RANGER AGAINST WAR: Fighting,There and Here <

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Fighting,There and Here


Smart lad, to slip betimes away,

From fields where glory does not stay,
And early though the laurel grows

It withers quicker than the rose.

--To An Athlete Dying Young, A. E. Housman

I had a brother at Khe Sanh
Fighting off the Viet Cong
They're still there, he's all gone
--Born in the U.S.A., Bruce Springsteen

One of the biggest things I've learned is that
the country wants heroes, but doesn't necessarily
want to pay for the consequences of having heroes
--Cpl. Stephen C. Sanford

_________

Distinguished Service Cross recipient Stephen Sanford is a true American hero, and he is not happy about what he sees now that he is on the other side of the fight.

Though medically retired following action in Iraq, he continues his heroism speaking out for veterans' benefits. You can surmise something is awry when the normally submissive fraternal magazine
DAV chooses to run the following:

"I've heard the damn "h" word [hero] a few times. Honestly, it's an honor to receive the award. I'm humbled by it. But at the same time, in reality, it's just a two-ounce piece of bronze." Sanford said. "If it means anything, I think, it means that I have a responsibility to use this time in the spotlight to help my fellow soldiers and veterans who've also been wounded or become disabled through their service."


"One of the biggest things I've learned is that the country wants heroes, but doesn't necessarily want to pay for the consequences of having heroes,"
said Sanford. "There are a lot of people making tremendous sacrifices, and the process of healing and recovering isn't fast. People think that once the stitches are out the wound is healed. And it's not. Recuperation is a long process, and many people will be affected by their injuries for the rest of their lives. While an injured soldier is just starting to learn to cope with a wound or disability, many people have already forgotten about him ("Honoring the Brave").

Truth. He is saying, what a cost, and for what? Four soldiers from his squad were medically retired following that fight. That afternoon will cost the American taxpayers many millions of dollars over the lifetimes of the soldiers involved. Is securing a Mosul street that important for the security of America that we'll continue to pay for that fight well into the 2060's?


The action for which Cpl. Sanford received his DSC was a call for backup for Iraqi police "who were engaging an enemy safehouse in Mosul. Sanford's squad was the second to enter the sprawling residence and immediately encountered enemy forces gunfire. The initial push to assault the enemy had left the soldiers overwhelmed. The first squad to enter was pinned down and suffered a number of casualties."


Once again, a terrible firefight with heavy U.S. casualties takes place in an ad hoc manner. What ever happened to pre-planning? Why is everything thrown together on the fly? Where is the leader's recon or estimate of the situation?


Driving into a fight blind is a recipe for disaster. This is a criticism of a chain of command that appears a tad too loose, and not the engaged soldiers.


Sanford goes on to criticize an arcane medical claims process and an unfair pension process. He says he "want(s) to make it so other guys don't have to fight as hard."


Sanford sustained numerous gunshot wounds in his action, and with DAV help, recently got an 80% disability rating from the VA. The DAV will also help him appeal that rating. The article concludes with Sanford's clarion call, "We need to continue fighting for these things that really should be a given." Pity.


Young Cpl. Sanford has learned many ugly truths following his service in the infantry -- to Sanford, "the best job in the world." Freedom is certainly not free, but neither are veteran's benefits.


Every penny a veteran receives as disability compensation is twice earned -- once fighting an enemy and once fighting an erstwhile friend, the VA claims adjuster, who more often than not never carried a rifle.


Some personal observations:


[1] Why isn't this DSC being considered for an upgrade to Medal of Honor? It fulfills the requirements (you can read the citation
here (p. 19).

[2] Seeing the pictures of Sanford then and now, it is obvious his wounds have debilitated him and drawn him down physically. How can any claims adjuster read these medical reports and arrive at anything less than 100% and total and permanent?


A tangential observation: It is a shame and a pox on America that the new generation can produce such fine young Americans, yet the best my generation could front for president was GWB.


Sanford is a living testament that deep down, there is still a chance for America. Thank you Cpl. Sanford. Ranger wishes you well. You have earned it.

Labels: , ,

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a responsibility to use this time in the spotlight to help my fellow soldiers and veterans

Aaaaamen brother!

Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 9:55:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, bravery and integrity through and through.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 11:45:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whaaaat? REALLY support the troops?
What a concept. It would probably involve not only caring for them fairly with regard to wounds, recovery and payments, but also NOT doing crap like billing them for equipment blown off their nigh-destroyed bodies or demanding they pay back portions of signing bonuses since their wounds prevented the military getting 'full value' of said signing or re-enlistment bonus.
Yeah, I feel snarly today---point and shoot mood.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 11:09:00 AM EST  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

Labrys,

You are always snarly but I'm learning to live with it. There is
a follow up post on the Sanford topic written and standing in the door.

The only solution I see is to have a draft that is truly fair and equitably administered. That will never happen. I'm snarly, too.

jim

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 11:39:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi
When more Sentators sons go to war there won't be any wars.

This was what the General told me as he made a phone call to ANG getting me back on the list and the Sentator son off.

I agree with labrys, the mistreatment it doesn't suprise
any more.
jo6pac

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 11:57:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL, Jim....well, I am going to claim "nature" for my snarliness. How much sweetness and light could one expect from somebody whose name means "double headed axe"? I wish I could get some of the rhetoric spouting fork-tongued asshats within striking distance...

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 4:24:00 PM EST  
Blogger Roger said...

Ranger, I am not sure you are being fair to Bubba Clinton by crowning GWB the best baby boomer president, not that I was a particular fan of his either. Now engineers don't usually like to predict a trend with just two data points, but in this case I think there is a case for not electing another baby boomer President. And I am one.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 7:55:00 PM EST  
Blogger Lisa said...

jo: True that.

labrys: I know Jim will be gratified when he sees your response. Fiestiness is called for in the face of outrageous violations. Yours is righteous indignation.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 9:15:00 PM EST  
Blogger Lisa said...

roger,

Bush is the penultimate worst baby boomer President; there is simply no comparison with his predecessor.

Funny on the trend prediction with only two data points, but we know the baby boomers are the consummate self-involved, indulgent and selfish consumers. Not all, of course, but their general characteristics are not expansive ones.

We must choose those with uncharacteristic characteristics.
(There is no do-over; we can't grow a new crop in a growing medium in a lab, unfortunately.)

Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 9:24:00 PM EST  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

roger,

I believe that today's decline in individual rights began with the Omnibus Crime Bill passed after the OKC bombing.

The Patriot Act is just an outgrowth of this assault on civil rights. Therefore, our position is that it is not the republicans which are solely to blame, but rather, an environment of general paranoia resulting form that earlier action which has permitted this erosion of rights.

Possibly, as Lisa commented, the BB are so self-involved and self-serving that they lack a good basis for developing leadership.

Thursday, November 22, 2007 at 10:01:00 AM EST  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

labrys,

Snarly folks don't dance freely under the moon, so how do you reckon being a battle axe with that affinity for gentle nature?

Thursday, November 22, 2007 at 10:03:00 AM EST  

Post a Comment

<< Home