Support the troops - send injured soldiers back to Iraq!

The BBQ Pit
21

[QUOTE=Cervaise]
Not exactly. As I mentioned in the GD thread about Walter Reed, the hospital at Fort Lewis, Madigan, has been known by Northwest locals to be decidedly subpar for as long as I can remember, going back thirty years. This is true in peacetime as in war. The only difference is that during wartime, the number of patients increases dramatically, thus highlighting and exacerbating a longstanding problem. Doesn’t mean the problem didn’t already exist, just that it was below the radar, so to speak.
[/QUOTE]

Exactly right. And there are hundreds of stories like this all around the country.

The interesting thing is that twenty years ago, you heard horror stories about DoD and VA hospitals alike, while today, you only hear them about the DoD hospitals. The VA has cleaned up their act so much that they now rate as the number one best agency to work for in the government by most surveys. The care and support veterans get there is a world away from that found in the DoD.

22

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Military health care and veterans’ health care can be issues even in peacetime. There are lots of ways a peacetime soldier can get injured, that would not arise in most private-sector jobs.
[/QUOTE]
That’s true, but how many in peacetime have these sorts of injuries? (WARNING: not for the faint of heart.)

23

[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
That’s true, but how many in peacetime have these sorts of injuries? (WARNING: not for the faint of heart.)
[/QUOTE]

That’s a pretty cheap shot. Do you really think no horrific accidents happen to peacetime soldiers practicing with live ordinance and massive powerful vehicles and equipment? But oh yeah, that dude is ugly now. Point well made.

24

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
I think that is all part of Mr Moto’s complaint. Yes dude, 2003 IS “newfound”. The concern can be easily seen as a partisan talking point to embarrass Bush et al. Yes, this war exacerbates problems with veteran and active duty medical care (eta: and equipment) but believe it or not, soldiers get injured every year even without combat*.
[/QUOTE]
But major ground combat takes it to a whole 'nother level, doesn’t it?

We’ve lost somewhere north of 3,100 troops in Iraq. Another 200,000 have sought treatment in military hospitals. What were the comparable numbers for 1996-99?

I make no apologies for not paying attention to relatively minor problems. Lots of bad shit is going on in this country at any given time, and you can’t pay attention to but a fraction of it. BFD.

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
The interesting thing is that twenty years ago, you heard horror stories about DoD and VA hospitals alike, while today, you only hear them about the DoD hospitals. The VA has cleaned up their act so much that they now rate as the number one best agency to work for in the government by most surveys. The care and support veterans get there is a world away from that found in the DoD.
[/QUOTE]
You can thank Clinton and Gore for that. Tough concept, I know.

25

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
That’s a pretty cheap shot. Do you really think no horrific accidents happen to peacetime soldiers practicing with live ordinance and massive powerful vehicles and equipment? But oh yeah, that dude is ugly now. Point well made.
[/QUOTE]
How, exactly, is that a cheap shot? Fact is, we’ve got a bunch of guys coming back who look not too much better. Again, show me that this is anything but a rarity in peacetime.

26

And I would still claim that, distinctly unlike most of the right wing, most of us dirty fucking hippies of the left would be quite concerned with the welfare of the troops in a war we favored.

It has nothing to do with whether we’re for or against the war; it’s a matter of whether or not there’s a war that’s chewing up our soldiers.

27

[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
How, exactly, is that a cheap shot? Fact is, we’ve got a bunch of guys coming back who look not too much better. Again, show me that this is anything but a rarity in peacetime.
[/QUOTE]

OK, if melted face marine is one of the injured soldiers they are sending back to Iraq then I take back the “cheap shot” comment.

28

RTFirefly, need I remind you that you have supported a conflict in Afghanistan that led to a fair share of troops similarly coming home dead and wounded?

In another thread some time ago, I challenged you based upon this to give me some concrete examples of how you are actually supporting the troops. You declined to answer, which is certainly fair.

I’d just like to reiterate, though, that I hope the people who are so quick to vent about matters like this are similarly quick to help out.

This is the American Legion’s American Legacy Scholarship Fund. It benefits the children of servicemembers killed in action.

Operation Uplink is a VFW program that provides phone cards to hospitalized and deployed servicemembers.

Credit card donations are welcomed, and you do not need to be a member of these organizations to contribute. Donations are tax deductible.

There are other worthy programs run by these and other organizations that ought to be a part of all of our charitable giving, given what is happening with our military.

29

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
OK, if melted face marine is one of the injured soldiers they are sending back to Iraq then I take back the “cheap shot” comment.
[/QUOTE]
Why?

This conversation has clearly migrated beyond “it’s evil to send injured soldiers back to Iraq” to “those dirty fucking hippie libruls only care about the troops because they hate the war.”

My response is that it’s not whether we love or hate the war; it’s that it’s war.

The counter to that was, a lot of bad shit happens to soldiers during peacetime.

I noted that a lot more bad shit happens to soldiers in war (and especially so in this war, I might add) than in peace.

The pic was in support of that point. Can’t see that it matters whether he’s going back or not.

30

If your point was “lot more bad shit happens to soldiers in war” then I concede it as it’s pretty fucking obvious. If you think no soldier has had his face blown off during peacetime, you are an idiot. What exactly did that photo album prove?

31

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
If your point was “lot more bad shit happens to soldiers in war” then I concede it as it’s pretty fucking obvious. If you think no soldier has had his face blown off during peacetime, you are an idiot. What exactly did that photo album prove?
[/QUOTE]
It seemed like the point that you now concede was “pretty fucking obvious” was meeting a lot of resistance in this thread. If people want to drag their heels in conceding the obvious, what does that tell me? It tells me that the obvious arguments aren’t fucking sufficing.

You don’t want people to go over the top in proving the obvious, then concede the damned point, rather than fighting it.

32

My personal example wasn’t intended to overinflate something as minor as my hearing shift. But a government that will screw around with a sailor’s separation date and then make his malady mysteriously disappear, and do this in 1998, with no major conflict going on, will do far worse things during a shooting war.

Doesn’t make it right, not for one second. But the people who seem surprised by this are only the ones who have ignored the military for so long. Anybody who has any experience at all with DoD health care could have seen this coming a mile off.

33

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
RTFirefly, need I remind you that you have supported a conflict in Afghanistan that led to a fair share of troops similarly coming home dead and wounded?
[/quote]
???

You are the one who says we dirty fucking hippy leftists ‘support the troops’ only because we oppose the war.

I am the one saying the issue is that it’s war rather than peace that makes the welfare of the troops an issue of greatly increased concern.

So your reminder may refute your assumption, I suppose. (I don’t care.) It isn’t germane to anything I’m saying.

Oh, good. I’m gratified to see you’re bringing it up again just to reaffirm its fairness, rather than to sneak in a bogus cheap shot while patting yourself on the back for being ‘fair.’

And of course, we should all be writing, telephoning, and emailing our Congresscritters, which costs essentially zero, to make sure stuff like this doesn’t get swept under the rug like it did when the GOP was in charge.

34

[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
???
[/QUOTE]
That’s 60 dead Americans in the first 2 years of Operation Enduring Freedom.

35

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
My personal example wasn’t intended to overinflate something as minor as my hearing shift. But a government that will screw around with a sailor’s separation date and then make his malady mysteriously disappear, and do this in 1998, with no major conflict going on, will do far worse things during a shooting war.
[/quote]
Is there some track record of the government’s having increased its screwing of the troops over peacetime levels in WWII, Korea, Vietnam?

And funny you should bring up 1998. It wasn’t like anyone had raised any bogus issues that kinda distracted us from dealing with real stuff that year.

You know what? I don’t have experience with DoD health care.

And you know what else? It doesn’t matter.

You’re right - I didn’t know it was an issue, back when it wasn’t much of an issue, other than for those directly affected. So yeah, I was surprised by it in 2003.

The thing is, now it’s 2007. By now, why hasn’t the ‘support the troops’ contingent ensured that the troops are supported in every way that we reasonably owe them our support as a grateful nation? It’s not like this war started yesterday. The GOP - the ‘support the troops’ party - controlled both houses of Congress, and the Presidency, from the beginning of 2003 to the end of 2006. Were they too busy pushing tax breaks for the petroleum industry, too busy building ‘bridges to nowhere’, to actually support the troops?

You tell me.

But I think the idea that my failure to be aware of a problem when it was a small problem, somehow invalidates my concern about it now that it’s a big one, is completely bogus.

Ever hear of avian flu? H5N1? A lot of people haven’t, but I’ve been aware of it for a couple of years now, and been trying in my small way to raise the alarm. Should only people like me be taken seriously if it becomes a pandemic? I think that would be pretty stupid, don’t you?

Now look in the fucking mirror.

36

[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
It seemed like the point that you now concede was “pretty fucking obvious” was meeting a lot of resistance in this thread. If people want to drag their heels in conceding the obvious, what does that tell me? It tells me that the obvious arguments aren’t fucking sufficing.

You don’t want people to go over the top in proving the obvious, then concede the damned point, rather than fighting it.
[/QUOTE]

You didn’t go over the top, it was a cheap stunt. Finding someone who was mutilated in a bomb attack doesn’t prove jack shit. The point I conceded doesn’t seem to match what you are trying to prove. And you last line in your next post

Is a bit of an admission to Mr Moto’s point, isn’t it. You care about the troops because it’s somehow the GOP’s fault.

37

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]

The interesting thing is that twenty years ago, you heard horror stories about DoD and VA hospitals alike, while today, you only hear them about the DoD hospitals. The VA has cleaned up their act so much that they now rate as the number one best agency to work for in the government by most surveys. The care and support veterans get there is a world away from that found in the DoD.
[/QUOTE]
[tangent]

Unfortunately, a lot of media outlets don’t appear to understand this and are talking about Walter Reed as if it were part of the VA system. Damned infuriating per se. Beyond that, I’ve seen TV interviews of local vets praising the Boston-area VA hospitals (deservedly so), without any clarification of the difference between the two healthcare systems. It seems to me that kind of misleading coverage could confuse public perception of what the hell’s going on, perhaps make the mess look like a singular incident (solved by throwing the specific bastards out) rather than a systemic problem (requiring wholesale remediation).

38

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
You didn’t go over the top, it was a cheap stunt.
[/quote]
Tomato, to-mah-to. Whatever.

No, I’m saying that part of the solution should be understood to be political, and that giving money to the American Legion Whatever while supporting the bastards in Congress and the White House who are screwing the troops is a way of your left hand fighting what your right hand is doing.

Believe it or not, a great many of us dirty fucking hippies dislike the current Administration and the all-too-recent Congress, not because of any sort of ‘Yay, my team - boo, your team’ attitude, but because we believe this Administration and that Congress are/were screwing the country, and we get kind of upset about people who are screwing this country over.

In a funny way, many of us dirty fucking hippies are actually patriots.

39

I don’t see the big deal here - you fight a war with the soldiers you have, not the soldiers you want.

-Joe, d&r

40

Sure, but you specifically mentioned the GOP sweeping it all under the rug. Kind of implies that “your guys” would never do such a thing. Is there reason to believe this beyond partisan hackery?