Category: Veterans Issues

A few weeks ago, we wrote about the Virginian-Pilot’s article which speculated whether the arsonist sought in a string of costly fires was perhaps a special operations trooper, or even, a first responder. Well, according to the Washington Post, an arsonist was arrested in the area and the investigation is leaning towards tying the criminal to the other 80 fires. Yeah, I think it might be a special forces soldier;

Tonya S. Bundick, 40, of Accomack County, was taken into custody just after midnight following a traffic stop near an arson at a vacant residence in the town of Melfa, police said. The fire was discovered around 11:40 p.m. on Monday and was quickly extinguished.

Bundick was charged with one felony count of arson and one felony count of conspiracy to commit arson in connection with the Melfa fire. Police are also interviewing a second person of interest, who has not been charged.

There have been 77 blazes set in Accomack County since mid-November in what authorities have described as one of the worst serial arson cases in Virginia history.

Of course, the special forces soldiers are skilled at completely hiding their identities, even becoming haggard-looking crack-addicted women. So, Virginian-Pilot, we military veterans are all sitting here patiently awaiting our apology – but I don’t think any of us are stupid enough to hold our breath.

Our buddy, Coby Dillard, sent us the text of his latest editorial and he said that he’s interested in what veterans have to say about it, so he sent it here for your opinions;

TOO OFTEN, when we start talking about the nation’s fiscal health, the discussion begins with cuts to the military and veterans. Under the Obama Administration, the Department of Defense has made more cuts than other cabinet agencies combined — and that’s before sequestration began. Military retirees face changes and increased out of pocket expenses for the TRICARE program.

One would think that it disrespectful to ask those who risk everything, every day, to bear the brunt of our politicians’ irresponsibility. However, there is a group of veterans who, if asked, might be willing to make another sacrifice on behalf of their country.

The VA’s disability compensation system pays veterans based on the disability percentage assigned by the VA; the higher the percentage, the more the veteran receives.

A veteran who is 100 percent disabled and unmarried receives a monthly payment of $2,816; when spouses and children and dependent parents are included, the payment exceeds $3,000 a month. In some rural areas, this is enough to live in a degree of comfort.

A veteran who is 10 percent or 20 percent disabled receives a payment of $129 or $255. This may cover a few expenses, but is not nearly enough to allow the veteran to live on without finding work. While veterans rated at 30 percent disability or above can receive additional monies for spouses and children, those below that threshold cannot.

To be certain, a disability percentage does not equate to a higher or lower degree of sacrifice; all who serve bear the weight of the nation. Also, a truly grateful nation should work to take care of those who have borne the battle, as President Lincoln said.

Suppose, however, that the government asked its veterans rated at 10 percent and 20 percent to give up their compensation as an act of sacrifice; as their final act of service.

Temporarily, of course; the compensation could be reinstated when the nation is in better fiscal health. But what if the government requested that these veterans — especially those in lucrative jobs — voluntarily give up their compensation until the nation was better situated to fully show appreciation for their service?

How many 10 percent and 20 percent disabled veterans would take them up on their request? As one, I know I would.

We as a nation have lost the true meaning of sacrifice. For many, it means forgoing the iPhone 5 for the iPhone 4. Veterans don’t have that problem; we know, better than most, what it means to forgo something — birthdays, holidays, anniversaries — in service and support of a greater good.

And if asked to do so again, I believe many of us would.

Now that the wars have slipped off the national screen, it’s time for journalists to start taking pot shots at veterans of those wars, like they did during the Vietnam Era. Of course, I see it as penis envy, or something, wherein the journalists got a good look at how useless they really are during the wars, how the big contribution they thought they were going to have on changing the world is really just a popcorn fart in the Great Scheme of Things.

Two journalists in particular have popped up in my inbox. The first, Bill MacClellan at the Saint Louis Post Dispatch thinks that most of us don’t even deserve a military funeral;

Both the federal government and the state government are broke. So why are we providing military funeral honors for all veterans? It is a nice gesture we can’t afford.

Certainly, men and women killed in combat deserve full military honors. It’s a way for the country to say, “We honor the memory of those who died in our service.” These military honors — and the thought behind them — are intended to provide some solace for the families of the fallen.

But what about the guy who spends a couple of years in the military and then gets on with his life? Bear in mind that most veterans did nothing heroic. They served, and that’s laudable, but it hardly seems necessary to provide them all with military honors after they have died.

What an asshole. I mean seriously. Just because he never wore a uniform (at least he didn’t hide behind someone else’s service for his vacuous rant), what gives him the right to decide whose service is worthy of a military funeral? Just so Bill knows, in these times, just stepping up and wearing a uniform is ten times more worthy than the rest of you shitheels who snipe at us for our service.

Over at the Washington Post, Charles Lane, another opinionated fartknocker has decided that we don’t deserve Tricare;

Neither the recently adopted Senate budget plan for fiscal 2014, drafted by Democrats, nor the supposedly “austere” Ryan budget passed by the Republican House, touched Tricare. Hell hath no fury like a veterans’ lobby scorned, as senators and representatives of both parties know.

So do I! In anticipation of a lot of hate mail, I would note that I respect and honor America’s veterans. They should be well provided for, including reasonable health benefits. But no one — not even a veteran — is entitled to taxpayer support regardless of competing public needs.

In the case of Tricare, this is what the veterans’ lobbies have demanded of Congress, and what Congress has given them.

Yeah, both Lane and McClellan say that because we’re broke, we can’t afford these veterans’ benefits anymore. Mostly because they don’t know what the sacrifice to military service involves, although you can be certain that, given a chance to explain, they’ll tell you how their grandfathers stormed the beaches at Okinawa or some damn thing. We all had a choice whether we wanted to serve or not, but these things that they want to take from us are factors that led to the decision to continue service.

I dare either one of those so-called journalists to publicly disparage those people on Social Security for smoking pot, or anyone else who has made a living out of government benefits without giving anything back. Veterans have at least earned those benefits around the world, whether or not we’ve done anything that rises to MacClellan’s or Lane’s standards of valorous service worthy of these benefits.

ADDED: StrikeFO emails to let us know that Bill MacClellan claims in another article that he was “drafted” into the Marine Corps, so there’s a possibility that he was a Marine, but his wording in the article leaves me with some doubt. Some draftees were drafted a second time into the Marines in the 60s, but it was a very rare occurrence.

Pat sends us a link from the Washington Post which does a fairly good job, surprisingly, representing Maryland veterans in the gun debate;

Since he has returned from Afghanistan, A.J. Wynne, 24, who was a corporal in the Marines, has spent countless hours shooting in the farmland north of Frederick. On a recent Sunday, he picked up his semiautomatic rifle, put down his demons and let muscle memory take over.

Breathe. Focus. Squeeze.

The weapon erupted into a violent cacophony — 30 shots in 11 seconds — and sent the crows in the treesbolting skyward.

The smile made his beard rise. He reloaded.

“It’s not yoga — it’s not graceful in any sense of the word, but I could do this all day long,” he said. “It’s just something that you go do to relax, to calm down.”

Wynne knows there are those who would argue that he is perhaps the last person who should be given unfettered access to high-powered, semiautomatic rifles that are designed to emulate the weapons he was trained to use in battle.

According to the article, some delegates to the legislature are rethinking a total ban on scary black rifles because of veterans and competitive shooters who have entered the debate. But, of course there are idiots in the article like Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown, a colonel in the Army Reserve who says;

“It’s nonsense,” said Brown, the highest-ranking U.S. elected official to have served in Iraq. “The military trains us on these military-style assault weapons to perform a combat mission, and that combat mission does not exist in the communities of Maryland or anywhere in this country.”

But, I’ll bet you that the dingus has a scary black rifle in his den. I didn’t realize how much I missed my M16 until I bought an AR this last year and that familiar feel of the pistol grip, my thumb knew right where to go for the selector switch and it felt like coming home. I didn’t need a foregrip on it, because the plastic handguards felt so good, but when I read Dianne Feinstein’s bill and discovered that she thought a foregrip should be illegal, I bought one. When I read that the Department of Homeland Security warned surplus store owners that anyone buying bipods for their rifle might be a terrorist, I immediately went out and bought three bipods.

The Post actually admits that veterans are are influencing the vote in Maryland with facts;

But the plight of veterans is one lawmakers, especially in the House, have heard loudly.

Veterans were a heavy presence among more than 1,300 people who on March 1 amassed in Annapolis to testify against O’Malley’s plan. Many cited federal data to stress that their rifles are for good, not for harm: Out of 398 Maryland homicides in 2011, two were carried out with rifles.

Yeah, so guns are a veteran issue, especially judging by the links that y’all send me dealing with the gun issue, and because the NRA and other gun groups keep us supplied with links and information, too, since we’re primarily a military-issues blog with a large audience of veterans.