Follow us on social

Military-welcome-home

Why military families like mine celebrate the end of war deployments

Married to an airman with depression and suicidal ideation since his deployment, this advocate says the war couldn't end sooner.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

President Biden recently announced that U.S. troops will fully withdraw from Afghanistan by September 11 of this year. As an active-duty Air Force spouse, this news brings me hope more than words can express. 

My Afghanistan story started the day before my 15th birthday. As my family and I drove to one of the best nearby restaurants to celebrate, an announcement screamed through the radio: President George W. Bush ordered attacks on Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I could not have predicted that almost exactly 16 years later, I would be hugging my husband good-bye at the airport as he prepared to deploy to support that exact war. 

Since his deployment, my husband has struggled with depression and suicidal ideation. These invisible wounds are a cost that my family bears, even years after he returned. Trying to support him through his struggle and processing is exhausting, as I go about my life not knowing what could be around a corner or behind a door. 

The costs of war are profound — lives, wounds, trauma, time with loved ones all become collateral damage. Over 2,300 service members have lost their lives and over 20,000 have sustained injuries in Afghanistan. At least 970,000 veterans have some degree of officially recognized disability as a result of the wars. Many more live with physical and emotional scars despite lack of disability status. Then there are us: the 2.6 million military spouses and children, in addition to parents and extended family, who are all impacted when their loved one decides to join a wartime military. 

My husband’s challenges with the military mental health world led me to speak out and advocate for change. I have found opportunities for conversations about our experiences in an arena that desperately needs change, both with Congressional aides and high ranking Air Force and Space Force leadership. However, there is only so much that mental health reform through the Department of Defense can do. No solution can be complete without tackling our force’s operational tempo.

Like many military families, I am eagerly anticipating the new September timeline when this weight would be off our shoulders. Almost 20 years ago, I watched as the Twin Towers came down and our country went to war, and I followed all the developments with intense focus, knowing the U.S. would pursue those responsible for the attacks. But then, nearly two decades later, war came home — to my home. 

For me, war is not an abstract concept that happens to someone else or another family; war is personal and it is painful. Families like mine watch our loved ones go off to war, and while they may return home physically, pieces of them are left on the battlefield. Others face the reality that their loved one will never come home, left with only a flag presented on behalf of a grateful nation. Still other families seem to reunite even stronger, but fractured in other unseen ways.

One friend of mine, an Army Ranger, told me that when he returned home, he felt angry that everyone back here was focused on the latest iPhone and video game console while there were  real hardships overseas, like when his buddies did not come home. He struggled with his loss of innocence or what he refers to as his “child-like self.” Everyone who goes through a deployment — those who go overseas and those of us who remain on the homefront — is forever changed and forever scarred. We are ready for this war to end. 

I am grateful to President Biden for taking this definitive step to ending America’s longest war. I am glad for the opportunity that the Trump-negotiated Doha agreement, which drew bipartisan support, provided in these deliberations. And now I wait with bated breath for this promise to be fulfilled.


Families welcome soldiers of 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division during the first of several Welcome Home Ceremonies following a nine month deployment, July 11, 2019, at Fort Drum, New York. (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Paige Behringer)
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.