Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Wounded Soldiers Endure Deplorable Conditions at Army Hospital

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Wounded Soldiers Endure Deplorable Conditions at Army Hospital


Source Link: www.washingtonpost.com

Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.

This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 07:57 PM
link   
This don't surprise me, the US government don't care about human life, just care about profit. I hope those brave soldiers turn against those who spitted on them and join the anti-war/impeach the Bush regime.



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Words fail me.

I guess, according to many on this board, that I am just too sensitive to the suffering of others.

Acceptable losses, they say. Sad, but a fact of life in the WOT, they say.

People get hurt, people die, it happens everyday. Get over it, they say.

What do they say about this? Is this acceptable? Is this a fact of life?

Shame, shame, shame on my government, that they would allow even one wounded hero to be exposed to conditions like this.

[edit on 20-2-2007 by Icarus Rising]



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Well, I remember Walter Reed back in the eighties and it was nothing that they describe right now . . . back them during the Regan years it was clean . . .

But as anything that has to do with government lately . . . we are facing the results of the budget cuttings hitting home . . .

Is very disgraceful that it has to come to this . . .

I am speechless because that is not the Walter Reed I remember.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Just saw Maj. Gen. McWeight, the commanding officer of Walter Reed, who happens to live across the street from the building in question, on the news trying to explain how these deplorable conditions have been allowed. He took over in August and claims he just learned about the problem last month.

If I took over a command such as this, the first thing I would do is tour the entire facility.

He also had the gall to say that many of the wounded soldiers had been billeted in worse conditions. I assume that was while they were in the field prior to being wounded. The man needs to be cashiered.

To all of you out there who say it is not possible to support the troops without supporting the war, I submit that this latest debacle proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is possible to support the war without supporting the troops.



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Walter Reed is just an example of what Health Care would look like if the Government ran it.

This is a big strike against Universal Health Care.



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Well, I remember Walter Reed back in the eighties and it was nothing that they describe right now . . . back them during the Regan years it was clean . . .

But as anything that has to do with government lately . . . we are facing the results of the budget cuttings hitting home . . .

Is very disgraceful that it has to come to this . . .

I am speechless because that is not the Walter Reed I remember.

Before this becomes a partisan/Bush-bashing issue, I turn your attention to this radio interview that Don Imus had with Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) yesterday:



Imus: Let me interrupt you for a second, but this is nonsense, Senator Schumer. I want to be respectful, but you can’t possibly be serious and suggest — I mean I’m not a fool. You can’t suggest to me that because the Democrats are now in power that something is going to be done about Walter Reed and about the mess in the Veterans Administration and all of this, and that if the Democrats hadn’t taken control of Congress that nothing would have been done. That’s preposterous; of course it would have.


Schumer: Well, something would have been done if the story would have gotten out . . .

Imus: Here’s another question. Have you ever been over to Walter Reed?


Schumer: Ahh, not in a while, no.

www.newsmax.com...




posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Figures you would spin it that way, RR. I suppose it is ok with you that over 15% of the population of the US, and over 8 million children, have no health insurance whatsoever. Do you lobby for big pharma, or what?



Of the nation's nearly 74 million children, about 8.3 million, or 11.2 percent, lacked coverage in 2005, up from 10.8 percent the year before.

The latest census figures (2005) show that a record 46.6 million Americans had no health insurance in 2005, up from 45.3 million in 2004. Among those who did have coverage, fewer were receiving it through their jobs.
Number of Uninsured


Why does the fact that the government is responsible for something automatically mean that it will be substandard in quality and inept in function? Why do we as citizens allow this? It is the greedy, sold out bureaucrats at the top siphoning off funds or simply underfunding crucial social programs so they can fight the global war on terror that are responsible, not the provision of the service itself.

It goes back to the old guns or butter economic question. Megalomaniacs with delusions of world domination are more than willing to sacrifice the needs of their people on the altar of their ill-gotten gains. That is exactly the circumstance the American people are suffering through right now.

Care for the widowed, judge the fatherless, minister to the poor. History shows us that judgment is sure to fall on those who fail to do so.



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   
@ Icarua Rising

I am against the Government forcing you to have health care.
I am doubly opposed to Government running health care.

This is a free country and if you want to pay for your own health care, you should be able to.

I'll spin it again!
Walter Reed is an example of what Government run health care would look like.



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Then the government needs to change the way it does business and become more accountable for its actions.

Government is the servant of the people, not the other way around. If the people have legitimate needs, it is the government's responsibility and mandate to provide services to meet those needs. Imo, there is a legitimate need in this country for healthcare to be provided to those unable to purchase it for themselves. Of course you wouldn't be forced to have it. You don't have to personally approve of every program your tax dollars fund. I know I don't. But I have enough of a social conscience to know there are those less fortunate that have legitimate needs that should be served by government programs.





new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join