Posted on 05/26/2008 6:15:39 PM PDT by The_Republican
Since the 1960s the combination of the antiwar and non-serving sectors of academia, the media, the leaders of various peace causes, the "allergic-to-combat" upper income sector of society and the “shrinkocracy” have made various cases with various levels of proof that try to establish that not only was the old Mothers for Peace poster correct that "war not healthy for children and other living things," but that it causes far more casualties than are normally counted.
Veterans have always found war downright hazardous to their health. But now their own lobbying groups such as the Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, and Vietnam Veterans of America, and employees of the Veterans' Administration itself have decided to facilitate a blizzard of dubious veterans' benefit claims worse than the wildest dreams of any welfare queen.
Now the anti-military groups and some veterans' lobbyists appear to be combining forces in asking that the honored Purple Heart for those physically wounded in combat be awarded for mental conditions based upon some highly dubious criteria. And this proposal is actually receiving serious consideration by the Bush Department of Defense.
Claims of injuries from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) are being used to grossly inflate the casualty rate and establish a whole new class of dubious "victims" out of veterans who served their country and are now being induced to serve themselves by both those who hate the American military while, of course, ritually praising their "service," and veteran lobbyist groups who claim to speak "for veterans" while increasing their ability to sell veterans on the benefits they get by paying for membership.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
What are we claiming here, 5% of the 5%? The purple heart is a combat earned medal, earned by those who had shed blood. If anything, they may want to consider an additional medal, but if they do, what about the agent orange victims? Looks like they will have to amend the requirements for eligibility for a purple heart medal to include PTSD? So long as there are benefits for PTSD one would think that was enough. Handing out medals for it? Can’t say how that could be beneficial, I can’t see where anyone would say he was given the medal for PTSD. Its going to be interesting to see how this plays out, especially this close to election time.
Not just NO!, but Hell NO!
What’s next? Do I get a PH for throwing my back out fighting an elephant grass fire burning toward a stack of 81mm mortar rounds? Of course not even though it cost a week at battalion med. Do I get one for the bite from a VC mosquito (or cruddy water or whatever gave me a fever of 105.6 and put me in 1st Med Bn, DaNang for 13 days. OF COURSE NOT!
Purple Hearts are for ENEMY caused wounds. Period. ‘Nuf said.
Please forgive the profanity
Political Correctness nonsense, but more than likely will become reality.
Why not also award the Medal of Honor to those with Low Self Esteem Syndrome. No doubt, this small token of recognition will help them live more rewarding and self-absorbed lives and is the least that our wonderful Politcians can do to recognize those who contribute to their campaigns.
My mother told me many times that the son she sent to war never returned. I'm sure I have suffered PTSD to some extent as I'm sure most who serve in and around battle zones do, but all you have to do is see some suffering severely to KNOW there is a major difference.
I don't deserve a Purple Heart for what I suffered and neither does anyone else not wounded in combat or combat related.
Nam Vet
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.