TRADOC Pam 525-3-7-01 - TRADOC - U.S. Army

TRADOC Pam 525-3-7-01the bitter dryness of fear in his mouth into mortar bursts and machine-gun fire of a determinedenemy.” 151 Samuel Stouffer and his associates Edward Shils and Morris Janowitz in TheAmerican Soldier: Combat and its Aftermath, and in their article, “Cohesion and Disintegrationin the Wehrmacht in World War II,” concluded that unit cohesion is built on the strength of thebonds Soldiers develop with each other and their leaders. 152 These small group ties combinedwith competent caring leadership, concern for their individual reputation with fellow Soldiers,and reputation as a contributing member of the unit are principle ingredients of effective units.These factors also contributed to lower psychiatric or battle stress casualties.Nowhere in civilian life is the importance of group identification and mutual support moreimportant than it is for Soldiers in combat. 153 A half century of research continues to indicate astrong relationship between among morale, cohesion, esprit de corps, combat motivation, andcombat stress casualties. Collectively, the importance of morale, cohesion, and esprit de corpslies primarily in their contribution to motivating Soldiers and sustaining their fighting spirit butthey also act as buffers against psychological breakdown.Similarly, nowhere in civilian life is the role of the family more important to improving andsustaining the workforce. Strong family support groups for deployed units serve now and willcontinue to serve as bastions against the negative effects of stress. Future efforts to keep thedeployed Soldier in contact with their families will continue to work both ways by shoring up themorale of the Soldier while reassuring those left behind of their continued support.6-2. Combat and Operational StressTraditionally, the loss of life, the numberof seriously wounded, and propertydestruction measure the costs of war. Yet,within the last century, the realizationemerged that the physical costs of war are notthe only ones. Continuous, protracted combatis largely a twentieth century phenomenon.Prior to World War I, battles typically lastedonly a matter of days before participantsOne of our cultural myths has been that onlyweaklings break down psychologically [andthat] strong men with the will to do so cankeep going indefinitely. 1G.W. Beebe and J.W. AppelVariation in Psychological Tolerance to GroundCombat in World War II, Final Report, 1951disengaged to recover and reset. World War I that introduced twenty-four hour combat lastingmonths and years, and it was in this conflict that armies first suffered large numbers ofpsychological casualties.Soldiers engaged in combat and other military operations often witness horrific events. Theykill others, risk death and wounds, and experience the loss of close friends. Modern militaryoperations expose Soldiers to many sources of stress. Casualties caused from COSR can be froma single traumatic event or prolonged exposure to combat, and the numbers of psychologicalcasualties can be as high or higher than the number of wounded or killed in action. Forcombatants in modern war, there is greater likelihood of becoming a psychological casualty thana casualty of enemy fire. There is also the danger of long-term stress or “post combat stress”reactions. Together these effects often extend beyond the lives of those who were there andshape the lives of family, friends, and communities for years afterwards.136