Smila: "Support the troops: Let them adopt stray Iraqi dogs!"

So why don't we leave them out of it? If human beings can't get along and insist on solving conflicts through violent means, fine, but why drag dogs into the mess? It's bad enough that innocent wild animals get blown to bits—or worse, maimed—by exploding bombs and gunfire, but intentionally forcing dogs and other animals to take part in human conflicts is just indefensible.

I won't bore you with my views on the current war and all wars (hint: I was married to a German conscientious objector and, before that, dated a Soviet-era Russian conscientious objector), because that's neither here nor there. The issue at hand is the ethics of forcing dogs to "serve" in combat zones.

I ran across a recent article in USA Today ("Dogs of War Bring Soldiers Peace of Mind," 12 Dec.) about two trained therapy dogs, Boe and Budge, who will be shipping out to Tikrit and Mosul, Iraq, this week. These dogs have been "acclimated to helicopter noise, explosions, gunfire, sirens" (yeah, right—please see my recent blog post "Through a Dog's Ear" for more on the effects of human-made noise on dogs' sensitive nervous systems) and "will be in areas that are kept safe" (I didn't know that they had any areas like that in Iraq). They will be working "very long days."

As usual, human needs trump dogs' needs every time. The chief training officer for America's VetDogs, which trains therapy dogs for the military and trained these two dogs, purposely picked one dog who "will cheerfully spend hours at someone's feet if that's what is asked" and another who is "hard-wired to please." It's all about pleasing the humans. Does anyone stop to think about the effect on the dogs of spending their entire day interacting with traumatized and depressed military personnel? The dogs' job is to "plug into humans," but what does all that negativity do to their sensitive psyches in the process?

America's VetDogs and Army personnel all try to make the whole thing sound acceptable by commissioning the dogs as "Army sergeants" and talking about them with patriotic fervor ("they'll be part of a vital medical team" and "we know they're going on a very important mission."). But dogs don't care about stuff like that. Sure, they like to have a job, but they are not at all invested in the big military mission, and anyone who talks about them as if they were is either in denial or, more likely, engaging in PR. What dogs care about is a stable home environment, but there's no guarantee that they'll have even that when this mission is over: At that time, they'll "likely be deployed with the handlers they have … to a new locale or reassigned to a military hospital in the USA." Sounds like they're going to be shuttled around until they're used up, just like a piece of equipment. So much for the needs of Budge and Boe.

The tragic irony of this situation is that Iraq is teeming with stray dogs, and many military personnel would love to adopt one of them, but regulations and other obstacles make it nearly impossible for them to do so. Imagine the impact on your morale if you were to fall in love with a puppy or an injured dog in Iraq and offer to take care of the animal, only to be told to forget about it—toss the dog back onto the street. And it gets worse: Often, soldiers are required to shoot stray dogs, especially any who might possibly bark and give their position away! Who wouldn't get depressed? The means for attaining a huge morale boost among the soldiers does not require the extensive and expensive training and transportation of therapy dogs from the United States. It's free and it's everywhere: Simply permit soldiers to adopt stray dogs and cats and take them home with them when their tour is over. I guarantee that this policy would have a much greater beneficial effect than the services of a few therapy dogs spread among the many traumatized and lonely troops.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Today's blog post is dedicated to beautiful, happy-go-lucky T.J., who died this morning of kidney failure, a result of the neglectful treatment that he got from his first family. His second adoptive family gave him everything possible to make him well and surrounded him with love, but his kidney damage was too extensive, and after 18 months, he finally succumbed. We will miss him.