War on the Cheap

The disgraceful episode that we see being revealed at the Veteran's Administration is a shame that no civilized nation should have to endure. Even more so, our wounded and other veterans of military service should not have to endure such disrespect and callous treatment. Lastly, if the battlefield did not claim them then inaction by the people charged with healing their wounds should never be the cause of their death.

General Eric Shinseki

We tend to view experiences such as these through the prism of emotional attachment and there is ample cause to view it that way. After all, it is ourselves who sent these men and women to act on our behalf so that we would not have to experience not just the horror of the battlefield but also the discomfort that such sacrifice would bring our families. It is a sad indictment that we found it necessary to offer up men and women unnecessarily but having done so it is our devout duty to care for them in the best way possible. We have failed in that duty. It is not just General Shinseki or some administrators who have failed. It is us since those people were acting on our behalf. The buck stops here.

September 11, 2001 was a shock to the national psyche that our nation had not experienced for sixty years and it left us thirsty for revenge against those who would dare come into our country and destroy significant buildings and some 3000 people in the process. That thirst galvanized us to war, first in Afghanistan where the assailants were harbored and then in Iraq for reasons still debated. There was little awareness that those wars would be more than brief campaigns for our vaunted military and, to be sure, our military performed its task with expedience. It was the aftermath that few anticipated. Years of occupation punctuated by guerrilla tactics using deadly Improvised Explosive Devices that could wreak havoc on our patrols and our soldiers and marines and therein lies the problem.

There were quite a number that returned from Vietnam with wounds both visible and invisible. It was years before Agent Orange exposure was recognized as an illness caused by injury on the battlefield. PTSD was identified but treatment lagged far behind while thousands were lost to suicide, depression and alcoholism. By the time we engaged ourselves in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan medical science had developed to the point that huge numbers of combatants that would have previously died on the battlefield were now being saved to encounter lives of desperate need for support. The rise in survival rates for traumatic brain injury swamped the military medical system with need for treatment still unanticipated and undeveloped. Survival from loss of limbs is now common but the treatment for those who suffered the effects of explosive devices was still in its infancy. Repeated deployments to combat situations where soldiers and marines were subjected to unimaginable, constant stress left even those who returned seemingly unscathed with horrible psychic wounds. Neuroscientists understand very well how repeated and constant stress leads to psychotic breaks but the military requires people to do just that. No one returned unharmed.

And this is the septic miasma in which the Veteran's Administration found itself immersed by 2002. People in Washington DC act all surprised at the recent news that the VA has been falsifying records. Did they really think we were doing that great a job? Has no one been paying attention to the news of the wounded coming home and the desperate lives they face? I remember for a fact that early in the wars there were warnings of just this kind of thing but the powers insisted there would not be that many since we would not be in combat that long. Now, thirteen years later everyone is all surprised. Yeah, right.

This is first and foremost a stark result of the refusal to recognize reality and fund expansion of medical services in the Veteran's Administration to meet the exploding need. The ideologies of the budget battles overwhelmed our commitment accept the price of waging war and left us swamped in the shame of neglecting those who we sent to do battle for us. There are already those who are denying that the Veteran's Administration is drastically underfunded but that is only to deflect blame for allowing their slavish adherence to partisan politics and ideology to undercut those to whom we owe the highest respect. While it is true that the budget for the VA has doubled over the course of the wars it still failed to keep up with the increased casualties. It did not allow for combatants who would survive horrifying injuries at a much higher rate than previously experienced.

This is not to say that there is no falsifying of records to indicate that wait times are acceptable. It remains that administrators at some level ordered their subordinates to create those false records. Just how high up the chain of command the duplicity goes is yet to be discovered but what must not happen is for some Congressional Committee demand that heads must roll, play politics with it and then go back to business the same old way. Anyone with any knowledge of corporate or governmental bureaucracies knows that these acts of falsification did not occur in a vacuum. If adequate resources had been available there would have been no need for falsification. The Veteran's Administration is a governmental bureaucracy and it will function like any other bureaucracy. It is populated with people just like you and me who want to keep their jobs and take care of their families. It has people in it who are ambitious and seek promotion. All of this occurs separately from those whose responsibility it is to actually deliver medical care. Yes, they should have risked their jobs and blew the whistle but before you become too harsh think about how you would have handled that in your job. Not too many of us will be that principled. There were those who sounded the alarm but they were pushed aside because the uncomfortable truth is that we saw, or should have seen, the dramatic increase as the wars dragged on.

My take? Those who planned and approved these wars did not do their due diligence to prepare for the results. As a people we allowed our thirst for revenge and lack of exposure to sacrifice to cloud our judgement. You can't go to war on the cheap. We will be paying for this for a long time and the cost will be many trillions of dollars more than we were led to believe.

What do you think about it?  Let me know.

 

Julian Castro, Shaun Donovan Part of Cabinet Changes | RealClearPolitics

Julian Castro, Shaun Donovan Part of Cabinet Changes | RealClearPolitics







Not too sure this is a smart move for Castro.  He and his brother are stars in Texas politics and are talked about for national office.  Being tied to the President this late in his tenure could hamstring Castro's chances.

About Wisdom and Idealism

The Constant Confrontation

Not long ago I was told by a young man, “Your generation just doesn't want to give up power to a new generation.” I was taken aback thinking, “hey, that's my line.” Well, it was 35 or 40 years ago (or more). I said much the same thing to those old guys who were in power and holding me and my generation back. After all, we had new ideas and the energy to do something about it while those dinosaurs were content to sit on their wallets and protect their own. I still think that but I have come to realize there are other elements in play.

I can still remember the first time it was driven home to me that right does not always win over might. It was a lesson in my political education that was quite painful and absolutely necessary for me to learn. I was a part of the local Young Democrats. We were a very active bunch with great sponsors who had ties to the party at the state level. I and some others had backed a person in a race but, in the end, our candidate saw the inevitability of losing and made a deal. I refused to accept that he willingly gave in and continued to support him only to finally be embarrassed by my naivete. That was the first time I learned that lesson but certainly not the last time. I have an astoundingly hard head when it comes to idealism. Now, I try to remain idealistic but with a modicum of realism. I don't like the negative outcomes any more but it hurts me less.

In that time all those years ago I was part of a generation that believed anything was possible, that our idealism was something new and that we were the chosen ones to bring that idealism to the nation. It was a long fall. However, even after having that idealism trampled into cynicism I have been fortunate enough to have it return even if in a somewhat tempered form. We won a few of those fights but neither easily nor quickly. I understand now that change rarely comes in an instant absent a traumatic event and that one must wage the long fight in order to effect the change first envisioned.

I started to angrily correct that young man's assertion but I caught myself just in time. You see, any kind of angry retort would have only reinforced his conviction and would have placed me outside of the realm of possibility of ever being able to have a beneficial relationship with him. We must never callously reject the idealism of youth. It is a treasure to be valued just as is the wisdom of years. If we try to ridicule idealism in the young we risk losing the value of that uncluttered vision in the future. Instead, we should mentor and use the lessons we have learned from our errors to enable young activists to carry their vision either to fruition or to being tempered by the convictions of others. Peering into my own past I can recall precious few of that type of friend. Most did just as the young man assumed my own position would be.

The fact is that youthful idealism will seldom burst forth full grown. It will usually fall short in the means of implementation and fail to foresee the pitfalls that await it. The fact is that we live in a world that is distressingly influenced by self aggrandizement and power. The fact is that even if our cause is just it will still have to deal with these realities. I still find that incredibly short-sighted but I now understand that usually it will be a long fight.

The occasion for those remarks I began with was a conversation about a local election in which a younger person is attempting to replace one of my generation. I pointed out the record of the incumbent as something to be worthy of reelection thereby prompting the young man's remark.

It is unfortunate that in so many political races these days the electorate has little or no idea of what the candidate is proposing to do. It seems that campaigns have been reduced to slogans and personality contests and those qualities are not the stuff of which progress is made. Wouldn't it be just wonderful if the candidates would state their ideas and records and ask the voters to judge according to how they value those statements and their judgment of the veracity of the candidates? That is my idealism.

But that is just not the way things are done these days and it will be for another column to discuss why. The main thing here is the desperate need to not rebuke the convictions and idealism of youth with the goal of destroying it but to nurture it in the hope of seeing it come to be reality. Confrontation is the nature of youth while discussion and rationale should be the currency of age. It is up to those of us who have learned the path to pass that knowledge on to those that follow us. We waste far too much wisdom in forcing the lesson to be learned and relearned with each generation.

But, there is also a reality that those holding power are reluctant to give it up willingly so it falls to the challenger to present reasons to allow someone new to take the reins. It is inevitable that a challenger will prevail at some point but the best results will be attained if evidence and aspirations are visible for the voters to see.

My Take is that we need to value idealism while tempering it with wisdom. Where the two intersect is greatness and the best possible outcome for the people.

National Immunity

Post WWI Germany was reeling from reparations payments, a destroyed economy, having lost vital parts of their homeland and finally the onset of The Great Depression. The military had been virtually disbanded and small para-military forces were vying to establish a hold on power. German society, long known for its rigidity and order became more liberal and bohemian in the 1930s which dismayed much of the nation scandalized by what appeared to be debauchery. It was out of this chaos that Adolf Hitler appeared to establish what would become The Third Reich, destined to reign for a thousand years. Thankfully that was not to be.

I want to take a few minutes to offer some thoughts on how we can take the lessons of the Third Reich and apply them to our world today. I am going to use words like liberal, conservative, progressive, reactionary, fascist, communist, republican and democrat. I want you to see and understand each of these words by the definitions of the terms and not by any political association because I want to make these remarks independent of political bias. Now, this does not mean that I am not politically biased but just that I am going to try to speak in a more philosophical nature. Try not to be offended to the point of throwing down the newspaper before finishing and considering the point.

Hitler was able to come to power by using tactics that have become well identified since his time. He appealed to patriotism, nationalism, racial superiority and military supremacy. He identified a common enemy in the Jewish population and the nations that had wreaked havoc on Germany following its defeat in WWI. He promised a better tomorrow with Germany claiming its just position as leader of the world because of German exceptionalism. The arts were condemned, especially modern art, as decadent and leading to the moral failing of German society. All of these have become identified with fascism. It was not hard to whip crowds into a frenzy with his inflammatory speeches and accusations of unjust persecution of the German nation. Finally enough power was attained and Hitler was made absolute dictator when he assumed both the Presidency and the Chancellorship and went about reforming the German governmental system.

The American people share a lot of characteristics with the German people. Centuries ago our ancestors largely came from England which had a large Saxon component. The English ruing family were the Hapsburgs. Much of our early immigration came from the Low Countries and Germany. The Nordic countries and Western Europe are ancestrally largely the same people. Our cultures are intertwined with political and cultural similarities and our literature is largely Germanic in origin. Reading early and even middle English is almost like reading German and about as easy to read. Being across 3000 miles of open water has allowed us to evolve some distinctions but the few hundred years have not been long enough to wash away our legacy.

I have long felt that in the United States there exists a strong undercurrent toward fascism. Many times in the past leaders have used nationalistic and racial lures to incite the patriotism of the people and foster the notion that American exceptionalism makes our way pure and deserving of no criticism. I am certain that many of us alive now can think of a time that we were over-exuberant in our exercise of power and crossed the line of decency. Since World War II we have allowed our military to assume an almost sanctified status among the citizenry. The economy has been taken over by the very wealthy who exercise an inordinate amount of power and every so often we are thrown some red meat in the form of an enemy whose existence is based on its desire to destroy our way of life and enslave us. Religion is often used to sound the alarm of religious persecution and the clarion call that our god demands that we go to war for him. Yes, there are similarities and no amount of caterwauling will make it not so but that is not the critical thing.

Barry Goldwater famously rang out during the 1964 Presidential campaign (yes, I'm old enough to remember it but not old enough to have voted in it), “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.”

Well, yes it is. Extremism is only useful in extreme situations and it is not without consequences even then. The modern conservative movement traces its heritage to that campaign and is now, fifty years later, ascendant. But there is also a defense mechanism built into our wonderful country, sort of like an antibody, that inoculates us against the ravages of extremism and fascism. We have had leaders before and we have some now who espouse a policy of American exceptionalism and believe we should use our powerful military as the point of the sword to force our vision on the world. The national antibodies are hard at work strengthening the national immune system to fend off the attack.

Those antibodies are republicanism, democracy, the arts and humanities, the tradition of a liberal education (remember, I said to use the dictionary and not political terms). It is the reverence for Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion. It is the willingness of our country to welcome people from other cultures. It is our differences that make us strong enough to fight off our tendency toward nationalism and fascism. Now, I want to tell you that patriotism is not the exclusive property of those who espouse the view of “My Country Right or Wrong.” Patriots can love their country and want and expect better from it. It is only then that the United States really becomes the exceptional country it can be. Many of our military leaders who have studied citizenship, leadership and war understand the value of an open society with a firm control over the the military. That knowledge seems to not be well known in the average citizen.

Yes, the Germanic peoples are our cousins and family is family. You can't choose that but you can choose how family affects your life.

My Take is that by being protective of the rights of all citizens we create the antibodies that protect ourselves from the diseases of totalinarianism, fascism and oligarchies.

Triumph of Logic

As Debate Goes On, the Military Prepares for Climate Change - Defense One





Even if civilian government can't agree on anything about climate change the defense department can use logic and reason to determine the course of action.  Too bad their leaders can't do the same.

Long Term Needs-Short Term Ideas

So, the candidate promises the crowd he will faithfully represent the wishes of his constituency in the halls of Congress. That really sounds promising since we certainly don't want someone to go to Congress that will act in contradiction to the best interests of his constituency. But, wait. Is that really true in every circumstance?

One of the problems that we have with our Congress now is that it is so difficult to reach a consensus on any kind of legislation. For instance, it is plain to see that as a nation we need to be moving toward an energy policy that drastically reduces carbon emissions. For states that do not produce fossil fuels this may be a no-brainer but for Kentucky, a state in which coal is a large part of the economy, it is a bit more important. So, what do our representatives do? Well, most of them go about wailing about the War on Coal and attempt to deny climate change saying that the eggheads are all a bunch of chicken littles. It is obvious that we all breath the same air, more or less, and that reducing carbon is in everyone's best interests but in the short term it is politically expedient to rail against those efforts in order to appeal to something that is affecting the electorate. The long term will require something else but if you are trying to win a two year term that is just not important.

So, what if a candidate came to you and said that he or she had certain goals and could state them to you clearly? What if that candidate asked for your support in achieving those goals and said that to achieve a goal that would be good for the nation it may be necessary to vote against the coal interests and for an energy policy that would provide for the future health of the economy and the environment. Would you be willing to accept that hard decision and vote for this candidate or would your own short term interest be the compelling factor. I'll bet most of us would like to think that we would be reasonable and accept that the short term discomfort would be worth the long term benefit. I hate to tell you but your candidates don't give you that much credit. Most candidates adhere to the old maxim that “if you can't dazzle them with facts then you must baffle them with bull----.” To be truthful, there is good reason for that since it seems to work. All it takes is millions of dollars to buy airtime and the bull flows unceasingly. It works and that is why we don't get better.

There is a long list of actions that need to be taken to prepare us for long term favorable results but we just can't get past the election cycle with the candidates that we have. The candidates you have accepted. Fact is that a candidate that is not beholden to the election cycle is a rare commodity and that is the epitome of selfishness and narcissism.

We need to come up with long term solutions for providing health care to our citizens. This isn't hard. We know how to do it but we are held slave to short term decision making that is reliant on ideology. We are enslaved to the big money corporations that get wealthy off the public coffers. They buy Congressmen. Our highways and bridges are falling apart and anyone can see we need to do some serious maintenance. We can't do it because we can't find the money. In the richest country in the world we can't find the money. Advanced education is going to be required for the United States to maintain its lead in innovation and research. What are we doing about it? Well, there is a substantial number who think we should abolish the Department of Education and return control of education to the individual school districts. Any reasonable solution is going to have to include more teachers and better pay. But we just can't get there in an election cycle. What is going to happen to our economy when the subways in New York are flooded and there is no water for crops in California or the Great Plains? We really need to be very active in preparing now to avert the worst but we can't even get people to agree that there is a need. In our state our candidates say we just can't lose those valuable coal jobs. Look at this. Those jobs are disappearing and we have waited so long that the loss is now being created by loss of market. We could have and should have seen it coming and diversified our economy but the short term addiction to the election cycle allowed the candidates to pull the wool over our eyes and we allowed ourselves to become blind.

The solutions to these problems that we have been unable and unwilling to accept are available. They have not even been hard to see. It is just that we have allowed ideology to make us blind. But there is a simple solution that will free us from candidates that just can't manage to be held beholden to the election cycle. Ask yourself, “what is the one thing that would remove the influence of special interests? What is the one thing that would cause candidates to listen to the people rather than those huge moneybags that finance the million and billion dollar election cycles? What is the one thing that would allow the candidates to make a case for policy based on logic and reason? It is no secret.

Get the money out of our elections.

“It'll never happen, you say.” The reason it will never happen is that you, we, will not make it happen. Why not? We are The People. We are the ones the candidates make speeches about and refer to in our great documents so why not? At the risk of sounding bombastic I am going to tell you that this is the most critical issue facing our country today. If we do not do this then the charade of open elections is a facade that will cover up rule by moneyed special interests. When that happens you can kiss any hope of a resurrection for the middle class goodbye.

What will you do? Will you continue to allow our candidates to dodge the issues and vote for special interests or will you demand something different? Will you accept servitude to political ideology or will you let the principle of “one man, one vote be our abiding resolve?

My Take is that there is no longer any time for short term thinking. We have squandered it by listening to the siren call of special interest candidates.