Walter Reed Hospital named unsafe..General fired! WHY?

Question

WE ARE A COUNTRY THAT DOES NOT TAKE CARE OF ITS TROOPS.
SOLDIERS CANNOT GET DISABILITY FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND NOW WALTER REED HOSPITAL HAS BEEN NAMED UNSAFE.

Answer 1

Nice rant. Here's a few facts:

99% of Walter Reed Hospital is a showplace.

One building, that's off the main campus, is in poor shape but is already being tended to. One General, who should have known about this, and maybe even did, did not do his job and was relieved.

This Country is taking FAR, FAR better care of it's troops than it did under the last numbskull who occuppied the Oval Office. He was too busy with his illicit affairs to take care of anything but his Johnson.

Answer 2

The Army Medical system has nothing to do with a wounded soldiers payroll.
Walter Reed was scheduled to be closed and all activities transferred to Bethesda Naval Hospital. They did limited renovation prior to 2005 because of the planned transfer of activities. The Department of Defense then changed their mind. No-doubt from special interests that that wanted to keep Reed open. This has thrown chaos into the system.
The General I believe, was made a scapegoat for government indecision, waste and mismanagement.
In any case this is an indictment of "socialized" health care.

Answer 3

Although Walter Reed Hospital provides excellent care for wounded troops, our system is seriously flawed. I keep hearing story after story from injured troops caught in a maze of red tape and substandard care worldwide. Taking care of these wounded soldiers should be a #1 priority, but it's not. The Bush administration, the Pentagon, and the entire military structure should hang their heads in shame.

Answer 4

Walter Reed was on the chopping block scheduled to be closed(to save money)!!!
In the middle of two wars no less!!!

I suspect the general was fired to protect those who made the decision to close that facility. Can you say bush and co.

Yet again this administration has shown it's utter stupidity and and disregard for the American People!

When are we gonna wake up get out of this stupid I raq war and throw bush, cheney, rumsfeld and who ever else got us into this mess (and please don't mention 911, Iraq had nothing to do with 911) in jail?

Impeach bush NOW!!!

Answer 5

Those who want to make a partisan argument can back off before you start. Military medicine has always had bizarre funding, and the only surprise is that it's a flag officer instead of a more expendable field grade that's taking the fall. This game has always been played by both political parties, and there's been little to choose one from the other here.

Answer 6

how about checking out the Tucsan VA facility, talk about troops not getting disability for months, how about years and years, and years, do you think i should have been a millionaire? at least, i am sure every one of the va facilities everywhere is unsafe, where are the architechs who designed the places, does the va ever follow up on the suggestions that they ask for,
what is interesting is, the WHY of the matter, it is a mystery, who to blame

Answer 7

And your point is? We do not send our soldiers in with the proper training, we do not give them the right equipment and you expect us to care for them after they are wounded? This is the Republican way of supporting the troops, let's hope the Democrats are a little more effective.

Answer 8

-- The Administration has proposed one of the most tight-fisted, miserly budgets for veterans programs in recent memory, said the 1.2 million member Disabled American Veterans (DAV). Instead of providing adequate funds for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical system, the budget proposes to shift the cost burden onto the backs of veterans, making health care more expensive and even less accessible for millions of America's defenders.

"The VA medical system has been strained to the breaking point over the years because its appropriation has failed to keep pace with the skyrocketing costs of health care and increased patient loads," said National Commander James E. Sursely. "As a result VA facilities across the country are cutting staff and limiting services even as the number of veterans seeking care is on the rise."

As called for in the President's budget, total VA funding for the next fiscal year would increase about 1 percent, from the current $67.5 billion to $68.2 billion. More than half of the budget would go for mandatory programs such as disability compensation and pensions. Medical care for veterans would rise from $27.7 billion $27.8 billion with the bulk of that so-called increase coming almost entirely out of veterans' pockets.

"The DAV and other major veterans service organizations are united in calling on Congress to provide $31.2 billion for veterans medical care, $3.4 billion more than the President has requested," said Commander Sursely "We also are united in opposition to imposing new fees and higher co-payments on certain veterans who choose to get their care from the VA."

The Administration wants to impose a new $250 annual user fee on certain veterans who also would see their prescription drug co-payments more than doubled, from $7 to $15. Those veterans who do not have service-connected disabilities already pay for the health care they receive from the VA. Adding to their out-of- pocket costs, would force them out of the system and put even greater strain on resources needed to treat their fellow veterans.

"A medical system that only treats the sickest of the sick and the poorest of the poor is not sustainable and would be undesirable. In the end, it would seriously erode the quality of care for today's veterans and tomorrow's," said Sursely.

The impact of the current budget shortfall on veterans medical care has been felt across the country as indicated by recent news reports of belt-tightening at VA hospitals. "With an inadequate appropriation in the President's budget for next year, the situation is likely to get even worse," said Sursely.

"This budget proposal is bad news for the nation's veterans, made even more distressing in light of the war in Iraq and military operations if Afghanistan and elsewhere," he added

Answer 9

Pretty poor crap from a government that seeks war.

Answer 10

Thank you Mr.Woodruff for bring that to our attention.