Hello, my name is Tanner and if I had to say what my strongest trait is, it would be curious. By nature, I like to learn new things, especially those that get me thinking, and that's one of the reasons why I chose to take this class. I also like to branch out and figure things out on my own, which is another thing in this class that drew me in.
I can’t say my life outside of school is interesting and eventful, but it’s still pretty good. Most of what I do outside of school is reading, watching shows, and playing games. There are also daily household chores and yard work. In winter I always go skiing with my Dad, which is expensive but still very fun.
My favorite activities are on the list of things I do outside of school, other than chores. Although if I had to choose my absolute favorite, it would have to be reading, whether it be comics or novels. There’s something about getting lost in a different world and growing to love and hate characters that I really enjoy. Although it always leaves a kinda void after finishing a good story. I do also enjoy sports, but not competitively, and I only really play during gatherings with family or when hanging out with friends.
I think what might be surprising to some people is how good I am with kids. I can’t say I give off that impression when I’m around adults and peers, but both with family and summer camp I’ve always been told I’m good with kids, and they seem to like me. I’d also like to think I’m a half-decent actor when I do it passionately.
My relationship with grades in school isn’t what I’d like it to be honest. I’m much too focused on them and stress over them too much, going as far as checking them every day and belittling myself for a lower grade. I’d like to be more relaxed with them so they don’t suck so much out of me, but I guess it’s better than completely ignoring them.
My favorite memory in school would have to be the time in elementary school when everybody in the lunchroom started flinging peas across the room with spoons like they were catapults. Outside the classroom though, I loved hanging out with a few of my friends in the FMS newsroom and goofing around with them, we also did some work too of course.
I’d say what actually motivates me to do the work would be grades and keeping them high so I might be able to get into a good college. Although grades aren't the only thing, if that were true I wouldn’t be taking this class. My own curiosity sometimes motivates me to go beyond or take different classes, like space exploration, which I plan to take. Sometimes certain topics pique my interest and that motivates me to put more effort into whatever project I may be doing.
I like school because it’s a nice place to socialize and live a normal teenage life with peers. I also like it when it actually allows for learning new and interesting things, such as electives or this class. I of course don’t like learning the boring things such as algebra and the stress that comes with grades and tests, but I’d say the fun and boring parts even out.
When I first saw it in the school catalog I honestly skipped over it because It was miscellaneous and I had no idea what it was. But my mom told me about it sometime later and she said something about self-learning and creative thinking, and so that piqued my interest. I looked further into it and started to see some other things that I liked and realized the self-learning and choose your own topic thing was perfect for satiating my endless curiosity.
I’ve juggled a few ideas over the course of this summer and finally decided on the evolution of war throughout time. I obviously have no personal connection to war myself, other than through relatives. But I have always been fascinated by it, such as the reasons why, the things it creates, and how it affects just about everything.
Due to my long interest in the topic and because we’re taught some in school, I’d say I know quite a bit. But I also know that there are a lot of things I don’t know. Such as pretty much everything after the cold war is unknown to me. I’d also like to delve into the future of war as well, like how it’s fought and why it’s fought.
What I'm going to start with is going back in time and examining war and comparing different regions and times with each other. Such as why did Chinese weaponry and armor differ so much from European weaponry and armor? Why did one country’s tactics and weapons beat another? How did the reasons for war change from food to land to religion and then to politics? These are just a few questions I’ve had brewing in my mind since I chose this topic and some even before, which might’ve been part of why I chose this topic. If I have extra time then go into the effects war has on not just society and the economy, but also on the individual person's psyche, whether it be a soldier, a protester or uninvolved.
I am looking to investigate the evolution of war throughout time and the effects it has on the human psyche, science, economy, and society as a whole.
I think I know that war can bring out a side of a person that you would never normally think they could have. Such as excessive violence, bloodlust, cruelness, and maybe even sadistic tendencies. This might be a more primal thing in every human that is only brought out during certain situations and war being one of them. It could also be a result of built-up stress, fear, and hatred which causes temporary madness. It might even be a mix of both and it might not even be specific to war. I also think I know that war has advanced science greatly and brought many new technologies to the world. I’ve also heard that war has ruined the economies of some nations, such as treasuries only being filled by plunder and the free labor from the defeated nations' people. I’ve also heard that it saved economies from depressions, such as WWII saving America’s economy from the Great Depression.
I know I know that during the Siege of Jerusalem(70 AD), towards the end of the siege, Roman troops ignored orders and killed helpless people, including the young and innocent (Invicta). I also know that about 15% of veterans from the Vietnam War were diagnosed with PTSD and double that number is what is actually estimated (The United States Department of Veterans). Something else that I also know is that the thermonuclear bomb was brought about because of WWII and the U.S. starting the Manhattan Project out of fear that Adolf Hitler would weaponize recently discovered nuclear technology first (History) (History). I am also sure that WWII is what saved the U.S. from the great depression and allowed its economy to flourish afterward even after such a hard economic hit (Library of Congress).
Things I don’t know:
I don’t know the cost of war in every aspect (economic, technological, social, government, and on the individual).
I don’t know the entire process of war and/or if there is a pattern between everyone (pre-war, start of war, end of war, aftermath?).
I don’t know the most common cause for war.
I don’t know what the actual benefits of war are if there are any.
I don’t know if technology can have the potential to limit the loss of life in war or if it just continues to add to the pile of bodies like it usually does.
I don’t know what drives people to die in what might seemingly be a fruitless war at the time.
I don’t know what always decides the end of wars.
I don’t know how big deterrence was before the 1900s
I don’t know the past and effectiveness of war propaganda
I don’t know what other effects war might have of individual soldiers other than PTSD.
I don’t know how morale works in war and almost everything else surrounding the topic of morale in war.
I don’t know how things other than the way we kill each other has changed throughout time in war.
I don’t know how to possibly reduce the cost of war on the individual.
I don’t know the exact future of war.
I have come to the conclusion that what I need to know the most is how war has changed throughout time other than technology. This is important for a few reasons, mainly because it will help me look at a greater picture before zooming in and possibly finding patterns that will help with other questions and the data already exists, I just need to learn and organize it and use it as a basis and table I can go back to. Knowing the past of war and its patterns could help me predict the future of war and help me have a better understanding of the human psyche in general. A lot of my other questions have to do with the cost of war on the individual and although I won’t get that answer with this question, I believe it will also help because understanding what war is at its base will help me find what its causes and effects are. Such as the effects it has on the economy, and how that may factor into the effects the actual war had on a person. For example, could a low economy and high employment significantly boost the effects of war on already worn out veterans? I really just need a higher base knowledge of war before going into the specifics of its effects.
After careful consideration and insight from coordinators I have decided to change the scope of my topic for studying war throughout time to the much smaller scope of studying WWI. The reason for this change is because I have come to the realization that studying all of war in time is too big of a topic to cover in the course of my entire school career. I will be doing the same basic concept of studying the human psyche and the causes and effects of war, it’s just now focused only on WWI. Because of this my essential need to know has changed as well, and I will be changing it to what are the reasons and circumstances that lead to the first World War?
There are a few reasons as to why WWI started and the easiest is by the acronym M.A.I.N. that Mr. Heimler used in his video(CAUSES of World War I [AP World History] Unit 7 Topic 2 (7.2)). M stands for Militarism, which is basically the build-up of a nation's military in order to aggressively progress their own interests. Militarism was wild in the times leading up to WWI, it was further increased by the advancement of technology in the Industrial Revolution and the rapidly accepted conscriptions in nations which increased nation’s numbers drastically. The A stands for Alliances, which are agreements between nations with the interest of self-defense of both nations by mutual protection of each other. The Triple Entente was an alliance between Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy. The Triple Alliance was between Britain, France, and Russia. These alliances will be the cause of a domino effect that got so many nations involved in one war. I is for Imperialism, which is where nations take territory under their own dominion. During the 19th century, many nations were vying for control of Africa, and this heightened rivalries and increased tension between nations. Finally, the N stands for Nationalism, which is a strong identity and connection to one's own nation and the exclusion of others outside of it. The rise of this philosophy only served to greatly increase tensions between nations. All of these reasons put together basically formed a bomb that was raring to explode Europe into war, and the spark that would set that bomb off was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austria-Hungary throne. On June 28th, 1914, in the city of Sarajevo, a young man by the name of Gavrilo Princip shot the Archduke and his wife Sophie while they were on their way to visit a hospital with the intent to see the patients that were injured due to a previous failed assassination attempt. Gavrilo was a part of a Siberian terrorist group called the Black Hand which wanted the liberation of Austro-Hungarian South Slavs and Bosnia. Austria-Hungary responded to this assassination by declaring war on Siberia after receiving support from Germany whom they were in an alliance with. They did this because they feared that Russia was going to get involved because they were backing Siberia, and they in fact did. They declared war on Austria-Hungary and Germany as well. They added Germany because the leaders of the military of Russia had already made plans that could only work if they declared war on Germany as well, so the Tsar authorized the full mobilization of the Russian army and invaded Germany as well. After that Germany declared war on both France and Russia due to similar reasons to Russia. Finally, Britain declared war on Germany due to them violating Belgium’s neutral stance. One question I’m left with is how were the people feeling during this build-up with all the conscriptions and war machines being made, did they know that war was inevitable and how much did they want it if at all? How much did that Nationalism ideology affect them?
I think that my SDA turned out satisfactory, but I feel I could’ve done better if I had not underestimated the amount of time it would take. I spent around 4 hours on it, like my coordinators had suggested, but if I spent more on it then maybe I would’ve felt better about the final project. I chose to make a presentation because I thought it would’ve been the best way to present what I had learned, as visuals were needed but an infographic was not big enough. I think next time I will make the best use of visuals, as my visuals on this last project were a little bit lacking. I would also like to incorporate my critical thinking into the project better so as to make it more natural. I think SPECS is a good definition of critical thinking, but I did not use it this project as much as I should’ve. So it did not help me on this specific assignment, but I think I will use it on future assignments. The process that you know, think, know, and need to know was very useful. It helped me get an idea of where my project would start and how I could connect it to future projects. I had no confusions on the assignment itself, and with the creative liberty you had with making your own assignment, it made it even easier to be comfortable with. Overall I think it was an okay assignment and I should take this as something to learn from and do better on the next one.
In my recent project, I explored the causes of WWI because I think context is very important. As I researched that topic I became interested in the feelings of the people during the war. So I came up with a new essential question. How did soldiers feel avout such a drastic change in war with new technologies?
Sub-questions
How did the introduction of trench warfare affect soldiers?
How did the invention of planes and tanks affect soldiers?
How did chemical warfare and city bombings affect civilians?
As I was exploring the causes of WWI a question kept popping into my mind. How did the people feel when the war was building up? That question combined with my pre-existing interest in war's effect on the human psyche created my now need to know question. This question will be diving deep into that, it will also provide more information on WWI and war in general. Such as how do people deal with changes in war and technology? My three sub-questions are specifics of new things that came into WWI, all of them deserving their own separate research time and journals. I have a little knowledge about the conditions of trench warfare, but I also think it is also a big topic and really should have its own thing, there’s probably enough to do an entire SDA on. The reason why planes and tanks aren’t separate is because I think they go well together and by themselves, there might not be enough to research. Lastly, I also want to include civilians, as this was a war where civilians were caught in the crossfire, very heavily too. I want to know how being bombed and gassed affected them, as they were not trained soldiers nor did they expect to be attacked directly.
“How did soldiers feel with such a drastic change in war with new technologies?” is my Need to know question. This falls in the analysis category of the HOTQs because it is similar to ““How is ____ related to…?”. The reason for this is because I am asking how the soldiers' feelings changed in relation to introductions to new types of warfare. I can identify the type of warfare and look through primary sources of the soldiers in order to get a grasp at this question.
“How did the introduction of trench warfare affect soldiers?”
“How did the invention of planes and tanks affect soldiers?”
“How did chemical warfare and city bombings affect civilians?”
All three of my questions are very similar to my need to know and thus I believe they all fall under the analysis category. The only real difference is the subject of the questions and what it’s in relation to.
After consulting the HOTQs and my advisor I will be changing my subquestions, but not my need to know questions. I will completely get rid of number three, as talking about civilians could be an entirely different need to know question. As for one and two, I will be changing them a little bit. From “How did the introduction of trench warfare affect soldiers?” to How did the introduction of trench warfare relate to soldiers' PTSD and shellshock? As for number two, I will be changing it to How did the introduction of new technology relate to soldiers’ PTSD and shellshock?
The main subquestion I will be choosing is “How did the introduction of trench warfare relate to soldiers' PTSD and shellshock?” I chose this because I feel that trench warfare has a lot of information and is the best representation of what I am aiming for in my need to know question, and that is “How did soldiers feel with such a drastic change in war with new technologies?”. I do count the introduction of trench warfare a type of technology.
Some resources I will be using are the Library of Congress, Christopher Newport University, and WWI Document Archive. These are all resources involving primary sources, which will be my main source of information.
My essential question is “How did soldiers feel with such a drastic change in war with new technologies?”, which is an analysis question from the HOTQs. My main sub question driving this question is “How did the introduction of trench warfare relate to soldiers' PTSD and shellshock?”, which also falls into the analysis questions under the HOTQs. The reasons I chose these questions is because I wanted to focus on something I could analyze myself from the direct source, that being memoirs and diaries. I also think that war is something that is very important to human history and it's future, so I think it's important to understand how war affects people in order to understand humanity as a whole. The reason why I chose this sub question specifically is because I think it checks all the boxes of the first question, but is more specific. It's new, brutal, and heavily impacted the soldiers at the time.
This question matters to me because I like to understand things and see new perspectives. I think this research will be really eyeopening on the subject of humans and war itself. For why this is important to the field, that would be because it's an important topic that is relatively overlooked by most people and new perspectives on the matter may help to bring to light what people had to go through and can help with dealing with it in the future. The sources I chose are all sources of primary sources, such as memoirs, journals, and diaries. I chose these because I think it's important to read these sources myself and analyze them myself as I want to form my own perspective on the matter. I think these are the best sources as they come straight from the war and minds of the soldiers that fought in these times.
For this months SDA I plan on making something auditory, like a podcast, completely different from my first SDA. I think visuals aren't going to be the best tool, so I will focus on making a story and analyzing that story and giving my opinions on the them through an auditory experience. I might add some visuals if I can, but those won't be much and will be secondary in my list of priorities. “If I ever wanted to be about the size of an ant, it was when I crawled through that hell of shellfire and slid over onto that sunken road.” (James Nelson Platt, memoir, page 162). With this sentence alone I can start to understand the feeling of some of the soldiers during their time in the trenches. Platt felt like an ant, ant's are small, insignifiant, and what's small to us, is their entire world to them. Platt's world at this moment are the trenches, and it's not a pleasant world. It's hell as he describes, and as an ant, there's nothing he can do to change it. He feels like nothing, he felt despair whenever he had to slide into the trenches. These are the kinds of things I will be doing in my SDA, telling a story from the solider's point of view and analyzing it for the listener, this will hopefully help them also understand the horror felt in WWI a little more.
I think my SDA this time around is better than my last one. I still think I can improve on many things and have a long way to go, but I feel a little pride about this one. I think my “so what?” was indeed conveyed, maybe not as well as it could’ve been, but I think I really think I did get the message across one way or another. I Spent around five to six hours on this, most of it went into sifting through different journals and picking out which ones I wanted to use and what parts I wanted to use. I think I hit the creativity C, Critical thinking a little bit, my communication I feel could’ve been better in the way I presented the “so what”, there wasn’t much collaboration, and I want to say I included curiosity because I personally felt it was there but I don’t really know. The most Important thing I think I took away from this is how much of an effect the raising of people can have on a person, these young boys were in a time of high nationlist pride and willingly signed up to fight for their country, something you don’t see a lot of in our modern day. I think it is a difference in time period and how one was raised, including local and global environment that truly determines how they might be affected by certain things, and in this case war. If there is a lot of nationalist pride and a society of militarism and duty, then war will perhaps have a less scary appearance and appear as more of a “dirty job”. My main and only source of information was primary accounts of the war, such as journals and memoirs. I’d say I’m most proud of the idea of my podcast and trying to take advantage of my voice and storytelling thing (emphasis on try because it is clear that I am holding my voice back, and I think it’s because I’m still not extremely confident in it, hopefully this will resolve itself with time and practice). I think I need to work on collabing more during the actual process of making the SDA, not just before and after, so I can get better feedback and improve on weaknesses, such as the execution of this and the whole voice thing. I think going forward I will use this information to compare the past to the present and maybe look into more recent war journals and compare them. I think the HOTQs were helpful, but most essential to crafting my questions. I think I should probably take more advantage of them in the future.
Two problems within in my topic that I'm interested in researching are; How are US veterans affected after their return to society and by PTSD?, and what are the causes for war now? Both of these problems I will be researching on a global scale, not just the US. As for why this matters at all, it matters because much like I stated in SDA 2, understanding war and how it affects people, even after the war is done, is essential to understanding humans as a whole. Comparing and contrasting how war has evolved in recent times will help to further that goal. This problem mainly deals with those associated with war, and that includes both soldiers and modern day politicians who decide where and what wars we fight. "Depression and suicide rates are higher among people who have served in the military. The reason people do not get the help that they need is that there is a social stigma attached to it. The cost can also be a barrier that stops people from getting mental health treatment" (BVA). This is only in the US and it's obviously problem that there is a negative stigma with veterans, especially because the veterans are already suffering from the effects of war.
Right now I think my biggest need to know is the local issue of how US veterans affected after their return to society and by PTSD? This problem is important because it is important to know how the government and the people in the US treat the brave men and women who fought for them and to see if they are doing their utmost best to treat them well after they come back from deployment. If they aren't then that is a problem that needs solving. It is only around 1% of the US population that volunteers to fight and risk their lives for the security of their nation and their loved ones and it is my belief that when they come home they should be taken care of if war has made it hard to care for themselves. PTSD is also a very real mental issue that should be taken care of with great care as if it isn't then there can be harsh effects of those suffering from it.
The article I chose was about current US military members from Iraq and Afghanistan who had completed the PTSD checklist. This article in specific focuses on the most common symptom of PTSD, insomnia, and even those who had not been confirmed to have PTSD reported sleeping problems. Insomnia is a common and persistent problem from veterans returning from deployment and can be a good indicator of PTSD. This article was written by Robert N. McLay et al. and was published by Military Medicine. The terms I used for this article were "military" and "return to society". Other terms I found successful were "veteran'" and "PTSD". Although the initial screening showed 41% of returning veterans had sleep problems, around 33% had these problems for more than the 3-month follow up period. It was also seen that these people even though they reported only mild insomnia, had higher scores on the PTSD checklist. This article is actually a great source of information for me as it almost directly addresses the question I am researching, which is how US veterans affected after their return to society and by PTSD? As I mentioned I think this article is great and gives me some really good information to go off of, and although it doesn't address the societal aspect of what I want, It does give me more information on PTSD and some other things to look for, such as insomnia. I think I may use insomnia or sleep problems as new key terms as this article clearly shows that it can be a good sign of PTSD.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fPAsu5YyCpdn6Hxlqo0PSZ3ithwUF0JOy4Gp7RoOidY/edit?usp=sharing
My question from last time, how US veterans affected after their return to society and by PTSD? Is not going to be changed, but I will overall be including more than just PTSD as something to look for, I will now also be looking for insomnia, depression, and anxiety. The article I have chosen this time focuses on depression and PTSD found in military health care workers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. It is published by Military Medicine, who's goal is to spread awareness about federal medicine by having discussion of ideas and issues, all to increase healthcare education. This article is written by Thomas A Grieger, Tonya T Kolkow, and James L Spira, along with Jennifer S Morse. The main writer and contributor is Greiger, who is a former USN captain and has many other works that deal with psychological issues in the military, ranging from suicide to families. Spira has a PhD, and the other authors are all former military members. This article, like the last one, is quite specefic, with the last one focusing on insomnia and this one focusing of depression and PTSD with healthcare workers returning from the war in the MIddle East. The article shows that the rates for PTSD amongst those who were surveyed were around 9%, which is considerably lower than the combat returness, who were around 13-18% and depressions was 5% (Grieger, Thomas A, et al). It was also seen that those of Non-Caucasian races were more likely to suffer from probable PTSD. Those who were in situations where their own personal safety was jeopardized were twice as likley to suffer from PTSD and other mental issues. It is addressed in the article but there is a very clear limitation, the sample size. The sample here was from a voluntary online survey that lasted a year, which was conducted from 2004 to 2005. If they had more time then the sample may have larger and more data could've been collected for a more accurate stat. This survey was also only for healthcare workers and not all military personnel. I think a new term I will now look for is "depression" as this and PTSD are seen together often. I used ProQuest elibrary, and the terms "PTSD" "Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder" and "Returning".
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1euG0Oz59Z0KRVtOveLYx9vrikK5pn0n_qJMNCj7mJWo/edit
This article is one that focuses on trauma as a whole instead of just PTSD and even going so far as to clearly define that they are not the same things, it also goes beyond the scope of just the armed forces and focuses on every type of trauma everywhere. Since the focus of this article is not creating a solution to trauma, but instead talking about the politics and social benefits and cons of bringing awareness of trauma to the people and society, there are not many solutions presented, but that does not mean I haven't learned any. One part that caught my eye in particular was when the article mentioned what goes into deciding whether or not a traumatic event causes PTSD. It said it had to do with the before, such as genes, the severity and duration of the trauma, and the after, who assists the person after the event. I find that last one the most interesting and possibly a good way to lessen the effects of PTSD or trauma in the armed forces, because we can't do much about genes and war is very unpredictable and traumatic events are inevitable, so if we focus on the after then perhaps we can keep the problem from developing into a psychological level, and although trauma is still trauma, at least it wouldn't get to the point where it permanently screws the psyche of a person. Some other things of note that I found were how culture affects trauma, for example if a culture is centered around war then those who go to war are far less likely to develop PTSD, and under this it can be assumed that the opposite could also hold true. It also goes into the bad of spreading awareness of PTSD, such as an informed populace knowing more about the condition and thus complaining far more than an uneducated one. This article is titled Post-traumatic stress disorder: medicine and politics and was published by the Lancet, who is a journal publishing organization that promotes all kinds of sciences and spreading knowledge of science. It is written by Dan J. Stein, Soraya Seedat, Amy Iversen, and Simon Wessely. Stein is a psychiatrist who is both a professor and chair at the department of psychiatry at the University of Cape Town.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_qa5yPdFcX7dK_BGZIDGeULpWZ4cUJ2PZF9Z5ORVBKU/edit
Before this midterm I have used databases before and read scholarly articles, although they were for EMC, just not for this particular assignment. Although they provide great information and usually trustworthy information, they can be hard to read sometimes and have a lot of unfamiliar terms. It could be discouraging at times but I persevered and interpreted as best I could. I usually just used search terms that felt right for the topic and kept adding to my keyword bank as I kept looking, the related sidebar on some databases were very useful.
I think the most challenging part of this SDA was the research, usually a fairly unfamiliar source of information. At first it was very difficult to navigate and find what I was looking for. I feel as though I didn’t answer my question perfectly, but I do feel I did the best I could and could benefit from looking even further. I was very weak on collaboration though, almost having next to none in this assignment. I do think I did well with creativity with both the format of the assignment and how it was executed using the specific research I used. For the next SDA I think I will use a similar format, with both visuals and audio but also flowing more like a story.
I think I have been most proud of my progress in doing better research with scholarly articles and getting better at creating SDA’s and similar projects. I think currently the coordinators are doing fine and I can’t think of anything in particular that would be helpful. For the next essential question I think I will go with something about the current situation in Ukraine for a better understanding of modern war and how it affects people even today as most of my information from the midterm came from U.S. vets from Iraq and Afghanistan.
For this interview I have decided to start with three professors that study in political sciences and economical sciences, as I want to delve into diplomacy for this SDA. One of them is Sandeep Baliga, who studies in economic and decision sciences and teaches it at Northwestern University. He has a Ph.D in economics from Harvard and a BA degree at Cambridge. The next person is William Reno who is in the field of political science and foreign affairs. He got a BA at Haverford College, then a MA at the University of Chicago, and a Ph.D at the University of Wisconsin. Finally I chose Olga Kamenchuk who also studies in political science and foreign affairs. She is an associate professor and senior lecturer at the School of Communication in Northwestern. I will be emailing these people to ask them about the interview as I think that would be better and more convenient for both of us. Here is what an email will look like.
Dear Professor xxx,
My name is Tanner from an upstate NY highschool called Guilderland High School. I am contacting you in regards to an upcoming project in an independent research and inquiry program and in which I have to interview an expert on something related to my topic. I am personally studying war and it's different aspects, I have already gone into some personal diaries of WWI veterans and looked into some things modern veterans experience. Now I want to go a bit bigger and study diplomacy between nations, hopefully using the current war between Russia and Ukraine as an example. I would greatly appreciate if you would participate in this interview through a call. It will be recorded for the sake of the project I am working on, so I would alos greatly appreciate your consent to that. If you are interested than please email back when would be best for you to have this interview.
For more information on my research then please visit this website https://sites.google.com/guilderlandschools.net/tanners-emc-site/journals. Thank you for your time.
Tanner,
10th grade, Guilderland HIgh School
My essential question for this SDA is what is modern diplomacy like using the Ukrainian war as an example. Out of the three professors I contacted, only Professor Reno responded and agreed to an interview. As the posting of this journal though I have completed a 45 minute interview with him, giving me the valuable information I need for this podcast. I will again be using SoundTrap to edit and create this podcast. Due to the surprisingly fast response from Professor Reno and the interview, I have yet to choose a mentor podcast. I have looked through the examples but none really interest me so I will be looking for more.
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanner534/episodes/Interview-a-Fellow-EMCer-e20m3p4
I believe this assignment was very useful and gave me a quite a lot to work with. I also think I ended up getting what I wanted from the interview into the podcast, even if I had to cut more than half of it out. I think I had a lot of difficulty choosing what parts of the interview I wanted to keep, and then editing it down to only keep those parts. I think the most rewarding part was the interview itself as it gave some much needed insignt on certain topics, along with ideas for the future. If I had to interview someone else then I would either try and keep the interview itself to a lower amount of time and hopefully have more concise and shorter answers and conversations with the interviewee, as it was really hard to not only keep my voice in, but also to cut down the long answers. I think a podcast works best for this type of assignment, but it can be hard to cut audio in a way to make it smooth, unlike visuals or text. As I said before, I think if it was either a longer time limit on the podcast or I had been shorter on the interview, I think that would improve it.
[Greeting]
[Hook]
This year I investigated how humans fit into war and what kind of effect these roles have on them. As most of you may know, that effect isn’t a very good one most of the time. Soldiers in the U.S. suffer because of what they do, with things like PTSD and mild traumatic brain injuries, and this is only just the surface. These are the types of things I have studied throughout the year, from first hand accounts of WWI to diving deeper into the suffering of modern U.S. veterans and their return to home. You often may see images of homeless men and women with signs saying they were veterans, but why is that and can we change it? Well I think we can and most definitely should. There are men and women who give up dignity, family, friends, comfort, and sometimes even their lives, all so they can fight for what they believe in and for you. Sometimes it may not be as noble as that, but that doesn’t matter, it doesn’t erase the fact that they fought.
I believe that it is the responsibility and duty for the people sitting in this room and all the other rooms in the nation, to give back to these people. Through money yes, but not just that. We also need to help them on a deeper level, such as getting them jobs and homes, proper and accurate health procedures and checkups, and most of all, welcoming arms. I can’t personally speak for these veterans and what they want, but I don’t think they want pity, I think they want help, they want to come back into society as a normal person again and just live their lives. We should be the ones helping them with that, they shouldn’t have to do it alone.
I myself am not a person of the military, if you couldn’t tell. But I do have family and friends in the military or were in it, even my lineage goes back to revolutionary generals and WWII pilots. Although they might all be dead, I still feel as though I’d want the best for them, as they did something that 99% of Americans didn’t want to do or couldn’t do, and that's fight in a war and give up so much for what could potentially end up being death. I don’t quite know if I could do that, but I know my brother took that step. So of course I’d only want the best for my family and the other men and women who do the same thing.
[logos]
I mentioned earlier some symptoms that you often hear associated with veterans, such as PTSD and MTBIs, which are caused by different things, but actually have a very similar effect on a person, behaviorally anyway. They both cause things like insomnia, mood irritability, depression, and anxiety. Due to these similarities, they can often get confused and then be diagnosed wrong, even though they are not the same thing. They might have some similar effects, but they also have very different effects, such as PTSD and flashbacks, and MTBIs causing more physical things like sound sensitivity. This is but a branch of the biggest problems that veterans face. Mental health issues. Wrong diagnosis’ and then wrong treatment, but also access to it in the field. How many therapists and mental health doctors work in the military? Not many, especially when they can work for much more money in the civilian world. So, there aren’t enough doctors and being understaffed can lead to rushing and just ignoring problems. Then they come home with these problems and it quickly becomes a very heavy burden to bear.
These mental health issues become a very unhelpful problem when it comes to reentering society. These problems can very easily cause family problems and other relationship problems which can make it hard for them to get support from close ones. It is further amplified by the disconnect between veterans and civilians and the cultural impact (idk if that is the right word) that the military may have on a person. Military life is fundamentally different from most others, you may see how it affects families in certain media, like the average “military dad” trope. They are told to be self-reliant and are told to be the strongest there is, as they have to be on a battlefield. This can lead to big trouble in asking for help. Help they may very well need. The mental issues can make it very hard to get a job properly and then they have trouble asking for help to get that job. Even when they get help from the VA, a little less than 50% of veterans who get help from the VA feel as though they do a good job. The outreach programs can be disorganized and it can be hard to get certain requests through. So they have a different view on the world which is usually very rigid, they can have mental and physical problems, and they can have lack of support from families and friends. None of this helps in any way as you may have guessed. And employers know these kinds of things as well, and they know that they aren’t the best candidates to hire for most jobs and that is a big problem, and again the disconnect between the veterans and normal civilians. It causes problems and lack of understanding between the two. So some go into law enforcement and security, which could be their only area of expertise, and these can be stressful and dangerous jobs themselves. A little less than 20% of law enforcement are retired veterans.
So from one dangerous and stressful job to another. From guns to more guns and fighting. This is not the kind of environment that is needed for veterans to properly return to society. They are the closest things we have to heroes in today's society, sure they may not be Hercules or Perseus, and maybe they don’t need to be treated like royalty or heroes of myth, but they should come close. They should be treated as brave men and women who fought for a nation at the cost of what they lost and gave up. They should be able to get an easy and comfortable life if they so wish it, and not all necessarily do. Some might want to go into law enforcement and continue a hard life, and they can. But some are damaged and simply want rest, and they deserve it. Some won’t take everything on a silver platter, it’s simply not how they think, and that’s fine as well, it might even be preferable. Instead of just giving them pity money, we give them a hand that they merely have to reach out to without much effort at all. Then we guide them through what they need for what they want. Whether it be a college education in order to get a good job, or simply a nice take it easy job and home. They will most likely work for what they want, but they can have trouble with asking for the help they need to get that started. And that's where we come in. We welcome them and tell them where to get started and where to get help should they need it. Whether it be a proper therapist or a good job. It is our duty in order to help them, we have to make the extra effort and go beyond meeting them halfway, as they already did that for us, we are merely returning the favor.