It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Veterans not entitled to mental health care, U.S. lawyers argue

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 08:22 AM
reply to post by grover

Which is why i said "I remember hearing stories"

Forgive me if i get the names mixed up, but I also remember reading a thread by one of the ATS Mix team members, (Dave Rabbit I think) which mentioned what I had heard.

Either way, You and I agree, Bush shows no love or support to those he is so willing to send off to kill and die.

[edit on 7-2-2008 by InSpiteOf]

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 08:29 AM
reply to post by InSpiteOf

I have been racking my brain about it ever since I posted about it but I do remember watching something on PBS recently about the end of the Vietnam war and how those claims were made but none were ever verified.

I am an old hippy who ended up serving in the mid 70's and most of the people I knew had the brains to know the difference between those who served and those who made the policy... the real ones who needed spitting upon, now as then.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 08:35 AM
It really bites my ample butt when I hear so much from the flag waving right wing about supporting our troops when their administration has done everything it can to throughly screw them.

If you really want to support our troops and veterans (which all troops will be someday) push your representatives and senators to fund the VA to the level it should be instead of nickel and diming them to death. The VA Administration, hospitals and all should be an entitlement program with set, tied to the cost of living funding instead of making them beg for every penny and if you are a vet with a disability join the DAV.

How this administration treats our vets after using them so callously is obscene.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 09:51 AM
reply to post by grover

No worries, i doubt PBS interviewed every returning draftee or volunteer.

Its quite possible that it happened on a smaller scale, and not en mass, as may have been suggested.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 04:14 PM
Okay this one makes me ill. The War Monger Administration wants to send our troops into an illegal War (and keep sending them and sending them), and then decides that they don't deserve the best healthcare possible. I am simply astounded. My only theory here is that somehow the man is so incredibly stupid that he actually believes he's playing with little green and tan plastic army men.

Picture him in his room at night in his little footy PJs with a green plastic tank in his hand:
"Didja see that there Laura? Got myself a whole heap o' them terrorist varmints. Eracticafied alla 'em. They hate us for our freedom y'know sweet cheeks but I'll get 'em."
"Good Georgie now take your pill and say your prayers. Nightie night time."

Get serious! This is just one more thing to add to the list of atrocities that this admin. is blatantly willing to commit.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 04:37 PM

Originally posted by grover
Get your facts straight and stop parroting the old blame Clinton line... its tedious and wrong.

Oh, really? And when they were doing a mass voluntary separation of troops in the USAF in 1993 because they had too many, that was Bush's fault?

Hmmmmm....and I thought I knew who was signing my paychecks back then.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 04:44 PM
As I had said previously, since when this is Bush's fault? Why is everyone busting on the present administration?

This has been going on for years!! Vets don't get decent medical benefits after they are wounded or retire from service. You do your 20+ years and you have to jump thru major hoops to get anything from the government.

And if it's not documented in your military medical records, I wouldn't count on them doing anything about it at all. For example, guys screw up their knees from jumping from perfectly good aircraft and don't say anything because they don't want to pulled from jump status. They retire, have knee problems, and since it's not in their records, the VA doesn't do squat.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 04:49 PM
At the last count there were 200,000 plus homeless veterans in the U.S.; over 25,000 alone,in the Los Angeles area where I live. A large majority of these vets have MH issues, among other things. I am a Viet Nam Vet but I also have several friends from the Desert Storm and also from OEF/OIF theaters. It's a travesty that the VA is not doing more to get these men and women the help they need and deserve. These veterans have seen and experienced things that will scar them forever and it really enrages me that they are being treated so poorly by the government and country that they served so faithfully.

As far as McCain is concerned, he has stated several times in campaign speeches and Q&A sessions that our troops could be in Iraq for up to 50 years! Those were his words when asked how long it would be before we left Iraq. Frankly, I don't hold out much hope for our troops if he is elected, although as a Viet Nam Vet and POW, he may have some good ideas for revamping the VA and getting some help to our returning vets.

Grover - I can attest to the poor treatment that Viet Nam vets received when they returned to the States; although I never saw anyone spit on, I did see & hear many insulting, demeaning remarks and gestures directed at myself and others who were in uniform. Thank God that the men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are treated with honor and respect when they get back to the States. It was over twenty years after I got back before I heard my firsr, "welcome home" and that was from another Viet Nam vet!

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 04:54 PM
reply to post by palehorse23

But wait!

I thought our government cared about our troops so much that they were investing resources and partnering with big pharmaceutical companies to give them drugs to numb them to the horrors of war just to help them live normal lives after their service.

That's what it was all about, right?

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 05:41 PM

Originally posted by Stormrider
Thank God that the men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are treated with honor and respect when they get back to the States.

Yeah, that's true.

But I get called a warmonger here on ATS.

Back on track: The entire VA system needs to be overhauled from top to bottom. It seems to be easier to navigate your way thru the IRS tax code than it is a VA office.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 05:54 PM
This is the first I've heard of this.

There are two things to take into account here.

1. The lawsuit was brought by two organizations I've never heard of.

2. The details of the case are not really all that clear from the article.

After the Civil War, America made a commitment to the nation that the veteran, his widow and his orphan would be looked after, but the reality is that the government has always tried to get off with as little as possible.

That would be you, the Americans, anyway.

Therefore, it has been in the interest of veterans to join together to lobby for adequate benefits and that battle has been ongoing for generations.

There is nothing new in this and the only reason most here are surprised to here this is that they've never had any interest in this issue until now and I'm willing to bet the interest only goes so far as just a one more good reason to bash the Bush administration.

In The Fifties, the Eisenhower administration ordered a study of the veteran population, its needs, and its rights. Omar Bradley was placed in charge of this study.

In a nutshell, the committee arrived at the conclusion that service to one's country was not sufficient cause to create a special class of citizens who have rights over and above the rest of the population.

Frankly, I can only find one source for this news and that's the SF Chronicle, who doesn't have a history of giving a hoot about the military or veterans.

If we knew better what the claims were in the lawsuit, we might find that the government's argument is based on the precedent set by the Bradley study that has been the basis of policy through fifty years of administrations.

There are many fine veterans' organizations that have been fighting for veteran's rights for a hundred years or so, some maybe more.

The fact that none of these organizations are listed as parties to this suit might tell us something about the validity of this lawsuit.

Most here know that I am a veteran.

I have had running battles with the VA that have lasted for decades.

Problems with the government bureaucracy that is called the VA are nothing new and they certainly did not start with the Bush administration.

It's not right, but that's the way it is and it is why I have belonged to one veterans' organization or another over the years.

Those who have a genuine interest in this issue should get in touch with their legislators to voice their opinion that veterans' issues should be fully funded.

As for the rest of you, let the Bush bashing continue.

[edit on 2008/2/7 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 07:20 PM
reply to post by jerico65

You didn't read what I wrote did you? It started under bush senior and continued under Clinton as a stand down from the cold war.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 08:26 PM
reply to post by GradyPhilpott

hey Grady. Many of us out here are not of the same experiences as you have had. We are not part of the military and are just now getting into the age of being concerned about politics and issues as this. I for one am 33. growing up basically late 70'2 and through 80's. At a young age you do not understand about government and its inner workings. this takes time and experience which I am learning each and everyday. We need people to educate us as to things they have experienced and dealt with. It has taken the beginning of a family for me to start to realize what is and has been happening over the years. I am more concerned now than ever. These things that I say Bush has done are because it is my most immediate experience. So yes, I am a Bush basher I guess. I had some issues with Clinton presidency and Bush Sr. but didn't really focus much because I had other concerns such as woman, partying, and college. Now that I am married and have a son, the real issues are what I am concerned with. I did not have the, for lack of a better word, pleasure to live in the 50's, 60's, or 70's when these government things you talk about happened.
So, in closing, I thank you for knowledge and insight on these matters but I don't know how to take your comments sometimes. Don't know if they are sarcastic or intended to be educational. Maybe it's just me. If so, I hope you don't take my comments in the wrong way. I appreciate your input. But please bear with those of us who are here to learn from others who have been around longer and have more "experience" in life. At the same time, not all of us may agree with you on everything you say. To me it is part of the "learning" curve.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 08:31 PM

Originally posted by grover
You didn't read what I wrote did you? It started under bush senior and continued under Clinton as a stand down from the cold war.

And? It's not like Clinton was any buddy to the military. But he would draw us like a gun whenever he felt the need.

The military was pretty bloated back then, to tell the truth. They just let go too many too quick.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 08:47 PM
palehorse23, you are so spot on with this thread.
So many issues need to be brought straight up into the forefront of the publics eye that are conveniently being suppressed and ignored, forgotten.
The opposite side of To Draft Our Young, to Support our Troops, is the return of our Soldiers and the respect we owe them.
I do not think Socialized medicine has worked in the past and do not now. I think that it will only make the situation worse and more controlled. Yes controlled medicine is one of the political options for the vulnerable.
Tell people to continue to email their representatives, make phone calls and support them for all they do to help in this important crisis.
Above all be polite and conscious of what you say. For those on Government subsidized life styles, this should be a wake up call after all if the Government can turn their back on the most important Vets of my lifetime, then what is there to say for civilians?

[edit on 7-2-2008 by antar]

[edit on 7-2-2008 by antar]

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 09:57 PM

You may take me at my word. I do use such devices as satire, sarcasm, hyperbole, etc., but the astute reader will be able to recognize these things for what they are.

I'm not here to rattle cages.

All the things you mentioned in your post about not having lived through certain eras is true of us all.

We can only know what we have experienced, unless of course we educate ourselves.

This is the reason that someone once said something to the effect that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Mark my word. I have lived through this.

The leftist media will do all in their power to paint all returning veterans as walking time bombs and this story is a perfect vehicle for that theme.

The recent New York Times story about returning vets being involved in violent crime failed to compare those data to the general population.

When all the data were included, it was shown that veterans were far less likely to be involved in violent crime than those individuals in the same demographics in the general population.

Government will always be a problem, no one understood that more than our Founders, but in the long haul, the record will show that the enemy of veterans is not the government, but the enemy within who all too often run the media.

But, don't take my word for it, just kick back and watch the show. It has only just begun.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 10:05 PM

Congress Send Economic Aid Plan to Bush With Tax Rebates for Many; Bush Signals Approval

Aid not much for disabled vets

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress, facing the prospect of an election-year recession, passed an emergency plan Thursday that rushes rebates of $600 to $1,200 to most taxpayers and $300 checks to disabled veterans, the elderly and other low-income people. President Bush indicated he would sign the measure.

How do you guys feel about this. It just came across the yahoo wire. How do disabled vets only get 300 bucks. How does that help the economy. Three hundred doesn't go very far. To be honest, neither does 1200.

posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 10:12 PM
reply to post by GradyPhilpott

The recent New York Times story about returning vets being involved in violent crime failed to compare those data to the general population.

This seems to be true of all "studies". And trust me, I do feel I am along for the ride. I think there will be devastating changes on this planet that probably will do a lot of us in before anything can really be changed. But, that is just my feeling. Government is and definitely always will be a problem no matter who is running the show. And don't forget, the Right side of the media also doesn't paint true pictures of the military either. Give it up for rupert Murdoch!!!

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 01:16 AM
The Bush admin. is being bashed because it is they who are arguing this. Not matter the precedent, it is they who asked our soldiers to put themselves in the path of death ... and without question ... so, it is they who must fight to change that precedent if need be ... not the other way around. Bush, Cheney, Clinton, Obama ... NONE of them risk the way our fighting forces do ... NONE of them ... in any way ... so let them show bravery another way ... by standing by those who they asked to stand.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:16 AM
reply to post by SpookshowJon

Well, I submit to you that the article that this thread is based on provided so little information about the specifics of the case that you don't know enough to pass judgement.

The attorneys for the US are answering the claims made by those who have brought the lawsuit and it might very well be that the arguments being made are the same ones that would be made by the lawyers for any administration where such a suit was filed.

I said earlier that facts don't get in the way of those who will use any thread to bash Bush, regardless of whether it is his fault or not.

I pointed out earlier that this suit is brought by veterans' groups that I've never heard of and I haven't heard a word about it from any of the mainstream veterans' groups who have made it their business to protect veterans' rights for a century or more.

I will do more research on this matter and see what the consensus is in the veterans' community at large and whether this case has merit.

The VA is going to have to do a lot of expanding to care for returning vets.

That's not always easy, because mental health professional and health professionals don't grow on trees.

But, don't let the lack of facts get in the way of a good thrashing of the president.

<< 1    3 >>

log in