Trumps says warriors with PTSD aren't 'strong.' Will veterans still back him?

Donald Trump, speaking at an event in Virginia, said some vets are strong enough to deal with what they experience during military service while others 'can't handle it.'

Evan Vucci/AP/File
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally, in Loveland, Colo., on Monday, Oct. 3, 2016.

Despite making a comment that implied those who struggle with mental health issues after serving the country in combat are weaker than those who don't have a diagnosis, Donald Trump doesn’t seem to be losing significant support from veterans.

Speaking at an event in Herndon, Va., organized by the Retired American Warriors political action committee Monday, Mr. Trump responded to a question about faith-based programs intended to help soldiers struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), brain injuries, and other issues as a result of their service.

"When you talk about the mental health problems – when people come back from war and combat, and they see things that maybe a lot of the folks in this room have seen many times over, and you're strong and you can handle it. But a lot of people can't handle it," he said.

"And they see horror stories. They see events that you couldn't see in a movie, nobody would believe it," he added.

Trump’s controversial comments have characterized his campaign, and those involving criticism of veterans and families of military personnel have drawn harsh criticism. Last year, Trump argued that Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona is only regarded as a war hero “because he got captured.” Then, this summer, Trump feuded with Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of a fallen American soldier, who denounced the Republican nominee’s run for president with a speech at the Democratic National Convention.

Despite these comments, Trump has polled well among veterans, carrying the group with 37.6 percent support while Hillary Clinton falls behind with 16.3 percent of the vote, the Military Times reports. And while veterans groups came out against Trump’s latest blunder Monday, others have jumped to his defense.

“I think it’s sickening that anyone would twist Mr. Trump’s comments to me in order to pursue a political agenda,” said former Marine Staff Sgt. Chad Robichaux, who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress and posed the question to Trump Monday, said in a statement. “I took his comments to be thoughtful and understanding of the struggles many veterans have, and I believe he is committed to helping them.”

Others took to Twitter to applaud Trump for “keeping it real” and for bringing attention to the issue, The Washington Post reported. Many see his plan as an attractive attempt to combat a problem that hasn’t been appropriately addressed.

Still, some close to the issue denounced Trump’s comments, emphasizing the importance of avoiding any speech that might perpetuate stigma surrounding the treatment of mental health issues.

“Every national leader has a responsibility to use accurate and appropriate language when talking about mental health and suicide especially,” Paul Rieckhoff, the chief executive officer of the non-profit Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, wrote on Twitter. “Terms like ‘killing yourself’ or ‘mental problems’, or any suggestion that suicide only impacts the weak, perpetuates stigma.... it can also promote contagion and may discourage people from getting help for mental health injuries. Getting help is a sign of strength.”

Information from the Associated Press was used in this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.