How are people going to be held accountable for Walter Reed?

Question

I have asked this before since the Generals are allowed to retire with their pensions and benefits. Is that fair?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070411/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/walter_reed

Answer 1

Interesting Question

~

Answer 2

Military folks being allowed to quietly retire has been happening for decades. I honestly don't have a problem with this...for this commander to reach General officer rank, he sacrificed a LOT for his country...especially being a doctor. He could have gone into private practice and made millions, but instead he chose a life in the military. He screwed up, no doubt, but his actions were not criminal and there is no reason they should follow him around for the rest of his life.

Answer 3

Agree with you that really isn't a punishment, I mean Shwartzkoff was allowed to lie to congress which is a crime, and CSM McKinney was demoted but under Army regulations when you retire you get the pay of the highest rank ever attained.

Answer 4

SFAIK, what happened was that money was shifted from non essential spending (eg. keeping barracks for outpatient soldiers shiny) to essential spending (eg. fighting the war). Of course once it was "properly" presented by the media, the military were left with a choice- say it plain that the Congress short changed the troops (and SFAIK- still does) or do the only "politically correct" thing, and accept the blame.

After all, Congress pays the army's bills. At least some of them, sometimes.

BTW, does the pork spent on spinach subsidies etc. also count as "war expenses" to be blamed on Bush?

Answer 5

It is system failure and Not individuals !!