Two MOH Winners say Bush Didn't Serve

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 00:14:01 GMT, Michael Wise wrote:

In article ,
Ed Rasimus wrote:

...It also talks extensively about the VA's interest
in perpetuating PTSD to the point of falsifying diagnoses for the
purpose of maintaining high funding levels.


Fair enough. I guess I'll have to read the book to find out the details.
However, if the VA has falsified diagnoses for financial gain as the
author apparently claims, it hasn't been very successful. Both Bush Sr.
and Jr.'s admins have slashed VA funding tremendously. It seems like the
leaders who beat the war drums the loudest and lavish money on the
military the most...also have no qualms about screwing over the people
who answered the call and paid for it in blood.

The period addressed was the late '70, '80' and early '90s. The issue
was the prevalence of PTSD from the Vietnam war. So, your linkage to
funding cuts is a bit late. You might consider that Clinton also cut
funding for vet programs--it was under his watch that my promised
lifetime health care became an HMO under Tricare which I now pay for.

The latest shining example is maimed vets (returning from Iraq) at
Walter Reed actually being charged for their food (because the
government didn't want to pay for it).

I was hospitalized once during my active duty years (1968) and paid a
per diem charge. You aren't really being charged--you've already been
paid BAS (basic allowance for subsistence) and when your meals are
provided, you repay what has already been advanced to you.

I was hospitalized in 2003 for 2.5 days. Had a 10.5 hour cancer
surgery and post-op care. Total bill was $16.80--that was the cost of
the meals. Outrageous!


(Please do not jump ahead and suggest that I'm all wet if I deny PTSD.
I certainly do not. Read the book and see what Burkitt documents.)


Sounds like a worthwhile read. The only book I've ever read concerning
Vietnam was Chickenhawk....which being a helo type, I enjoyed immensely.

It would be self-serving to suggest that you might enjoy When Thunder
Rolled. There are several SAR stories you might find interesting.

It is his conduct during the
Winter Soldier testimony, his categorization of the military still in
harm's way as criminals and guilty of atrocities,

Did he say that all military personnel in Vietnam were criminals and
guilty of atrocities?

Yes, he did.

his throwing of
someone else's medals over the White House fence

What of it?

You don't see a problem with such a grandstanding effort using someone
else's awards?

his alignment with
VVAW and offering of aid/comfort to the enemy.


How did he offer either aid or comfort to the enemy?

His picture hangs in honor in the Vietnamese War Remembrance Museum.


He now seeks to turn the clock back and trade on his combat experience
as that seems to offer more traction in a nation at war.


He was silent on it for a long time, but the media kept bringing it
up...over and over again. Is he supposed to remain quiet about his
honorable service to country?

C'mon. You really haven't been paying attention. Kerry is the one who
repeatedly brings it up. His TV spots running in CO start out with him
slogging through the jungle (unusual position for a Swift boat CC),
and listing his awards.

The Republicans made such a big deal about Clinton not having served and
avoiding serving. Now that their opposition served in combat and served
with honor while their candidate and many of the people in his admin
(the people who really run this country) did everything in their power
to avoid putting their asses on the line is on the table...they do
everything to discredit honor where honor is due and inflate the service
to country of a chickenhawk administration.

I think we've been repeatedly through the issue of length of service
between the two candidates. We've also discussed the dangers involved
in flying single-seat/single-engine military tactical jets.

It's bad enough when chickenhawk politicians use such tactics, but its
shameful when real vets do. You don't have to like John Kerry (I
personally don't although the alternative is unthinkable) and you don't
have to vote for him. But to **** on his service because he came home
against the war (like many vets) and was outspoken about it is shameful.

I feel no shame at all. I've got a pretty clear idea about what honor
is and what the "band of brothers" thing is about.

...
Didn't you say a while back that you were in the CSAR business? Never
got to employ your skills?


Nope. About 10 years too young to have served in Vietnam and got out
well before Iraq. I was in the active reserves (HS-246) during the first
Iraq affair, but never got called...and quit the reserved after
hostilities ended (out of disgust over US troops being sent there in the
first place).

Is it unfair to note that you should have been told that when you
signed on to the reserves that you could be "sent over there in the
first place"? And, to go a bit further, to note that your service
seems quite parallel to the President's? Except, of course that when
you signed on there was not the possibility of conflict and when there
was the possibility you got out?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8