Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: Fuck you very much for your service!

  1. #1
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423

    Default Fuck you very much for your service!

    Ah, government... it's like the Mafia, only without any of the redeeming qualities, like loyalty.

    A pretty long read, but a lot of good "learning experiences" and lessons in there, the top two in my mind being that you can't trust the government to keep its word to anyone and that given the choice between helping others and a bullet to the head, you should take the bullet, because it's quicker and less painful.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stars and Stripes
    Critics: Fort Carson Policy Targeted Troubled, Wounded GIs

    November 16, 2011
    Stars and Stripes | by Bill Murphy Jr.


    FORT CARSON, Colo. -- Army Cpl. Joshua Smith saw the orange glow against the South Carolina night sky long before he reached his sister’s apartment complex. The fire in the back buildings was intense. People stood in shock, watching the blaze.

    Smith leapt from his rental car and vaulted a five-foot brick wall, yelling at onlookers to call for help.

    He grabbed an exercise weight someone had left in the yard, threw it through a sliding glass door and burst into the burning building.

    He shepherded a mother and her 16-month-old daughter to safety, then turned his attention to the other apartments, kicking down doors, running room to room, making sure no one else was trapped.

    By the time he emerged, firefighters had arrived. The local TV news hailed the 22-year-old infantryman — home on leave after a tour in Iraq before transferring to Fort Carson, Colo. — whose quick action saved lives.

    “It was easy,” Smith said later. “Nobody was shooting at me.”

    Sixteen months later, in November 2010, the acting commander at Fort Carson, Brig. Gen. James H. Doty, pinned the Soldier’s Medal, the Army’s highest award for noncombat heroism, to Smith’s chest. It was the young Soldier’s second valor medal in three years in the military, after an Army Commendation Medal with valor device that he’d been awarded for his combat service.

    For all his heroics, however, Smith’s life was falling apart.

    He was headed for a medical discharge he didn’t really want, due to knee and back injuries. He was in a disastrous marriage, drinking too much, trying to hide the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Fort Carson doctors checked him into a mental health facility for several days in January. Then, just three months after the Soldier’s Medal ceremony, Smith came up positive for cocaine use in a random drug test.

    The usual course of action in the Army is to punish Soldiers who test positive for drugs locally and to begin a process that can — but doesn’t always — lead to an administrative discharge from the military. At Fort Carson, military lawyers had devised a different plan to quickly get rid of wounded Soldiers who got in trouble.

    Smith’s commanders in the rear detachment of the 2-8 Infantry Regiment, who hadn’t served with him in Iraq, took steps to court-martial him. The criminal charge they levied against him, use of a controlled substance, carried the possibility of jail time, a punitive discharge and a civilian felony record.

    Smith and his defense lawyers were shocked. Then the prosecutors offered him a quick way out: If he would request an immediate discharge under a legal procedure known as a Chapter 10 — without his medical review, military medical care and potential medical retirement pay or disability severance pay — they would recommend that Doty approve it.

    The prosecutors even offered to recommend that Smith receive an honorable discharge (albeit one marked on his paperwork as “in lieu of court-martial”), an almost unheard-of outcome. Chapter 10 discharges are almost always characterized as “other-than-honorable.”

    With his lawyers’ encouragement, Smith took the deal. On May 31, the same general who had commended Smith at the ceremony ended his career over a single act of misconduct.

    Three days later, Smith was a civilian — nearly penniless, suffering and alone. He’s moved three times in the five months since then, mostly staying with family and friends.

    “I’ve been sleeping on couches since I got out,” Smith said in an interview. “Technically, I’m homeless.”

    ‘These kinds of cases’

    Civilian defense lawyers and advocates for troops say stories like Smith’s have become increasingly common at Fort Carson. The trend has its genesis in an email that the top military prosecutor on post sent to nearly two dozen colleagues in August 2009 in which he bemoaned how hard it could be to kick wounded or sick Soldiers out of the Army for misconduct.

    “How frustrating it is,” Maj. Javier Rivera wrote, when a Soldier undergoing the Army’s formal medical review process used drugs or committed other misconduct. Army regulations required the medical case to be complete before the Soldier could be discharged, a process that often took many months. Meanwhile, Rivera wrote, “the Soldier continues to do whatever he wants and believes himself untouchable.”

    But, Rivera wrote, he and the deputy staff judge advocate, Lt. Col. Steven P. Haight, had a solution. If Soldiers pending medical review were accused of using drugs, commanders and prosecutors should skip the regular administrative proceedings and court-martial them instead.

    “If you are dealing with these kinds of cases, our DSJA recommends that you seriously consider preferring charges and offering CH 10s to get the Soldiers out quickly. I concur,” Rivera wrote on Aug. 14, 2009. “I think that is a reasonable remedy that not too many [prosecutors] and Commanders are aware of. I think it is time to start teaching these kinds of Soldiers a lesson.”

    Rivera, who is still assigned to Fort Carson in a different job, did not reply to emailed requests for comment.

    One year later, the commanding general at Fort Carson, Maj. Gen. David Perkins, deployed to Iraq, taking the top Fort Carson military lawyer with him. Doty, a one-star reservist, took over as the acting commander. Haight became the Fort Carson staff judge advocate.

    Critics charge that Haight and Rivera’s strategy soon became the post’s unofficial policy, and that leaders used the system to get wounded, troubled Soldiers out of the Army fast.

    Some Soldiers were charged criminally, as Rivera’s email suggested, in the hope that they would request a quick discharge instead. Others went through the medical review process, but Doty separated them with less-desirable discharges that short-circuited their benefits.

    The result is that Soldiers who had no history of trouble before they went to war ended up without access to benefits and programs that the government uses as recruiting tools.

    Most of the Soldiers affected received general or other-than-honorable discharges. In most cases, that means they cannot use the GI Bill to pay for college. They might also have to repay enlistment bonuses, and they lose military medical care and retirement pay.

    While wounded veterans with less desirable discharges can go to the Department of Veterans Affairs and apply for disability benefits, it’s not that simple. The VA has a huge backlog of disability claims and veterans often wait many months before their cases are heard. Moreover, participating in the VA process requires that a veteran be geographically stable and have transportation to get to VA appointments. Abrupt dismissals and lack of income can make that almost impossible.

    Haight, who left Fort Carson for a new assignment in September, agreed that it is rare in the Army to charge a Soldier criminally for one-time drug use, except perhaps for pilots, surgeons or others with highly technical jobs.

    He said he believed that the Fort Carson Soldiers who had been charged for one-time use had probably failed multiple drug tests. That was not true in Smith’s case, according to documents in his official files.

    ‘This pattern ... is so clear'

    With Soldiers coming home broken in record numbers, the Army has pledged to take care of their physical and mental wounds. The quick-separation policy at Fort Carson stands in direct conflict with that pledge.

    The Army touts a zero-tolerance policy for drug use, but commanders have considerable discretion regarding how much punishment Soldiers receive and whether they ultimately are retained or discharged.

    Moreover, defense lawyers and veterans advocates point to many cases in which Soldiers who tested positive for use of drugs once, or occasionally even twice or more — but who were not facing a possible medical discharge — have been retained on active duty.

    Just last month, the vice chief of staff of the Army, Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, talked about the link between PTSD and traumatic brain injury on the one hand, and substance abuse and suicide on the other.

    “The interrelation of these two things is something I’m very, very concerned about,” Chiarelli told military leaders at the Association of the U.S. Army Annual Meeting and Exposition. “We will define our readiness in the Army by how we handle Soldiers who are having these kinds of problems. We must ensure that we take care of our people and that we take care of one another. And I charge all of you with doing that.”

    For Soldiers with PTSD and related medical issues who tested positive for drug use at Fort Carson in at least 10 recent cases that Stars and Stripes identified, there was no apparent compassion.

    “It’s insane what they’re doing. It’s criminal,” said Robert Alvarez, a veterans advocate in Colorado Springs who formerly worked as a counselor at Fort Carson. “They’re taking kids that are wounded from war with alcohol problems or a drug problem. Somebody who is a stellar Soldier — or even a marginal one, but who deployed — they’re looking at a chapter.”

    A former JAG officer at Fort Carson who now represents Soldiers as a civilian lawyer agreed.

    “This pattern of discharges is so clear that I can only conclude that commanders are using the system against injured combat veterans who have engaged in minor misconduct by cutting off their hard-earned and much-needed medical and financial benefits,” said Stephen P. Karns, who represents several affected soldiers. “This is a shameful practice.”

    The policy at Fort Carson comes as the Army has announced plans to cut 50,000 Soldiers by 2017, and critics point out that dismissing Soldiers saves on military medical care and retirement pay.

    In one Fort Carson case identified by Stars and Stripes, a colonel advised Doty in writing that administratively discharging a Soldier risked a “high potential for negative press and political backlash,” but that allowing him to be medically retired and receive his military benefits would increase the “cost to the Army (50% pay for PVT=$734.40 per month).”

    “This guy’s cleaning house,” Sheilagh A. McAteer, a deputy state public defender in Colorado Springs who has represented many Fort Carson Soldiers involved in civilian criminal cases, said of Doty. “If you’re not deployable, you’re taking up space.”

    'A definite connection'

    When Doty took over during summer 2010, it was an unusual arrangement. Unlike the wounded Soldiers whose cases he ultimately decided, he has never been to war. Doty’s official biography indicates he worked as an Army civilian employee while building his reserve military career. His most recent position was director of planning for the Installation Management Command.

    “What I’m here to do is make sure that the main mission of the post — to train and deploy ready Soldiers — is carried out,” Doty told The Gazette, a Colorado Springs newspaper, in a February interview.

    He emphasized that he had full authority.

    “If I have to run to [Perkins] for routine decisions, then I wouldn’t be doing my job,” the newspaper quoted him saying.Perkins returned from Iraq in October.

    Asked to comment about the discharge process, the public affairs office at Fort Carson scheduled a 15-minute telephone interview with Doty, but canceled it at the last minute. The staff later offered a written statement and answered some questions via email.

    In the statement, Fort Carson officials denied that Soldiers in the medical evaluation process were treated differently than able-bodied troops.

    Officials said the percentage of Soldiers administratively discharged despite being in the medical evaluation process “almost exactly mirrors the percentage of the total Fort Carson population who have been administratively discharged” without being in the medical process. The officials did not provide the numbers behind that calculation except to say that there were “dozens” of cases while Doty was acting commanding general.

    “More than 97 percent of our Soldiers uphold Army values and serve professionally every day,” the Fort Carson statement said. “An extremely small minority chooses to break moral, legal and ethical standards of personal conduct, which runs counter to Army values and ultimately harms the Soldiers who serve professionally.”

    Separately, Haight, who is now assigned as a fellow in the office of the Director of National Intelligence in Virginia, acknowledged that PTSD could be a complicating factor for some Soldiers.

    “The tough calls are where the person truly has PTSD and they self-medicate,” he said, adding that commanders had to rely on doctors to provide answers.

    “The vast majority, at least within my career [say] … ‘No, PTSD isn’t going to cause you to go out and try illegal drugs.’ You still have your free agency, your willpower.”

    Medical experts interviewed by Stars and Stripes emphasize that while correlation is easier to prove than causation, there is no doubt that patients with PTSD are at higher risk for substance abuse than others, including alcohol and illegal drugs — a trend that holds true especially among younger veterans.

    “There is a definite connection between them,” said Lisa M. Najavits, a professor of psychiatry at Boston University and the author of “Seeking Safety: A Treatment Manual for PTSD and Substance Abuse.”

    Suggesting that PTSD cannot cause drug use, she said “is a bit like saying depression is not going to cause you to go out and commit suicide," Najavits said. "In our current medical understanding, both PTSD and substance use disorders (SUD) are illnesses … and need to be understood as medical conditions.”

    Other than honorable

    Sgt. Daryl Williams had been a Soldier you could count on during his three tours as an infantryman and scout-sniper in Iraq, right up until he was shot and blown up in July 2008.

    Williams filled in for another Soldier that day, leading about a dozen troops from 1st Battalion, 1-68 Armor Regiment on a combat patrol. When he got out of his armored vehicle and approached an Iraqi Army checkpoint, an improvised explosive device detonated and insurgents opened fire.

    “My body armor saved me,” Williams recalled, but shrapnel tore up his neck, arms and buttocks. “My median nerve was severed. My femur was fractured and I had multiple shrapnel wounds.”

    Williams, 29 at the time, was awarded a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star. When he awoke in a hospital bed, the first thing he did was to ask to re-enlist.

    “I’d been in my unit a long time and I was a leader,” Williams said. “I didn’t want to look like I was giving up.”

    But like Smith, when Williams reached Fort Carson, things fell apart. He was dealing with physical pain and mental anguish, his medical records show — PTSD, TBI and his other injuries — and going through the medical evaluation process to determine whether he could stay in the Army.

    He was drinking massive amounts of alcohol, he said, and in June 2010, a random urinalysis revealed he’d used cocaine.

    Williams quickly admitted as much. He’d been so drunk, he said, that he’d used cocaine despite having been warned that he’d likely have to take a drug test the following week.

    “I’d never done any drugs or anything until after I deployed,” said Williams, who is one of Karns’ clients. “Never drank, never did drugs. I lived a really sheltered life. My family was Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

    For more than a year, it looked like Williams would take his punishment, get a medical retirement and leave the Army.

    He was demoted to specialist, did 45 days of extra duty and forfeited $1,146 per month for two months. His records reflect that his commanders initiated the required administrative separation process against him, but they didn’t push it for 14 months.

    Meanwhile, Williams’ medical evaluation board process continued. He stayed sober and passed several drug tests. In July, the board recommended that he be medically retired for PTSD.

    But then, in September, his company commander called him into his office. Instead of letting his medical retirement proceed, the Army was going to refer him for separation with an other-than-honorable discharge, ending his chances for retirement pay and disqualifying him from most veterans benefits.

    Because of his longevity in the Army — he enlisted in 2002 — Williams is entitled to a hearing before a board of Soldiers who could overturn that decision before it ever gets to the commanding general.

    The hearing has yet to be scheduled, but if the Army gets its way, he’ll wind up with the same discharge as Soldiers who commit much more serious acts of misconduct.

    For example, on June 3, Doty approved an other-than-honorable discharge for a Soldier who had never deployed and who was facing civilian criminal charges for allegedly driving the getaway car in a robbery and attempted murder.

    'Hanging by a thread'

    Andrew Trotto was one of the youngest and lowest-ranking Soldiers in his company in Iraq. He enlisted in the Army Reserve at 17, switched to active duty the following year, trained as a tanker and arrived in Sadr City with 1-68 Combined Arms Battalion in February 2008.

    The young Soldier saw plenty of combat over about a three-month period. But after Trotto hurt his back in an accident away from the fighting, he was evacuated to Kuwait for treatment.

    There, Trotto said, he became depressed and suicidal, signature symptoms of PTSD. When the Army sent him back to Iraq his parents got involved, unsatisfied with his medical treatment. They contacted his commanders in the middle of the war zone and filed an inspector general complaint. Trotto spent the second half of his deployment on a U.S. military base in Taji, no longer going out on patrols and missions.

    Back at Fort Carson in January 2009, Trotto was assigned to its Warrior Transition Unit. Diagnosed with PTSD and other injuries, Trotto said the 20 or so pills he took every day “made me a zombie.”

    Eventually, he said he tried marijuana after another wounded Soldier suggested that it would treat his PTSD without the side effects.

    “I slept for the first time in like a week,” he said, and his symptoms abated.

    Trotto grew the drug in a garden in his apartment, and while it helped his symptoms, he was far from out of the woods. He and his wife separated, and he grew more depressed and angry. He tried to kill himself by taking pills. When he awoke in the hospital, he learned that his sergeants had searched his house, found his marijuana and called the local police.

    Still on active duty, Trotto was sent to a civilian hospital with a program for Soldiers suffering from PTSD. He spent more than five months there over the next year before coming up positive for marijuana in a drug test in December 2010.

    Commanders in the WTU punished him with demotion, forfeiture of pay and extra duties and began administrative separation proceedings.

    The head of the Fort Carson Medical Department Activity, Col. Jimmie Keenan, wrote to Doty advising that he should allow Trotto’s medical disability case to go forward, although she acknowledged that doing so would likely cost the Army $734.40 a month in retirement pay. But Trotto’s commanders wrote to Doty that they did not believe his marijuana use had anything to do with PTSD.

    On April 27, Doty went with the commanders’ recommendations, and against Keenan’s advice. He approved Trotto’s separation with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, which meant he received no medical retirement pay or transition help.

    He was on his own.

    While staying at his mother’s home in Pennsylvania last summer, he said he planned to live with his father in California — which, he pointed out, is a medical marijuana state. His wife was still in Colorado, their marriage “hanging by a thread,” he said.

    “I got injured. I got my benefits taken from me. I got my schooling taken from me. I have no money coming in,” Trotto said. “I couldn’t afford my house. I could barely afford my dog.”

    First time in trouble

    Soft-spoken, polite and still missing a front tooth that he lost in an accident during basic training in early 2009, former Spc. Joseph Allen was serving in Afghanistan with the 32nd Transportation Co. as a truck driver — an “88-Mike” in Army parlance — when Rivera wrote the email about getting wounded, troubled out quickly.

    His job there was to haul supplies — everything from Soldiers’ personal gear to ammunition — to remote combat outposts. He often came under fire.

    He was in his barracks when it suffered a direct hit from a Taliban rocket in September 2009.

    “It goes through my sergeant’s room and instantly kills him,” Allen recalled. “It felt like a giant just swatted us into the wall.”

    Allen and his roommate were knocked out. When they came to, they had to dig through the wreckage of the room to escape.

    “It didn’t set in until 15 minutes after the attack, but I had severe spinal bruising and a severe concussion,” Allen said. “We were so lucky. So lucky.”

    Awarded a Purple Heart, Allen was again running missions just a few days after the attack. When he came home, however, his wife Claire noticed immediately that something was wrong. Allen couldn’t remember things. He was edgy and irritable. He was drinking heavily.

    “I’d been having a lot of PTSD problems and stuff, so I wasn’t being, like, the best Soldier I could be,” Allen recalled.

    In January, Allen came up positive for marijuana. His commanders demoted him to private, took half his pay for two months and made him do 45 days of extra duty.

    On the 45th day, he came home to his wife in their off-post apartment. Claire, 26, had exciting news: She was pregnant. The next day, his commanders told him they were going to kick him out of the Army.

    His case was referred to Doty in April, and Allen was quickly out with a general discharge.

    “What’s going to become of my [medical] appointments?” Allen said he asked his company commander when he heard the news. He said he had a neurology appointment scheduled for May 25. “What about my Purple Heart and my benefits?”

    “Try the VA,” Allen said the captain told him.

    Allen and his pregnant wife were in real trouble. They were broke, and their military health insurance ran out. Allen said he never received another dime from the military. His last paycheck was held to repay what he said were questionable debts. Where was the commitment from the Army to heal its wounded, he wondered.

    After months of barely scraping by with Claire’s income as a pet groomer and help from others, the Allens packed their things into a 14-year-old Toyota and drove back to their native Massachusetts.

    Their daughter, whom they’ve already named Taegan, is due in January. They’ve been staying with relatives while Allen looks for a job, and hope to get vouchers for public housing.

    “First time I was ever in trouble,” Allen said. “I’m a Purple Heart veteran and I freaking got kicked out. The only thing I got out of the Army was a backpack, a brain injury and a pen. And I already lost the pen.”
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  2. #2
    Okay so what's twisting the arms of the military hotshots and the prosecutor and forcing them to abstain from decency even though they have the option to act differently? Is it news to them that people who fight in wars can suffer from poor mental health and that substance abuse can be a part of that? This is as retarded as saying that health problems is grounds for reneging on a promise of free universal healthcare.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Okay so what's twisting the arms of the military hotshots and the prosecutor and forcing them to abstain from decency even though they have the option to act differently? Is it news to them that people who fight in wars can suffer from poor mental health and that substance abuse can be a part of that? This is as retarded as saying that health problems is grounds for reneging on a promise of free universal healthcare.
    I'm sure the words "cost saving initiative" are in there somewhere.

    However, how do you tell soldier who has served their country with no incidents of bad behavior either on or off duty that they guy next to him that served with him with the cocaine addiction and\or problems with the law is entitled to the exact same benefits, services, and recognition? It's slippery from a certain point of view.

    The problem from my perspective is that the VA doesn't offer enough solutions for PTSD (instead of drugs) that the soldiers will actually participate in. So they are forced to go other routes like substance abuse. I'm sure there is a military pencil pushing, policy chanting tool somewhere that is thinking "It's not our fault they don't want to use the services we provide and decide to deal with their problems their own way."

  4. #4
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    However, how do you tell soldier who has served their country with no incidents of bad behavior either on or off duty that they guy next to him that served with him with the cocaine addiction and\or problems with the law is entitled to the exact same benefits, services, and recognition? It's slippery from a certain point of view.
    Isn't that what those benefits are actually for? The soldier served its country and thus the country cares for its soldiers?

    What good are benefits like free health care if you are not allowed to actually use them in time of need?
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    Isn't that what those benefits are actually for? The soldier served its country and thus the country cares for its soldiers?

    What good are benefits like free health care if you are not allowed to actually use them in time of need?
    Don't get me wrong, I believe that soldiers earn their benefits, and should get them no matter what kind of hard times they may fall on. My wife is an Iraq war veteran with PTSD and a couple of other chronic injuries, and if it were not for the VA, we would either be broke, or she would be completely miserable.

    But I'm imagining the whole "How do you logically reward bad behavior the same as good' mentality is a platitude for this guy to argue his point of view:

    “How frustrating it is,” Maj. Javier Rivera wrote, when a Soldier undergoing the Army’s formal medical review process used drugs or committed other misconduct. Army regulations required the medical case to be complete before the Soldier could be discharged, a process that often took many months. Meanwhile, Rivera wrote, “the Soldier continues to do whatever he wants and believes himself untouchable.”

    But, Rivera wrote, he and the deputy staff judge advocate, Lt. Col. Steven P. Haight, had a solution. If Soldiers pending medical review were accused of using drugs, commanders and prosecutors should skip the regular administrative proceedings and court-martial them instead.

    “If you are dealing with these kinds of cases, our DSJA recommends that you seriously consider preferring charges and offering CH 10s to get the Soldiers out quickly. I concur,” Rivera wrote on Aug. 14, 2009. “I think that is a reasonable remedy that not too many [prosecutors] and Commanders are aware of. I think it is time to start teaching these kinds of Soldiers a lesson.”
    The lesson being, that it's your fault that you may make some bad life choices directly influenced by the mental or psychological injuries that you incurred while serving your country. What happened to "Leave no man behind"?

  6. #6
    What about those Vietnam veterans who are sponging off society by having their venereal diseases---HIV, genital warts, herpes, and various other STDs--- by the government? I don't recall killing and fucking being part of the military policies. Although, if they did contract those diseases by skullfucking their victims, then I guess it's ok.

  7. #7
    ^^ That made me laugh Omega
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It's not okay to shoot an innocent bank clerk but shooting a felon to death is commendable and do you should receive a reward rather than a punishment

  8. #8
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    I'm not quite sure if there was more than one synapse involved in that particular brainfart.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    I'm sure the words "cost saving initiative" are in there somewhere.

    However, how do you tell soldier who has served their country with no incidents of bad behavior either on or off duty that they guy next to him that served with him with the cocaine addiction and\or problems with the law is entitled to the exact same benefits, services, and recognition? It's slippery from a certain point of view.
    By pointing out that he provided the same service? By saying that these benefits/recognition etc are not a measure of worthiness but service? By pointing out that the eyes of the government are egalitarian and we all have fucking equal human worth?
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  10. #10
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    I'm sure the words "cost saving initiative" are in there somewhere.

    However, how do you tell soldier who has served their country with no incidents of bad behavior either on or off duty that they guy next to him that served with him with the cocaine addiction and\or problems with the law is entitled to the exact same benefits, services, and recognition?
    By saying it?

    It's part of the deal everyone makes when they sign up, and I've yet to meet the soldier (by which I mean "real" soldier, not some fuckwit tampon with more brass than brains) who'd say it's alright to dishonor that deal on account of drug use to deal with a combat-related injury (which PTSD is).

    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    The problem from my perspective is that the VA doesn't offer enough solutions for PTSD (instead of drugs) that the soldiers will actually participate in.
    Such as? You say that as if there are effective therapies or a "cure" for PTSD, and that's just not so.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    So they are forced to go other routes like substance abuse.
    Well, that's part of the problem right there. How is it that (in this example, for example) a daily cocktail of pharmaceutical mood-altering drugs and anti-psychotics (and probably some prescription narcotics and/or barbiturates) is "medicine," but using just one other drug on a much less frequent basis is "substance abuse?" Sounds a lot to me like that anti-"drug" propaganda everyone laughed off in middle school. And high school.

    "D.A.R.E. to keep your kids off drugs! ... and don't forget to take your ADD medicine with lunch..."

    High time we treat "self-medicating" as what it is... which would be "medicating," rather than forcing inferior solutions on those in need, and punishing them for trying something more effective. Not that I guess it would make much of a difference, given that the only thing government does with any consistency is break its word, but social acceptance of that bullshit propaganda certainly doesn't help matters.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    Such as? You say that as if there are effective therapies or a "cure" for PTSD, and that's just not so.
    I don't think anyone expects a cure, but it's still the responsibility of the VA to find treatments that work for every soldier. It's their freakin' sole function, to serve veterans injured in combat. They are OWED that.

    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    Well, that's part of the problem right there. How is it that (in this example, for example) a daily cocktail of pharmaceutical mood-altering drugs and anti-psychotics (and probably some prescription narcotics and/or barbiturates) is "medicine," but using just one other drug on a much less frequent basis is "substance abuse?" Sounds a lot to me like that anti-"drug" propaganda everyone laughed off in middle school. And high school.

    "D.A.R.E. to keep your kids off drugs! ... and don't forget to take your ADD medicine with lunch..."

    High time we treat "self-medicating" as what it is... which would be "medicating," rather than forcing inferior solutions on those in need, and punishing them for trying something more effective. Not that I guess it would make much of a difference, given that the only thing government does with any consistency is break its word, but social acceptance of that bullshit propaganda certainly doesn't help matters.
    Yes, Yes, we all know we like your drugs, and don't like being told how to take them. Unfortunately not everyone is as drug savvy as you and knows what to take, when to take it, how much to take it, and how not to take too much. That's why the rest of us go to doctors. That way we have someone to blame when we get addicted or our livers give out, or both.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    There's a documentary on tonight, with the fitting title "Beer is cheaper than therapy", might watch it
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  13. #13
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    Yes, Yes, we all know we like your drugs, and don't like being told how to take them. Unfortunately not everyone is as drug savvy as you and knows what to take, when to take it, how much to take it, and how not to take too much. That's why the rest of us go to doctors. That way we have someone to blame when we get addicted or our livers give out, or both.
    Riveting. What does that have to do with Cpl. Smith, last seen homeless and abandoned by the country he served with courage and honor? It was a choice between tossing him out like garbage or banning medical doctors?
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  14. #14
    I'm still not sure where the gummint comes in. the people involved have the choice to not screw these soldiers but are choosing to be evil.



    Those who are in the know, in what ways could you possibly approach this problem in order to ensure that soldiers with mental health issues--including substance use/abuse, depression, PTSD, whatever--get the healthcare they need/want? Is there someone you can sue? Someone you can get fired? What're the legal issues here anyway? If you commit a felony, any felony, you lose everything you were promised and go to prison, or you just lose everything you were promised?

    I realise I wouldn't be asking these questions if we were talking about offences such as murder, but yeah
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  15. #15
    Btw, I hear you guys have a few special courts for veterans. Whaddaya think about that
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    Riveting. What does that have to do with Cpl. Smith, last seen homeless and abandoned by the country he served with courage and honor? It was a choice between tossing him out like garbage or banning medical doctors?
    Does does you tirade against D.A.R.E or doctors that prescribe ritalin have to do with it?

    If the VA or the medical community as a whole could either come up with a drug that takes care of PTSD safely, or preferably something other than drugs that does the same thing, then these kinds of things wouldn't be an issue. For example, my wife used to have a social worker assigned by the VA, that worked at the VA, that she had a monthly appointment with to deal with her PTSD issues. They took that SW away and forced her to either go to group therapy, or just deal with it. They technically didn't take her treatment away, but took away the treatment option that was best for her. She doesn't feel comfortable talking about her issues in front of other people, and since it causes her more stress to do that than do without, she does without.

    Meanwhile, the government that chooses loyalty to the money before the veterans will get what they deserve in the end. But I'm sure these kinds of stories won't be on the news when the next war springs up and the government needs more volunteers to serve. Not only does the government owe treatment to those who serve, it is it's responsibility to fix what was broken in it's service. They "broke" this man's life, they should do everything they can to fix it.
    Last edited by 2HD; 11-25-2011 at 02:54 AM. Reason: Added more

  17. #17
    Wondering one thing: does it matter if the soldiers highlighted in this article are bad apples for other reasons than their latest drug accident? Yes yes blame the rape victim etc etc, but does it?
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  18. #18
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    Does does you tirade against D.A.R.E or doctors that prescribe ritalin have to do with it?
    That's the question you need to answer. You're the one who framed use of a drug to treat combat-induced PTSD as "substance abuse," because it was used in lieu of (or in conjunction with?) a cocktail of drugs to treat combat-induced PTSD.

    In other words, I don't know (and am not really sure if I even care) why you think treating PTSD with drugs is substance abuse, while at the same time, treating PTSD with drugs is not substance abuse, and something the VA needs to do more of. That's your tangled what-the-fuck-web of cognitive dissonance and propaganda, not mine... so, you sort it out, please. And do let me know what you decide.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    If the VA or the medical community as a whole could either come up with a drug that takes care of PTSD safely, or preferably something other than drugs that does the same thing, then these kinds of things wouldn't be an issue.
    So, the problem is that the drugs that treat PTSD are drugs, but on the other hand, the drugs that treat PTSD may or may not be drugs, so the VA should come up with drugs to treat PTSD that are not drugs?

    Brilliant.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    Meanwhile, the government that chooses loyalty to the money before the veterans will get what they deserve in the end.
    How so? No shortage of volunteers, even in wartime... the problem is the volunteers that do exist being disqualified for being gay (well, until very recently), or having used unapproved drugs, or already possessing some of the skills they'll be taught in basic, or for racist reasons, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Wondering one thing: does it matter if the soldiers highlighted in this article are bad apples for other reasons than their latest drug accident? Yes yes blame the rape victim etc etc, but does it?
    Of course it does. For the same reason it matters at sentencing whether or not you have a history of killing puppies and raping children, or whether you're a generally good seed who just went off the rails one night and accidentally raped puppy and/or killed a kid.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  19. #19
    I ask only because I'm trying to find possible alternative explanations for why some soldiers seem to be getting an extra shitty deal.

    Re. substance abuse, you can't really diagnose a person with substance abuse based on an isolated incident, so if someone's doing that then shame on them. Re. drugs, you're smart enough to know the differences between different classes of drugs, as well as to know the differences between a planned and regular treatment regimen (handled/supported by experienced professionals) on the one hand and a completely unplanned, irregular, stupid/desperate and misguided one (managed by a mentally and physically ill individual whose life is coming apart) on the other hand.

    Substance abuse and addiction can make recovery from/rehabilitation of PTSD much more difficult. Don't let your reflexive aggression,your biases and your obtusity force you to defend really bad ideas. What's more important to you: being right (about the wrong thing) even when you're wrong and stupid, or eg. increasing awareness about PTSD and the way the US govt. is betraying those of its soldiers who suffer from it? The latter is interesting and important to everyone, while the former is tolerable only to eg. your mom. Does anyone here look like your mom? No, so get a grip. I don't care who started it

    Btw, how did you escape PTSD?
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    That's the question you need to answer. You're the one who framed use of a drug to treat combat-induced PTSD as "substance abuse," because it was used in lieu of (or in conjunction with?) a cocktail of drugs to treat combat-induced PTSD.

    In other words, I don't know (and am not really sure if I even care) why you think treating PTSD with drugs is substance abuse, while at the same time, treating PTSD with drugs is not substance abuse, and something the VA needs to do more of. That's your tangled what-the-fuck-web of cognitive dissonance and propaganda, not mine... so, you sort it out, please. And do let me know what you decide.

    So, the problem is that the drugs that treat PTSD are drugs, but on the other hand, the drugs that treat PTSD may or may not be drugs, so the VA should come up with drugs to treat PTSD that are not drugs?

    Brilliant.
    I'm afraid I haven't been clear on my stance on the use of drugs for the treatment of PTSD. I don't necessarily have a problem with using drugs to treat PTSD, but, as with so many default treatments for any and all psychological ailments, drugs seem to be the end of the conversation. If the first round doesn't "fix" you, then let's just up the dose until you don't care anymore.

    I am of the opinion that drugs should be a stop gap used while the actual treatment is applied, whether it be counseling or hypnosis or something.

    And when I say "using drugs" I mean drugs prescribed by doctors the way doctors , not self-medication with illicit drugs or alcohol.

    How so? No shortage of volunteers, even in wartime... the problem is the volunteers that do exist being disqualified for being gay (well, until very recently), or having used unapproved drugs, or already possessing some of the skills they'll be taught in basic, or for racist reasons, etc.
    Let the military tell everyone that benefits aren't guaranteed for service and see how enlistment is affected. Tell them they could be broke and unemployable when they are done risking their lives and going through the hell of war, and see how some people may think twice about volunteering to serve a government that doesn't care about it's soldiers.

  21. #21
    http://news.yahoo.com/swat-teams-sho...172246257.html

    Speaking of screwing a soldier for his service...
    Hope is the denial of reality

  22. #22
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    I find it absolutely astonishing that such raids do not cause more deaths, with gun possession rampant in the US and all.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  23. #23
    Senior Member Draco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    573
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    I find it absolutely astonishing that such raids do not cause more deaths, with gun possession rampant in the US and all.
    Did you finish that sentence by sipping a cup of tea? Seeing how you were 'absolutely astonished' and all..
    The present state of the world is not the proof of philosophy's impotence, but the proof of philosophy's power. It is philosophy that has brought men to this state-it is only philosophy that can lead them out.
    -Ayn Rand

  24. #24
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco View Post
    Did you finish that sentence by sipping a cup of tea? Seeing how you were 'absolutely astonished' and all..
    Well, he has a point - you're allowed to have guns and shoot burglars (even if they are unarmed I think?), yet the police can have no-knock warrants and shoot you for brandishing a gun. It's something you can expect to go wrong pretty frequently.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  25. #25
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    Exactly. You have citizens allowed to possess guns and also use them in defense of their homes.
    And then people end up riddled by bullets because they actually exercised that right.

    It's actually a very nice system to get rid of unwanted elements - simply execute a no-knock warrant and if you do it right, the subject may be dead afterwards. And it's even legal!
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  26. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    It's actually a very nice system to get rid of unwanted elements - simply execute a no-knock warrant and if you do it right, the subject may be dead afterwards. And it's even legal!
    This seems somewhat fiscally unwise, as the for-profit prison industry and jobs in the guard business are booming in an otherwise spiraling economical situation. Gotta feed more meat into the Gulag.
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  27. #27
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    You're right, I didn't consider the possibilities for slave labour!
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  28. #28
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I ask only because I'm trying to find possible alternative explanations for why some soldiers seem to be getting an extra shitty deal.
    It is in the nature of government to create poverty in the cause of spreading wealth, to oppress when attempting to create liberty and to make harsh inequalities in an effort to treat everyone equally. Not much for reading about history, are you?

    It's undoubtedly an unintended consequence... someone exerted political pressure to deal with "problem soldiers" because someone else complained or had their puppy run over (or whatever) by a vet who was out of his mind on meth (or whatever) and as that flowed down the chain of command, it got turned into generating quantifiable metrics or otherwise proving that something was "being done" and the alleged problem was being dealt with, which turns into a ruined life, denied entitlements and yet another broken government promise for minimal "offenses" by the time it filters its way down to the rank-and-file. Yippie, government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Re. drugs, you're smart enough to know the differences between different classes of drugs, as well as to know the differences between a planned and regular treatment regimen (handled/supported by experienced professionals) on the one hand and a completely unplanned, irregular, stupid/desperate and misguided one (managed by a mentally and physically ill individual whose life is coming apart) on the other hand.
    And you're smart enough and medically knowledgeable enough to know the [usually] minimal degree of difference between "medical" drugs and "recreational" drugs and that they're often even the exact same pill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Substance abuse and addiction can make recovery from/rehabilitation of PTSD much more difficult. Don't let your reflexive aggression,your biases and your obtusity force you to defend really bad ideas.
    Right back atcha, particularly considering that we both know (or ought to) that the "discontinuation effects" [withdrawal symptoms] of modern mood-elevating medications like Prozac and Wellbutrin and Effexor (etc.) are far harsher and more damaging than, THC's (for example), and both the anti-depressant/mood-elevating pills and the pot are doing the same thing anyway.

    So, speaking of really bad ideas, ruining someone's life because they'd rather try a potentially effective solution over one that may have worse side-effects and less effectiveness than its worth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Btw, how did you escape PTSD?
    Pretty sure I've avoided discussing any personal details that could lead anyone to know one way or the other if I had... but in the general case, how does somebody "escape" cancer?

    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    And when I say "using drugs" I mean drugs prescribed by doctors the way doctors , not self-medication with illicit drugs or alcohol.
    Yeah, that's part of what I was criticizing. A toke or three from a joint will have about the same effect as a Prozac, as far as endorphin levels go, but one's "medication" (with some rather unpleasant side effects, it should be noted) and the other's "substance abuse." How can you justify that arbitrary distinction, particularly for conditions that are largely an issue of endorphin levels, like PTSD can be, or post-combat depression is?

    It sounds like you say you want soldiers to get support, but if they don't an "approved" and potentially inferior drug to treat their symptoms, well, meh, no biggie if they get fucked out of what they're owed and have their lives ruined by the same organization that gave them the condition in the first place.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2HD View Post
    Let the military tell everyone that benefits aren't guaranteed for service and see how enlistment is affected. Tell them they could be broke and unemployable when they are done risking their lives and going through the hell of war, and see how some people may think twice about volunteering to serve a government that doesn't care about it's soldiers.
    Well, articles like this do that very thing, and so far the effect on enlistment has been underwhelming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    http://news.yahoo.com/swat-teams-sho...172246257.html

    Speaking of screwing a soldier for his service...
    Seems more of a "fuck you for living in the US" thing to me. Happens a lot on raids like this, and most of the dead civilians can't claim veteran status.

    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    I find it absolutely astonishing that such raids do not cause more deaths, with gun possession rampant in the US and all.
    How many deaths do you think they do or "should" cause, incidentally? These types of raids do cause an awful lot of deaths, far more then their media footprint would suggest.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  29. #29
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,239
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    How many deaths do you think they do or "should" cause, incidentally? These types of raids do cause an awful lot of deaths, far more then their media footprint would suggest.
    Okay, let me rephrase that: "It's astonishing that we don't hear more about such raids gone bad."

    In light of your argument that such deaths are a common occurance, I'd suggest that we only hear about them if it happens to someone who's not "suspect" in the public eye (like, committing the crime of being black and breathing).
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by CitizenCain View Post
    It sounds like you say you want soldiers to get support, but if they don't an "approved" and potentially inferior drug to treat their symptoms, well, meh, no biggie if they get fucked out of what they're owed and have their lives ruined by the same organization that gave them the condition in the first place.
    No, I would never condone any policy that results in a veteran not getting the treatment they deserve. However, the military in this OP article is pushing soldiers in a direction that results breaking the law because of a.) judgement issues due to their lack of treatment and b.) using illicit drugs to deal with their medical conditions.

    The military is essentially saying, "If our crappy treatment doesn't work, it's your fault when you suffer from it and\or try to find another way to treat yourselves." What they should be saying is "We are sorry our crappy treatment doesn't work, and we will support you in any way possible until we try to do right by you."

    Not, "If you guys would just legalize all drugs, everything would be OK".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •