The Promise...

Promise to Veterans?
It’s the great American myth; an urban legend of epic proportions. But, there was no promise made, so there’s nothing to keep. Now, it’s time for a new, in-your-face attitude: WE ARE U.S. MILITARY VETERANS – YOU OWE US!

By

Larry Scott

www.vawatchdog.org

x

I’ve searched high and low for a promise made to veterans. I can’t find it. Surely, it must exist. From George Washington to George Bush, we have reams of flowery rhetoric praising the good deeds of those who have served in the U.S. military. But, where is the promise? Washington said the nation owes veterans a “debt of honor.” Bush often speaks of “honor,” “support” and “compassion” in speeches about veterans. In between, Abraham Lincoln said our mission is “…to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and orphan…” All of this sounds good, but it’s not a promise. The elusive promise to veterans has been used by politicians since the earliest days of our republic to raise armies to fight wars and to pass legislation to care for veterans when they come home from those wars. But, what actually was promised?It’s a simple fact: that nothing was promised to veterans. There was no promise made, so there’s nothing to keep and nothing to break. It’s the great American myth; an urban legend of epic proportions.

x

This myth is promulgated by politicians who want us to think they are keeping a promise to veterans or want us to think some other politician isn’t keeping a promise. A quick Google search will show thousands of entries about a promise to veterans. Many are from those claiming to keep the promise. Others are from those who loudly declare the promise is not being kept. But, nowhere will you find exactly what this promise might be. So, why do we believe there’s a promise to veterans? Because we want to believe it. We want to believe that our country will care and provide for those who have given years of their lives to military service. We desperately want to believe that our country will care for those who return from the fields of battle with physical and emotional wounds. Anything else would not fit the standards we have set for ourselves as Americans.

x

However, the truth is something different. Veterans of the Civil War have left us volumes of their post-war battles with the Commissioner of Pensions who parceled out medical care and disability compensation. One document tells of a veteran’s struggle with the Commissioner to get a wooden leg to replace the real leg he’d lost in combat. After years of denials, he carved the leg himself. Military retirees of the World War II era were under the assumption they would have free, life-time health care at military hospitals. Those hospitals were closed. And now, the retirees find themselves in a HMO. Vietnam veterans fought for years to get benefits for exposure to Agent Orange. Now, many of them who served in the “Blue Water Navy” find their adversary is the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) who is in Federal Court trying to deny them benefits.Our new veterans coming home from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan find themselves faced with military and VA health care systems that are underfunded, overcrowded and incapable of caring for their needs.All of these veterans thought there was a promise and found out otherwise.

x

Veterans have been accepting the constantly-changing hodge-podge of laws and regulations that, sometimes, provide disability compensation and care. And, “sometimes” is the operative word. A check of federal regulations covering veterans’ benefits shows an abundant use of the phrase “the Secretary may.” The “Secretary” is the Secretary of Veterans’ Affairs who “may” or may NOT provide the benefit listed in the specific regulation. But, could there be a promise to veterans buried somewhere in mountains of laws or hidden deep in the recesses of the Federal Code?

x

The Herculean effort to see if such a promise existed was undertaken by David F. Burelli, a National Defense Specialist for the Congressional Research Service. Burelli’s research paper is titled Military Health Care: The Issue of “Promised” Benefits. The 23-page paper makes this determination: “Many…military retirees…state that they were promised ‘free health care for life at military facilities’ as part of their ‘contractual agreement’ when they entered the armed forces. Efforts to locate authoritative documentation of such promises have not been successful. Congressional report language and recent court decisions have rejected retiree claims [of] a right or entitlement.” While Burelli’s paper deals with military retirees, it can be extrapolated to include non-retiree veterans, as well.

Others, realizing Burelli’s findings to be accurate, have tried to reframe the language of a promise to veterans. Dave Autry of the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) likes to use the concept of a “moral obligation” to veterans. That high-minded verbiage has been used thousands of times by politicians, authors and veterans’ advocates. But, it still doesn’t equate to a promise. And, it assumes that Congress, who supplies funding for veterans’ care and disability compensation, understands what is “moral” and has the fortitude to commit to an “obligation.” Those are two dangerous assumptions. But, this verbal posturing leaves us where we began; there is no promise to veterans.

The government can’t keep a promise that was never made. And, it’s not realistic to assume that they are breaking a promise they never made. Will there ever be a promise to veterans? A real promise that is codified? A document that positively states what veterans will receive for their service to country? Not unless we, as veterans, force the issue. No politician is brave enough to step forward and say, “We lied to you,” so it’s up to us. We must raise hell about the issue. I, for one, am tired of the hand-in-glove relationships our veterans’ service organizations (VSOs) have established with Congress and the VA. Every year the VSOs go to Capitol Hill and grovel for next year’s VA budget handout.

x

When the budget is passed and doesn’t meet their expectations, the VSOs politely thank the politicians for doing a good job and then politely urge them to do better. Whatever happened to in-your-face, do-it-or-else political lobbying? We pay our VSO dues so they can represent us on Capitol Hill. They are currently failing in their mission. They allow politicians to ramble on about a promise to veterans and never ask the questions: What promise is that, politician? The one you never keep? And, the politicians keep playing us for fools. As long as veterans buy into the myth of a promise, the politicians win. We, as veterans will continue to scrap and fight for our justly-deserved benefits.
x
It is time that we adopt a new attitude. It’s time to stop accepting piecemeal legislation that gives a few budget dollars to slap a Band-Aid on a chronically-underfunded VA health care and benefits system. It’s time we stop accepting the nonsense of politicians who openly view VA benefits as charity, to be handed out only to those who fit their warped definition of the deserving. We owe it to all of our Brother and Sister veterans. And, let’s be honest; we owe it to ourselves.

This is not the time to be humble. It’s time for the in-your-face type of confrontation that our VSOs are incapable of providing. We must take our elected representatives to task and demand that they stop talking about a promise and actually give us one. We must tell Congress what we want. We must tell the American people what we want and that we earned our benefits through our service. Most “civilians” live under the assumption that “the VA takes care of it” when it comes to veterans’ benefits. It’s time they were educated. It’s time to stop asking and start telling. No more “Yes sir” and “No ma’am” and “Thank you very much” for what little we get. If we don’t force this issue, we can only blame ourselves.

x

The next time my Senator or Representative holds a town hall meeting in my area I’ll be there asking about The Promise. I want them to tell me what The Promise is and where I can find it in writing. They won’t be able to do that. But, maybe, just maybe, they’ll listen as I tell them it’s time to make a real promise and it’s time to really keep it. And, I’ll be wearing the T-shirt with this slogan printed in large letters: WE ARE U.S. MILITARY VETERANS – YOU OWE US FOR YOUR FREEDOM!

x

www.VetSpeak.org

Some thoughts on PVS, PTSD & Combat Stress Injury

Still at War

~VetSpeak 2007~

You are happy when they come home, and you see them and hold them again. You think that they are safe because they are back home with you where you believe nothing can hurt them. This is an illusion.

In reality, too many are still at war. Too often, they won’t tell you about the war, or how hurt inside they are, from the things that they can’t reconcile in their own minds; the things that they did, and the things that they experienced. The things that keep coming back to haunt them, whether it be in dreams or in flashbacks. Things that drain one’s self esteem, stimulate one’s depression, repress one’s motivation, and ultimately; destroys one’s relationships. It has been thus since just after “The Greatest Generation” won their war. As a society, we just didn’t ever want to admit it.

The good news is, that it can be dealt with. However, the Veterans cannot do it alone. They need hands-on peer guidance, brought about thru a support network coalition of peers, programs, and non-political institutions and infrastructure (re Orange County Veterans Advisory Council Needs Assessment Survey, Orange County, Ca., 1974). However, just as importantly; they need comfort and validation while moving through the labyrinth of a society torn apart over the very war which stole their youth and their innocence (Still at War, Calif/Nev VVAW, 1976).

x

http://www.vetspeak.org/

Move-on.org: Betray Us Vs Patreaus

Betrayal is in the eyes of the beholder, or; context is everything…

By
Willie Hager

www.VetSpeak.org

xbetray 1: to lead astray 2: to deliver to an enemy by treachery 3: to fail and desert esp. in time of need...Merriam Websters Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition

The last time that I tread in these waters, there weren’t just ripples; there was, relatively speaking, a resultant tsunami of vindictive rhetoric (ABC'S SPIN ON 9/11 ). Therein lies the culturally and politically destructive nature of Political Correctness and Political Spin (see Don't Think of an Elephant, George Lakoff , ironically; an apparent move-on founder) and lock-step politics. My pen now, once again, says Engarde! to those enemies of Truth who wield the swords of political spin.

In this particular instance, the literary gauntlet is thrown at the feet of www.Move-on.org. Today, one of the major political foils now currently in service to the Democratic Party. Somewhere in the fog of the Blogosphere, Move-on.org has transformed itself from a pioneer grassroots electronic Community Meeting Hall and soap-box for Truth, as seen through the eyes of the Beholders of those Truths. Beholders who before the advent of the Blogosphere and the creation of groups such as Move-on and Alter-net, had seemingly very little input into the public debate on issues that directly effected their day to day lives.

Beholders of Truth who made Move-on a cyber-media giant. Before groups like Move-on, there was no voice for the unwashed masses. Sadly, the Move-on of today's political content is controlled by the mainstream media's and party political operatives' choice of issues; not the Grassroots'. And, even more sadly, is now directly in the hands (pockets) of the Democratic Party, and no longer in the service of those unheard and disenfranchised voices of the politically downtrodden; The Grassroots. Move-on had originally created a cyber-port into which anyone with something to say could guide their cyber-sled, and be heard when they got there. A cyber-port that developed the ability to seriously impact social and political thought at the grassroots level…in my mind; the most important political base of all. This transformation was much like "mild man and reporter, Clark Kent" stepping into the phone booth and then bursting forth from it as Superman, an ever vigilant threat to evil doers of all stripes.

Move-on’s first major political impact came about when they focused their agenda on support of Cindy Sheehan’s emotionally powerful message, back when she was encamped out on Bush's doorstep in Crawfordville, Texas (see windbender.livejournal.com). For Move-on, she was an immediate Blogosphere “hit generator”. One that demonstrated that the anti-Iraq and anti-Bush True Believers and the anti-war types out there had finally found some traction, with Cindy as their poster person. This was a successful tactic, and it sent Move-on's hit counters spinning out of control! Thier cyber-ratings and political influence soared in geometric proportions, much to the thanks of the Cindy Sheehan spirited campaign for peace, as did Democratic Party Grassroots support. And then, just as suddenly, driven by Democratic Party dwindling supporter donations due to internal divisiveness on party direction with regards to the Iraq war, and in face of the up-coming Presidential elections in '08; unscrupulous Democratic Party operatives eased Cindy off the platform, and off the agenda. Move-on chilled it's jets on Cindy as a result of this in-house Democratic Party power struggle with Cindy and those who marched at her side. The one that ended up with very public "Resignation" by Cindy of her anti-war leadership role. They simply dumped her over the side, and sailed off into the sunset, hand in pocket.

x

This Party loyalty put Move-on in tight cahoots with the Democratic Party power brokers who, ultimately, through major Democratic Party contributions and techno-cyber corporate funding; politically co-opted Move-on’s site, took control of their agenda and used Cindy’s commitment and resultant political rage to further their own agenda, as well. So much for the grassroots. To my mind, as one of those grassroots voices; this was a major sell-out of principle.

x

Together, shrouded in that fog of the blogosphere, they became a powerful alliance, with Cindy Sheehan as the unifying standard bearer (see windbender.livejournal.com). Her courageous actions were the earliest attempts by anybody to foster a cohesive anti-war strategy regarding Iraq, and to bring cohesion to a badly fragmented since the '80s (see Cracker Swamp Manifesto) Democratic Party base. Today, however, despite these major successes; Move-on.org and the Democratic Party are uneasy with the company of the likes of Cindy Sheehan and her supporters, and, for the most part, consider them as loose cannons. Move-on.org is no longer a premier soap-box for the unwashed masses. It is now a powerful political foil employed for the most part by the Democratic Party to further it’s political agenda, leading up to the ’08 Presidential election. Superman has managed to sully the bright red cape...and all that it stood for, with smudges of political and economic opportunism.

x

The Democratic Party is now using Move-on.org in their public personal attacks on General Patreaus in their efforts to undermine his credibility with the American people regarding his character. They present no documentable facts that I am aware of, nor do they provide any viable alternatives to counter his arguments. Instead, they offer 527 funded, unfounded public insults that they are hoping will take America’s objective and pragmatic eye’s and ears away from the conclusions of Patreaus's report to Congress and the American people. A job for which he was Presidentially commissioned, and Congressionally approved for by The People's elected Representatives and Senators, to research and report back to Congress and the nation, regarding his assessment of the current situation on the ground, in Iraq. Move-on, in paid for major newspaper ads, labeled him as "General Betray Us", in spite of his well documented history of Honorable Service to America, and their lack of hard evidence to the contrary, before he uttered the first word to Congress and the American People.

x

Just prior to the date of the presentation of the report to Congress and the American People; Move-on paid for and enacted a character assassination campaign of the General. This campaign was strategically calculated to kick-off just prior to the General's presentation of the report for the specific purpose of literally "killing the messenger", in a very insidious attempt to re-frame the argument for the eyes and ears of the American people from the assigned results of the report, to one of the credibility and allegiance of the of the General to America, and our Constitutionally legitimate form of government; thereby seriously underarming confidence and belief in the General's findings in the field. This report was his assigned duty, as a high ranking military officer with vast command experience. It is beyond rational comprehension that anyone could question the man's loyalty and dedication to service and country, without even having heard what he had to say.

x

As a Combat Veteran of Vietnam, as well as a past Regional Coordinator (1972-1974) of Vietnam Veterans Against The War, I am insulted by this blatant, politically motivated disrespect of an American fighting man, despite his political party affiliation…whatever happened to “Honor the warrior, not the war…”? But, that’s what political spin-miesters do; cloud up the Truth and attempt to re-frame the argument (Lakoff/Don't Think of an Elephant) with this kind of despicable rhetoric, rather than with factual reporting and empirical documentation of their assertions that he lied in his report to Congress on behalf of the Bush administration. If I am wrong about all of this; please...show me your evidence, for mine and the American People's consideration, that this man betrayed his country, his service, or the American People's trust...and I will apologize, right here on these very pages, to you, and all who have read this, and take issue with it. But don't respond with rhetoric; bring facts to the table for debate.

x

In my humble opinion; the American Peoples' response to Move-on.org should be “Put up, or shut-up". Show me the facts, or some hard evidence of wrong doing and betrayal, otherwise; put a public apology to General Patreaus and the American People in the very same newspapers that you paid to print your libelous and politically inflammatory political rhetoric. You know; the one everybody's talking about; the one that your "organization" produced which portrys General Patreaus as General Betray Us, and accuses him of ‘cooking the books’ for the White House. Oh, yes; I also, unless proven wrong with empirical and pragmatic evidence, believe and will continue to believe that you owe the General a personal and public apology, as well...on all of the news networks, at prime time.

x

And, finally; I think that you also owe an apology to the American People for attempting to color and influence the American Peoples perspective on the Truth of this critical national issue. This report is too important to America’s future to be the subject of political machinations, from either side of the aisle, or from political operatives from either Party. Hello! It is our very future as a nation that is at stake, here, folks. We better examine the FACTS before we act, and given the fervor and dedication of the jihadists; we better get it right, before we act or speak as a nation, or allow others to speak for us, without regards for empirical and pragmatic Truth. if the report is factually wrong; demonstrate your evidence, don't assassinate the reporter.

x

Like the Swift Boat Veterans (Not So Swift Vets or NSSVs, in VetSpeak-ese), who coincidentally are still in business under the guise (see Cyber-camouflage) of Vets for Freedom, fronted by an Iraq Veteran named Wade Zirkle; Move-on.org believes that if they say something loud enough and often enough, it will become truth...facts be damned! These are the very same despicable tactics the Republican Party and the NSSVs used to undermine John Kerry’s campaign as a Presidential candidate, last time around. On either side of the vast political divide between "Conservative" and "Liberal"; "Swiftboating" (a term in popular use these days for smear campaign politics by 527s) is "Swiftboating"; whether from the left or the right, and should be denounced as such, by all, regardless of political party affiliation.

x

The NSSVs did this through character assassination and lies regarding Kerry’s military record in Vietnam, and his stand as an anti-war Veteran. This last as a result of his association with Vietnam Veterans Against The War (VVAW), which he, like thousands of other Veterans joined upon his return from a combat tour in-country, Vietnam. That and his speaking out against the Vietnam war before Congress, as a spokesperson for VVAW. This in spite of having Honorably served combat tour in-country, for which he was highly decorated for his actions as a Swift Boat Commander. These were illegal campaign tactics, for which the NSSVs, as a 527 political organization, have since been heavily fined (Swiftie campaign fine). If these tactics were illegal for the NSSVs and the Republican operatives then; they should now be deemed illegal for Move-on.org and the Democrats' operatives involved in the Patreus smear, and they should be prosecuted prosecuted to the fullest extent Constitutional law.

x

The moral of the story; no one is safe from the minions of Political Correctness, unless they learn to think for themselves...Truth is not about content, it is about context.

www.VetSpeak.org

Honor The Warrior, Not The War

By

Jan Allan Rhuman

j.allan.rhuman@camoves.com

From the Editor, www.vetspeak.org: In response to a posting to the editor@pomeradonews.com, my friend Jan Rhuman wrote the following. He has asked me to post his response on our pages as well. WH

Dear Sir/Madame,
I am respectfully submitting the letter below in response to Mr. Robinsons’ letter regarding “Those who oppose Bush, oppose the troops” of Sept. 20. I am aware that it is 485 words, almost twice your preferred limit, but feel that the topic of “Free Speech” in our public discourse is, at this point in time, of critical importance to all Americans. Edit as I did time and again this was as short and concise as I could be. I hope that you find it worthy of publication. Thank you.
Sincerely, JAR:

I’m compelled to respond to Mr. Timothy D. Robinsons’ letter “Those who oppose Bush, oppose troops” in the September 20 issue.

In my opinion, nothing could be further from the truth. As a United States Marine who served two tours in South Viet Nam, back to back, on the ground in I Corps from Sept. 1966 to May 1968, I too am “someone with military experience”.

I’m reminded of the saying, by Voltaire, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” A sentiment I took to heart when I swore an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America. Fredrick Douglas said, “Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants.” Mr. Robinsons’ statement is an attempt to marginalize and question the patriotism of those with whom he disagrees and it leads me to question if he has ever read the United States Constitution that he swore to protect and defend and if he has, does he believe it to be an out dated and passé rambling of old fools?

I recall and take solace in what these Founding Fathers, of this great nation, said so long ago: “The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse” and “The truth is, all men having power ought to be mistrusted”, James Madison. “They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”, Benjamin Franklin. And a more contemporary patriot was right on target when he said, “It doesn’t take a hero to order men into battle. It takes a hero to be one of the men who goes into battle”, General Stormin’ Norman Schwarzkopf.

Questioning authority and speaking truth to power is as American as Apple Pie. I fully support our troops. It breaks my heart to watch the news night after night after night and to see the faces of those beautiful young men and women who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for this misguided and failed foreign policy blunder.

While George W. Bush may be the President and thus “The Commander in Chief” I do not support this President and I did not and do not support his illegal preemptive war in Iraq, in violation of all international laws. Quite frankly he’s arrogant, cocky and an embarrassment and unfortunately dangerously deadly for the world, for America and for all U. S. Military personal. I wonder if we, as a people, will we ever truly understand that freedom isn’t free and that “The Price of Liberty is eternal Vigilance”, Thomas Jefferson. I choose to “honor the warrior, not the war” and certainly, not this President.

http://www.vetspeak.org/

Some Personal Thoughts on VVAW's 40th Anniversary

By

Horace Coleman

Forty years ago this year, in 1967, a group of Vietnam veterans who’d met each other at anti war rallies, marches and demonstrations started a group. There were fewer of them then you have digits on two hands. They had ambitious goals.

They wanted to end the war. They wanted to dethrone the politicians and fire the bureaucrats who’d started and continued it. They wanted to change the mindset of the people who supported it, those who had fought in it and those who would be sent to fight it.

Getting the Veterans Administration to acknowledge and provide better treatment for people affected by Agent Orange, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, the usual physical ravages of war and improve the sub par treatment and conditions that existed in too many VA hospitals for too many veterans was also a priority.

Forty years, as human things go, is a long time. Four times as long as the Vietnam war lasted. Ten presidential terms. Many marriages, bands and companies don’t last that long. So, when VVAW celebrated it’s 40th anniversary more than a milestone was reached.

More time than a generation (a life time for some) has passed. Styles, economics, politics and different national concerns, priorities and needs--as well as new wars—have come about.

No longer is this “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” It never really was. That statement was just jingoistic and chauvinistic trash talk set to music.

Certainly there are brave and free people here. But an entire nation of them? We’re the land of the some what free where a minority of the world’s brave live. War wimps, not all of them politicians, run and put on the show that an audience of mostly armchair patriots watch.

It’s been that way since the Revolutionary War when there were Tories, people who were for who ever was in the area with force at the time while the basically indifferent were every where.

There VVAW was in Chicago—more wear and less hair for some, varying health ailments for others--people who hadn’t seen each other for years or never met but might have exchanged e-mail or phone calls. Those who were always up for a demonstration or a march and sometimes organized them. The spirit was as strong as ever and the flesh was still willing.

There were those who counseled vets about VA issues, psychological problems or helped an active duty service members (or a relative seeking help for them) with a problem. Those who visited and spoke at high schools, colleges and churches with students and congregations. Or provided literature, showed movies, took pictures, participated in debates, wrote articles or letters-to-the-editor, maintained and edited web sites. Those who organized and participated in stand downs. Those who did some or all of that—and more.

Founding members—like Jan Barry—and living legends like Al Hubbard and Bob McLane were present. Work horses like Jeff Machota were there. Willie Hager showed up with arm loads of a well put together tribute booklet that he and Diane Ford Wood edited and she and Gerald Nicosia funded. Many vets contributed remembrances and shout outs. W.D. Ehrhart, poet / writer, teacher, and anthologist read at a panel. VVAW stalwarts Marty Webster, Ann Hirschman and Ann Bailey were on a panel.

The booklet that VVAW put together for the 40th anniversary was crammed with historic photos, reproductions of newspaper stories, ads and flyers, prose pieces and poems by vets about key events, experiences and issues that happened during VVAW’s existence.

The last panel of the 40th anniversary celebration consisted of Iraq veterans, most of them members of IVAW, Iraq Veterans Against the War, was chaired by Aaron Hughes (president of Chicago’s IVAW chapter). Being last on the program was proper. It made everything else an opening act.

They’re veterans of another dubious war, more ignored than Nam vets because there’s no draft now. Civilian chicken hawks preen and squawk as loudly as politician chicken hawks about the need to protect America. Which doesn’t ask for their precious participation. These veterans are saddled with PTSD the Army too often attributes to “prior existing conditions” it can ignore, inadequate VA service, extended—and repeated—tours in the War Zone, new war related illnesses and diseases. And, a primarily indifferent public that thinks disapproval alone is enough to stop this stubborn stampede.

The Decider has decreed that 62 is `”young” so VVAW will be around for a while.

During the last visit I made to a high school, I said “I’m opposed to stupid wars.” That’s the essence of VVAW. That and changing the poor treatment given war veterans by the country they serve. A soldier can’t be the guard dog that bites any time fools with bad judgment say “Sic ‘em!”

VVAW still stands, “fighting for veterans, peace and justice,” honoring the warriors but not the bad wars. Those are tasks and a legacy I can live with. So can quite a few others.

www.VetSpeak.org