Support the Troops. No, Really.
You know, I'm starting to get really sick about all this rhetoric
flying around about "supporting the troops." As if doing something as
basic as debating foreign policy somehow places our men and women in harm's way. I always thought things like free debate were exactly the things that our soldiers fight for. And if the Republicans are going to try and wrap themselves in the flag of "supporting our troops," well, then as Desi Arnaz used to say, they got some 'splaining to do. Because this administration has cut the budget for the Veterans Administration every year, I believe (I have to check that). And whereas the Bushies have been very giving for all of their corporate friends, even to the point of wasting billions of dollars that can't be accounted for in Iraq, their support for the fighting men and women on the ground has been pretty pitiful, from a lack of armor, to a lack of health care. Examples? There is bullet proof armor known as Dragon Skin that can stop AK-47 rounds. But the Defense Department won't buy it because, well, essentially it would require not buying inferior equipment from one of their corporate buddies. See here. And a new series in the Washington Post illustrates
how absolutely abysmal the conditions are at Water Reed Hospital. And this is the preeminent facility in the Armed Forces. See more of this debate here.
Anyway, it frustrates me. I come from a military family, so these kind of things get under my skin. And even though I don't serve, I think those who do deserve the very best. And they aren't getting it. We put bazillions of dollars into what Eisenhower presciently described as the military-industrial complex, but little to the actual care of those who get maimed and killed using the instruments of that complex. And those who are responsible for this neglect, be it through a budget or whatnot, deserve shame when they say that they "support the troops" as a political device to demonize fr
flying around about "supporting the troops." As if doing something as
basic as debating foreign policy somehow places our men and women in harm's way. I always thought things like free debate were exactly the things that our soldiers fight for. And if the Republicans are going to try and wrap themselves in the flag of "supporting our troops," well, then as Desi Arnaz used to say, they got some 'splaining to do. Because this administration has cut the budget for the Veterans Administration every year, I believe (I have to check that). And whereas the Bushies have been very giving for all of their corporate friends, even to the point of wasting billions of dollars that can't be accounted for in Iraq, their support for the fighting men and women on the ground has been pretty pitiful, from a lack of armor, to a lack of health care. Examples? There is bullet proof armor known as Dragon Skin that can stop AK-47 rounds. But the Defense Department won't buy it because, well, essentially it would require not buying inferior equipment from one of their corporate buddies. See here. And a new series in the Washington Post illustrates
how absolutely abysmal the conditions are at Water Reed Hospital. And this is the preeminent facility in the Armed Forces. See more of this debate here.
Anyway, it frustrates me. I come from a military family, so these kind of things get under my skin. And even though I don't serve, I think those who do deserve the very best. And they aren't getting it. We put bazillions of dollars into what Eisenhower presciently described as the military-industrial complex, but little to the actual care of those who get maimed and killed using the instruments of that complex. And those who are responsible for this neglect, be it through a budget or whatnot, deserve shame when they say that they "support the troops" as a political device to demonize fr
posted by cc at
10:36 AM
1 Comments:
I have known about the demise and neglect of the military's medical system when it comes to the "What's next." Rehab and long term care is a glaring weak point within the military, due to the private side of the house is much more lucrative. There is no place better to get acute care training while getting paid, than in the military during a conflict. This is why the guys and gals are so good. They signed up for the experiences, to better themselves, before going private. Most will not endure the military long to get experience in rehab and long term care when the private sector has great places in place already. Look at Craig, Jewish, Mayo, and others. Heck, the Shriners is a "better" place to work then in the military. I believe that the healthcare system as a whole (private and goveremental) in the US is flawed and so disjointed that it is really hopeless. I have worked both and they both have good and bad points.
The Walter Reed example is really a good example of healthcare as a whole. Trust me on this one. Some good here equates neglect there. Some bad here, covers some good there.
Troops deserve what they can get -- I agree. Especially if wounded. Thing is, the best cost money, and the goverment does not pay their medical bills. Simple as that. Getting payment from the VA, Medicare, and Medicaid is like getting teeth pulled. There are a huge number of people in Billing at my company and they are better paid, because they work the magic the gets the money to the CEO's pocket. Not us on the streets, we just "waste" the money in his mind. In the business sense, it is not not lifes saved or improved, but the money made. Is that wacked or what?
Post a Comment
<< Home