-
David Botti
|
May 9, 2008 01:58 PM
Though he was killed in Afghanistan in 2004, Pat Tillman's death is
still a subject of controversy and tremendous reflection. Tillman, you
will recall, was the NFL player turned Army Ranger who was originally
said to have died under enemy fire (he was awarded the Silver Star),
but later reports found he was killed by friendly fire.
Now his
mother, Mary, has published a book in which she charges that former
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld knew about the cover-up over the
details of her son's death. As she writes [via MSNBC]:
“... I believe Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld knew Pat was killed
by fratricide and permitted the cover-up. It is not
believable that a man known for his propensity to micromanage would not
want to know what happened to his most high-profile soldier. I informed
the committee that Pat received a personal letter from Rumsfeld shortly
after he and his brother enlisted, commending him for his commitment to
serve. Pat was obviously in Rumsfeld's consciousness."
During a recent 60 Minutes interview,
Katie Couric questioned Army Secretary Pete Geren over the alterations
of eyewitness accounts of Tillman's death used for his Silver Star
citation. She asked if he knew who manipulated the statements, and he
replied:
"Well, that's one of the questions that we will never completely
answer. But it certainly is one of the areas that
that raises questions. There are so many mistakes. So many things that
happened. If you add them all together, it certainly calls into
question the credibility of those who handled this. And raises the kind
of questions that Ms. Tillman raises. I don't blame her for that. And I
don't expect her ever to believe us. But there was no effort to
deceive. There were mistakes and grievous errors by the legions. And as
a result, we fell short of our duty to her as a mother of one of our
heroes."
Over at the IAVA blog,
Perry Jefferies takes issue with Sec. Geren's uncertainty, saying that
the process for awarding medals should clearly indicate who writes a
citation:
Only a certain amount of people handle the citation
for the Silver Star, one of our highest military awards. Each commander
signs a block on the document and there is a document called a
transmittal letter that accompanies it from office to office. Only
organizational will prevents the Army from prosecuting the criminal
that a) faked an official document and b) tried to leave a lower grade
enlisted Soldier to take the blame.
If indeed the medal was awarded under dishonest conditions, should it still stand? A letter to the Arizona Republic newspaper took this stance:
The awarding of the decoration was illegal, as
the incident obviously
didn't represent "gallantry in action against an armed enemy," as
required by the Army's own regulations. This award does a disservice
to all of our veterans who have legitimately earned this august award.
The Tillman family should return the award to the Army, which should
then rescind the award as unjustified and issued illegally.
Another reader then responded:
Yes, it may be true that this star represents "gallantry in action
against an armed enemy." What could be more gallant than a young man
giving up not only his career but his life? Pat Tillman gave up his life to serve in an illegal war that has ruined
our economy with the billions of dollars being wasted but, more
important, the loss of the respect of the rest of the world.
In the New York Times' look at Mary Tillman's new book, there's an interesting historical note of other athletes who've been killed in action.
Eddie Grant, the Giants’
third baseman, died in France in 1918. Christy Mathewson, the great
Giants pitcher, had his life shortened from a mustard-gas accident in
training near the end of World War I. And Nile Kinnick, the star
running back from Iowa, died in a training flight in 1943. But Pat
Tillman’s death was different because of the way he was used,
posthumously, blatantly.
You can read a Newsweek Q&A with Mary Tillman here.
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 30, 2008 10:28 AM
Is it possible that, when all is said and done, the war in Afghanistan will become a "forgotten war"? An article in yesterday's Philadelphia Inquirer
on U.S. soldiers killed in Afghanistan got me thinking about where that
war will end up in the history books--and I couldn't help but think of
the Korean War. My knowledge of that war comes primarily from my
father, an Air Force veteran who served during the conflict. Ever since
I could remember, whenever he talks about Korea he prefaces the
conversation lamenting the fact the Korean War receives much less
attention than WWII or Vietnam. Korea shows that even a modern war can
fade from collective memory.
It's clear that Iraq overshadows
Afghanistan in the public consciousness, but it seems as though over
the past few years the term "overshadows" has become somewhat of an
understatement. Here's the situation over there as told by the
Inquirer:
The U.S. military death toll will soon reach 500 in Afghanistan,
where the war has received less media attention than the conflict in
Iraq despite an increasingly violent insurgency, the resurgence of
al-Qaeda, and a growing commitment of troops...
...By the Pentagon's latest count, the armed forces have suffered 489
deaths so far. And still troops arrive: The number in Afghanistan
exceeds 34,000, with 7,500 additional men and women requested.
The U.S. troops are part of a 40-nation force expanded from 40,000
in fall 2006 to nearly 70,000 today. Last year was the deadliest since
2001, according to the United Nations, which reported 8,000 fatalities,
including 1,500 civilians.
As far back as 2004, Time Magazine published a cover story whose online component was titled: "Remember Afghanistan?" And then there was this New York Times 2005 editorial
titled: "Afghanistan's Forgotten War." Now, in 2008, we're still
wondering if Afghanistan is forgotten. But, why? Is it simply because
of less media coverage? Is it because of Iraq? Is it because people
don't care, don't understand, or don't have enough energy to follow two
U.S. wars at the same time?
Whatever the reason, the violence
still continues. Yesterday came word that U.S. Marines recently
deployed to Afghanistan, launched a major operation attacking a
Taliban-held town in the violent Helmand region. According to the Associated Press, this was the furthest south U.S. forces had operated in years:
The goal is to stretch NATO's presence into an area where illegal opium
poppy fields are plentiful and the Taliban is strong. British troops
man a small base on Garmser's northern edge but insurgents rule the
countryside south of the outpost all the way to the Pakistan border.
Also yesterday, Canada's Globe and Mail Newspaper published an opinion piece
by Brigadier General Dennis Tabbernor, deputy commanding general,
Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan. The paper posed the
question: "Is Afghanistan Worth It?," and he answered in part:
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 29, 2008 10:41 AM
More than half a century after the GI Bill
was first enacted to help send vets to college, politicians and
advocates are touting a new proposed bill to expand these benefits. The
Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act was introduced by a
number of Republicans and Democrats in both the House and Senate. Among
them is Virginia Senator (and Vietnam vet) Jim Webb whose posted this
statement on his Website:
The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act is designed to offer
the brave men and women who have served honorably since September 11,
2001 a level of educational benefits on par with those provided to
veterans of the World War II era.
In a profile of numerous veterans
struggling to capitalize on education opportunities after returning
home from war, the Washington Post helps to break down where the
current GI Bill stands now. The problem is that these benefits can no
longer fully fund higher education, as they once did for earlier
generations of veterans.
Many people enlist to earn money for college, and almost everyone signs
up for the education benefits -- which, in the case of the main GI
Bill, requires a service member to pay about $1,200 into the plan-- but
not everyone takes advantage of it. And that buy-in is not returned
even if the benefits are unused.
About 70 percent use at least some part of it, said Keith Wilson,
director of the education service, but the VA does not track how many
earn degrees.
An independent study found that just over half use some part of the
benefits, said Ray Kelley of AMVETS, a veterans support group, and only
8 percent use all. "Congress is realizing we're not giving them the
benefits we say we're giving them," Kelley said. "They only have 36
months from the time they start using it to the time they finish." That
means going to school full time, year-round.
Earlier this month NPR's Morning Edition broke down more of the specifics of the proposed bill.
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 25, 2008 03:03 PM
The Air Force Times reported today
that the bankruptcy of a civilian airline under contract to provide
flights for the military is delaying homecoming for some troops. ATA
shut down the day after filing for bankruptcy on April 2--the airline's
second bankruptcy in nearly three years. An army spokesman told the AF
Times that troops could expect delays of two to six days for the next
several weeks.
ATA was part of the FedEx Teaming Arrangement, a
group of airlines contracted by the military to transport troops and
their families overseas. The Indianapolis Star reported on the circumstances of the local air carrier's demise:
Hampered by unprofitable routes, ATA lost $75 million last year and was
in talks with five potential suitors when FedEx, with apparently little
explanation, decided to cut off the Indianapolis carrier's only money
maker: military charters...Its roots were passenger charters that led the carrier, earlier known
as American Trans Air, to branch out into troop charters. ATA operates
a $340 million-a-year airborne bus line ferrying troops and their
families to and from places where the U.S. military stations troops
worldwide.
Back on the home front, military families awaiting the return of their stranded loved ones are speaking out. The Hartford Courant has the story of one father who reached out to his old college roommate, Miramax Films co-founder Harvey Weinstein, for help:
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 23, 2008 09:57 AM
A trial in U.S. District Court is now underway as a group of veterans
challenge the Department of Veterans Affairs over the lack of care
afforded to returning troops. The case, Veterans for Common Sense v. Peake, is said by the plaintiffs' attorney to be the first of its kind. Yesterday a suicide expert testified on behalf of the plaintiffs that veterans are killing themselves at three to seven times the rate of the general population. The American Lawyer has a good summary of what the case is all about:
The suit claims that many disabled combat veterans are in dire need of
counseling and other services they are not currently receiving from the
U.S. government. Erspamer [the plaintiff's counsel] estimates that 120 veterans who served in
Iraq or Afghanistan commit suicide each week. The veterans' groups are
not seeking monetary damages but want reform of a health care system in
which they allege a huge backlog of cases prevents veterans from
receiving timely care.
The
San Francisco Chronicle outlined what suicide expert Ronald Maris sees
as a complete lack of readiness within the VA to deal with the great
number of veterans suicides:
A majority of the VA's
counselors, doctors, social workers and psychologists "don't have the
tools and the information that they need to intervene effectively with
suicidal vets," said Maris, a former president of the American
Association of Suicidology who has been a consultant to the Army on
suicide prevention.
He was particularly critical of the VA's top health care
administrator, William Feeley, who said in a pretrial deposition April
9 that the agency has no systematic national plan for suicide
prevention. Feeley also said he was unaware of any methods of tracking
veterans at risk of suicide and that suicide rates "are not a metric we
are measuring."
The impact of the trial is being felt in Washington, D.C. where two U.S. senators are now calling for the resignation
of the VA's chief mental health official, Dr. Ira Katz. Senator Patty
Murray (D-Wash.) is citing evidence learned in the trial showing that
the VA withheld information on the rising number of veterans suicides.
As her statement reads:
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 17, 2008 01:22 PM
A new comprehensive report
by the RAND Corporation has concluded that 300,000 veterans of Iraq and
Afghanistan suffer from depression or PTSD--and only about half have
sought out treatment, according to the Associated Press.
The report surveyed 1,965 vets in what the AP calls the first large
scale private study of its kind. The numbers show that 18.5 percent of
all Iraq and Afghanistan vets suffer from these these symptoms.
According to RAND, possible solutions to temper these problems may be
available:
Among our recommendations is that effective treatments documented in the scientific literature — evidence-based care
— are available for PTSD and major depression. Delivery of such care to
all veterans with PTSD or major depression would pay for itself within
two years, or even save money, by improving productivity and reducing
medical and mortality costs. Such care may also be a cost-effective way
to retain a ready and healthy military force for the future. However,
to ensure that this care is delivered requires system-level changes
across the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs,
and the U.S. health care system.
The AP offered up more conclusions drawn from the study, including why vets are not seeking care:
They gave various reasons for not getting help, including that they
worried about the side effects of medication; believe family and
friends could help them with the problem, or that they feared seeking
care might damage their careers.
The
report also noted who is most susceptible to depression and PTSD,
although, in the end, it is a vet's exposure to combat trauma that is
the greatest predictor:
Rates of PTSD and major depression were highest among Army soldiers and
Marines, and among service members who were no longer on active duty
(people in the reserves and those who had been discharged or retired
from the military). Women, Hispanics and enlisted personnel all were
more likely to report symptoms of PTSD and major depressions.
Last November the Pentagon opened the Defense
Center of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain
Injury in an effort to bring together education, treatment, and
research. From the Department of Defense:
The center also will set standards and
assess, survey and validate DoD programs, and decide, in part, how
resources are directed... Center officials are
reviewing hundreds of research project proposals that hope to claim a
piece of the $300 million set aside by Congress last year for brain
injury research. The office also will work with the military services
to see which of the many programs funded with another $600 million from
Congress are working and how to direct those funds to programs most
beneficial to servicemembers and families.
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 9, 2008 10:09 AM
Since the start of the Iraq war, the importance and viability of
military blogs has stirred up tremendous debate. There have been
issues of military censorship, journalistic viability, and ethical
dilemmas. Recently, talk of where (and how) military blogs fit into
the war's narrative has seemed to intensify to some degree. Here's a
look at what's happening:
The Columbia Journalism Review published a lengthy article in its last issue profiling Bill Roggio, a U.S.-based military blogger who's set up his own media operation
aimed at reporting on terrorism and "small wars" beyond what the
mainstream media can do. Before the piece gets to Roggio, the intro
takes a look at the gap military blogs aim to fill:
When the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, among the
seven-hundred-odd journalists who embedded with combat units were few
who were familiar with the military in any intimate way. To many
critics, especially those with military experience, this revealed
itself in the press’s coverage of the war, which they felt often missed
the mark when it came to explaining the hows and the whys of the fight,
as well as the mundane realities of military life and culture.
Army veteran Roggio first started blogging about the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan to put the events in perspective for his family. But, as
CJR notes, a transformation took place that's changed the way Roggio
operates—and underscores the significance these blogs can have:
It was during the second battle for Fallujah in November 2004,
however, that he began to focus his effort. He had been posting
detailed battle maps of Iraq’s Anbar province on his site, showing
where Marine and Army units were meeting the stiffest resistance from
insurgent groups who harassed them with roadside bombs and the
occasional ambush. In the spring of 2005, a new group of readers began logging on to
Roggio’s site. The Marines in Anbar province were embroiled in a deadly
game of cat-and-mouse, and looking for any tactical advantage they
could find. Officers with the Regimental Combat Team 2 discovered
Roggio’s site and began using it as an information source, calling his
site the “Command Chronology of Western Iraq.”
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 2, 2008 11:10 AM
The Washington Post reports today
on the decrease in readiness among U.S. ground combat forces. Not only
are the soldiers and Marines worn down by continuous deployments, but
tactically there are few available forces to respond other potential
conflicts throughout the world. According to the Post, Army Vice Chief
of Staff Gen. Richard Cody told the Senate Armed Services Committee:
"When the five-brigade surge went in...that took all the stroke out of the shock absorbers for the United States Army."
Currently,
Army soldiers serve 15-month overseas deployments with 12 months at
home in between. Marines serve seven-month deployments separated by
another seven months. For the Marine Corps (a much smaller branch of
service than the Army) the fact that 3,200 Marines are now being sent to Afghanistan is considered by some to be severely degrading Marine assets.
"There has been little, if any, change of the stress or tempo for our
forces," [said Gen. Robert Magnus, assistant commandant of the Marine Corps], calling the current pace of operations
"unsustainable."
Magnus suggested that if more Marines are freed from Iraq they could
also go to Afghanistan. Marines "will move to the sound of the guns in
Afghanistan," he said. But he said it would be difficult to keep the
force split between the two countries because the Marine Corps has
limited resources to command a divided force and supply it
logistically.
The Marine Corps is "basically in two boats at the same time," he said.
The
Post further reported that efforts to increase the number of soldiers
and Marines will not translate into units able to provide operational
relief until 2011.
More
-
David Botti
|
Apr 2, 2008 10:36 AM
A reader recently pointed me to an incredibly detailed interactive map
indicating the hometowns of U.S. military casualties from Operations
Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. Based on information available from
the Department of Defense, the map's creator has allowed viewers to
filter the map by branch of service, military operation, sex, and age. Check it out here. It first appears zoomed in on the New York City area, but one can view anywhere in the country.
From the Website's mission statement:
In mid 2007 oobgolf.com launched an advanced golf course finder for our users. We recently made the decision
to use that same technology and development resources to map the hometowns of soldiers who have died in
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
This was not done as a political statement. We simply felt that this tool provided a unique way for Americans
to connect to these fallen soldiers in a new more personal way.
More
-
David Botti
|
Mar 11, 2008 01:03 PM
Thirty-seven years after John Kerry and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War
(VVAW) descended upon Washington, D.C. to protest against U.S.
atrocities in Vietnam, a new generation of veterans will do the same
later this week. The group Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) is
heading to the Capital as part of an event called Winter Soldier: Iraq
& Afghanistan, named after the similar VVAW event four decades
ago. As IVAW puts it:
The four-day event will bring together veterans from across the country
to testify about their experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan - and
present video and photographic evidence. In addition, there will be
panels of scholars, veterans, journalists, and other specialists to
give context to the testimony. These panels will cover everything from
the history of the GI resistance movement to the fight for veterans'
health benefits and support.
There
hasn't been much U.S. press coverage on the event, but the UK's Sunday
Times, using the headline of "Patriot Missiles," had a lengthy magazine story on the subject:
The veterans are not against the military and seek not to indict it – instead
they seek to shine a light on the bigger picture: that the Abu Ghraib prison
regime and the Haditha massacre of innocent Iraqis are not isolated
incidents perpetrated by “bad seeds” as the military suggests, but evidence
of an endemic problem. They will say they were tasked to do terrible things
and point the finger up the chain of command, which ignores, diminishes or
covers up routine abuse and atrocities.
Other
veterans, and vet bloggers, aren't thrilled with this event. A group
called "Stop the Slander," described as a "coalition of concerned
veterans, family members, and friends," has even published a guide for reporter's covering IVAW.
The guide warns journalists that claims made by IVAW may be untrue.
The guide even provides an acronym to follow of questions to ask:
D: Date(s) – When did the incident occur?
U: Unit(s) – What military units were involved?
P: Personnel – What are the names of the participants and witnesses?
E: Event(s) – What exactly happened exactly where?
S:
Signature(s) – Was this reported at the time or later and were reports,
affidavits or depositions signed, or will they now be signed?
Veterans For Freedom blogger, Mark Seavey, took his own critical look at the IVAW's preparations
for the Winter Soldier event, but in the end wrote that both sides of
the debate should be heard -- without unnecessary contest or debate:
I think it speaks well of IVAW that they expect all testimony to be
true and verifiable. And there will plenty of eyes there to ensure
that. Hopefully we can all say our piece, discuss our views and then
go home with no violence on anyone’s part.
The term "Winter Soldier" is derived from Thomas Paine's passage
intended to motivate George Washington's troops suffering at Valley
Forge:
“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and
sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his
country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man
and woman.”
This
is generating a huge amount of debate within the vocal veterans
community. What's interesting to note is that perhaps the only
demographic who can debate IVAW, without being called-out on their lack
of service, is other veterans. The issues goes above someone's service
record, and shows how the fabled, and perhaps cliched, military bond
can only go so far in such times of controversy. Or, is it still
there, above all the ruckus? We'll soon find out.
More
-
David Botti
|
Mar 10, 2008 12:17 PM
In the realm of military awards, history was recently made when the military announced a 19-year-old soldier would become only the second woman since WWII to receive the Silver Star . Monica Lin Brown , an Army medic who served in Afghanistan, will be...
More
-
David Botti
|
Feb 26, 2008 11:25 AM
Over at the IntelDump last Friday,
Phil Carter was urged by his readers to examine an anecdote Barack
Obama gave in the Democratic presidential debate the day before. In the
military community Obama's recollection of his conversation with an
Army captain about the use of captured weapons prompted curiosity,
skepticism, and disbelief. As Obama said:
I heard from a Army captain, who was the head of a rifle platoon,
supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to
Afghanistan with 24, because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to
Iraq. And as a consequence, they didn't have enough ammunition; they
didn't have enough humvees.
They were actually capturing Taliban weapons because it was easier
to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by
our current commander in chief. Now that's a consequence of bad
judgment, and you know, the question is on the critical issues that we
face right now who's going to show the judgment to lead.
What's
got everyone talking is the idea that U.S. troops are so ill-equipped
that they are actually using the enemy's weapons to turn around and
fight the same enemy. My rifle company landed in Iraq in 2003 with
hardly any M240G machine gun ammo. The rumor was additional ammo was
graciously provided to the machine gunners by some Navy SEAL's. But
that was when the war first started. How about now?
Carter provided a few follow-ups which sought to fact-check Obama's comments. Here's what he found out through a friend:
I talked this morning with two friends who led rifle platoons in
Afghanistan. Both confirmed to me that they did, at times, use captured
or found weapons or ammunition. One relayed the story of mounting a
Soviet 12.7mm heavy machine gun (the equivalent of a U.S. .50 caliber
machine gun) on his HMMWV because it was too difficult to get the spare
parts needed to fix their G.I. (government issue) .50 cal. Another told
me his platoon carried AKs anytime they patrolled with their Afghan
counterparts, and that it was always much easier to get 7.62mm ammo for
the AKs than to go through the U.S. bureaucracy for ammunition
requisition.
Then there was ABC News National Correspondent Jake Tapper who went straight to the Obama campaign staff seeking an interview with the Army soldier Obama referenced. The story checks out; but Tapper saw fit to elaborate:
They also didn't have the humvees they were supposed to have both
before deployment and once they were in Afghanistan, the Captain says.
"We should have had 4 up-armored humvees," he said. "We were
supposed to. But at most we had three operable humvees, and it was
usually just two."
So what did they do? "To get the rest of the platoon to the fight," he says, "we would use Toyota Hilux pickup trucks or unarmored flatbed humvees." Sometimes with sandbags, sometimes without.
Carter also pointed out this post on the National Review Online
which took issue with the idea that captains were commanding rifle
platoons; a job normally reserved for lieutenants. At one point I had a
captain commanding my rifle platoon; so, that takes care of that,
fact-check. Particularly in the Marine Corps Reserves, where officers
must complete a period of active duty service before switching to
reserve duty, you find hardly any Lieutenants. The result is that
higher ranks are sometimes taking up lower billeted job positions.
Finally, over the weekend, the Associated Press fact-checked
Obama's story. The article also mentioned that Sen. John Warner,
ranking Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is
seeking information about the anonymous captain and his platoon. Warner
is looking to speak about the situation at the next committee meeting.
More
-
David Botti
|
Feb 5, 2008 11:57 AM
President Bush's release of his $3 trillion budget yesterday included a number of veterans' and military-related provisions. Here's a few of particular interest:
Pay Increase:
For 2009 the new budget seeks a 3.4 percent pay raise for current active duty service members. As the Military Times reports
this is the minimum raise allowed under federal law--and some advocates
are displeased with the projected numbers. Here's the paper's rundown
of sample salaries for the troops in 2009:
- An E-4 with more than three years of service now earns $1,949.10
per month; that would rise to $2,015.40 per month on Jan. 1 under the
Pentagon plan.
- An E-7 with more than 10 years of service now
earns $3,263.10 per month; a 3.4 percent raise would turn that into
$3,374.10 per month.
- An O-3 with more than six years of service
now earns $4,763.10 per month; that officer would earn $4,925.10 per
month with a 3.4 percent pay increase.
A Hospital
Veterans in the Orlando, FL area are
speaking out against what they perceive as the proposed budget's lack
of funds for a local VA hospital. As the Orlando Sentinel reports:
President Bush put $120 million in his proposed budget Monday for the
long-awaited Orlando VA hospital, but area veterans said they were
disappointed that more of the nearly $600 million needed will not come
right away. Michael Kussman, undersecretary of health at the Department of Veterans
Affairs, said $120 million is all the agency needs this year to begin
work on the facility...But area veterans are not so trusting after waiting years for a
hospital. Orlando is the largest metropolitan area in the country
without a VA hospital, forcing veterans to drive to Tampa or
Gainesville for care.
"What a disappointment," said retired Air Force Col. Joseph Kittinger,
a decorated veteran. "All of the politicians give lip service to the
veterans, but that is all it is, lip service." He added, though, that
the $120 million "is a start and better than nothing."
Long-term
The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America took a long-term look at where it sees facets of the budget allocated for veterans ultimately ending up.
For veterans, the 2009 budget provides $47 billion in funding for
veterans’ health care, benefits, and other services. This reflects a
modest increase over 2008 levels. However, starting in 2010, the budget predicts sudden (and unrealistic) drops in costs for veterans’ care.
The administration’s argument is that the deaths of earlier generations
of veterans will reduce expenses, but this line of reasoning fails to
account for the dramatic increase in the cost of caring for Iraq and
Afghanistan veterans. This will push future budget expenditures up, not
down. Like the budget as a whole, the long-term accounting in the VA
budget is improbable.
Defense Budget
For the defense budget itself, USA Today provides a good summary of highlights covering where the money is intended to go:
•Increasing the size of the Army and Marine
Corps: $20.5 billion, an increase of $8.7 billion or 73%, compared with
2008. This year, the Army would grow to 532,000 soldiers, and the
Marine Corps would increase its ranks to 194,000. By 2012, the plan
would be complete, with the Army topping out at 547,000 soldiers, while
there would be 202,000 members of the Marine Corps.
•Aircraft and weapons: $45.6 billion, a $4.9
billion increase, that would include purchases of fighter planes such
as the F-22A Raptor and F/A-18 Hornet and unmanned aircraft like the
Predator and Reaper.
•Cyberspace security: The budget shows at least
$65 million for research and development projects tied to computer
security. Some elements of the effort are secret, and funding levels
are not disclosed.
•Pay and health care: $149 billion to increase salaries and fund health care. Military salaries would increase by 3.4%.
For an overall political view of how things are shaking out, the Associated Press provides this quick piece on reactions to the budget.
More
-
David Botti
|
Feb 1, 2008 04:18 PM
The current series in the New York Times
on veterans who've committed murder has spurred tremendous debate over
the way vets are portrayed by the media. To understand origins of the
prevailing portrayals of our current veterans, it's a good idea to take
a step back and view the issue in a historical perspective.
Jerry
Lembcke is a Vietnam veteran and professor of sociology at Holly Cross
college in Worcester, Massachusetts. Lembcke's book "The Spitting
Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam," looked in part at how
the news media and pop-culture cultivated narrow portrayals of Vietnam
vets. He has also written op-eds for the Boston Globe, Newsday, and the
San Francisco Chronicle among others. In 1968 Lembcke was drafted into
the Army, serving as chaplain's assistant before returning home and
joining the anti-war movement.
I talked to Lembcke about how
the Vietnam-era vets experience impacts that of those men and women
coming home from war today -- and how he thinks the media is handling
its coverage of veterans and issues associated with them.
SOLDIER'S
HOME: You've written that a veteran's behavior can be influenced more
from how past vets were portrayed in pop-culture, as opposed to
personal experiences he/she might have had. How does this
happen?
LEMBCKE: The post-Vietnam popular culture
representations of veterans was so powerful and so long lasting, and it
so overwhelmed the war itself in popular culture, that as people began
to come home during the Gulf War in the 1990’s, and present these same
symptoms as Vietnam veterans coming back, I thought there’s a
connection here. I think I used the phrase “learned experience,” and it
occurred to me that this was a generation of veterans who’d grown up
immersed in this popular culture of what it looks like to be a war
veteran coming home.
This was very different than the culture
Vietnam vets grew up in. Looking at representations of WWII veterans
for example, which was not nearly as powerful in film for example. We
got more war films about WWII, but not so many films about veterans
coming home.
What is being portrayed in these kinds of movies that can influence veterans?
More
-
David Botti
|
Jan 31, 2008 12:18 PM
Yesterday we learned from the Washington Post
of the record-breaking number of Army suicides during 2007. This is the
latest edition of veteran suicide news that's made national
headlines--further evidence that this is one aspect of the homecoming
experience that isn't getting any better despite all the attention.The
latest figures as reported by the Post:
- In 2007, suicides among active-duty soldiers reached their highest point since the Army began keeping records in 1980.
- 121 soldiers committed suicide in 2007, a 20 percent increase over 2006.
- Attempted suicides or self-inflicted injuries rose sixfold since
the Iraq war began: there were 350 cases in 2002 compared to 2,100 in
2007.
- Historically, suicide rates within the military decreases during wartime; the current trend is the opposite of that.
- In 2001 the suicide rate was 9.8 per 100,000 active-duty soldiers--in 2006 the rate jumped to 17.5 per 100,000.
- In 2007 twice as many soldiers committed suicide in the U.S. as they did in Iraq or Afghanistan.
The Post provides this sober passage about a young Army reservist currently hospitalized after her suicide attempt:
On Monday night, as President Bush
delivered his State of the Union address and asked Congress to "improve
the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives
of hope and promise and dignity," Whiteside was dozing off from the
effects of her drug overdose.
Taking a look at the issue of veterans suicides it's somewhat alarming to read this USA Today article from 2003.
The language, the sense of urgency, the utter surprise in statistical
findings can make one wonder if five years from now we'll still be
reading the same type of articles--waiting for things to get better.
The lead paragraph from the article could easily be substituted for a
story about the current findings:
Alarmed by the number of suicides among soldiers in Iraq, the Army has
asked a team of doctors to determine whether the stress of combat and
long deployments is contributing to the deaths.
Everyone knows it's an issue. But, what can actually be done? Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org has this to say via the Huffington Post:
One very simple idea that would have helped relieve the mental burden
of our troops (short of finding a way out of Iraq), and help them get
the care that they need, is to give them substantial time off between
deployments. Spend two years in Iraq, spend two years at home. And, on
the homefront, aggressively test, treat, and monitor troops for mental
injuries...
...Even without dwell time, and a much deserved rest for our forces, we
have got to be more diligent about mandatory and exhaustive screening
of returning troops, and providing adequate care and monitoring.
The Washington Post itself provides a summary of online reader comments for the article, and highlights particular entries. Here's an excerpt:
Our
Readers Who Comment for the most part commend The Post and
reporter Dana Priest for continuing to report on what happens to
mentally and physically wounded soldiers returning from Iraq. They
express sympathy for the individual around whom this story is built,
call for a change in political leadership, improved patient car...Some
contend that such reporting aids the enemy and question the
patriotism of the journalist and her news organization. And, as
sometimes happens, commenters take the opportunity to issue boilerplate
condemnations of the Iraq War, some of which are anti-Semitic.
With
almost regular headline-making reports of the suicide issues it can
sometimes get confusing where things stand. Here are some key stories
to revisit from 2007:
OCTOBER 30 -- A study by the American Journal of Public Health
reports findings that younger veterans are more prone to suicide.
This is the opposite of suicide trends among the general public.
NOVEMBER 13 -- CBS News concludes a five-month investigation into the "hidden epidemic" of military suicides.
DECEMBER 12 -- The House Veterans Affairs Committee holds a hearing on how to stop veterans suicides.
More