Just Another Guy with Opinions

Support the Disabled Troops

Posted by shadmia on February 22, 2007

“Support the Troops” has been the sound bite for the American involvement in the Iraqi war. Even if you don’t agree with the war….. “Support the Troops“. It is the national anthem and if you don’t support the troops, you are somehow unpatriotic. But what does “Support the Troops” really mean? If you ask the Bush Administration there is no difference between support the troops and support the war. I say this because if there were no troops there would be no war. Congress holds the purse strings that make the war possible. If funding was cut off, the troops would have to come home. So far Congress has played along and supported the troops by giving Bush the money he needs to continue waging the war. So in the political context, “Support the Troops” means: “Give me money so that I can send the troops into battle”. This seems to be the true meaning of “Support the Troops”.

What happens to the men and women who are wounded in the war and may need medical/psychological attention, sometimes for the rest of their lives? Is the money there for physical rehabilitation and mental therapy? If you were wounded and disabled will the money and facilities be there to take care of you….for as long as you need help?

In the words of President Lincoln who considered it a mandate of government: “To care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphanThe government has a primary responsibility to take care of the wounded and the family of the dead. An NBC/Washington Post investigation into the care provided outpatients at the Walter Reed hospital shows that much is lacking in the care and support of those wounded in battle.

After the report was aired the Bush Administration admitted that more needs to be done to care for the wounded war veterans in military hospitals. The controversy poses a public relations problem for President George W. Bush, who has spoken often of America’s debt to military personnel wounded in the wars.

The White House expressed concern at conditions for veterans after reports that many suffering physical and psychological problems lived in shoddy housing on or near the sprawling complex and faced long battles with army bureaucracy.

“I can tell you that we believe that they deserve better,” White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters. “Of course, there’s outrage that men and women who have been fighting have not received the outpatient care.”

“We need to make sure that whatever problems there are get fixed,” he added.

This seems to be a major failing on the part of the government to “Support the Troops”. The people that have put their lives on the line to go to war for their country deserve to be supported before, during and after their tour of duty. It should not appear to be an afterthought that “some problems need to be fixed

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, said they would introduce legislation to improve the quality of care and require more frequent inspections of active-duty military hospitals.

“Caring for our returning heroes is one of the things we can still get right about this war, and that’s why the deterioration of the conditions at Walter Reed is both appalling and unacceptable,” said Obama, a candidate for his party’s 2008 presidential nomination.

The following video clip covers the reactions to the investigation


Add to Technorati Favorites

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: