PDA

View Full Version : The Army is ordering injured troops to go to Iraq



tompritchett
03-12-2007, 02:30 PM
Here is the link to the full story:
http://www.salon.com/news/2007/03/11/fort_benning/index.html?source=rss

Somehow, I don't think that this story will be picked up by the major media conglomerates. It will be interesting to see if such reports start popping up in Army Times.

hanktrent
03-12-2007, 03:13 PM
But it's so cute and always gets a laugh when reenactors say, "All the surgeon cared about was if you had two teeth to bite a cartridge."

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

Trooper Graham
03-12-2007, 04:22 PM
But it's so cute and always gets a laugh when reenactors say, "All the surgeon cared about was if you had two teeth to bite a cartridge."

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

then there was this line you were told before you even got to see a doctor

"take two aspirins and drive on soldier" :rolleyes:

BigDuke634
03-13-2007, 11:07 AM
Heck, in the Corps, the most our corpsmen ever did was give us Motrin. Broken arm? " Here, have some Motrin"

sbl
03-13-2007, 11:25 AM
"major media conglomerates"

Thomas, that would mean FOX and ABC for starters. I stream Air America and I know about the story.

Brian Wolle
03-14-2007, 12:45 AM
I'm with you, but I think we're in the minority...

sbl
03-14-2007, 05:22 AM
Brian,

Maybe a minority on this forum. The people here are good, decent, thoughtful and patriotic, or else they wouldn't be CW/WBTS reenactors. They may be getting their news from FOX, the big three and their radio and newspaper equivelents. The 24 hour news format carries way too much fluff and scandel for me.

I'm from the Boston area and the two low-power radio affiliates that carried Air American and two other syndicated shows changed to a Spanish Language format.


Good thing there's still NPR with BBC news and the Globe. When I stream Air America on the computer in my basement and I feel like I'm in the resistance!

HighPrvt
03-14-2007, 09:58 AM
Army Times article would be titles "Shirkers sent back to Iraq".

I'd like to read something on this that came from a less biased source.

road_apple1861
03-14-2007, 10:46 AM
but can we believe this, I for one have never heard of that new's source and if that were true wouldnt CNN of Fox be covering it non stop?





Support our troops!

toptimlrd
03-14-2007, 11:02 AM
but can we believe this, I for one have never heard of that new's source and if that were true wouldnt CNN of Fox be covering it non stop?





Support our troops!

I would think so. I am one of those who was discharged at the end of basic training against my desires because of a failing knee (it was right after Desert Storm and I was told by a ranking medical officer they were not to give waivers but to thin as many as they could as we stood down). While processing out I ran into many shirkers who were using minor injuries as excuses to be discharged. I am not saying the people in this particular story are doing the same, but I always eye such stories with more than a small amount of scepticism. I would really like to know the whole story. Like WR Medical Center, there are huge problems in anything the government does but I think we take exceptions and try to make them out to be the norm.

Been there, done that, wish I could go back.

sbl
03-14-2007, 11:03 AM
[QUOTE=road_apple1861]but can we believe this, I for one have never heard of that new's source and if that were true wouldnt CNN of Fox be covering it non stop?


Edmond,

Not "Faux" and CNN (Blitzer anyway) still thinks the Pres. is still "the best ever!"


Are you a College or High School student?

sbl
03-14-2007, 11:10 AM
toptimlrd,

I for one am grateful there ARE folks like you.

"Like WR Medical Center, there are huge problems in anything the government does but I think we take exceptions and try to make them out to be the norm."

This is the problem when you elect folks that are against government to run and oversee it. That's my quick "smart-@ss" answer to this issue. As I wrote in an earilier post, the contractors hired to serve WRMH are the same folks that trucked ice for Katrina victims to Gloucester Mass.

tompritchett
03-14-2007, 11:16 AM
but can we believe this, I for one have never heard of that new's source and if that were true wouldnt CNN of Fox be covering it non stop?

One reason why I posted it with comment that I was looking for Army Times confirmation. However, based upon articles that I have read in Army Times, such behavior by the current military would not be out of character, especially given how tightly they are being pulled in terms of available manpower.

toptimlrd
03-14-2007, 11:55 AM
[QUOTE=sbl]toptimlrd,

I for one am grateful there ARE folks like you.

Yeah, but you'd hate me in office. ;-)

The military is one of the few things the government is involved in that they should be involved in. The Katrina thing, why is everyone looking to Washington? It was the responsibility of the mayor first, then the governor, then Washington. Washington should realistically not been on the scene until much later. If we could get the government out of social issues and concentrate on what it's for (common defense, protection of interstate commerce, negotiating with foreign powers, etc) we probably wouldn't have the WRMH problems. Everyone up there wants to pork barrell their constituents area and the rest of the country be d*&#@%. Oh well enough political rant. By the way the sun feels pretty good, you ought to cme out of the basement once in a while for some fresh air. ;-)

toptimlrd
03-14-2007, 12:02 PM
I did a quick Google search on the author and he seems to write quite a bit for Salon.com and nobody else (a staff writer perhaps). Just a quick scan of his more recent articles showed me a definite anti war bias. I'm not saying that there is anything untruthful about his writing, but the writing I found was usually condemning the military's treatment of it's soldiers. It seems he has a single focus which means he probably has blinders on and misses the big picture.

Just my $0.02 worth.

sbl
03-14-2007, 01:12 PM
"The Katrina thing, why is everyone looking to Washington? It was the responsibility of the mayor first, then the governor, then Washington. Washington should realistically not been on the scene until much later.."

Washington was responsible for the Coast Guard, FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers. The locals were overwhelmed and the Feds knew that they were going to be overwhelmed but I won't go off topic with this toptimlrd. The Gulf is part of our United States and not a red-headed stepchild that deserves what it got.


I like the ideal of Competance and Oversight that some government, our government can supply over unaccountable and unelected contractors.

toptimlrd
03-14-2007, 04:14 PM
"
Washington was responsible for the Coast Guard, FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers. The locals were overwhelmed and the Feds knew that they were going to be overwhelmed but I won't go off topic with this toptimlrd. The Gulf is part of our United States and not a red-headed stepchild that deserves what it got.


None of which are or should be first responders. Accountability begins at home in all things. How many times wer the locals made aware of the severity of what was bearing down on them? Why were school buses left sitting in water instead of used to get people out of there? I also agree the gulf is not the red headed stepchild, my state is bordered on one side by the gulf. We have had numerous hurricanes and other disasters with the same federal agencies but have not had the same problems because we took initiative and responsibility ourselves and didn't sit around waiting for Washington to bail us out...... again. But I agree, let's get back to the topic at hand.

sbl
03-14-2007, 04:30 PM
Thomas,

The Salon.com story is the only source I've found so far on other sites. That's the source I heard on Air America.

sbl
03-14-2007, 04:32 PM
Coast Guard not a first responder? Are you sure on that?

Sgt_Pepper
03-14-2007, 05:52 PM
From Wikipedia (emphasis mine):

Major freeway damage occurred up to 32 km (20 mi) from the epicenter. Portions of Interstate 10 (the Santa Monica Freeway), Interstate 5 (the Golden State Freeway) and California State Highway 14 (the Antelope Valley Freeway) collapsed and had to be rebuilt. The interchange of Interstate 5 and California State Highway 14 collapsed as it did 23 years earlier during the 1971 Sylmar earthquake (it was rebuilt without improved structural components [2]). California Department of Transportation has been praised for their quick and effective response to the collapse of the highway. They used an incentive technique for contractors in which contractors received $200,000 per day for every day they were ahead of schedule. This incentive method combined with expedition of permits allowed the highway to be completed in 710 days, rather than the predicted time of 1,112 days.[3]

This incentive technique is not being used in Louisiana. The Federal government is focusing on reallocation of people and not performance incentives. Katrina caused more damage and will take much more time to repair, but failure to learn this lesson will cost far more in time and money than it should.

toptimlrd
03-14-2007, 09:50 PM
Coast Guard not a first responder? Are you sure on that?

Although it's still off topic, you requested a response.

Not for disaster relief. Their primary duty is to protect our coasts and to be first responders at sea. New Orleans is quite a few miles inland. There is simply no way this is not the primary failure of the local governments. Let's just put it this way, in case of a disaster the LAST place I want help from is the Feds.

reb64
03-15-2007, 04:19 AM
Unfortunately real injuries, disabilities and "livable" aches and pains are blurry in the military and they sometimes get lumped together, sometimes are excuses too to avoid duty. i know something of this. my last year in I had a back injury, bad enough to draw va disability afterwards, but not bad enough to get out of deployments or else I would face medical discharge.In otherwords if I claimed i was too hurt to wear my gear, then i could face discharge and lose retirement, so i remained deployable . in the army way of thinking, you are deployable or non deployable and if not why? some guys too injured to do field duty are let to work in rear jobs, needed of course, especially at or near retiremnet, but many way too far from retirement or just in the army are non deployable. some for serious reasons, some for overcomable injuries etc, pregnancies. the army and especially commanders have to decide whether to keep these soldiers holding up slots needed to fill combat readiness or cut them loose. its a tough management act and some commanders try to keep the headaches down by saying your either good to go or your not. doctors sometimes mark the injuries as up to the commanders discretion, meaning they decide whether you get to go or stay. its a fine line and you know how jumbled it gets. whats worse is where some play the game, too injured too do pt or deploy but somehow manage to make a whole career out of staying in garrison. there has to a place for some real injuries instead of a discharge. garrison jobs do need filling, but there are way to many senior ncos i notice at the px with only one patch and no combat patch while i see privates with two and authorization to wear others. thw whole story is not told. whats even funny is how many sy they can't deploy, then retire and then try to get a contract job in kuwait or dubai or iraq

reb64
03-15-2007, 04:24 AM
Brian,

Maybe a minority on this forum. The people here are good, decent, thoughtful and patriotic, or else they wouldn't be CW/WBTS reenactors. They may be getting their news from FOX, the big three and their radio and newspaper equivelents. The 24 hour news format carries way too much fluff and scandel for me.

I'm from the Boston area and the two low-power radio affiliates that carried Air American and two other syndicated shows changed to a Spanish Language format.


Good thing there's still NPR with BBC news and the Globe. When I stream Air America on the computer in my basement and I feel like I'm in the resistance!

if you aint watching fox, then your probably in left field somewhere.

sbl
03-15-2007, 05:30 AM
Although it's still off topic, you requested a response.

Not for disaster relief. Their primary duty is to protect our coasts and to be first responders at sea. New Orleans is quite a few miles inland. There is simply no way this is not the primary failure of the local governments. Let's just put it this way, in case of a disaster the LAST place I want help from is the Feds.


I have to agree with you under THIS administration. If the local government fails because it is overwhelmed, it's good to have a back-up with the resources to help. I believe that local emergency resourses were destroyed by those recent tornados in Georgia.

sbl
03-15-2007, 05:32 AM
Yep! An' it's a gittin crowded shur nuff! :)

You didn't get that from my Colbert quote?

tompritchett
03-15-2007, 04:42 PM
The Katrina thing, why is everyone looking to Washington? It was the responsibility of the mayor first, then the governor, then Washington.

The mention of Katrina in the post you are replying to had nothing to do with the Federal Government's response but rather with competence of the contractor that was hired to serve WRMH. If the contractor could not perform their assigned job on one government contract, it should have raised eyebrows before they were awarded another. It would have raised mine.

But then, during my 9 years of experience with the U.S. EPA, I learned that the whole government contracts system is rarely operated in a manner that truly rewards those contractors that actually do their job well and often prevents the government end-user from forcing contractor corrective actions, short of revoking the full contract. Because of the headache and time involved in spec'ing a new service contract, this truly is the last resort. Contractors do not report to the Project Manager of the Contractor, the actual end-user, but instead are only responsible to the Contract Officer, the government's assigned bean-counter. Unfortunately, the Project Manager, who wants to get the job done as quickly and efficiently as possible, and the Contract Officer, who often only cares that all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed, do not always see eye-to-eye.