Questions are growing over how the U.S. military describes injuries suffered by U.S. troops following Iran-linked drone strikes, with wounded soldiers and their families accusing the military of downplaying the severity of the incident.The issue has also drawn new attention to comments in March by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who said “almost 90 percent” of the roughly 400 wounded U.S. service members had suffered only minor injuries and had returned to duty. Some families now say the descriptions don’t match what they were told or what soldiers are still dealing with.Soldiers injured in a March 1 drone strike in Kuwait said their situation was much worse, according to interviews with CBS News.Chief Warrant Officer Rodney Bearman was working in the port of Shuaiba when a drone struck him. Medical records reviewed by CBS News show he suffered shrapnel wounds throughout his body, a concussion, hearing and vision loss and lung damage. The military described his injuries as “minor”.“This assessment is unacceptable,” his wife, Amy Behrman, told CBS News.The attack killed six US soldiers and injured more than 20 people, making it one of the most serious incidents involving the US military in recent years. Soldiers told CBS News they were warned about security and medical vulnerabilities ahead of the attack, which also raised questions about preparedness.Amy Bellman said she was first notified by an official phone call from Fort Knox. She was told her husband’s injuries were classified as NSI, or “not serious,” and that “he has been treated and returned to work.”“As a military spouse for nearly 25 years, I know that if anything happened to my husband while he was deployed, I know I would receive a formal call or a formal visit,” she said.But she later learned directly from her husband that the situation was more serious. “I’m going to be fine,” he told her in a Kuwait hospital. A moment later, he added: “I can’t go back.”Staff Sergeant Corey Hicks, who was also wounded in the same attack, said that although he underwent multiple surgeries for shrapnel wounds, he was told his injuries were minor. “They said your husband was injured, he had a minor injury to his jaw and he was going to return to duty,” Hicks recalled.He said he believed the incident had been downplayed. The military rejected this claim.Injury labels such as “not serious” follow strict medical definitions, an Army spokesman said in a statement. “The care and well-being of our Soldiers is a top priority,” the Army said. “Any suggestion that the Army is trying to downplay Soldiers’ injuries is incorrect.”The military said “serious injury” or “very serious injury” only applies to situations where there is a risk of death within 72 hours.Family members and survivors have also expressed concerns about conditions leading up to the attack, including claims the army had warned of gaps in protection and medical support. CBS News earlier reported that Senate Democrats had launched an investigation into the matter.Bellman’s case has since attracted political attention. Senator Shelley Moore Capito wrote to the Army asking for clarification on how his injuries were classified and what he disclosed to his wife. Maj. Gen. Michael J. Lini later defended the designation, saying it did not diminish Bellman’s service or sacrifice.Nearly four months after the attack, Hicks is still being treated at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center with a severe brain injury that will require months of recovery.
