used as a training mission weve done it before send in troops for a type of task bring them back split them up and let them train others for any similar situation down the road think of the civ and non combatant containment knowledge that could be learned for such a mission just my thoughts
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
A1C Kenneth Crocker, from my understanding of the mission, US troops are not going to be doing direct contact with infected patients. they do not need full hazmat gear.
(0)
(0)
Maj Chris Nelson
LTC Labrador, I pose this food for thought: I have heard that there is a heavy equipment CE type unit being deployed to set up mobile isolation hospitals. By your theory, no direct contact with infected patients, they do not require full hazmat gear. I grant that point. However: deceased continue to be infected, in a 3rd world country without the same standards as the USA. Do we know that deceased locals have not been buried in the same area as the CE guys with heavy equipment are going to be digging and/or otherwise establishing a site for an isolation facility? If they unearth an Ebola victim, they will be exposed. THEY are not trained medical assests ..... I agree with much else that you have said, but this is my one big concern.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
BTW, for the folks who think this is not a military issue: how long do you think it will be before some bright fellow in ISIS (or any other less than scrupulous terrorist organization) comes up with the idea of infecting suicide carriers with Ebola (or other nasties) and then flying them to America. Really think about that for a second..... That's how bio-warfare works. It's easier to acquire and employ than a nuke, and could be just as effective, particularly if they have multiple infected people entering the US from different points.
(6)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
LTC Paul Labrador, I have thought about that sir. And to be honest with you, it scares the hell out of me.
(1)
(0)
LTC Hillary Luton
Valid point. And yes, we have CBRN units for a reason. Still bothers me, but I'll give you this one LTC Paul Labrador.
(2)
(0)
SFC Clark Adams
It take note of the lack of comment on the voiding of laws restricting those with diseases that pose a public health threat as a result of the Liberal outcry over excluding HIV(+) people from obtaining visas in the 90's. Again it's a media driven action, where are the other advanced nation's military or the WHO???
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
I wouldn't wish such a death on any person, but I certainly wouldn't want it on one of our own. It is a truly terrible fate.
There is no way we can establish the quantity of isolation units necessary to ensure the spread ceases - the infrastructure does not exist and it is too large an endeavor for us to undertake.
Given the probability of contamination, seeing that doctors themselves are contracting the disease - it is highly likely that our service members may contract the disease and possibly die.
I believe something needs to be done, but it should be a coalition effort, not good ole USA to the rescue for the world, yet again.
I listened to a story of a journalist who has been on the story since it first surfaced - he stated that the real problem with the response to this has been a lack of communication. The people in this part of the world can be very skeptical and superstitious, thus, one of the leading problems is none of them had heard of Ebola and when they saw WHO and other organizations coming in droves, they became skeptical. What if they are the ones giving us the disease?! What if they are testing it on us?!
Additionally, the people of these nations often do laying on of hands and other similar rituals in the death of a loved one or friend. The Ebola virus can exist in the body for days after being deceased, thus transferring through the sweat and other bodily fluids during the funeral period. Funerals have largely exasperated the spread of this disease. It may also be confusing to people that the body remains hot to touch for some time after the heart/brain have ceased to function.
Largely, this was screwed up from the outset and we have little chance to fix or even salvage this situation. We are taking on too much risk with minimal chance of even marginal success.
There is no way we can establish the quantity of isolation units necessary to ensure the spread ceases - the infrastructure does not exist and it is too large an endeavor for us to undertake.
Given the probability of contamination, seeing that doctors themselves are contracting the disease - it is highly likely that our service members may contract the disease and possibly die.
I believe something needs to be done, but it should be a coalition effort, not good ole USA to the rescue for the world, yet again.
I listened to a story of a journalist who has been on the story since it first surfaced - he stated that the real problem with the response to this has been a lack of communication. The people in this part of the world can be very skeptical and superstitious, thus, one of the leading problems is none of them had heard of Ebola and when they saw WHO and other organizations coming in droves, they became skeptical. What if they are the ones giving us the disease?! What if they are testing it on us?!
Additionally, the people of these nations often do laying on of hands and other similar rituals in the death of a loved one or friend. The Ebola virus can exist in the body for days after being deceased, thus transferring through the sweat and other bodily fluids during the funeral period. Funerals have largely exasperated the spread of this disease. It may also be confusing to people that the body remains hot to touch for some time after the heart/brain have ceased to function.
Largely, this was screwed up from the outset and we have little chance to fix or even salvage this situation. We are taking on too much risk with minimal chance of even marginal success.
(5)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SPC (Join to see) Having seen first hand what IEDs can do to a human, I'm not sure ebola is such a bad death. At least the sepsis gives you some delusions to act as a self medication, and with ebola you either live or die. No coming out minus limbs.
(2)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Touche, sir.
I would clarify my initial sentence to read: I wouldn't wish a violent or terrible biological death on any person, but certainly not on one of our own.
I would clarify my initial sentence to read: I wouldn't wish a violent or terrible biological death on any person, but certainly not on one of our own.
(0)
(0)
SFC Clark Adams
You are on target as a Health care professional, I can state the issue is the societal circumstances that result in the presence and spreading the disease. The abject failure of these countries to practice or enforce basic sanitation and public hygiene standards is the true issue. Our military cannot or will not change these long ingrained behaviors in uneducated, superstitious tribal societies, led by corrupt ineffective politicians
.
.
(3)
(0)
4
4
0
No. Too much political conflict already and nothing to gain (for them or US). Troops have one primary function and Ebola is too small for effective targeting.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
Absolutely not.
First off, how are troops going to fight a disease? Why does it need to be/have to be the US? What about these "allies" we have? Why is Ebola on another continent across the planet that has been riddled with disease since the begging of time a threat to us? Where are we getting the funding to send troops to yet another spot on the globe?
Why do we allow our government to continue to ignore issues at home and play world savior?
First off, how are troops going to fight a disease? Why does it need to be/have to be the US? What about these "allies" we have? Why is Ebola on another continent across the planet that has been riddled with disease since the begging of time a threat to us? Where are we getting the funding to send troops to yet another spot on the globe?
Why do we allow our government to continue to ignore issues at home and play world savior?
(4)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Vaild question. However, waiting for the world to provide a response is like herding cats. And when time is a critical factor, do you REALLY want to wait....? ;o) Furhter, there is a reason why, when there's a disaster, we always send the military (ARNG here in CONUS and AD globally). We have unique capabilities that allow us to conduct operations like this that other agencies could only wish for.
(3)
(0)
SSG Jacob Wiley
Roger - no argument. I just feel like there is a difference in donating to charity when you can, and then giving away so much that one becomes a charity case.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
SPC Jeff Daley, PhD, the disparity is a political one. Fighting Ebola is a feel-good mission that is good PR. Eradicating ISIS thoroughly REQUIRES boots on the ground......but that looks too much like War and is thus politically unpalatable.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
If we don't get it under control,it will spread.Pray it doesn't go airborne.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
If I Only Had a Brain - The Wizard of Oz (4/8) Movie CLIP (1939) HD
The Wizard of Oz movie clips: http://j.mp/1L5gtKP BUY THE MOVIE: http://j.mp/v4LU0Y Don't miss the HOTTEST NEW TRAILERS: http://bit.ly/1u2y6pr CLIP DESCRIPTI...
This should replace "Hail to the Chief" until January 2017:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nauLgZISozs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nauLgZISozs
(3)
(0)
PO1 Steven Kuhn
This song could be applied to many members of all three branches of our government. The problem is that I think our President has a brain, but is a puppet put on a throne by those of Islamic origin and I believe he is playing at being stupid at the cost of good leadership in our military, leaked intel to our enemies, and the welfare and security of America!
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
SFc Kendrick,
I completely agree with you. What protection measures is the U.S. putting in place for these service members to prevent infection? Is this even a U.S. fight or should we pressure the U.N. to address this issue? With the high fatality rate, no vaccine, and risk of exposure to the infection I feel that the risk of harm is unacceptable.
I completely agree with you. What protection measures is the U.S. putting in place for these service members to prevent infection? Is this even a U.S. fight or should we pressure the U.N. to address this issue? With the high fatality rate, no vaccine, and risk of exposure to the infection I feel that the risk of harm is unacceptable.
(3)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
Thanks! You too! I am waiting for the White House to put to paper a proper plan for utilizing U.S. troops in Africa, if this plan doesn't appopriately address exposure concerns I would fully support petitioning to keep troops out of this issue, or at the very least advocating for prevention measures to reduce risk of exposure.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
The troops who will have direct contact will likely be in equivalent to what the CDC and USAMRIID uses in their highly infectious disease storage facilities. And since you need direct contact to bodily fluids to get infected, simply isolating non-patient care support personnel will suffice as precautions.
(1)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
Sir,
According to the WHO website "Human-to-human transmission of the Ebola virus is primarily associated with direct or indirect contact with blood and body fluids." and "The incubation period from time of infection to symptoms is 2 to 21 days." My concern is infection through indirect contact or unobserved/unreported direct contact that could then spread due to the infection not being identifed for up to 21 days. Sending trained medical professionals is one thing, but I would not trust many of our junior troops to take the appropriate precautions to prevent or report exposure. Accidents happen, and sending young and inexperienced troops amplifies the risk of these accidents occuring. I am still waiting to see what precautions are taken in this matter, but as of right now I feel that the risk is unacceptable.
According to the WHO website "Human-to-human transmission of the Ebola virus is primarily associated with direct or indirect contact with blood and body fluids." and "The incubation period from time of infection to symptoms is 2 to 21 days." My concern is infection through indirect contact or unobserved/unreported direct contact that could then spread due to the infection not being identifed for up to 21 days. Sending trained medical professionals is one thing, but I would not trust many of our junior troops to take the appropriate precautions to prevent or report exposure. Accidents happen, and sending young and inexperienced troops amplifies the risk of these accidents occuring. I am still waiting to see what precautions are taken in this matter, but as of right now I feel that the risk is unacceptable.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Yes we need to ensure people are trained....but the type of training they need is no more than what they already have (ie CBRNE training on MOPP gear and decon). It's just a matter of giving them enough motivation to ensure that they become hypervigilant and more importantly STAY hypervigilant. And when the possible consequence of being sloppy is a possibly death, people tend to take what they are doing a lot more seriously.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google