Good one, Rob; it’s always good to get past the emotion-based crap and run the real numbers. The fact is, if you want to talk about poor treatment of returning vets, you can’t beat Vietnam, and that was exclusively due to the leftie hatred directed at them.
robert108 - 09:09am on 09/30/2007
He’s getting twice as much in government payments as I make working 40+ hours a week. And he must have taken advantage of one of those “sub-prime” housing loans, because there’s no way a bank would give him a loan with that kind of debt-to-income ratio.
Daniel - 09:09am on 09/30/2007
GAMAL AWAD!
We let people with MUSLIM-sounding names like that into OUR MILITARY! Someone tell docdave and r108! We have to put an end to this! Someone, whip out a conditional that PROVES something and let’s gripe!
Sparkie Arbuckle - 09:09am on 09/30/2007
I don’t have a problem with his heritage. I just don’t think he should blame his self-inflicted financial situation on the government.
Rob - 09:09am on 09/30/2007
My first instinct is to passionately attack Rob for what appears to be his gross insensitivity to how some veterans suffer such great emotional damage in war that they simply cannot make good decisions when they come home and return to civilian life. My brother suffered a great deal after 2.5 tours in Vietnam, despite his many medals for valor he became a wife beater, he couldn’t hold a job and he was drifting through life. Thank the Lord he was able to make a turn around, without sucking once on the federal tit and he has succeeded in life, albeit his body is now failing him due to the injuries of war and thankfully Veteran’s Hospitals have helped him enormously.
We will always have a small number of our soldiers, as compared to the whole that need intensive, long term emotional and other medical help throughout their lives. But the question Rob correctly posed is this: When they get into trouble as did Mr. Awad, can we as a society be expected to keep them from making bad decisions in life and rescue them from all their gross mistakes, all in the name of honoring their prior war experiences? I think the answer is no!
They must have free access to medical care from the Veterans Administration all their lives, in many cases they must receive such financial help as necessary to keep a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs, that is the least we can do for those warriors having risked their all that we might enjoy the fruits of liberty.
On the other hand, I don’t believe it is good for them, their fellow soldiers or society as a whole for us to deliver a message that we will absolve and rescue them from all their poor decisions in life. Most of us since WW-II went into the military voluntarily, knowing the risks and be willing to bear the burdens of our defense of liberty even after discharge. Until recent decades, we still expected out soldiers to take responsibility for their own lives after a war, they had to wake up and realize life is tough, they had to pull up their socks and make a life for themselves. Because we are grateful to them we have extended them many benefits; but, I think we must reassert that time proven formula of self reliance for all our citizens, including our soldiers, recognizing that some will need more help than others, but only help - not rescue from all the vicissitudes of life, for their good and for that of our country.
Lastly, no matter how many msitakes these broken soldiers make in life, no matter how much these mistakes cost them, if any should fail to honor them or offer kindness and some minimal help in times of crisis, these ungrateful citizens don’t deserve any of the fruits of that liberty wherein they now stand.
Neiman - 09:09am on 09/30/2007
I must add, because a few here are hypercritical and looking for weaknesses in others: I am of advanced age and I have never taken one penny from the Federal Government in health care, loans for housing, education or any benefit whatsoever.
Neiman - 10:09am on 09/30/2007
I don’t have a problem with his heritage. I just don’t think he should blame his self-inflicted financial situation on the government.
It is highly probable that they selected a guy with an Islamic name for this article, simply for propaganda purposes, and it worked on Sparkie.
If we didn’t piss away huge sums of money on unnecessary and useless social engineering programs, we might have enough to take care of injured vets, but as you say, Rob, we aren’t responsible for his financial blunders.
robert108 - 10:09am on 09/30/2007
My first instinct is to passionately attack Rob…
Why not a reasonable and logical disagreement? Why attack?
robert108 - 10:09am on 09/30/2007
Awad used to make $100K, used to be married, maybe he could afford his house then.
Now he’s a basket case and you think his problem is poor financial planning.
compensation for his total disability from post-traumatic stress disorder. His flashbacks, thoughts of suicide, and anxiety over imagined threats — all documented for six years in his military record
WOOF - 10:09am on 09/30/2007
robert108: I hate it whenever you get involved in any debate, you are so unreasonable, overbearing, demanding, bullying and hypercritical of everything, as you are always and only just looking for a way to be disagreeable and hurt others. I wasn’t attacking Rob at all and I am willing to bet he did not think I was after reading my post, although by his own admission he rarely does read my posts.
I used that phrase in order to move from a point of liberal compassion Rob had mentioned in the thread, towards my own demand for personal responsibilty with some help along the way for our veterans. But, you would rather find a way to be disagreeable than to look at what is really being said, it is all hate with you.
Good one, Rob; it’s always good to get past the emotion-based crap and run the real numbers. The fact is, if you want to talk about poor treatment of returning vets, you can’t beat Vietnam, and that was exclusively due to the leftie hatred directed at them.
He’s getting twice as much in government payments as I make working 40+ hours a week. And he must have taken advantage of one of those “sub-prime” housing loans, because there’s no way a bank would give him a loan with that kind of debt-to-income ratio.
GAMAL AWAD!
We let people with MUSLIM-sounding names like that into OUR MILITARY! Someone tell docdave and r108! We have to put an end to this! Someone, whip out a conditional that PROVES something and let’s gripe!
I don’t have a problem with his heritage. I just don’t think he should blame his self-inflicted financial situation on the government.
My first instinct is to passionately attack Rob for what appears to be his gross insensitivity to how some veterans suffer such great emotional damage in war that they simply cannot make good decisions when they come home and return to civilian life. My brother suffered a great deal after 2.5 tours in Vietnam, despite his many medals for valor he became a wife beater, he couldn’t hold a job and he was drifting through life. Thank the Lord he was able to make a turn around, without sucking once on the federal tit and he has succeeded in life, albeit his body is now failing him due to the injuries of war and thankfully Veteran’s Hospitals have helped him enormously.
We will always have a small number of our soldiers, as compared to the whole that need intensive, long term emotional and other medical help throughout their lives. But the question Rob correctly posed is this: When they get into trouble as did Mr. Awad, can we as a society be expected to keep them from making bad decisions in life and rescue them from all their gross mistakes, all in the name of honoring their prior war experiences? I think the answer is no!
They must have free access to medical care from the Veterans Administration all their lives, in many cases they must receive such financial help as necessary to keep a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs, that is the least we can do for those warriors having risked their all that we might enjoy the fruits of liberty.
On the other hand, I don’t believe it is good for them, their fellow soldiers or society as a whole for us to deliver a message that we will absolve and rescue them from all their poor decisions in life. Most of us since WW-II went into the military voluntarily, knowing the risks and be willing to bear the burdens of our defense of liberty even after discharge. Until recent decades, we still expected out soldiers to take responsibility for their own lives after a war, they had to wake up and realize life is tough, they had to pull up their socks and make a life for themselves. Because we are grateful to them we have extended them many benefits; but, I think we must reassert that time proven formula of self reliance for all our citizens, including our soldiers, recognizing that some will need more help than others, but only help - not rescue from all the vicissitudes of life, for their good and for that of our country.
Lastly, no matter how many msitakes these broken soldiers make in life, no matter how much these mistakes cost them, if any should fail to honor them or offer kindness and some minimal help in times of crisis, these ungrateful citizens don’t deserve any of the fruits of that liberty wherein they now stand.
I must add, because a few here are hypercritical and looking for weaknesses in others: I am of advanced age and I have never taken one penny from the Federal Government in health care, loans for housing, education or any benefit whatsoever.
It is highly probable that they selected a guy with an Islamic name for this article, simply for propaganda purposes, and it worked on Sparkie.
If we didn’t piss away huge sums of money on unnecessary and useless social engineering programs, we might have enough to take care of injured vets, but as you say, Rob, we aren’t responsible for his financial blunders.
Why not a reasonable and logical disagreement? Why attack?
Awad used to make $100K, used to be married, maybe he could afford his house then.
Now he’s a basket case and you think his problem is poor financial planning.
robert108: I hate it whenever you get involved in any debate, you are so unreasonable, overbearing, demanding, bullying and hypercritical of everything, as you are always and only just looking for a way to be disagreeable and hurt others. I wasn’t attacking Rob at all and I am willing to bet he did not think I was after reading my post, although by his own admission he rarely does read my posts.
I used that phrase in order to move from a point of liberal compassion Rob had mentioned in the thread, towards my own demand for personal responsibilty with some help along the way for our veterans. But, you would rather find a way to be disagreeable than to look at what is really being said, it is all hate with you.