Replies

Okay, I’m going to respond to the points you raised, but I’m not trying to nail you. I’m simply trying to reason with you concerning these issues. I do appeciate your response.

Our troops did have helmets in prior wars. They did have shells going off nearly on top of them as they lay in Foxholes. The shock wave could and did effect these men, without killing them in many instances. They didn’t have the troop carriers we do today, but they did have trucks, tanks and aircraft. I guess physicians could say that foks in prior wars were more likely to have these types of inujuries for the reason they weren’t in a troop carrier, providing at least some protection. I’m not trying to be testy, but I do have a very hard time thinking our men at Iwo Jima, Normandy and too many other campaigns to mention, didn’t have massive munitions going off in their direct vicinty without dying. Some might be shielded by other troops, trees, terain for instance, but still be very close to a munition going offf, causing a massive shock wave.

As for the physicians who are treating these ailments, I’m not trying to cast any dispersions their way either, but how many of them served in WWII, Korea or even Vietnam? I am not trying to caste them as Liberals or fronting for this writer. I just can’t help but try to consider what happened in other wars, compared with that is taking place now. I can see troops survivability being increased these days. That’s a given IMO. I do think that is reasoned, but with the massive numbers of troops injured in WWII during certain campaigns, I can’t help but reason that a reduced percentage of troops with this type of injury survived, but that a number of them did due to the shere numbers of overall casualties in those campaigns.

I don’t fault you for believing these phsyicians. It’s not important that they or you are wrong. If everything reported in this article were true, I would still find it highly unusual for a member of the MSM to actually give a damn.

Please take note of the articles that appeared today. Please take note of the add in the New York Times. Please take note of the polling data from Iraq that was published today. What we have seen is a concentrated effort to build opinion against this war. It’s my opinion that this A.P. story was merely one more aspect of that disinformation campaign, containing some truth, but ulimately designed to cast Bush as an uncaring Commander in Chief because he won’t bring the troops home, and doesn’t care to get them proper care once they are injured.

This is the MSM. I’m sorry, but I do not think they would print an article like this one right in the middle of a push to end the war, unless it fit in somehow with that effort.

Now, are our troops getting the care they need? I’ve not been convinced of that since Vietnam. This does trouble me quite a bit actually, but the idea that it is Bush’s fault is rediculous to me.

Is the the fault of every president since 1975? Well, I might buy into that to be honest. It may even be true that Ronald Reagan didn’t pay as much attention to our war wounded as he should have. Should this be remedied today? I believe it should. Will it be? I’ve been waiting a long time to hear that it has. I’ll more than likely be waiting for a lot longer.

As much as this drives me nuts, I don’t know what I can do about it. I don’t know what any of us can do about it. I would hope that things aren’t as bad as I could imagine, but my faith in our leaders has taken a hit over the years.

You take care.