VCS in the News, Pt. 1: One Soldier’s Struggle – Sgt. Fights Anger, Treatment System

May 3, 2009 – Sgt. John Jones’ anger usually starts simply.

Sometimes, it’s triggered by a thought about circumstances he cannot change. It builds until he thinks of little else.

Or it flares up when superiors speak to him harshly or rudely – events, he says, that occur with too much frequency in the Warrior Transition Unit’s Charlie Company at Fort Stewart, a special unit focused on soldiers with injuries that require more than six months of medical treatment.

He tries in vain to control the rage by reminding himself to breathe.

He recognizes his behavior as inappropriate. He knows he would never have acted this way before.

Before the Iraqi insurgent’s bomb blast in June 2007.

Before doctors found a brain tumor and removed it from his left temporal lobe in January 2008.

Before he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.

“If I didn’t have kids, right now I’d be in jail for doing something stupid,” said the father of three.

Watch video of two soldiers in the Warrior Transition Unit at Fort Stewart talk about their experiences.

For nearly two years, Jones has been assigned to a unit designed to help him focus on a new mission: getting better.

But the litany of police reports for this 3rd Infantry Division soldier, Army counseling statements and threats of being removed from the military tell a different story.

They paint a dark picture of a combat veteran struggling with the scars of war even as the Department of Defense vows to meet the complex needs of others just like him.

‘I thank God’ for the blast

The Iraqi insurgency was still raging in the summer of 2007 when the 3rd ID’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team deployed as part of a troop surge ordered by former President George W. Bush.

Jones was assigned to the 2nd Brigade’s 1st Battalion, 30th Infantry. He was already a seasoned combat veteran at the age of 29 and serving a second tour as a gunner.

He doesn’t remember much about July 16, 2007.

“I knew we were in a bad area for IEDs (improvised explosive devices),” he said.

Jones remembers the crew’s driver inching their Humvee through an area suspected to contain insurgents’ bombs.

He recalls being perched in the gunner’s turret, carefully scanning the roadway before him searching for tell-tale signs of hidden bombs.

“I said ‘Clear,’ and as soon as I said that, it blew up,” he said. “I don’t remember much after that.”

The left side of his body took the brunt of the blast. It mangled his ankle and slammed his shoulder.

 View more images of Sgt. John Jones.

Jones never lost consciousness but doesn’t remember the moments that followed.

Back at the forward operating base, doctors put him on bed rest for a week.

But a week later, Jones’ medical records show, he still couldn’t walk steady and was constantly nauseous. His ears rang nonstop and headaches were incessant.

He wasn’t getting better.

It raised enough concerns that doctors at Aid Station Falcon sent him to Balad Air Base, Iraq, for further testing. The attending doctor called Jones’ ongoing symptoms “worrisome.”

He feared Jones was exhibiting an illness other than stress disorder or mild traumatic brain injury – common side effects among soldiers involved with IED blasts. They flew him to Landsthul Regional Medical Center in Germany for further testing.

There, Jones’ life was shaken again, this time by the discovery of a half-inch tumor in his left temporal lobe.

“I know it sounds crazy, but I thank God for the IED,” Jones said. “If it hadn’t been for that, I wouldn’t have known about the tumor.”

For Jones, the next six months became a blur of splitting headaches and strong medications.

A turning point

On Jan. 22, 2008, Sgt. Jones went under the surgeon’s knife at Walter Reed Army Medical Center to have a Grade 2 astrocytoma tumor removed from his brain.

It marked a turning point for Jones, a proud soldier who enlisted Sept. 12, 2001, and had no previous record of behavioral issues. He awoke from surgery into a nightmare that would eventually become his reality.

A day after brain surgery, military records indicate, a junior officer at Walter Reed entered Sgt. Jones’ room to begin the initial intake process, thinking the soldier was being assigned to the medical center’s newly established Warrior Transition Unit.

He wasn’t.

The conversation didn’t go well.

“During the intake (Jones) became very agitated with me,” the officer wrote in a memorandum dated Jan. 31, 2008. “During our conversation the (patient) ran around the room, in and out of the bathroom, yelling and using profanity.”

The soldier’s mother, Teresa Jones, still remembers the scene.

“They kept following him around the room asking him questions, and he just got more and more upset,” she said.

Teresa Jones is a registered nurse back home in Louisiana. She said she was taken aback that officials at the Army’s premier medical facility would even attempt such a conversation so soon after brain surgery.

“The doctors had him on steroids in the hospital, and they thought that his being short-tempered was maybe a result of the steroids, so they weaned him off of them,” she said. “But I was very surprised … especially when they could have gotten answers to the same questions prior to surgery.”

The soldier had suggested the same thing.

“I remember telling them … ‘I don’t know what I’ll be like after surgery, so if you have any questions, ask them now,’ ” Sgt. Jones said.

Two days after brain surgery, the same junior officer returned with a squad leader.

Again, they tried explaining the process to Sgt. Jones and his family.

Again, they faced an irritated patient who cursed and yelled. A lot.

The Army deemed the behavior unbecoming of a non-commissioned officer. Sgt. Jones was reprimanded for the outbursts in written letters sent to his chain of command back at Fort Stewart.

The letters form the base of a tower of punitive paperwork, including two Article 15 hearings – one at the company level, another at the battalion level in the months to come. These hearing are the military equivalent of a mini trial for soldiers who commit offenses that don’t warrant a full-fledged court martial but cannot go unnoticed.

Much of the paperwork after his brain surgery note his history of outbursts against officers and non-commissioned officers.

A new record begins

Doctors at Walter Reed, pleased with Jones’ physical healing, sent him back to Fort Stewart’s Warrior Transition Unit.

Throughout the spring, his medical records show a patient on the mend.

He attended morning formations. He went to group therapy as well as physical therapy for his ankle, which wasn’t better despite an earlier surgery.

He met with case managers and returned to Walter Reed for post-operative follow-up appointments in March 2008.

Doctors prescribed painkillers and anti-inflammatories, anti-seizure medication and anti-depressants.

He sought to quit smoking, a bad habit from his days as a gunner.

The headaches, however, persisted. He developed sensitivity around the scar tissue on the left side of his head, so much so he couldn’t wear a beret – an Army uniform standard.

When Jones missed a doctor’s appointment on April 28, 2008, he was given a developmental counseling form.

In it, Sgt. 1st Class Gerald Williams, his platoon sergeant, noted the soldier had “a record of being disrespectful to officers and non-commissioned officers.” Informed of the missed appointment, Williams claimed his soldier once again had “a very bad attitude.”

Jones’ signature was missing from the counseling statement, and Williams noted Jones was on “home duty and not present to sign because of his conditions.”

A month later, Jones was given – and signed -a second counseling statement.

By this time, Jones had been transferred to Charlie Company, which was created in May 2008 due to overcrowding in the WTU. The new company was under the command of Maj. Gwendolyn Moore.

For Jones, it meant new squad leaders and commanders, new personalities to please.

A few weeks later, he had an altercation with these new leaders after a request for leave was denied.

Documents indicate his commander feared Jones was a safety risk based on his history; Jones argued he needed time away from the transition unit for the sake of his sanity.

Military records state Jones went into a rage and threatened to harm his company commander and her family.

The incident resulted in a recommendation for his first company-level Article 15 on June 23, 2008.

Two days later, the soldier was counseled on a change in his profile. He was taken off home duty and told to report to company formations at 7:30 a.m. each weekday.

A day after that, his commanders discovered Jones was working a part-time job at a local vacuum cleaner dealership. He needed money to support three children from his first marriage, who live with their mother in Louisiana.

They told him working a civilian job could compromise his recovery. They said it also violated doctor’s orders not to lift more than 25 pounds.

He argued the cleaners only weighed 23 pounds. The dispute still frustrates him.

“I got pretty good at it,” Jones said, adding the extra cash helped, especially since he had remarried and has two stepchildren.

He’s toyed with the idea of going back into sales once he is released from the Army but isn’t sure he’ll be able to handle the work as he once did.

“I don’t know if I can be as good as before,” Jones said.

Escalating turmoil

Jones’ volatility spilled into the civilian world.

A disagreement over the purchase of a new truck at a Hinesville-area car dealership found the soldier threatening the business owner, prompting even more concerns among his commanders.

“Sgt. Jones, your behavior has been completely unwarranted and unacceptable and will not be tolerated,” Maj. Moore wrote in a June 27, 2008, counseling statement after getting wind of the incident. “Your medical condition(s) will not serve as an avenue for you to do and say whatever you please.”

In the counseling statement, Moore ordered Jones to begin anger management group therapy sessions twice a week.

A month later, Jones was struggling to get more than four hours of sleep on any given night despite his prescription for the sleeping aid Ambien.

He was written up for a two-week period in which he made two unscheduled visits to the doctor, called in sick twice and missed formation due to the effects of medication Fort Stewart doctors prescribed for insomnia.

He lost his driving privileges. His superiors threatened to move him into the transition unit barracks on post, rather than letting him stay with his wife in their Hinesville home. He was told he could only go home on supervised visits.

Each punitive action made him angrier.

During a discussion on July 25, 2008, about his revoked driving privileges, Jones’ nurse case manager got frustrated. Jones said she slammed a stack of files onto a desktop.

The noise set the soldier off. A strong reaction to sudden noises is a common occurrence among those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

The nurse case manager feared for her life.

Reports indicate his squad leader tried to calm Jones down and pinned him to the wall until military police arrived. They reported Jones appeared calm but still took him to the station for booking before releasing him to his unit.

Jones returned to his barracks that night, having hit a personal low.

He felt bullied by the people charged with helping him.

He dwelled on fears of new medical tests indicating a tumor’s possible growth in his right temporal lobe.

He had lost sight of any hope of recovery a year after his injury in the bomb blast.

He found solace in a bottle of sleeping pills.

He was rushed to Winn Army Community Hospital in the early morning hours, where they pumped his stomach and filled him with IV fluids.

“I tried to commit suicide at that point,” Jones said, his voice low and his eyes welling with tears.

Jones would get a short reprieve from the punitive orders and threats.

During this time, the soldier separated from his wife and moved into a cabin in Riceboro.

It has become the last place on Earth where he still feels like the “old John.” It’s a place that takes him back to his childhood and fishing on the Louisiana bayou.

Problems continue

By late September 2008, the paper trail of counseling statements had resumed:

— One for failing to call in to his squad leader during a weekend fishing trip off post.

— Another to remove his personal weapons for fear he remained a threat to himself or others.

— Yet another for insubordination to his case manager for canceling an appointment.

Each time, his commanders threatened to make him leave the cabin.

By early 2009, Jones was still struggling with insomnia, had his medicines stolen from his truck, and was chastised for showing up to formation under the influence.

His company commander ordered him to take a drug test, suspecting illegal drug use.

The test came back clean, but it was another turning point for Jones.

He decided to stop taking the narcotics the Warrior Transition Unit doctors prescribed.

During the last week of January, he quit cold turkey.

No more Oxycontin. No more Ambien. No more Percocet.

“I still need it, but I’m not going to take it,” he said at the time.

In February, Jones was ordered to move back on post.

The move was prompted by an incident on Feb. 20 when Jones was arrested in Alabama.

He had made an emergency run home to Gonzales, La., because his son, Kyler, had been hospitalized with respiratory problems, a chronic issue for the child, who was born prematurely two years earlier.

Jones said his visit had gone well and he was returning early to Fort Stewart but struggling to stay awake on the road.

He pulled over and got a hotel room for the night. He was still struggling to get a full night’s rest and decided to take an Ambien left over from an old prescription.

“I went to sleep and woke up in jail,” Jones said. “I don’t even know what happened.”

Daphne, Ala., police officials say he was arrested after a couple reported the soldier had tried to break into their hotel room. During the night, police said, Jones had left his hotel room after taking the Ambien, got confused and tried to get into what he thought was his room.

When police arrived, Jones resisted arrest.

The next day, he said, police were ready to drop charges and release him, but officers at Fort Stewart asked them to hold him until he could be picked up by his squad leader.

When Jones got back, he was told he must leave his Riceboro cabin indefinitely.

Jones said he was so angry he knew he would say or do something stupid to yet another new company commander.

So, four days later, Jones checked himself into the behavioral health department at Winn Army Hospital, where he stayed for nearly two weeks before checking himself out.

Waiting for release

Now, Jones finds himself caught in a waiting game.

He received a battalion-level Article 15 for the incident in Alabama.

He’s been threatened with a demotion to specialist and was banned from leaving the installation for 30 days.

He is awaiting discharge from the military.

His commanders tell him he’ll be out by June 1.

He doesn’t believe them.

Meanwhile, time means a lot to Jones.

With his cancer always in his thoughts, the 31-year-old worries about having only another 10 “good” years left.

He doubts getting a four-year college degree is worthwhile.

His left ankle is still causing him pain. Army doctors haven’t even touched his left shoulder, which constantly aches.

Now, he frets about his future. So does his family.

“He knows he won’t be the same as before,” Teresa Jones said.

His mother said she, as well as her son, worry about how Jones will support himself, his current family and the three children from a previous marriage once he is released from the Army.

Jones’ release from military service is just as elusive as his cancer.

“I’ve heard I’ll be out in three months, probably no more than six,” Jones said in November.

“But they’ve been telling me that for a year now.”

 

 

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged | Comments Off on VCS in the News, Pt. 1: One Soldier’s Struggle – Sgt. Fights Anger, Treatment System

May 6, VCS in the News: Vet Advocate, Politicians Disagree Over Protection for Soldiers

May 5, 2009 – Top U.S. Army officials say the Department of Defense took a revolutionary approach to helping wounded soldiers when the first 35 Warrior Transition Units opened nearly two years ago.

Today, the Army boasts of 36 such units for wounded warriors, where soldiers in need of more than six months of medical treatment can go to mend.

Army officials say they have learned to adapt quickly as they continue to provide medical assistance to 9,400 wounded warriors assigned to Warrior Transition Units Army-wide. There are 301 soldiers in Fort Stewart’s WTU.

One veterans’ advocacy group says good intentions sometimes just aren’t good enough.

Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, argues the Defense Department needs to consider policies that protect warriors carrying invisible scars of war long after they return stateside.

That would be in addition to making pre- and post-deployment medical examinations mandatory and uniform, Sullivan said.

An evolving process

“I believe we have a program that is really tailored toward individual soldiers that have, in some cases, medical issues that require intensive care,” said Brig. Gen. Thomas Vandal, the 3rd Infantry Division’s deputy commanding general-support. “I believe we got it about right. There are still some modifications that will occur as this evolves.”

To prove his point, Vandal touts Fort Stewart’s 80 percent approval rating among wounded soldiers who transition out of the WTU.

“That’s an approval rating higher than any other WTU Army-wide,” he said.

Watch video of two soldiers in the Warrior Transition Unit at Fort Stewart talk about their experiences in, Warriors Transition into New Lives.

Even Sgt. John Jones, a 3rd ID soldier who has faced two Article 15 hearings for behavioral problems since being assigned to Fort Stewart’s transition unit, agrees the amenities get high marks.

“They have Internet and cable and flat-screen TVs,” Jones said. “It’s great.”

But he contends the fancy gadgets don’t make up for how soldiers, especially those with diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorders such as himself, are treated by non-commissioned officers and commanders in the unit.

View more images of Sgt. John Jones.

“The amenity side is good, but as far as leadership goes, I’d say it’s the total opposite,” Jones said. “They don’t take into consideration what is really going on with us.”

Sullivan contends something as simple as a policy that would require commanders to consider combat-related mental health issues before taking punitive actions could go a long way.

“Americans believe in due process,” he said. “There’s this assumption that people are innocent.”

A higher standard

Sullivan argues that members of the military are expected to be better civic citizens – as well as healthier and physically stronger – than the general U.S. population.

“And it’s important that, if a service member performed honorably in a war zone and then exhibits behavior problems afterward, the military give him or her additional steps of due process,” Sullivan said.

“We need to make sure we don’t excuse criminal behavior. If they do the crime, they need to do the time. However, there may be mitigating circumstances.”

He cites as an example: service members busted for taking prescription drugs that are not their own or for using illegal drugs after a deployment.

“In a war zone, if they are hurt, they are given copious amounts of painkillers,” said Sullivan, who is a Gulf War veteran. “Their medication is terminated when the pills run out or when they go home.”

As a result, he said, a soldier might get a 30-day supply just 15 days before returning stateside.

“But they have nowhere to go to get another prescription because they can’t get in to see a doc,” Sullivan said. “So these soldiers are running to someone else or using illegal drugs or over-medicating with alcohol.

“And when you do that, your propensity for getting involved in illegal behavior goes up.”

Veterans for Common Sense argues that any soldier, Marine, sailor or airman facing Uniform Code of Military Justice action after combat duty should have an extra layer of due process. They say that’s especially the case when ramifications can range from cut in pay and lost rank to jail time.

“We need to examine service members … to make sure war is not a contributing factor,” Sullivan said. “Then, if so, the military has a responsibility to make sure that a service member has prompt and high-quality medical care.”

Only then, he argues, can the military re-evaluate what punitive damages are necessary.

Expectations

Army officials say such policies aren’t needed.

“For the purposes of good order and discipline, WTU soldiers are soldiers just like anybody else,” Vandal said. “The same regulations of (the uniform code) applies to them.”

In the example of a wounded warrior busted for drug use, Vandal said commanders take the soldier’s medical history into consideration.

“If it is a result of injuries or based on injuries or medications they have received, we will consider that and make a determination of what is appropriate,” Vandal said. “If you say (you get a) blank check because you are assigned to a WTU and the normal standards of discipline and regulations don’t apply to you, you can quickly see that you would have some significant issues in the WTU.

“And you simply can’t afford that.”

Lt. Col. James Kanicki, the WTU’s battalion commander, said leaders up and down the chain of command are expected to consider whether a once-model soldier before them received an injury that has changed his or her behavior before taking punitive action.

“I believe we do – and will – take their medical conditions into consideration,” Kanicki said. “The goal is to take a holistic assessment of each individual.”

Because the expectation is there, both officers said, a specific policy isn’t needed.

Policy ‘difficult’

Georgia’s delegation on Capitol Hill shares that sentiment.

In a phone interview last month, U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., said Maj. Gen. Tony Cucolo, commanding general of the 3rd ID, has assured him that the individual needs of soldiers are being met, especially in the case of punitive military actions.

“His response to me was there is an expectation that the physical or emotional or mental conditions of a soldier would be considered in as far as he was concerned,” said Isakson, who serves on the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. “I trust what he’s told me.”

Isakson said contact he’s had with patients in Georgia’s various veterans hospitals confirms that the best interests of the injured remain a top priority.

“We owe an obligation to all our soldiers, if they are having a difficult time transitioning, whether physically or emotionally, from injuries where they were deployed … it is only appropriate to transition them all the same way if they need help,” Isakson said.

U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., took the idea of a policy a step further.

“I think trying to have a written policy is difficult,” he said.

The senator, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, fears a policy would make Uniform Code of Military Justice proceedings inconsistent Army-wide.

“This information does come out. It is available to the triers of fact and they can take it into consideration,” Chambliss said. “It’s not any different than what happens on the civilian side.”

Both senators pointed to the options soldiers have to make appeals to ombudsmen.

Sgt. Jones, the soldier who has faced two Article 15 hearings, said he has called on ombudsmen services twice.

“I feel like the ombudsmen are another way for company commanders and battalion commanders to get intel from soldiers about what’s really going on,” he said. “They don’t really advocate for us. It’s more like a neutral party.”

High expectations

U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., who sits on the House Subcommittee on Defense, said a strength of the current WTU program remains its adaptability.

“I think one of the things this program does do is give commanders flexibility for individual circumstances,” Kingston said. “It’s not a perfect situation, and I think Congress would respond to whatever the Army would recommend.”

Kingston has sent an inquiry to Army Staff asking them to investigate allegations of extended delays in returning Reservists or National Guardsmen to their home units after a recovery stint in a WTU.

In a prepared statement, U.S. Rep. John Barrow, D-Ga., did not specify whether he supported a specific policy.

Barrow was specific about his expectations, however.

“I expect our military commanders to do right by all of our soldiers who are injured in the line of duty, and that includes all the injuries arising out of their service, whether or not they are combat-related,” Barrow said via e-mail. “Whenever there is evidence that they aren’t getting the treatment they need or deserve, as in the situation we saw at Walter Reed … I think we need to step in and hold our commanders accountable.”

Sullivan contends this approach to setting Defense Department policy based on waiting for one of the armed forces branches to say it has a problem is a problem in and of itself.

“There is a very serious problem when a member of the legislative branch has to contact someone in the executive branch prior to answering a reporter’s questions,” he said. “It should be transparent.

“There is a disconnect, and it’s shameful and embarrassing the senators of Georgia are this disconnected,” he said. “I would encourage them to sit down with veterans, unscripted, with no commanders present, and ask them some questions.”

Sullivan said the first two queries are simple: How long did it take you to see a doctor? Did the doctor listen to your concerns or just try to put you on medication?

“Our soldiers are our most important asset, and we must give them medical exams before and after deployment,” he said. “And if they are accused of a crime, especially if loss of pay or rank or a discharge is involved, we need to make sure the due process rights of these soldiers are protected. It is the least we can do after sending them to a war zone.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Gulf War Updates, Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged , | Comments Off on May 6, VCS in the News: Vet Advocate, Politicians Disagree Over Protection for Soldiers

May 4, VCS in the News: Veterans Face Computer Delays for new GI Bill Education Benefits

May 1, 2009 – Veterans nationwide, trying for the first time on Friday to log on to online forms to apply for a rich package of educational benefits, encountered a network that either failed or was extremely slow.

The Veterans Affairs Department launched the Veterans Online Application (Vonapp) site to begin taking applications from veterans interested in the benefits offered in the new GI Bill, whose formal title is the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act.

The GI bill provides veterans with more generous educational benefits than the previous GI bill, originally passed in 1944. For example, this version hikes payments for tuition from $1,300 a month to a payment that is pegged at the highest tuition at a public university in a veteran’s state of residence, which for Massachusetts would be $10,232. The bill includes monthly living expenses of $1,100 to $1,200.

But veterans became frustrated when they tried to log onto the site. Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, said it took more than four minutes to reach Vonapp’s login screen using his computer in Austin, Texas, which has a high-speed cable modem.

“Veterans should not be viewing the hour glass of death” as they try to file for benefits, he said. “The VA needs to fix this now.”

Joe Mancinik, a Navy veteran who attends The George Washington University in Washington, said his attempts to access the site took more than a minute. Once on the site, however, the system timed out.

When Larry Scott, who runs the VA watch dog group Watchdog.org in Vancouver, Wash., tried to log on for the first time, he received a message from Vonapp that read: “Connection Interrupted. The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading. The network link was interrupted while negotiating a connection. Please try again.”

Scott, who accesses the Internet over a 24-megabyte-per-second cable connection, said he was successful signing into the site on his second attempt, but “the connection was slow beyond belief.”

“It appears the VA did not adequately prepare their servers to handle what they knew to be a huge load,” he said. “They had to know this was coming.”

Others who were able to log on to the system also found the site slow. Dean Lee, assistant adjutant for the Veterans of Foreign Wars Department of California, said communications with the site dragged over his T-1 connection, which receives data at 1.5 megabytes per second.

Nextgov attempted to connect to Vonapp three times over a 100 megabyte-per-second Internet circuit from its offices in Washington and once received a time-out message, with the other two attempts taking minutes to complete.

At a Nextgov remote office in Las Vegas, N.M., only one connection out of 10 attempts worked, and that was shortly after midnight EDT, when registration for the new GI bill benefits first opened.

All attempts to reach the Vonapp login page after 11 a.m. EDT from New Mexico either resulted in a time out or an inability to get beyond the first two or three screens that lead into the login page.

Sullivan said 1 million veterans are eligible for post-911 educational benefits and VA should have anticipated a heavy load on the first filing day.

VA should have tested if the system could handle a heavy load, said Bob Charette, president the risk analysis firm Itabhi Corp. in Spotsylvania, Va. “This could just be a first-day problem, unless its continues over the weekend,” he said.

The department has until Aug. 1 to receive and process the claims, and VA made a smart decision to start the application process three months before it had to make payments, said Joe Davis, a spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Washington.

He said he had no problems accessing Vonapp from his office, adding he was “not a techie, but I would imagine most systems would have difficulties handling potentially hundreds of thousands of accesses at the same time.”

VA did not respond to a query on the amount of traffic the site experienced on Friday and what it could have done to resolve connection problems.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on May 4, VCS in the News: Veterans Face Computer Delays for new GI Bill Education Benefits

May 4, Gulf War Illness News: Congress to Hold Hearing on Gulf War Ilnesses on May 19

House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

Subject: Gulf War Illness Research: Is Enough Being Done?
Date: May 19, 2009, 10:00AM
Locatin: 340 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC

 

Posted in Gulf War Updates, Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged | Comments Off on May 4, Gulf War Illness News: Congress to Hold Hearing on Gulf War Ilnesses on May 19

Apr 30, PTSD News: 1.3 Million WWII Veterans Hospitalized with Mental Health Conditions

In one of the few accounts written, here is a realistic appraisal of the social readjustment of WWII veterans, contradicting the popular portrayal promoted by the news media and Hollywood.

April 30, 2009 – We are all familiar with the “Greatest Generation” storyline. A generation raised during the Great Depression fought and defeated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan; returned home and quickly settled back into civilian life. They worked hard, had families, and enjoyed—one might even say built—the American dream.

For many veterans, of course, homecoming did go smoothly. Some hit the ground running and never looked back. Others, after an initial period of stumbling readjustment, quickly regained their footing in the civilian world and moved on. Their stories are important, often inspiring, and they have been told in volume.

But what about those veterans whose re-entry was more troubled, those long-ignored men (and their families), who found readjustment a disruptive and wrenching process?

For the past 10 years, I have conducted countless interviews, visited numerous oral history collections around the country, read letters, diaries, and the newspapers and magazines of the post-war period.

What emerges from that research is a picture of veterans’ postwar experience that is more complex, more sobering than expected. That picture does not diminish the wartime generation’s epochal accomplishments—they deserve all the testimonials and public tributes they get.

But it does suggest that the price they paid was far higher. The toll extracted from them and their families was far greater, and their struggles far more protracted than the glossy tributes to the “Greatest Generation” would have us believe. Theirs is a struggle—and a heroism—of a different order, and it deserves to be told.

‘Suffering Isn’t Over’

“The shooting war may be over,” Gen. Omar Bradley, head of the Veterans Administration, warned the American public in 1946, “but the suffering isn’t.”

Tens of thousands of men were arriving home badly in need of medical attention; millions needed jobs, a place to live, even clothes (ordinary white shirts were impossible to find). Despite government programs to ease the transition to civilian life, returning veterans found themselves in for a severe jolt of postwar reality.

In 1946-47, unemployment among veterans was rampant — triple the rate for civilians. Among disabled veterans it was astronomical. For all the public pieties about the sacrifices of “our boys in uniform,” employers were wary of hiring the handicapped, even if they were veterans.

In January 1946, more than 52,000 disabled veterans applied for jobs. Only 6,000 got them. Bradley worried that veterans were already being forgotten “when the war has been ended only six months.”

Adding to the difficulties of readjustment was a severe shortage of adequate housing. Few houses had been built during the Depression and war years. Although homelessness was not in the social vocabulary in those years, the phenomenon was certainly present.

Veterans scrambled to find anything — trailers, converted military barracks, barns, even cars. Many moved in with relatives. In early 1946, an estimated 1.5 million veterans were squatting with friends or family. In many cities, as many as one-third of all married veterans were living with parents, in-laws or friends.

Veteran anger over these unexpectedly harsh postwar realities was everywhere in the news. After interviewing veterans from around the country in the fall of 1946, the distinguished journalist Agnes Meyer described a mood of “appalling loneliness and bitterness.” Over two million veterans were without work and “floating in a vacuum of neglect, idleness and distress.”

So widespread was the sense of disenchantment that virtually half (48{cd9ac3671b356cd86fdb96f1eda7eb3bb1367f54cff58cc36abbd73c33c82e1d}) of all ex-servicemen in 1947 felt that their military experience had left them worse off than they had been before.

In fact, one 1947 poll indicated that approximately one-third of all veterans felt estranged from civilian life, even after more than a year of peace. And another survey found that 20{cd9ac3671b356cd86fdb96f1eda7eb3bb1367f54cff58cc36abbd73c33c82e1d} of veterans felt “completely hostile” to civilians.

Brig. Gen. Leon W. Johnson, in charge of the Army Air Force’s Personnel Services, made a public plea for understanding. Veterans didn’t want to make raids on the treasury or receive preferential treatment. “All they want is a place to live, and a chance to have gainful employment consistent with their abilities and skills,” he said.

“Surely they are entitled to that much, and yet, these are the very things they aren’t getting. … Today I think I see a frustration, a sense of being lost and a hint of fear in the faces of young veterans. These are the same men who were so fearless and resolute brief months ago, when they went forth to risk their lives.”

From Neuropsychiatric to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

These problems intensified the personal and emotional troubles experienced by veterans. During WWII, 1.3 million American troops were hospitalized for what were referred to as “neuropsychiatric” (NP) symptoms.

On Okinawa alone, the Marines suffered 26,000 psychiatric casualties. Some required only a brief hospital stay and were released back to duty. Others endured symptoms for years, most often in private.

Many veterans returned to civilian life with little apparent difficulty. But for others the war and its traumas could not be left behind.

By war’s end, the Army had admitted over a million “neuropsychiatric” patients to its hospitals (40{cd9ac3671b356cd86fdb96f1eda7eb3bb1367f54cff58cc36abbd73c33c82e1d} of its discharges had been for NP cases). By 1947, some half the beds in VA hospitals were occupied by men suffering from neuropsychiatric problems.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) went undiagnosed until 1980. Yet in the aftermath of WWII, depression, recurring nightmares, survivor guilt, outbursts of rage (often directed at family members), “exaggerated startle responses” and anxiety reactions—all of which are recognized today as classic symptoms of PTSD—were as common as they were unnerving.

For many, the problems began long after combat. For others, the nightmares and other symptoms began immediately and lingered for decades.

An infantry veteran who fought in northern Europe was typical: he “had recurring bad dreams … [that] went on very heavy for about, oh, 15, 20 years.” Another who landed on Omaha Beach and fought into Germany still had “flashbacks” — some 60 years later—of the grisly things he saw.

One Marine survivor of Peleliu and Okinawa recalled that “for the first 20-odd years after my return, nightmares occurred frequently, waking me either crying or yelling, always sweating, and with a pounding heart. Some nights I delayed going to bed, dreading the inevitable nightmares. Old comrades wrote me that similar troubles drove many of them to drink and to the ensuing misery of alcoholism.”

Divorce to POWs

These problems undoubtedly contributed to another often forgotten aspect of the war’s aftermath. Americans married in record numbers during the war, but they also divorced in record numbers when it ended. Between 1945 and 1947, petitions for divorce flooded the courts, in some cities even outnumbering marriages.

VA duly reported that the divorce rate for veterans was twice as high as for civilians. More than 500,000 marriages ended in divorce in 1945, and the figures climbed again in the following year, becoming the highest in American history.

Nor were these troubles confined to the immediate postwar years. In the 1990s, older veterans were beginning to turn up at the VA—men who had made a successful readjustment to civilian life after the war. Yet they still suffered from recurring nightmares, problems with close relationships or anger.

These men had coped more or less successfully with their memories and had not sought treatment before. After all, society expected them to put all this behind them, forget the war, and get on with their lives.

But big life changes, retirement, a death in the family, divorce, could trigger symptoms of PTSD, reviving long-repressed traumatic experiences.

Former prisoners of war are particularly vulnerable. One study found “high rates of persistent PTSD almost 50 years [after liberation] among former prisoners of war.” More than one study revealed that the “prevalence rates of PTSD among elderly former POWs exceed percentages found for elderly combat veterans.” This was particularly true of prisoners of the Japanese.

Contradictory Legacy

For a time, the troubled emotional legacy of the Vietnam War generated tremendous public interest in the experience of veterans’ readjustment. But in ways that seemed to suggest that any problems that arose—PTSD, homelessness, substance abuse and shattered personal relationships—were somehow unique features of the Vietnam experience.

If veterans of WWII were mentioned at all, it was to draw a striking contrast. They had fought “the good war” and returned home to a grateful nation, healthy, happy and well-adjusted, or so the storyline went.

The reality was a great deal more unsettling. Although largely forgotten today, many of the profoundly disturbing social and personal problems arising from the wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were glaringly present in the aftermath of WWII.

It is time that we recognize the emotional aftershocks of that colossal conflict. Not just for aging veterans and their families, but also for a new generation of veterans struggling to adjust to a life interrupted and forever changed by war.

Thomas Childers is the Sheldon and Lucy Hackney Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania and the author of three books on WWII. The latest is Soldier from the War Returning: The Greatest Generation’s Troubled Homecoming from World War II, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, out in May 2009. Professor Childers was an Army 1st lieutenant serving as an infantry platoon leader in 1972-73 at Ft. Benning, Ga.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged , | Comments Off on Apr 30, PTSD News: 1.3 Million WWII Veterans Hospitalized with Mental Health Conditions

Apr 29, VCS Civil Liberties Victory: Spain to Investigate Bush-Era Torture; VCS Urged Members to Write Spain’s Ambassador

Spanish judge opens Guantanamo investigation

April 29, 2009, Madrid, Spain (AP) — A Spanish judge opened a probe into the Bush administration over alleged torture of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, pressing ahead Wednesday with a drive that Spain’s own attorney general has said should be waged in the United States, if at all.

Note: Earlier this month, Veterans for Common Sense called upon our members to write Spain’s Ambassador and investigate the Bush era torture.

Judge Baltasar Garzon, Spain’s most prominent investigative magistrate, said he is acting under this country’s observance of the principle of universal justice, which allows crimes allegedly committed in other countries to be prosecuted in Spain.

He said documents declassified by the new U.S. government suggest the practice was systematic and ordered at high levels of the US government.

Garzon’s move is separate from a complaint by human rights lawyers that seeks charges against six specific Bush administration officials they accuse of creating a legal framework to permit torture of suspects at Guantanamo Bay and other U.S. detention facilities.

Spanish prosecutors said on April 17 that any such probe should be carried out by the U.S. and recommended against it being launched in Spain. Their opinion has been endorsed by Attorney General Candido Conde-Pumpido. Garzon originally had that case, but ultimately it was transferred to another judge, who has yet to decide whether to investigate.

Now, Garzon is opening a separate, broader probe that does not name any specific suspects but targets “possible material authors” of torture, accomplices and those who gave torture orders.

Garzon is acting on his own, rather than in response to a complaint filed with the National Court, which is the usual procedure for universal justice probes in Spain.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, speaking with reporters in Berlin before the investigation was announced, did not rule out cooperating with such an investigation.

“Obviously, we would look at any request that would come from a court in any country and see how and whether we should comply with it,” Holder said.

“This is an administration that is determined to conduct itself by the rule of law and to the extent that we receive lawful requests from an appropriately-created court, we would obviously respond to it,” he said.

Asked if that meant the U.S. would cooperate with a foreign court prosecuting Bush administration officials, Holder said he was talking about evidentiary requests, and would review any such request to see if the United States would comply.

In a 10-page writ, Garzon said documents on Bush-era treatment of prisoners, recently declassified by the Obama administration, “reveal what had been just an intuition: an authorized and systematic plan of torture and mistreatment of persons denied freedom without any charge whatsoever and without the rights enjoyed by any detainee.”

Garzon cited media accounts of the documents and said he would ask the U.S. to send the documents to him.

The judge wrote that abuses at Guantanamo and other U.S. prisons for terror suspects, such as the American air base at Bagram, Afghanistan, suggest “the existence of a concerted plan to carry out a multiplicity of crimes of torture.”

He said this plan took on “almost an official nature and therefore entails criminal liability in the different structures of execution, command, design and authorization of this systematic plan of torture.”

He said he also is acting on the basis of accounts by four former Guantanamo inmates who have alleged in Spanish courts that they were tortured at that U.S. prison in eastern Cuba.

All four were once accused of belonging to a Spanish al-Qaida cell but eventually cleared of the accusations. One is a Spanish citizen, another is a Moroccan citizen who has lived in Spain for more than a decade, and the other two are residents of Britain.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Apr 29, VCS Civil Liberties Victory: Spain to Investigate Bush-Era Torture; VCS Urged Members to Write Spain’s Ambassador

Apr 27, Torture News: Senator Leahy Wants Non-Partisan Probe of Bush Era Pro-Torture Policies

Senator Leahy wants to probe ‘chain of command’ on torture

April 27, 2009 – Washington, DC (CNN) — An independent commission is needed to determine who authorized the use of abusive interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists, a leading advocate of such a panel said Sunday.

Some congressional Democrats are calling for an investigation into CIA interrogation techniques.

“I want to know who was it who made the decisions that we will violate our own laws; we’ll violate our own treaties; we will even violate our own Constitution,” Sen. Patrick Leahy told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“That we don’t know,” said Leahy, D-Vermont, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “We don’t know what that chain of command was.”

Former President George Bush repeatedly denied that his administration authorized the torture of prisoners in U.S. custody. But a set of legal opinions released earlier in this month documented the Bush administration’s justification for coercive interrogation techniques including waterboarding, which has been considered torture since the Spanish Inquisition.

A Senate Armed Services Committee report released last week showed that top Bush administration officials gave the CIA approval to use waterboarding as early as 2002. And in 2003, a meeting that included then-Vice President Dick Cheney, CIA Director George Tenet, Attorney General John Ashcroft and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice reaffirmed the use of coercive tactics, according to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The releases have fueled calls for investigations of former administration and led to arguments from Bush’s defenders — including Cheney — that the tactics produced information that saved American lives.

Leahy first proposed the idea of a nonpartisan “commission of inquiry” in March. He said Sunday that he was not “out for some kind of vengeance,” but added, “I’d like to read the page before we turn it.”

“I want to know why they did that; what kind of pressures brought them to write things that are so off the wall; and to make sure it never happens again. That’s why I want it.”

Former Republican presidential nominee John McCain said any talk of prosecution was about “settling old political scores.” McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, fought for limits on U.S. interrogation practices during the Bush administration, but the Arizona senator said the United States needs “to put this behind us.”

“We’ve made a commitment that we will never do this again,” McCain told CBS. “No administration, I believe, would ever do this again. And it’s time to fight the wars that we’re in.”

President Barack Obama has said his administration is not interested in prosecuting CIA officers who relied on legal advice from the administration. Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said last week that the administration would not pursue officials who authorized coercive interrogations, either.

But Obama appeared to back Leahy’s idea last week, when he suggested that having a panel “above reproach” look into the issue would be “a more sensible approach to take.” However, his spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said Sunday that a review already under way by the Senate Intelligence Committee “is the appropriate place for that.”

“I think the president had great fears that the debate that you’ve seen happen in this town on each side of this issue, at the extremes, that’s taken place, would be what would envelop any commission that looked backward,” Gibbs told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

The Democratic leaders of Congress have split over Leahy’s “Truth Commission” proposal. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi supports it, while Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he prefers any inquiry be handled through the Intelligence Committee.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the head of the Intelligence Committee, told CNN’s “State of the Union” that the committee’s probe will take six to eight months.

“My hope is that the public debate quells, that we have an opportunity to do our work,” said Feinstein, D-California. “The committee will consider it and then we will release, most likely, findings and recommendations.”

Connecticut Independent Joseph Lieberman told CNN that an investigative commission would “poison the water here in Washington. It will achieve nothing. … So let the Intelligence Committee do its work. That should be the end of it.”

Lieberman and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, criticized the release of the Bush administration memos, which came in response to a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union. iReport.com: Share your take on torture

“I think it was a mistake to release the techniques that we’re talking about and inform our enemy as to what may come their way,” Graham said.

Graham, a lawyer in the Air Force Reserve, said the use of abusive interrogations may have produced some information, “but also to say that it’s been a net positive is wrong.”

“There’s a way to get good information in an aggressive manner to protect this nation without having to go into the Inquisition era,” he said. “I believe you can do both.”

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged , | Comments Off on Apr 27, Torture News: Senator Leahy Wants Non-Partisan Probe of Bush Era Pro-Torture Policies

Apr 25, VCS Torture Lawsuit News: Pentagon to Release Hundreds of Torture Photographs

April 25, 2009 – The Pentagon, in response to a lawsuit, will end a Bush administration legal battle and release “hundreds” of photos showing abuse or alleged abuse of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan by U.S. personnel, according to defense officials and civil liberties advocates.

The photographs, to be released by May 28, include 21 images depicting detainee abuse in facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan other than the Abu Ghraib prison, as well as 23 other detainee abuse photos, according to the American Civil Liberties Union and a letter from the Justice Department sent to a federal court in New York yesterday. [Veterans for Common Sense is a co-plaintiff in the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.]

In addition, the Justice Department letter said “the government is also processing for release a substantial number of other images” contained in dozens of Army Criminal Investigation Division reports on the abuse.

“This shows that the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was not aberrational but was systemic and widespread,” said Amrit Singh, an ACLU staff attorney involved with the 2004 Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that led to the promise to release the photographs. “This will underscore calls for accountability for that abuse.”

Singh called for an independent investigation into torture and prisoner abuse and said it should be followed, if warranted, by criminal prosecutions.

Pentagon officials disputed the charge that the photographs proved abuse was “systemic” in prisons run by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan, saying the images came from 60 of the military’s own investigations of abuse allegations.

“What it demonstrates is that when we find credible allegations of abuse, we investigate them,” said a senior defense official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

The Pentagon has not stated when or how it will release the detainee photos, but defense officials said the initial 44 and possibly hundreds more are likely to be made public close to the May 28 deadline.

The Pentagon has noted that it investigates all allegations of detainee abuse and since 2001 has taken more than 400 disciplinary actions against U.S. military personnel found to have been involved in such abuse.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates yesterday said it was “unrealistic” for the government to try to keep photos of detainee abuse a secret, noting that the ACLU lawsuit and others like it have made public release practically unavoidable.

“There is a certain inevitability, I believe, that much of this will eventually come out,” Gates said. “Much has already come out.”

The Bush administration had argued that public disclosure of the photographs would unleash outrage and violate a section of the Geneva Conventions that is widely interpreted to mean that photos of prisoners should not be shown to the public.

But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit rejected such arguments in September 2008 and required disclosure of the photos because of a “significant public interest” in potential government misconduct.

A Bush administration request that the full appeals court rehear the case was denied March 11.

Facing a deadline to either produce the photographs or take the appeal to the Supreme Court, where they believed chances of success were not high, Pentagon and Justice Department lawyers consulted last week and decided to comply with the lower-court ruling.

“This case had pretty much run its course. Legal options at this point had become pretty limited,” said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman.

At the same time, however, Gates voiced concern that the release of photos, along with disclosures of interrogation memos and other materials, could cause unrest and create further problems for U.S. troops serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

“I also was quite concerned, as you might expect, with the potential backlash in the Middle East and in the theaters where we’re involved in conflict, and that it might have a negative impact on our troops,” he said.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Apr 25, VCS Torture Lawsuit News: Pentagon to Release Hundreds of Torture Photographs

Apr 23, VA News: Tammy Duckworth Confirmed as Assistant Secretary

April 22, 2009, Chicago, IL — The U.S. Senate on Wednesday confirmed former Iraq War helicopter pilot Tammy Duckworth’s nomination as an assistant secretary at the Veterans Affairs Department.

Duckworth will direct the Office of Public Affairs and Intergovernmental Communications. Among other things, the Illinois National Guard major will oversee VA’s public affairs operations, as well as programs for homeless veterans.

“President Obama and America’s veterans now have Tammy Duckworth as their advocate and champion,” Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said in a statement. “I know Tammy will bring the same level of commitment to the VA that she has shown in fighting for her country and representing Illinois veterans.”

North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, the top Republican on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, delayed Duckworth’s nomination earlier this month, saying he wanted more due diligence. A spokesman at the time said Burr wanted “to ensure that veterans have the best representation possible.”

Duckworth, a major in the Illinois National Guard, lost both her legs and partial use of one arm in a rocket-propelled grenade attack in 2004. She ran for Congress as a Democrat in 2006, but lost.

On Feb. 3, Obama nominated her to the VA position. Soon after, she stepped down from her position as director of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs, where she had worked since 2006.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Apr 23, VA News: Tammy Duckworth Confirmed as Assistant Secretary

Apr 21, President Obama Wins Respect from Military

April 21, 2009 – A crisp salute, a first lady’s campaign, a generous budget and some familiar appointments have allowed President Obama to take great strides toward reassuring the group that was perhaps the most wary of his election — the military.

While past and present military leaders aren’t about to change their largely Republican leanings, they are willing to credit the president with some shrewd moves that allowed him to avoid the mistakes that made for such a hostile relationship between the military and the last non-veteran president — and Democrat — Bill Clinton.

Even though many former Clintonites are back in power with Obama, “they’re not dumb enough to make the same mistakes,” said retired Army Lt. Col. James J. Carafano, now a defense expert at the Heritage Foundation. “I think they are much more attuned to the challenges of civil-military relationships than Clinton was when he came in.”

One of the smart things he said Obama did to reassure the military was to appoint respected retired military people to key posts — Army Gen. Eric Shinseki as head of the Veterans Affairs Department, Marine Gen. James Jones as national security adviser, and Adm. Dennis Blair as director of national intelligence. The president retained the service chiefs, which is normal, and two of the three service secretaries, which is not normal since they are political appointees. He also retained Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Nothing showed the contrast between the early approaches of Obama and Clinton more than one moment during Obama’s April 7 visit with troops in Iraq. “We love you,” shouted a soldier as other troops cheered and the flashes of dozens of cameras went off. “I love you back,” said the president. The soldiers at that base could not restrain their enthusiasm, stretching their hands to touch their new commander-in-chief.

At about the same time in his presidency, Clinton visited sailors aboard the carrier Theodore Roosevelt in 1993. There were no outstretched hands then, just a quiet, almost sullen reception and lots of complaints to reporters about a president who didn’t understand the military.

Another early sign of good things for Obama was something far less substantive but symbolically important — his salute.

The first 39 presidents did not salute, even though 25 of them were veterans and 12 had been generals. But once Ronald Reagan started returning salutes from military honor guards, every president since has had his salute put under the microscope. From the moment of Obama’s first salute, outside a gym at a Marine air base in Hawaii in December, his style has been praised.

Inside the Pentagon and inside the powerful veterans’ organizations, though, they were looking for more than symbolism. They wanted signs that the new president respected them and was willing to back that respect with money in his first budget.

One early positive signal came when Michelle Obama made clear that the plight of military families would be her prime cause as first lady. Since the inauguration, she has often talked about that cause and has traveled to Fort Bragg and to Arlington National Cemetery to meet with families.

The president also signaled his interest with his schedule — talking to his Iraq commanders, meeting with retired officers, going to the Pentagon and meeting with senior enlisted officials all in his first 10 days in office. He also traveled to Camp Lejeune to meet with troops and gave a major speech at the National Defense University.

Obama’s only major military stumble came from a budget proposal that enraged large and powerful veterans’ groups. The administration hoped to save $540 million by having treatment for service-connected injuries charged to the private insurance plans of veterans. The anger escalated when Obama clung to the proposal after leaders of all the major veterans’ groups came to the White House to complain in a March 16 meeting with the president, Shinseki, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Steven Kosiak, the director in charge of defense spending at the Office of Management and Budget.

“All parties went into that meeting very hopeful that the decision would be reversed then and there,” said Craig Roberts, media relations manager for the 2.6-million-member American Legion. “When it was not, there was disillusionment, disappointment, even anger.”

Less than 48 hours — and 53 radio interviews by Roberts — later, the White House dropped the proposal. “There were some hurt feelings on both sides,” he said. But he noted that veterans’ groups are “generally encouraged” by what they have seen from Obama, singling out “the surge in Afghanistan, the sensitivity to military families that the first lady has shown … and the overall VA budget proposal from the president, which exceeds even our own expectations.” That budget, boasted White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, calls for the largest VA increase in 30 years.

Roberts said he believes the ex-Clintonites around Obama have been crucial. “I think he’s being schooled by them,” he said. “He is showing a better understanding of the military’s role in our society and the necessity for a strong and healthy military. We may not agree with all of his policies regarding it, but he seems to be showing a greater sensitivity to the need for a military and how to treat military families.”

One lesson from the Clinton veterans was not to fall into the trap that ensnared Clinton when he tackled the question of gays in the military right out of the box in 1993. In contrast, said Carafano, Obama “sent out pretty clear signals that that is not an issue that is going to be addressed right now, that that is something for down the road.”

P.J. Crowley has seen both sides of the divide. As an Air Force colonel, he was an insider at the Pentagon and the White House in the Clinton years, serving 11 years as a spokesman at the Pentagon and three years as a spokesman for the National Security Council. Currently, he is close to the Obama team from his perch as a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress and is said to be in line for a top job at the State Department.

He contends that Clinton had a “very strong relationship” with the military by the time he left office. But he acknowledged “it took awhile,” adding, “Clearly, anyone who comes after him benefits from that experience.”

While praising Obama for “quite effectively managing his early relationship with the military and the veterans’ community,” Crowley said more than politics is involved. “The relationship between the military and the commander-in-chief is fundamental to our democracy. It is an important relationship. At some point in a campaign, any candidate has to pass the commander-in-chief test” or he will not win the campaign. But then, in office, inevitably comes “a trial” when a president must flex American military muscle. That trial has not yet come for Obama.

Otto Kreisher contributed to this report.

Posted in Veterans for Common Sense News | Comments Off on Apr 21, President Obama Wins Respect from Military