Desperate Bush Admin sending the Disabled to Iraq

04SCTLS

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
3,188
Reaction score
7
Location
Lockport
JAMES RAYMOND, DISABLED VETERAN: “ I thought it was a joke and then I was shocked.”

Honorably discharged vet ordered back to Iraq despite disability



Derek Gee/Buffalo News James Raymond, now a student at the University at Buffalo, was honorably discharged from the Army in 2004 and given a 10 percent disability by the Department of Veterans Affairs.


James Raymond lost the hearing in his left ear while fighting in Afghanistan. The former U.S. Army specialist later suffered a knee injury that required him to be flown back home for surgery.
In September 2004, he was given an honorable discharge and the Department of Veterans Affairs determined that he was 10 percent disabled, enabling him to receive $120 a month for the rest of his life.
So it was much to his surprise Thursday when Raymond — now a University at Buffalo student — got a call from his stepfather that he was being deployed again — to Iraq.
“I thought it was a joke, and then I was shocked,” said Raymond, 26, who is from Irondequoit, a suburb of Rochester.
Raymond figured it was all just a big misunderstanding. He thought he would be able to call the Army’s human resources department, explain that he is a disabled vet and that they would cancel his redeployment.
That was not the case. Raymond is expected to report for training May 18 at Fort Benning, Ga., where he would undergo a medical and mental evaluation. Five weeks later, if he is determined to be fit to return to duty, he will be deployed to Fort Dix, N.J., where he would join up with a Reserve unit there. In September, the unit is expected to be sent to Iraq.
“Why am I, as a disabled vet, to be called up?” he questioned. “Why isn’t there a process around this to get me out of having to go to Fort Benning and drop my life?”
When Raymond was discharged, he was told his name would be included on a list of what’s called the Individual Readiness Reserve.
He said it was explained to him that “your name goes into a big computer in St. Louis [where the Army’s Human Resources Command is based], and unless World War III breaks out, your name is never going to be called.”
Raymond said that left him with the impression that he didn’t have to worry about being redeployed.
He enrolled in UB, using college funding he earned during the three years he served with the Army.
He began pursuing a degree in communications. Like many other UB students, he rented a house with some friends in University Heights. He was named Homecoming King this school year. He was expecting to live a normal student’s life until he graduated in December.
Now, he is looking at the very real possibility that he will be in Iraq instead.
With the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq dragging on, the Army has been calling up soldiers in the IRR pool.
Since 2001, 12,226 IRR mobilization orders, both voluntary and involuntary, have been issued. Currently, there are 6,578 IRR soldiers on active duty, Army officials said.
Maj. Maria Quon, a spokeswoman for the Human Resources Command, explained that all soldiers in the Army “incur an eight-year statutory Military Service Obligation.” Most soldiers fulfill part of those eight years in active duty and then serve the rest as part of the reserves. The IRR is considered a Reserve unit, but its members are not required to report on weekends or for special training. However, they are expected to be ready to be deployed if necessary.
She said IRR soldiers can be “involuntarily mobilized in time of national crisis, as we have seen today in support of the Global War on Terror.”
Quon added that the orders can be challenged for reasons of extreme hardship or physical disability through the Army Human Resources Command.
But Raymond said he has learned the process involves filling out a complicated 18-page form requiring signatures from doctors and officials that must be completed by April 23. He said he was also told that almost no one is granted an exemption.
Quon said that it is also up to the soldier to let Human Resources Command know that he or she has been given a disability rating by the VA.
Raymond questioned that. He can’t understand how the government can send him checks for being disabled one day and then ask him to fight in a war the next.
David Autrey, spokesman for Disabled Veterans of America, said he has heard many reports of disabled vets being called back to duty.
“It all depends on if they were disabled enough to be considered undeployable,” he said.
Being 10 percent disabled many not necessarily exempt a vet from being redeployed, Autrey said.
But, he said, it’s also not unheard of for vets to be low-balled in their disability rating.
Raymond worries about how his knee will hold up, as well as coping with his hearing in a war zone. He also knows he is not as physically fit as he was when he left the Army. And he has gained 50 pounds and hasn’t been able to quit smoking, a habit he picked up in the military.
In addition, he is uncomfortable with the idea of being forced to join a unit with which he has no history.
“When I was in the military, I was active duty,” he said. “I served with men that I lived with, that I trained with on a regular basis. I knew who was going right and who was going left. . . . Now the Army expects me to go down there and be activated to a Reserve unit with guys that train on weekends, that aren’t as trained as active-duty [soldiers]. And they’re in New Jersey. I’m not a New Jersey guy. I’m from New York.”
Raymond has reached out for help from local politicians, including Reps. James Walsh, R-Syracuse; Louise Slaughter, D-Fairport; and Brian Higgins D-Buffalo, and has taken his story to local media in the hopes that he will be able to avoid being redeployed.
He also wants to make sure this doesn’t happen to anyone else.
“I want families who have a son or daughter who got out to know their son or daughter might be redeployed,“ he said.
_______________________________________________

It would seem that once someone joins the military the Bushies consider them property to do with as they please.
After serving their tour and being honorably discharged, the government repudiates it's agreements, changes the rules and steals more of their life.

There is no honor amongst thieves.

The Bushies should live up to the contracts they signed with the soldiers instead of ripping them off.
But cynically they think the soldiers volunteered so f--- them.
I wouldn't be surprised if they lowered the enlistment age to 16 so that they could con and send children(yes in this country we call 16 yr olds children when it suits us) to fight their war(s)
 
Your angry little editorial opinion doesn't jibe with the facts laid out in your very own article.

When Raymond was discharged, he was told his name would be included on a list of what’s called the Individual Readiness Reserve.

VERSUS:

After serving their tour and being honorably discharged, the government repudiates it's agreements, changes the rules and steals more of their life.

In case you are totally ignorant of what military contracts consist of, you're in the inactive reserve for an equal amount of time that you enlisted for, so you can be called up at any time. That's in the papers you sign when you first enlist. So go get a clue before you get diarrhea of the mouth.

This article is one simple FACT (which I quoted) surrounded by a big whine. Yeah, it's unfortunate, but nobody changed the rules. He signed a contract that says the military owns him until his IRR period is over.
 
I'm sure all this is spelled out to the enlistee(!)
Obviously Raymond should have had an attorney check out his contract because now he's Shocked, SHOCKED to find out he's going back.
I suppose without a draft and dwindling volunteers the government has to resort to desperate measures.
Maybe they should set up a disabled division.
 
I'm sure all this is spelled out to the enlistee(!)
Obviously Raymond should have had an attorney check out his contract because now he's Shocked, SHOCKED to find out he's going back.
I suppose without a draft and dwindling volunteers the government has to resort to desperate measures.
Maybe they should set up a disabled division.
Once again, you don't know what you're talking about and your sarcasm is based on ignorance.

I enlisted back in 1989 and I was well aware of the reserve commitment. Your prejudices against the military and Bush in particular have colored the way you interpret stories like this. You obviously didn't consider the possibility, especially since these kinds of stories are few and far between, that this whiny soldier is lying through his teeth and that he was told very clearly to READ HIS CONTRACT and that it said that he would have to fulfill a reserve commitment. Besides, anybody that signs his life away without reading it shouldn't be taken seriously if he whines after the fact. This is simple common sense.

Finally, the guy is only 10% disabled. He still has to go through a physical and may not be sent to active duty. He's only been told to report as yet, so your ranting is premature. Furthermore, it makes more sense for the military to call up a reservist who has some experience than it does to train a new green recruit. That's why the military keeps a reserve.

Once again, get a clue before you get diarrhea of the mouth. I'm getting tired of having to straighten out your misconceptions which are causing you to lash out in blind, bald ignorance. If you don't know something, just ask the question instead of ranting over something you know nothing about.
 
Bush just sent my grandma. That bastard.
Good to see you have a sense of humor.

fossten, things have been a little quiet on the board here lately, no one's even posted anything about Obama's "Bitter Guns and Religion" gaffe so I thought I'd stir things up a bit with this.

I thought you were against foreign military adventures.

The rules of war are such that there are no rules.
Since it's not a game, the government will do everything in it's power and then some to accomplish it's goals.

My rant may be a bit melodramatic and excremental as you contend but I see it got your dander up a bit which is good for the discussion board.
 
Oblahma is not electable. Back on March 13th I made that determination to save you the pain of watching another liberal democrat go down in flames.


http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showthread.php?t=40422

And we haven't even got to the general election.

I've been working with some 527's on the Oblahma stuff.

If you think John Kerry got swift-boated....wait till you see what happens to the most liberal member of the Senate that happens to be an elite, class-warfare racist.:shifty:

He's gonna run to the press for help. Can't hide from your past Mr. Oblahma.
 
Good to see you have a sense of humor.

fossten, things have been a little quiet on the board here lately, no one's even posted anything about Obama's "Bitter Guns and Religion" gaffe so I thought I'd stir things up a bit with this.

I thought you were against foreign military adventures.

The rules of war are such that there are no rules.
Since it's not a game, the government will do everything in it's power and then some to accomplish it's goals.

My rant may be a bit melodramatic and excremental as you contend but I see it got your dander up a bit which is good for the discussion board.
There you go again, speaking of things that you know nothing about. I've never said I was against foreign military adventures. Furthermore, that's not what your article is about. It's about fulfilling a contract and it's about you trying to SMEAR the US Military by implying, without any factual basis whatsoever, that the military has deliberately violated this man's contract against his will and is forcing him into involuntary servitude.

You're still doing it with the part I bolded above. This is about the military, not necessarily the government. I draw a distinction because as corrupt as I believe the government is, I believe the military retains much of its erstwhile integrity.

Your quote "the rules of war are such that there are no rules" sounds like so much nonsense, especially taking into account the way we are fighting this particular war. Who said that, and/or where did you read it, and how is it relevant to this thread?

What you said was false, I was just correcting it. Your assumption that I've got my 'dander' up is again a false assumption.

I believe the reason people on this forum aren't talking about Obama's gaffe is b/c nobody on this forum will be voting for him anyway. If you feel froggy, though, please jump. I noticed you didn't post about it either.
 
Well Obama's comments have certainly stirred up some controversy in an otherwise smooth campaign.
Guns, creed, religion and immigration are sensitive and emotional issues in America.
To combine them all in a self aggrandizing clever quip, coining a new cliche in a way not said before while by his explanation trying to say

The thoughts that ran together, he said, were that people who feel abandoned find stability in their traditions but also are vulnerable to politicians exploiting wedge issues."

comes across as sophistry and stereotyping being a little insulting although people aren't exactly sure how.

We'll see if this has any traction and how it plays out with the voters as opposed to the media who are chewing this like a prize steak.
 
here's an interesting study from the Rand Corporation

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1728241320080417

Study says 300,000 U.S. troops suffer mental problems

By David Morgan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - About 300,000 U.S. troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan suffer symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder or depression, but about half receive no care, an independent study said on Thursday.
The study by the RAND Corp. also estimated that another 320,000 troops have sustained a possible traumatic brain injury during deployment. But researchers could not say how many of those cases were serious or required treatment.
Billed as the first large-scale nongovernmental survey of its kind, the study found that stress disorder and depression afflict 18.5 percent of the more than 1.5 million U.S. forces who have deployed to the two war zones.
The numbers are roughly in line with previous studies. A February assessment by the U.S. Army that showed 17.9 percent of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan suffering from acute stress, depression or anxiety in 2007, down from 19.1 percent in 2006.
But the 500-page RAND study, based in part on interviews with more than 1,900 soldiers, sailors and Marines, also said that only half of troops suffering debilities receive care. And in half of those cases, the care is only minimally adequate.
"There is a major health crisis facing those men and women who have served our nation in Iraq and Afghanistan," said Terri Tanielian, a RAND researcher who helped head the study.
"Unless they receive appropriate and effective care for these mental health conditions, there will be long-term consequences for them and for the nation."

The study said many service members do not seek treatment because they fear the stigma associated with psychological problems could harm their careers.
Post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, can result from wartime trauma such as suffering wounds or witnessing others being hurt. Symptoms include irritability or outbursts of anger, sleep difficulties, trouble concentrating, extreme vigilance and an exaggerated startle response.
RAND recommended that the Pentagon create a way for service members to receive mental health service confidentially and monitor the quality of care.
Army Col. Loree Sutton, director of the U.S. Defense Center of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury, welcomed the study.
She was concerned at the finding that only about half of those who sought help received "minimally adequate" treatment and said it would spur the military to try harder to recruit more mental health specialists.
The Army wants to hire 275 civilian mental health professionals but a tight labor market and difficulties getting civilians into war zones has slowed the effort, officials say.
RAND, a private research organization, estimated that stress and depression among returning soldiers cost $6.2 billion in the two years following deployment, mainly due to lost productivity, medical costs and a higher risk of suicide. (Additional reporting by Andrew Gray; Editing by Alan Elsner and Will Dunham.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top