This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Veterans Issues

  • Washington Post: Want to help veterans? Stop pitying them.

    Chief Tango sends us a link to an opinion piece in today’s Washington Post by Howard Schultz and Rajiv Chandrasekaran entitled “Want to help veterans? Stop pitying them” which is basically the same thing that we’ve been saying for a while.

    The press, politicians and even many veterans’ advocacy groups tend to focus, with legitimate reason, on service members who have returned banged up or who are struggling in their new civilian lives. But this fails to convey the full measure of this generation of veterans. That wouldn’t be a problem if Americans knew their military and understood these stories in context, with the knowledge of veterans who are thriving. But fewer than 1 percent of Americans have participated in our latest wars. Add their direct family members, and it is still only about 5 percent of the population.

    With so few possessing a direct link to someone who has served, Americans often don’t understand that most of our veterans are not damaged and that many have successfully navigated the transition to life after the military. Even those suffering from trauma or physical injuries can have an enormously positive impact in their communities. Our veterans can make — and are making — valuable contributions in business, government, education, health and community service.

    Our all-volunteer force has provided us with the best-trained military in the world. The reliance on volunteers, however, has led many other Americans to pay scant attention to the sacrifice and skill of our warriors. We let them protect us, while we go on with life as usual.

    That lat part is probably the fault of George W. Bush who told us to go with our lives as usual so the terrorists don’t win. Some people don’t understand the limits of that statement. Some saw it as their duty to fight terrorism in the malls with their dollars and their inattention to the war. So now, their “pity” for veterans springs from that inattention. The only veterans that they read about in the news are the ones who misbehave and blame their military service for their crimes. Those are the veterans, or the non-veteran pretenders who thrive on the pity.

    I can rattle off the names of folks from Tim Poe to James Deon Korfhage who lied about their service to make excuses for their behavior. To get pity from judges and audiences.

    The concern about prospective bosses prying into post-traumatic stress or asking “Did you ever kill anyone?” prompted one active-duty soldier to tell us that he is more nervous about sitting for a job interview than he is about redeploying to Afghanistan.

    That feeds the whole “pity” thing for people who have no experience or understanding of military service. They’re actually victims of the popular culture and the media who want to tell about the “crazy vets” who do bad things because George W. Bush sent them to war instead of the mall.

    Paying attention to the many who have returned with serious physical and mental wounds is one way to build that support. But pity isn’t a sustainable strategy. A better recognition of the overall veteran experience — the bad, the good and everything in between — is essential to forging a lasting compact between those who have served and the rest of us.

    The “pity” thing feeds the phonies who only compound their bad behavior with more bad behavior while the mall walkers pity them. After the Vietnam War, the popular culture (obviously, not all folks) reviled veterans for what they’d done in the war and the pendulum has swung back to the other extreme and everyone wants to be a veteran, even those with minimal or non-existent service. The “pity” is the attraction.

    Rajiv Chandrasekaran has contributed mightily to the “pity” for veterans in the pages of the Post. For example, his columns After the Wars: The other wounds and After the wars: A legacy of pain and pride, so I guess this one as well as his book due out this month is his penance.

    It’s easier for Washington Post’s readers and writers to think of veterans as victims of George W. Bush than to acknowledge their own contributions to the popular culture’s perception of veterans.

  • DoD Corrects an Error

    Everyone who serves in the military – well, everyone except those literally dumb enough to qualify as “rocks with lips” – knows that it’s a dangerous job. The Pale Horse and his Rider are constant companions; sometimes they’re near at hand, and sometimes they’re far in the distance. But they’re always there.

    Those serving accept this. All they ask is that, should the worst happen, they be taken care of properly and given their due.

    Most of the time, DoD does that. But sometimes DoD stumbles. (Don’t get me started on Fort Hood.)

    That’s why it’s incredibly heartening to see this:

    Marine corporal is reclassified as 1st to die in Operation Inherent Resolve

    Rest in peace, Cpl Spears. It took a while, but DoD got their act together regarding your demise.

  • Lermon: What those who serve their country deserve

    The Washington Times invited our own Mike Lermon to respond to their October 19th article disparaging the traditional Veterans Service Organizations. If Mike wants to tell you his screen name here, he can do that in the comments. But he hit many of the points that I did, but he was much more artful;

    I’m writing today in response to The Washington Times article by Jacqueline Klimas on Oct. 19. Interestingly enough, I read this piece in the lobby of my local VA clinic on Monday morning. The broad-brushed “out of touch” characterization of groups such as the VFW and American Legion, and the overall tone that permeated much of the article, was very surprising and disappointing as I watched groups of selfless veteran volunteers — mostly from the Vietnam era that forms the majority of their membership — diligently helping the clinic staff and cheerfully assisting every one of their brothers and sisters who walked in the door. Based upon my experiences with the veterans from this visit and other similar encounters in my community, the people who make these groups worth supporting are out helping their fellow veterans at 10 a.m. in places like the VA clinics and Vet Centers, instead of just drinking and smoking at the post hall.

    You should click over and read the article to let the Times know that we veterans are watching.

  • Bed & Breakfast stays for vets

    Bed & Breakfast stays for vets

    BnBFinder

    The folks at BnBFinder want you to know that some of the people they list are offering discounts on Bed & Breakfast stays for veterans on Veterans’ Day. There are quite a few at their website. I noticed that some of the places are already booked up, so if it sounds like a good idea, you’d better hurry.

  • GY6: misconceptions about veterans

    GY6: misconceptions about veterans

    Vanderhoof2

    Chief Tango sends us a link to Army Times which reports on a poll commissioned by those people at “Got Your 6” in regards to the perception that Americans have of veterans. It’s not surprising really that 46% of the people polled thought that a hobo is most likely a veteran, that only ten percent of the polled thought that a successful businessman might be a veteran.

    “The perception of veterans is just not aligned with reality,” said Chris Marvin, managing director of Got Your Six. “A lot of the time, people just have a completely wrong image in their minds.”

    […]

    The good news, he said, is that those opinions seem based more on unfamiliarity with veterans than on deep-seated beliefs about them.

    “We’re not talking about religion or politics here,” Marvin said. “We know we can change people’s minds on this.”

    Marvin and campaign officials have been sharing portions of the results with Hollywood writers and producers, encouraging them to bring more nuanced portrayals of veterans into their scripts.

    Yeah, well, Hollywood is the reason that Americans have that perception. Movies like “Deer Hunter”, “Coming Home”, “Apocalypse Now” all portray veterans as borderline psychopaths who are one loud noise away from exploding all over society.

    The media is another reason. You only read about veterans who commit horrific crimes – like Jared Loughner, the Tuscon shooter who once stopped into an Army recruiter office and caught the PTSD while he was there. Then there was the highly-trained veteran in the Pacific Northwest who drowned in a mud puddle while on the run from police. That fellow who gunned down some Sikhs in California who spent a few months in the Army two decades ago. And the crazed World War two veteran who finally cracked 70 years after his service and shot up the Holocaust Museum. A veteran pulls several people out of a burning home, or drags an injured driver from his his vehicle which is engulfed in flames barely get a mention in the local news.

    Make lying about your military service a crime and start locking the liars up then the homeless veteran population would drop by half. The folks who make their grievance money from holding up phony vets as homeless wouldn’t go along with that.

    You know, “Got Your 6” should go back to Hollywood and convince them to portray veterans in a better light, but it won’t work. Hollywood doesn’t want to do movies about well-adjusted folks who play by the rules. There are a million success stories out there, but there’s no box office draw because the culture is corrupted – it was corrupted by Hollywood who makes their money criticizing this country. Successful veterans who go to work every day and save the world from itself aren’t newsworthy enough.

    And, oh, yeah, I’ve sent people who could use “Got Your 6” help to them, and we got the sound of crickets chirping as an answer. Got Your 6 is nothing but something that Hollywood people can throw their money at and feel better about themselves – while stabbing vets in the back.

  • Washington Times: Younger veterans bypass VFW, American Legion for service, fitness groups

    Washington Times: Younger veterans bypass VFW, American Legion for service, fitness groups

    The Washington Times features an article today entitled Younger veterans bypass VFW, American Legion for service, fitness groups and it features a picture of my little buddy, Kate Hoit with whom I disagree more often than agree, and this is another instance. The article by Jacqueline Klimas reports the age-old stereotype of the Veterans Service organizations (VSOs) as being out-of-touch with modern veterans, that all they are is dingy little clubhouses for aged veterans reliving their glory days stooped over a beer. That younger veterans are flocking to the new veterans organizations;

    The new generation of veterans instead is gravitating toward groups organized around activities such as running or volunteering, and groups that allow nonmilitary members to take part as well.

    Younger veterans say the traditional organizations differ in many ways from groups that appeal to them, including the types of advocacy they do and their ways of communication — “snail mail” versus email.

    Vietnam veterans will recall how the VSOs weren’t exactly welcoming them home from their war either. Now look at who is running the VFW and the American Legion – the Vietnam veterans.

    The Times article talks about our friends at Team Rubicon which deploys veterans to crises around the world to lend a helping hand. They talk about the fitness club Team Red, White and Blue, and I encourage veterans to participate in those organizations if that’s your thing. But does your club have legislative directors that represent your interests in government?

    A good example of what the old VSOs do for you is when the Obama Administration were going to force service-connected disabled veterans into private insurance – the American Legion and the VFW marched into the Oval Office and demanded that they back off – and they did.

    The plans for your future are in debate now in Congress and in the halls of the Pentagon and there are only a few obstacles to them screwing you and the rest of veterans to the wall, and those obstacles are the VFW, the American Legion and the Military Officers Association of America, not Team Rubicon or Team RWB – what gives them the strength that they have in Congress and the White House is their membership numbers and the infrastructure that the VSOs have already established for generations. I doubt your local fitness club will spend much time in front of Congressional committees defending your COLA increase, or make a big deal out of the failures of the Veterans Affairs folks.

    In addition, the VSOs represent you individually in your VA claims. The Paralyzed Veterans of America got my disability claim processed without me having to leave my house.

    Yeah, if you take a short-term view of your life, the fitness clubs and the other organizations look good, but there will come a time when you’ll need more than fellowship from your club. And this administration is a clear example of why we really need the old VSOs, given that they expect more from veterans while cheating us out of the things we were promised.

    I’m a life member of the American Legion, the VFW and the Disabled Veterans of America and it’s like insurance for my future, and the future of all veterans even though I didn’t get much out of it when I joined initially. One day, the younger veterans will be running those VSOs like the Vietnam vets are now running them. But can you imagine how future government leaders will be able to screw you without those VSOs?

    Added: A link to our friends at The Burn Pit on the subject

  • On “getting over ourselves”

    Chief Tango sends us a link to the Washington Beacon article about an employee at a Public Radio station in Binghamton, NY who was fired because that employee sent an email to the campaign of Rep. Chris Gibson (R., N.Y.) who also happens to be a retired Army colonel with four tours of Iraq under his belt. The email supposedly reads;

    A WIOX employee used the press release to express his annoyance with Gibson’s career as a member of the military.

    “Cool,” a WIOX staffer wrote in response. “Someday maybe he will find a real job like the rest of us and not live off the taxpayers [sic] money as he has done his whole life.”

    I’ll admit that it was a pretty crappy thing to say and the writer is probably an illiterate asshole, but, what concerns me is the underlying issue here. That issue being that members and former members of the armed services are above criticism, and that it will cost your job to criticize them. Yeah, we have taken a lot of shit from the 99%, but a politician who runs on his military career shouldn’t be above criticism. Apparently, the Gibson campaign released the email to the media and that’s how we found out about all of this.

    Coincidentally, I republished a link from our buddy, Commander Salamander last night on our Facebook page to some acclaim, that blog post was entitled “Really, some of us really need to get over ourselves” some of us referring to veterans. He quotes from Carl Forsling at Task & Purpose and so will I;

    Many veterans pull the vet card anytime a civilian upsets them, be that at a government office, a bar, or a traffic stop. But the worst examples are at retail establishments. If Home Depot doesn’t give a non-active-duty veteran 10% off every single day, or Sears has a hard time processing your free gift card, guess what? They didn’t have to give special treatment to vets in the first place. So when the minimum-wage ticket clerk at an amusement park doesn’t allow you to take a fourth family member in for free admission, don’t lecture her about your extensive deployment experience.

    If you have a legitimate gripe about a store’s discount policy, politely ask to see a copy. If it doesn’t include your service status or the type of ID you have, then stop. Just stop there. If you think it should include you, then calmly ask to speak to a manager. If that doesn’t work, then write a simple, concise e-mail to their corporate headquarters. No one, including other veterans, wants to hear an angry vet venting about an imaginary slight, whether in person or in a poorly-conceived YouTube or Facebook post. You’re spoiling it for everyone else. That advice goes double for spouses.

    “I was in Afghanistan/Iraq/wherever” is not an answer to anything other than, “So where did you serve?” Also, no one, in or out of the military, wants to hear your story about indirect fire at the forward operating base. Let it go.

    “So how will everyone know that I’m a badass soldier/Marine/sailor/airman?” Well, if you really are such a force to be reckoned with, people will know. Regaling them with unsolicited tales of bravado isn’t helping anybody. If you want to prove you’re a stand-up guy, do it with your actions, not your words.

    Yeah, we’re all proud of our service and probably the only place we talk about it is here amongst ourselves and no one here shoves their war stories down everyone else’s throat because we’ve had the same experiences, we’ve all done things that the civilians can’t even imagine, but I really hate it when some of those among us use their service as a shield.

    A certain Reverend Doctor comes to mind. If you watched his dumbass video, when the cops were knocking on the door of the car in which he was sleeping, at night, in a public park, the first words out of his mouth were “I’m a veteran and I have PTSD”. Honestly, I hate that.

    Now, I’ll be the first to admit that I’m an asshole, and the Army made me the best asshole I can be, but, that’s what I am, I’m not going to hide behind my service in the Army to escape criticism. I’m certainly not going to get someone fired because they criticized me.

    Yet, it’s better now than it was during the post-Vietnam Era when veterans of that war were shamed into silence about their careers – that ended when the Vietnam Wall was erected in DC, and the idiots came out of the woodwork. And we see it everyday here – those who did the least are the loudest about how they should be treated better by the civilians.

    Many of the people here suffer from PTS, but you’d never know it. Some of you have written to us in private emails and told us how being a member of this small community have helped them deal with their problems. We have members here who have served in every US combat action since the Korean War, because, to some degree, we’ve all experienced the same things. Separately, but equally. But, we’re not shoving it down the throats of non-veterans, and yes, we have some of them among us, too.

    But there are others, you can all name one, who begin every sentence with the fact that they’re “100% disabled combat Purple Heart trail assassin”. As CDR Salamander and Mr Forsling (a Marine MV-22B instructor pilot, by the way) that should only be the answer to an appropriate question, not the way to shield yourself from the realities of the world.

    In summation, Mr. Gibson should announce that the inappropriate email to his campaign should not be the cause for that public radio employee’s firing. I’d hate that we live up (or down) to the expectations of the general public and bully them with our service. Over.

  • White Horses

    Seeing TSO’s article from last night regarding the ongoing Left Coast “Saga of Teh Stoopid” reminded me of something I’ve been pondering for a while. So since Jonn lets me wax foolish here from time to time, I decided I’d share it.

    Yeah, that means I’m about to ramble “off the res” a bit again. Consider yourselves warned. (smile)

    . . .

    TSO ended his article with a lyric from Emerson, Lake, and Palmer – ELP, for short. It was thoroughly apropos for his purposes.

    But it brings to mind another tune from ELP. And I’d guess that one resonates even more strongly, if perhaps a bit ambiguously, with many of TAH’s readers.

    The tune is Lucky Man. For those readers who might be unfamiliar with it, I’ve linked a clip below.

    Released in 1970, the song was not written to protest the Vietnam War – though many at the time and since doubtless took it to be exactly that. Greg Lake, the song’s author, wrote in 1959-1960, when he was 12 years old. It sat unrecorded until the sessions for ELP’s first album – and ended up on that self-titled record.

    It’s not a typical ELP tune.  It’s written more-or-less as a piece from an English Medieval traveling minstrel, updated to be more modern lyrically.  Lake wrote it on and for the acoustic guitar.

    On the surface, the song addresses the futility of war and the waste of life inherent in same. A man who “had everything” goes to war and loses it all when he’s killed in battle. It makes a powerful, if perhaps unintended, anti-war statement.   Many doubtless see the tune as a paean for pacifism.

    And yet . . . I think most of us who’ve served may view it a bit differently.

    In the song, yes – the main character dies. And he’s understandably sad on realizing he’s about to die.

    But consider:  he dies voluntarily. He dies while serving a cause greater than himself. And he dies doing his duty to that greater cause – in this case, his nation.

    His nation called. He answered. It cost him dearly.  But he died honorably and true to himself nonetheless.

    Each of us who has served has given that possibility some thought. Anyone who’s served and hasn’t (or didn’t) is IMO a complete and utter fool.

    And anyone who’s served voluntarily has decided – implicitly or explicitly – “I’m OK with that”.

    . . .

    Anyway, my take is this: yes, the story is sad. Life is sad sometimes. Not all stories have happy endings.

    But in at least one respect, IMO the title is apropos. The man in question’s life was forfeit while serving a cause that mattered. He spent his life willingly. While not perhaps the end he wanted, he went out on his own terms while doing what he wanted to do.  The ending to his life was honorable.

    Some aren’t so lucky. They never do anything meaningful in their lives. They never serve a cause larger than themselves.   And whatever they do, it’s about their wants and needs – not about serving a greater cause.

    So you tell me: was the man lucky? I don’t know. Everyone has to decide that for themselves. I’ve got somewhat mixed feelings personally.

    But on balance, I’d have to say – yes he was. He died doing his duty, voluntarily serving his nation.  He died doing something that mattered.

    I’d guess many of our readers feel the same.

    . . .

    Enough rambling for today.  Heading back to the res.