Thank you for your service. Now piss off!

[Bootneck]

It never ceases to amaze me as to how the present administration in Britain treats the needs of veterans who have served the country in combat, particularly in the area of mental health. They do not hesitate to send us to fight their wars in the most goddamned awful places, but when we’re done it’s thank you for your service, here’s a campaign medal, now piss off.

At least the MoD goes through the motions, but senior government seems not to care. After all, why would they waste budget on those past their ‘sell by date’.

This report is typical:

Ministers' war of words over treatment of ex-servicemen

A furious row broke out between Whitehall departments last night as a Defence minister publicly pilloried his senior government colleagues over what he said was their failure to provide health services for former members of the armed forces.

The Veterans minister Kevan Jones accused Health ministers of "not listening" to the needs of troops suffering severe – and sometimes hidden – traumas from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has insisted that former servicemen and women are given priority on the NHS.

But a Department of Health strategy launched yesterday to improve mental health services makes no mention of veterans. The New Horizons programme will host "listening events" around the country to consult a "wide range of people", and will promote the mental health benefits of mother and toddler groups, lunch clubs for the elderly, inner-city sports societies and community arts projects. A health spokesman conceded there were no plans to talk to armed forces organisations as part of the programme.

Mr Jones berated his colleagues. "This makes me very angry," he said. "As Veterans minister I have raised this directly with the Department of Health. The fact that they don't appear to listen to veterans is not acceptable and I will be taking this up directly with the minister responsible."

That minister is Phil Hope, who is responsible for care services, and the Health Secretary, Alan Johnson.

Former military commanders also attacked the Department of Health's decision to ignore the armed forces in the programme. They insisted that this showed that veterans, far from being a priority, were being ignored.

Colonel Tim Collins, a former commanding officer with the 1st Battalion, The Royal Irish, said: "It smacks of incompetence that it does not occur to them to speak to Combat Stress, who are the leading experts in armed forces mental health issues."

Patrick Mercer, a former Lieutenant-Colonel and commanding officer with the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment, criticised the lack of reference to the armed forces: "It is disgraceful," he said. "The amount of publicity that has been given to mental sickness occasioned by combat makes this unforgivable."

With increasing numbers of personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, serving and past soldiers have been calling for a specialist mental health unit. Many complain that they are forgotten in an overburdened NHS system and do not feel comfortable opening up to people with no understanding of the horrors of war.

Mr Mercer said: "MoD employees have got to be a priority even when they are ex-employees. These are men and women who have been willing to lay down their lives for their country. There is a debt of honour.

Ministers' war of words over treatment of ex-servicemen - Home News, UK - The Independent

What our prime minister seems to ignore is that Britain has a 'duty of care' to its armed forces. This began as an unspoken pact between society and the military as far back as the 17th century and was formally codified as a 'covenant' in 2000. It is not a law but is reinforced by custom and convention.

The covenant only officially applies to the army, but its core principles are taken to extend to the air force and navy too.

The Military Covenant

Soldiers will be called upon to make personal sacrifices - including the ultimate sacrifice - in the service of the Nation. In putting the needs of the Nation and the Army before their own, they forego some of the rights enjoyed by those outside the Armed Forces.
In return, British soldiers must always be able to expect fair treatment, to be valued and respected as individuals, and that they (and their families) will be sustained and rewarded by commensurate terms and conditions of service.
In the same way the unique nature of military land operations means that the Army differs from all other institutions, and must be sustained and provided for accordingly by the Nation.
This mutual obligation forms the Military Covenant between the Nation, the Army and each individual soldier; an unbreakable common bond of identity, loyalty and responsibility which has sustained the Army throughout its history. It has perhaps its greatest manifestation in the annual commemoration of Armistice Day, when the Nation keeps covenant with those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, giving their lives in action.

Army Doctrine Publication Volume 5

Sorry to whack on about this, but it does anger me. Are US vets treated with the same contempt by government?

 

[strollingbones]

bootneck good to read you....i read your post but i am a little more concerned about you...and how you are doing etc...let us know....you have been missed....i know i didnt get here till you were leaving but i have kept you in my pagan prayers...

 

[Annie]

Bootneck, I think the US government backs the troops and retired, but not to the degree they've earned. I do think that in the main, most Americans agree, regardless of politics.

 

[strollingbones]

i do not think us vets are well treated....instead of being given the basic treatments they should be given the state of the art medical treatments that politians receive...

 

[editec]

Depends, Boot.

Sometimes the vets were treated well, and sometime not.

And, judging from what I'm hearing how Vets are treated in our Vets hospitals really depends on what part of the country you;re in, too.

Here in Maine the Vet hospital is fairly good.

Elsewhere it's pretty damned shoddy according to Vets I know who've been in other areas.

 

[jillian]

We actually have a good one in Brooklyn from what I'm told. But the reality is that there are waits and right now I'm not sure the VA is equipped to deal with all of the injured returning vets. I have been told that it takes months for a vet with PTSD to see a doctor, but again, I was told that a while back. I don't know if it's still the case or if that was across the board since it's just anecdotal.

but this site deals with a lot of vet concerns, bootneck, perhaps it will answer your questions.

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America

 

[Truthmatters]

Its just crazy how vets are treated here.

I have hope that it will get better under Obama.

 

[Bootneck]

bootneck good to read you....i read your post but i am a little more concerned about you...and how you are doing etc...let us know....you have been missed....i know i didnt get here till you were leaving but i have kept you in my pagan prayers...

Thanks SB! No worries. I'm fine, or will be once I adjust to normalcy. Got back Saturday and haven't done much since then except mooch around here. Plan to spend some quality time with family and friends - and any young women who may be interested -over the next few weeks.

Out with some of the lads later for

 

[strollingbones]

riddle me this?

why dont vets have state of the art artifical limbs? i am talking about state of the fucking art...ankles that move....wrists that turn.....borg bullshit ...hell yes...why not?

items like these:

http://www.pipoinc.com/services.htm

cost is why...they are willing to give it all...the governments all of them....want to give as little as possible...


if i were empress.. doctors who received government funds for education would not be forced into the military but would be allowed to work off ...allowed my ass...forced to work off their loans by giving time to these vets...treating vets free of charge...companies would be donating or selling state of the art shit at cost....if i were empress....

 

[strollingbones]

bootneck good to read you....i read your post but i am a little more concerned about you...and how you are doing etc...let us know....you have been missed....i know i didnt get here till you were leaving but i have kept you in my pagan prayers...

Thanks SB! No worries. I'm fine, or will be once I adjust to normalcy. Got back Saturday and haven't done much since then except mooch around here. Plan to spend some quality time with family and friends - and any young women who may be interested -over the next few weeks.

Out with some of the lads later for

it is just good for you to be home....takes a while to unwind...

 

[Bootneck]

OK. From what you're all saying, it seems the aftercare for vets leaves a lot to be desired, so our governments' attitudes are not dissimilar. Makes me wonder whether politicians have a 'cannon fodder' mentality when it comes to the military. I wonder whether this would change if the people who run our countries had children, or loved ones fighting in foreign lands.

 

[Bootneck]

riddle me this?

why dont vets have state of the art artifical limbs? i am talking about state of the fucking art...ankles that move....wrists that turn.....borg bullshit ...hell yes...why not?

cost is why...they are willing to give it all...the governments all of them....want to give as little as possible...


if i were empress.. doctors who received government funds for education would not be forced into the military but would be allowed to work off ...allowed my ass...forced to work off their loans by giving time to these vets...treating vets free of charge...companies would be donating or selling state of the art shit at cost....if i were empress....

Now that's one area where we have no complaints. We don't have dedicated miltary hospitals any more, ironically the government closed the last one down just over a year ago, but we do have Headley Court, The Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre. It is a facility run by the military and runs largely on charitable donations.

Following treatment, the very seriously wounded are sent there for rehabilitation. With a staff of about 220, they provide a comprehensive and intensive residential rehabilitation programme, as well as an outpatient service. The orthopaedic and neurological rehabilitation teams are multi-disciplinary and work with the patient and their families to achieve their full potential.

Amputees are fitted with state of the art limbs and some have even returned to active service. One guy was even fitted with a bionic hand!

As I say, it's charity that keeps it going. Not government money, although they have donated in the past.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

i do not think us vets are well treated....instead of being given the basic treatments they should be given the state of the art medical treatments that politians receive...

You would be wrong. Politicians USE military hospitals. They may get head of the line access but it is the SAME care that active military receive. Further the VA has drastically changed their programs and times for mental health , Bush made it a priority. The VA hired new Doctors and nurses and increased the available hours from ending around 5 pm to extending to 9 PM.

At out processing every military member getting ready to leave service for ANY reason is instructed on how and where to get treatment and EXACTLY how to prepare and expediate access to the VA and it's health care Facilities.

Now with in that context, there probably needs to be more money spent on the VA programs but it has had it's budget increased every year.

 

[Old Rocks]

Bootneck, I think the US government backs the troops and retired, but not to the degree they've earned. I do think that in the main, most Americans agree, regardless of politics.

Absolutely. Those that have served honorably deserve the best that this nation can give them. Our failure to do that is a blot on the honor of all of us.

 

[Old Rocks]

OK. From what you're all saying, it seems the aftercare for vets leaves a lot to be desired, so our governments' attitudes are not dissimilar. Makes me wonder whether politicians have a 'cannon fodder' mentality when it comes to the military. I wonder whether this would change if the people who run our countries had children, or loved ones fighting in foreign lands.

During WW2, virtually all of our wealthy and politacaly powerful had sons and daughters serving in the military, many in active combat. After the war, the GI Bill was created, and the benefits helped create the boom of the 50s.

Now, with very few of the "Fortunate" sons serving, you are correct. There is a 'cannon fodder' mentality. What happened at Walter Reed was a prime example of that.

 

[tigerbob]

It never ceases to amaze me as to how the present administration in Britain treats the needs of veterans who have served the country in combat, particularly in the area of mental health. They do not hesitate to send us to fight their wars in the most goddamned awful places, but when we’re done it’s thank you for your service, here’s a campaign medal, now piss off.

At least the MoD goes through the motions, but senior government seems not to care. After all, why would they waste budget on those past their ‘sell by date’.

This report is typical:

Ministers' war of words over treatment of ex-servicemen

A furious row broke out between Whitehall departments last night as a Defence minister publicly pilloried his senior government colleagues over what he said was their failure to provide health services for former members of the armed forces.

The Veterans minister Kevan Jones accused Health ministers of "not listening" to the needs of troops suffering severe – and sometimes hidden – traumas from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has insisted that former servicemen and women are given priority on the NHS.

But a Department of Health strategy launched yesterday to improve mental health services makes no mention of veterans. The New Horizons programme will host "listening events" around the country to consult a "wide range of people", and will promote the mental health benefits of mother and toddler groups, lunch clubs for the elderly, inner-city sports societies and community arts projects. A health spokesman conceded there were no plans to talk to armed forces organisations as part of the programme.

Mr Jones berated his colleagues. "This makes me very angry," he said. "As Veterans minister I have raised this directly with the Department of Health. The fact that they don't appear to listen to veterans is not acceptable and I will be taking this up directly with the minister responsible."

That minister is Phil Hope, who is responsible for care services, and the Health Secretary, Alan Johnson.

Former military commanders also attacked the Department of Health's decision to ignore the armed forces in the programme. They insisted that this showed that veterans, far from being a priority, were being ignored.

Colonel Tim Collins, a former commanding officer with the 1st Battalion, The Royal Irish, said: "It smacks of incompetence that it does not occur to them to speak to Combat Stress, who are the leading experts in armed forces mental health issues."

Patrick Mercer, a former Lieutenant-Colonel and commanding officer with the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment, criticised the lack of reference to the armed forces: "It is disgraceful," he said. "The amount of publicity that has been given to mental sickness occasioned by combat makes this unforgivable."

With increasing numbers of personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, serving and past soldiers have been calling for a specialist mental health unit. Many complain that they are forgotten in an overburdened NHS system and do not feel comfortable opening up to people with no understanding of the horrors of war.

Mr Mercer said: "MoD employees have got to be a priority even when they are ex-employees. These are men and women who have been willing to lay down their lives for their country. There is a debt of honour.

Ministers' war of words over treatment of ex-servicemen - Home News, UK - The Independent

What our prime minister seems to ignore is that Britain has a 'duty of care' to its armed forces. This began as an unspoken pact between society and the military as far back as the 17th century and was formally codified as a 'covenant' in 2000. It is not a law but is reinforced by custom and convention.

The covenant only officially applies to the army, but its core principles are taken to extend to the air force and navy too.

The Military Covenant

Soldiers will be called upon to make personal sacrifices - including the ultimate sacrifice - in the service of the Nation. In putting the needs of the Nation and the Army before their own, they forego some of the rights enjoyed by those outside the Armed Forces.
In return, British soldiers must always be able to expect fair treatment, to be valued and respected as individuals, and that they (and their families) will be sustained and rewarded by commensurate terms and conditions of service.
In the same way the unique nature of military land operations means that the Army differs from all other institutions, and must be sustained and provided for accordingly by the Nation.
This mutual obligation forms the Military Covenant between the Nation, the Army and each individual soldier; an unbreakable common bond of identity, loyalty and responsibility which has sustained the Army throughout its history. It has perhaps its greatest manifestation in the annual commemoration of Armistice Day, when the Nation keeps covenant with those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, giving their lives in action.

Army Doctrine Publication Volume 5

Sorry to whack on about this, but it does anger me. Are US vets treated with the same contempt by government?

After yesterday's fuckawful budget it would appear that the "present administration" could be on the way out. I have no great love for the tories (they still have a lot to prove after Major's premiership IMO), but if there's anyone more fiscally responsible for the current UK economic mess than Gordon I'll eat my hat.

David Cameron gets Budget bounce - Telegraph

Maybe the election will put underinvestment in the armed forces front and centre where it should be. When does Gordon have to go to the country? By next May? With the polls the way they are now he's going to hang on til the death. Tony Blair must he pissing himself.

 

[Burp]

Its just crazy how vets are treated here.

I have hope that it will get better under Obama.

Don't know about that yet.

He did consider making vets pay for their treatment.

At least he changed his mind. One of the few "I changed my mind" moments.

 

[Bootneck]

After yesterday's fuckawful budget it would appear that the "present administration" could be on the way out. I have no great love for the tories (they still have a lot to prove after Major's premiership IMO), but if there's anyone more fiscally responsible for the current UK economic mess than Gordon I'll eat my hat.

I don't think it's a case of 'could' tigerbob. They've been on dodgy ground for some time now and every week that passes finds another nail in the coffin of the Labour government. Bunch of sleazebags. Dead men walking mate.

 

[tigerbob]

After yesterday's fuckawful budget it would appear that the "present administration" could be on the way out. I have no great love for the tories (they still have a lot to prove after Major's premiership IMO), but if there's anyone more fiscally responsible for the current UK economic mess than Gordon I'll eat my hat.

I don't think it's a case of 'could' tigerbob. They've been on dodgy ground for some time now and every week that passes finds another nail in the coffin of the Labour government. Bunch of sleazebags. Dead men walking mate.

I was interested to see a lot of headlines today relating to the Gurkhas case. If it's seriously true that the revised guidelines for settlement in the UK are actually only going to be met by about 100 Gurkhas (mainly officers) then it seems clear that some civil servant has been very clever with the wording. Did I say clever? I meant duplicitous.

Gurka immigration policy condemned as 'a sham' - Times Online

With all the ways one can get into Britain for free, I find it nothing less that a national disgrace that the rights of these guys who have fought for the country are somehow less important than the rights of literally tens of thousands of Eastern Europeans who haven't done a damn thing (with the exception of take ownership of the drug and vice trade).

Another case of "Thank you for your service - now piss off".

 

[editec]

OK. From what you're all saying, it seems the aftercare for vets leaves a lot to be desired, so our governments' attitudes are not dissimilar. Makes me wonder whether politicians have a 'cannon fodder' mentality when it comes to the military. I wonder whether this would change if the people who run our countries had children, or loved ones fighting in foreign lands.

During WW2, virtually all of our wealthy and politacaly powerful had sons and daughters serving in the military, many in active combat. After the war, the GI Bill was created, and the benefits helped create the boom of the 50s.

Now, with very few of the "Fortunate" sons serving, you are correct. There is a 'cannon fodder' mentality. What happened at Walter Reed was a prime example of that.

WWII vets got a decent GI bill but as to wounded and diabled vets?

I was stationed at St. Albans Naval Hospital in Queens. (for a while I think it became a VA hospital then a Nav hospital.

Anyway, Post WWII it has 7000 beds.


Ya' know what the locals used to call it back then, according to people I knew who live in NYC at the time?

The FORGOTTEN VETERANS hospital.

Post wars, all people want to do is move on and forget the war.

And since vets remind us of it, we often forget them, too.