As the last days of 2007 come upon us, I've compiled a timeline of veterans news throughout the year. What struck me is the vast number of veterans stories pouring out from all media outlets. Will this continue to be the case in 2008? Most likely it will be for the simple fact that the number of Iraq/Afghanistan vets is getting bigger. 

Here are selected stories from throughout 2007:

FEBRUARY 18 -- The Washington Post exposes decrepit living conditions for wounded soldiers recovering in Building 18 at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center:

Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.

MARCH 8 -- A New York Times study finds vast inequities in how veterans receive disability checks based on location and type of service.

From Newsweek's Dec. 31, 2007-Jan. 7, 2008 issue:

I grew up in an era when war veterans were the aging men at Memorial Day parades wearing triangular hats. It never crossed my mind that a vet might someday be a kid like me. If it had never crossed yours, either, this year probably changed all that. At my graduate school in New York, I can count at least five classmates who know an Iraq War veteran firsthand—and that's just one class, in one school. More than 1 million veterans have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan, lifting our collective profile by the sheer weight of our numbers.

During the past year, veterans' issues were all over the media—and often the news was grim. In February the Walter Reed hospital scandal broke, with revelations about decrepit housing and substandard care. Next came a series of reports on Iraq War data: we learned that the Army suicide rate had reached a 26-year high in 2006; that there'd been 4,698 desertions during the 2007 fiscal year, an 80 percent increase since 2003; that the number of Iraq vets diagnosed with mental-health issues triples during their first six months at home. I followed these stories with a strange sense of relief. For too long, people seemed to think veterans came home and simply melted back into society. Now vet issues were finally getting attention—even if it took bad news to make it happen.

When I started my blog this year, I wondered if there would be enough news about veterans to get me through one day. I couldn't have been more wrong. There we were in the rhetoric of politicians, in countless newspaper features, even on reality TV. For the blog, I've made an effort to examine not only the challenges that my fellow veterans face but also their accomplishments. As one Wall Street Journal columnist wrote, "The media struggles in good faith to respect our troops, but too often it merely pities them."

Stories like the Walter Reed scandal can invite this kind of pity and overshadow the fact that most of us are immensely proud of our service. A single tour in Iraq or Afghanistan can define a person's entire life; collectively, our experiences will echo for decades. If 2007 was the year when veterans' issues entered the public's consciousness, we need to make sure they don't go away in 2008.

"There may be soldiers who have been disfigured for the past four years who may feel that they are so unhappy with their appearance they may wish to look at different alternatives.  Face transplant is the only option for full reconstruction."

I recently spoke by phone with a military friend who's currently a nursing student at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. He talked about how being with the war's wounded every day affects him, both on a human level and as someone who may be deployed to Iraq in the future. Of the scandal which broke last February at the hospital, he assumes the media blew it out of proportion and hasn't seen any negative conditions at the facility. 

What's interesting about his words is how in some cases they could be applied to any civilian hospital worker in the country, and in others we see how his position as a soldier informs his experiences. As he is still on active duty in the Army, he's asked for anonymity. Excerpts:


On working as a stateside medic and nursing student:

Personally I’d say that you get to see another side of the war from being on the health care side. [The wounded soldiers] are treated with a lot of respect. They’re really cared for. On an emotional level sometimes the reality of it catches you. You try to be professional, but you’re still human. And sometimes it dawns on you the situation that person’s in is a very harsh one…There are situations that I’m very happy these people are alive and everything else, but sometimes you wonder if there are fates worse than death. 


On his thoughts during off-duty time:

I think off-duty I think about it more. I think about the possibility–you know, I wear the same uniform as they do. These guys are younger than us. They’re kids. It scares me because I know that I’m still gonna be in the Army until 2010, and I’m pretty sure I’m going back over [to Iraq]. And to be faced with that reality every day looking at the people you’re looking at, and knowing that this is a very indiscriminate war; knowing that you can be walking to the bathroom and just get hit by something in any kind of zone. It's guerrilla warfare. It’s ugly. Your chances are very good that you can be that guy. There’s a lot more people injured than are coming up dead. 


On conversations with patients:

They’re pretty honest about what happened, or what they remember–which they usually don’t. They’re usually like, “yeah, I was driving or doing this and then I woke up and I was in Germany.” They like to talk it out. They love to try to relate to you [as an Army soldier].


On how he comforts a patient's fears:

I think it’d be safe to say it’s kind of like, you know how us infantryman have that black humor. I think humor is one of the things I use. 


On controlling his own fears:

I think the biggest thing that affects me is my fears. I mean, honestly, I get nightmares and stuff. But I think that’s more my anxiety of what my future holds. Sometimes you just need to indulge in the work and do whatever it is to help that person. Sometimes you focus on that person, and that’s how you get by.


On the worst he’s seen in a stateside military hospital:

The burn ward–it was just gruesome, you know. Everything was rearranged and changed. They have pictures [of the soldiers beforehand]–you know, a family puts up pictures. It’s a common practice. You look at someone who’s burnt severely and it’s hard to ever imagine they’re a human. And then right next to that patient–that slab of meat, rearranged face, it’s almost monstrous–right next to that, only to make it more melancholy, is the picture of the young kid with his future ahead of him. Not to sound so cliché. But, you know that person has the future ahead of him. That look that says, ‘look at me I just joined the Army, I’ve got my new uniform, a young girlfriend.’ And they’re not kind of robbed, they’re a hundred percent robbed of that. I think that’s a dark reality right there. 


On the best he’s seen:

The best moment I’ve had was one of my first patients I had. I actually watched him for three weeks.  I took care of him. He was one of my harder cases, and I purposely took him for academic reasons. And I watched him go from being very immobile and sick–just looking like hell to now he’s talking.  That was powerful. You actually watch your accomplishment by giving care, you actually nourish something back to life.

Add gambling addiction to the long list of administrative, medical, and emotional issues facing veterans these days. Moreover, as The Hill reported yesterday, the problem may be fueled by the military's own use of slot machines.  According to The Hill, vacations for soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are funded in part by other soldiers' money lost on military slot machines.

The critics say:

“It is wrong for the U.S. government to use gambling to pay for what we [in Congress] should be supplying for our troops to begin with...That’s a disgrace and a shame.”

Proponents say:

“The military is not a helpless waif in this; they will do what they want to do...Members of Congress should not waste time with nonsensical issues telling the military what recreational activities they should allow on bases.”

And the official line as told to CNN last May:

"Undersecretary of Defense Leslye Arsht, in a statement to CNN, said the machines on bases and posts provide "a controlled alternative to unmonitored host-nation gambling venues and offers a higher payment percentage making it more entertainment oriented than that found at typical casinos."

Slot machines and bingo games are often found on overseas military bases. From The Hill:

The Army operates more than 3,000 slot machines on overseas bases, and manages the Marine Corps’ and some of the Navy’s and Air Force’s slot machine operations. The Air Force also runs its own gambling programs. The military currently has slot machines in Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan and Korea, but the Department of Defense did not provide the total number.

Critics charge pathological gambling is one by-product of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and these readily available gambling facilities only fuel the problem.  According to The Hill's article the last inpatient military treatment clinic for gambling was closed in 2006.  From 1998-2003, two percent of military personnel (30,000 people) reported problems with pathological gambling.  Despite outcry on the readily available gambling facilities, one retired Admiral had this to say:

“There is a fine line between asking young men and women to give the ultimate sacrifice and making life-and-death decisions and then saying that they are not mature enough to make conscious decisions on their own.  Where do you draw the line?”

To personalize the issue The Hill found Lenyatta Tinnelle, a senior airman who was eventually forced out of the Air Force as a result of her gambling addiction.

Tinnelle first started gambling when she was stationed at Camp Red Cloud in South Korea in the mid-1990s, but her addiction intensified when in 2000 she was deployed to Keflavík, Iceland, where the slot machines available on the former naval base offered a respite from dark, cold evenings and boredom.
The senior airman, who had been diligent about having savings and investing money in bonds over the years, ended up gambling all her $40,000 in savings and wrote about $50,000 in bad checks on the base.

Yesterday's Baltimore Sun has a fascinating article on the Army's policy of keeping Silver Star award citations away from the public.  These citations provide narratives of a soldier's actions at the time he/she earned the medal in combat.  As the Sun writes:

Army lawyers and bureaucrats have blocked requests by The Sun and others to open these war stories to the public. They cite, among other reasons, potential threats to soldiers' privacy and safety.

Army Capt. Sean McQuade calls such arguments "absurd." As a lieutenant, McQuade led the platoon that fought Habib Jan. He and two of his soldiers were awarded Silver Stars for heroism in that fight. He is proud of their stories and wants them known.

"Their story needs to be told," he said, "but it's not."


According to the story, in six years of war about 350 men and women have received the Silver Star.  As a result of these stories remaining hidden a Colorado congressman is sponsoring legislation to create a public database of military valor awards.  Rep. John Salazar announced his Military Valor Roll of Honor Act of 2007 in this October press release:

The Military Valor Roll of Honor Act of 2007 requires the Department of Defense to establish a searchable database containing the names and citations of members of the Armed Forces who have been awarded our nations highest military honors.  Currently no comprehensive database exists for these records.


Perhaps Salazar's congressional position will bring these stories to light, but if the Baltimore Sun's attempts are any indication there's a strong will in the Pentagon to keep them private.

The Army denied a March 2006 Freedom of Information Act request for the narratives, first on the grounds that it couldn't find all of them.

Next, Army lawyers argued that releasing the narratives "could subject the soldier and family to increased personal risk." But the Army and the Defense Department already publicize the names, photos and hometowns of medal recipients.

The lawyers also argued that disclosure would discourage officers in the future from writing detailed battle accounts.

The Sun appealed the Army's decision to withhold the narratives in December 2006, and is still awaiting a decision.

Both sides in the matter have valid points.  How do we honor these soldiers' heroic actions without jeopardizing their privacy?  An interesting question whose answer doesn't seem like it will come any time soon.

Yesterday we took a look at the background of retired Lt. Gen. James Peake, who spent Wednesday in confirmation hearings as the nominee for Secretary of Veterans Affairs.  Today brings reactions to his testimony:

VA nominee disappoints Senate panel
Skepticism ran high at Wednesday's hearing for Lt. Gen. James Peake, the nominee to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs. But problems at the VA and a leadership vacuum led most senators to say they would support the nomination, which is expected to go to the full Senate later this month...His background as a Vietnam veteran, a military physician and Army surgeon general was widely praised at the hearing. But several senators questioned whether Peake would be a forceful, independent advocate for veterans.

VA Secretary nominee gets favorable Senate hearing
Retired Lt. Gen. James Peake, President Bush's nominee for Veterans Affairs secretary, breezed through a Senate confirmation hearing today with bipartisan support. Members of the Veterans' Affairs Committee praised Peake, 63, a highly decorated veteran with 38 years of Army service including time in Vietnam and two years as its surgeon general. They also told him his task ahead would be difficult if confirmed.

Somewhere in the middle is where most senators and veterans advocates fall when summing up Peake.  They're giving him a clean slate, but are strongly strongly reminding him of VA woes yet to be sorted out.  And with thousands of new veterans returning from the War on Terror, the scope of their needs will cease to slacken anytime soon.

What's perhaps most interesting about Peake's confirmation hearing yesterday is the lack of press coverage detailing the event.  We're at war and this is a cabinet position, and sure, most papers had a blurb about the hearing -- but nothing expansive.  I wonder what would've happened if the hearing took place right after the Walter Reed scandal broke when vets were in the daily headlines.

One guy who's taking the hearing very seriously is Paul Rieckhoff from Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.  Over at the Huffington Post, Reickhoff sets out a list of questions he believes Peake needs to answer.  Some highlights:

***In 2007, the scandal at Walter Reed finally drew attention to the tremendous obstacles facing wounded troops coming home from Iraq. But many of these issues were already coming to light years earlier, even in 2003 and 2004, when you were Surgeon General. You have said that you were unaware of any problems during your tenure. How will you ensure these mistakes aren't repeated at VA?

***According to the Pentagon's Task Force on Mental Health, "the current complement of mental health professionals is woefully inadequate" to provide the mental health care to today's military. Do you agree with this assessment? Should you have done more to alleviate this shortage in the military, and how will you address this problem at VA?

***Do you believe the current World War Two-style GI Bill adequately covers the cost of college tuition today? If not, what specific improvements to the GI Bill would you recommend?

***Disabled veterans are waiting too long for their disability benefits. The number of backlogged claims has increased over 50 percent over the past three years to almost 400,000 pending disability claims. Just last week, a new report showed that the average time for claims processing has risen again, to 183 days. What will you do to reduce the backlog?

***The VA budget is late again this year, and temporary funding bills leave veterans' hospitals unable to plan their budgets accurately. Do you think mandatory VA funding is the answer?

***You will have much less time than your predecessors to influence VA policy under this Administration. What are the top three specific changes you hope to implement during your tenure and what can you realistically hope to accomplish?


Rieckhoff's questions mirrored some asked by senators during Peake's hearing.  As Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said:

"I've always said the VA secretary has to be an advocate for our veterans, not just an apologist for any administration."


Now that the confirmation hearing is over and it's seeming more than likely Peake will be confirmed, he's about to step into a job where decisions need to be made now -- decisions that allow little room for error.  So, let's give Peake the last word:

“I look forward, if confirmed, to moving forward with making the system less complex, more understandable and better supported with the tools of information technology...A veteran should not need a lawyer to figure out what benefit is due or to get that benefit.”

 

Name: Dr. James Benjamin Peake
Age: 63
Born: June 18, 1944; St. Louis, Mo.
Education B.S., United States Military Academy, 1966; M.D., Cornell University, 1972; graduate, U.S. Army War College, 1988.
War Service: Vietnam
Awarded: Silver Star, Bronze Star with "V" device, Purple Heart with oak leaf cluster
Other: former Army surgeon general with 40 years in military medicine; if confirmed, he will be the first general and first physician to hold the job

"The disability system is largely a 1945 product, 1945 processes, around a 1945 family unit. About everybody that has studied it recently said it is time to do some revisions."

When a veteran first applies for that compensation, a doctor conducts a physical to help determine how much money he or she deserves. Historically, VA doctors do most of those examinations. But increasingly they are being performed by QTC Management, the for-profit contractor that employed Peake as its chief operating officer from 2006 until now.

The company has a virtual lock on the expanding business of performing the physicals on veterans, which help determine how much they should get in disability checks from the VA.

To alleviate other possible conflicts of interest, Peake also told the Senate committee that he would divest stock holdings in more than 57 companies, many of them major pharmaceutical companies such as Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers, Medtronic, Wyeth and Pfizer, that either currently or might do business with the VA, said a Senate staffer who demanded anonymity because the information had not been made public.

Even the administration's most ardent critic on the committee, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., plans tough questions but expects him to be confirmed.

"The problems at the VA are huge, and lives are at stake," she said. "I hope General Peake's the guy for the job, because this administration has failed to plan and failed to be honest and we simply can't waste any more time when it comes to getting this right."

A five-month saga pitting the right-wing blogosphere against The New Republic ended yesterday when, in a nearly 7,000-word article, editor Franklin Foer said he could no longer stand by narratives his magazine had published written by a soldier serving in Iraq. The soldier, Scott Thomas Beauchamp, wrote what many had considered questionable pieces for the magazine regarding the behavior of his comrades during their Iraq tour. In one controversial entry, Beauchamp describes an exchange between troops as they notice a disfigured woman in the chow hall:

Man, I can't eat like this," he said.
"Like what?" I said. "Chow hall food getting to you?"
"No--with that f*cking freak behind us!" he exclaimed, loud enough for not only her to hear us, but everyone at the surrounding tables. I looked over at the woman, and she was intently staring into each forkful of food before it entered her half-melted mouth.
"Are you kidding? I think she's *** hot!" I blurted out.
"What?" said my friend, half-smiling.
"Yeah man," I continued. "I love chicks that have been intimate--with IEDs. It really turns me on--melted skin, missing limbs, plastic noses ... ."

Soon after "Shock Troops," the piece that contained this anecdote, was published in July, conservatives questioned the accuracy of the reporting--and lambasted The New Republic for the unsubstantiated "anti-war" message of its stories. Foer quotes Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol as saying:

But what is revealing about this mistake is that the editors must have wanted to suspend their disbelief in tales of gross misconduct by American troops. How else could they have published such a farrago of dubious tales? Having turned against a war that some of them supported, the left is now turning against the troops they claim still to support."

While criticism for The New Republic has continued over the past five months, almost equally vehement is criticism of Foer's recent article.  Bob Bateman of Media Matters highlights his belief Foer waited too long into his lengthy article to actually give his position on Beauchamp.