Supporting the Troops

 

Supporting the troops, three words that show patriotism and caring for our soldiers in harm’s way, and at times three words that are divisive.

President Bush says these three words all the time, Republicans and Democratic politicians also use these three words while trying to show that they care about the troops and their families.

 

But was does it mean to “Support the Troops?”

If you are a citizen does it mean hanging a yellow magnet on the rear of your car? Why do Republicans say they support the war, but when democrats say it, the republicans snicker?

 

Is patriotism partisan or bipartisan? Or is patriotism inherently American?

Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was once asked by a soldier during one of his speeches why soldiers are being sent to Iraq without any body armor and Rumsfeld replied: “As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.”

 

Is that supporting the troops, sending them into battle without body armor?

Republicans, who controlled both the House and the Senate for the first six years of Bush’s presidency didn’t seem to mind. Even while extra money was allocated for more body armor, to this day, troops are still being sent to Iraq without body armor. In fact many parents have been buying the armor themselves on Web sites such as eBay and sending the armor to their children in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

 

Back in March of this year President Bush had requested another $100 billion for his wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the democratically controlled House tacked on a few billion for the VA because in Bush’s budget request earlier in the year; Bush had spending cuts scheduled for the VA’s budget for the years 2008 and 2009. The White House told Congress that if money was diverted to the VA, Bush would veto the bill, and he did. 

  

Also earlier this year if you all recall, the Walter Reed Army Hospital was in the news because of the living conditions recovering wounded soldiers were forced to live in. The building and rooms were infested with rats, leaky pipes and the conditions were unfit for humans. That certainly was no way to show our support for the troops.

But how did that come about, the Walter Reed Hospital has a reputation as a well run medical facility.

Privatization, President Bush outsourced the support staff to a company called IAP Worldwide Services; IAP cut the support staff from 300 to 50. The U.S. Army awarded a five-year, $120 million contract in January 2006 to IAP Worldwide Services and for every support staff cut, more money went to their bottom line.

 

President Bush likes to privatize services that were once done by government employees to private companies who care more about their bottom lines than the service they are being paid to provide.

Oh, and the CEO of IAP Worldwide Services, Al Neffgen, is a former senior Halliburton official. And one other thing about IAP Worldwide Services, before I move on, IAP was also one of the companies that were given a contract by FEMA to deliver Ice to Katrina victims, and you know how well that went.

Back in April of this year, new Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, extended the tours of duty for the military from 12 months to 15 months for those in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

Is that supporting the Troops?

In exchange for the extension, Gates said the service will be able to give all units a year at home between deployments. But soldiers are not getting the year at home as promised most are getting 10 months at the most.

Our troops are spread very thin, and many have said that we have reached the breaking point; is that supporting the troops?

 

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said “The Bush administration has failed to create a plan to fully equip and train our troops, bring them home safely and soon, and provide our veterans with the quality care they deserve.” Pelosi went on to say, “Extending the tours of all active-duty Army personnel is an unacceptable price for our troops and their families to pay.”

 

Some of the support our troops have come to rely on by President Bush and the Republican Party include but are not limited to:

•  Outsourced medical support.

•  Slashed Funding for the VA

•  Extended tours in Iraq and  Afghanistan from 12 to 15 months

•  Outsourced logistical support.

•  Armed forces Stretched to the Breaking Point

•  Troops sent to war with no Body Armor.

•  Troops sent to war with no Armor for Trucks or Humvees.

•  Politicizing the troops at every opportunity.

 Because of the Walter Reed scandal, Democrats created the The Wounded Warriors Assistance Act a piece of legislation that establishes a hot line for medical patients to report problems with any treatments, and to cut through the red tape for when the wounded move from the Pentagons care to the Veterans Administrations care. At least that is what it was designed to do.

 

There are currently 400,000 wounded personnel waiting for their cases to be heard that will determine the extent of permanent disability and monetary compensation the soldiers will receive. The Wounded Warriors Assistance Act is supposed to assist in ridding the Military’s long waiting list. But President Bush has voiced concern over one of the provisions that require imposing a one-year moratorium, on a program that lets private companies compete with public agencies for military and hospital work contracts, private companies, such as IAP Worldwide Services.

 

When Bush says that he supports the troops, and gives speech after speech with soldiers standing behind him as if they are his personal back drop, and while he is slashing the budget for the V.A., or sending troops into battle without body armor, or awarding contracts to firms that only care about their bottom lines, maybe, just maybe you will think twice, when he says, that he supports the troops.

Supporting the Troops, three words that have been so politicized that the true meaning of the words are lost in the rhetoric of politics.