Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted October 2, 2017 Moderators Posted October 2, 2017 The following is a short article published in the October, 2017 issue of: Military Officer, on pages 30 - 32. The author was Brooke Goldberg. It may be accessed on the Internet at: http://www.moaa.org/Content/Take-Action/On-Watch/Tipping-the-scales--The-cost-of-sacrifice-versus-the-value-of-democracy.aspx I am posting it here because I will suggest it presents a human interest view of what the life of our military members and their families. We hear many words and phrases to describe military service such as honor, patriotism, duty, commitment, and courage. These words represent the values reflected in the voluntary act of military service. Every servicemember, upon taking their oath of enlistment or commission, sets aside “something of value” for the sake of “something greater.” They sacrifice a degree of personal freedom because they believe the ideals of our nation (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) hold a greater value. An all-volunteer force based on this premise can continue as long as there is “something greater” on the other end of sacrificing “something of value.” Only 1 percent of the U.S. population volunteers to serve. And of those who do, nearly one-third has parents who also served. This makes military families a significant part of the history and future of national defense. But do we really understand what servicemembers and their families are giving up to protect our democracy and way of life? Do those who do not or cannot join the military view our “something greater” as worthy of personal sacrifice? How do Congress, the president, and our fellow citizens interpret this notion of sacrifice vis-à-vis democracy? We commonly accept servicemembers will sacrifice holidays at home, living where they would like, facing physically/emotionally difficult training and deployments to hostile environments. But they do this repeatedly, and sometimes without breaks or recovery. They do this without taking time to prepare for life after the military, or even time to develop relationships with friends, family, and neighbors who might support them through normal life challenges. They also do this at the cost of consistent and predictable routines for themselves, their children, and their spouses. The light at the end of the tunnel, when the commitment of sacrifice finally ends, remains dim or nonexistent for many who are currently serving. Spouses and children sacrifice, too. They struggle when the military assigns them to a location that lacks useful resources for success. It’s less likely they can rely on being a two-income family because of high spousal unemployment and limited child care options. Children with learning disabilities struggle with extraordinary challenges if they live in states that have fewer resources to meet special needs. The same goes for access to quality health care for those families who need more than routine care. These sacrifices are often beyond a servicemember’s control and are the result of reassignments to places ill-equipped or poorly resourced to deal with the influx of military families with any level of special needs. Such sacrifices are also a distraction, and servicemembers recognize the lack of control they have to resolve these issues while serving. The level of sacrifice of the 1 percent of the population who raised their hand to serve is increasing. At best, the value of military service to our country remains the same. At some point, however — and history reflects this through recruiting and retention problems — the balance will tip, and even fewer than the 1 percent will join because it is just not worth it. But we are not at that tipping point — yet. However, consistent attempts to reduce benefits, services, and support to servicemembers and their families are accelerating the rate at which we will get to that tipping point. The topics of reduced pay raises, reduced housing allowances, and increased TRICARE enrollment fees and pharmacy copays are frequently brought up in discussions on Capitol Hill because some believe we are paying our military too much and those who serve should pay more for their health care. If the very government you serve is consistently devaluing your sacrifice, what impact does that have on your willingness to join or stay? If the general public does not share your values, either by volunteering themselves or by lobbying their legislators to support servicemembers, does that also devalue your sacrifice? Do these factors foretell retention problems and reduced states of readiness? Will a continued degradation of support to military families negatively sway one of the most valuable recruiting pools — military children? If history is a predictor, the answer to these last two questions is, “Yes.” And if we cannot correct this trajectory, we will tip the scales where sacrifice becomes too great for the lesser gain, and that answer will have unfortunately been correct. Those in uniform need your voice, and by you, we don’t mean just MOAA members — we mean everyone who holds freedom in high regard. Our elected officials must demonstrate to our men and women in uniform, in budget and law, an understanding of the true cost of sending them in harm’s way and maintaining their readiness. Congress must stop finding the money to pay for war and readiness in the pockets of servicemembers and veterans and their families. Act now by writing your congressman or senator with this suggested message. Quote Gregory
Outta Here Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 If a person had an opinion contrary to the opinions expressed in this article, would the person be free to voice such opinion without being attacked (by the OP and/or any other members of this forum)? Asking for a friend. Quote
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted October 3, 2017 Author Moderators Posted October 3, 2017 Aubrey: I posted the above article fully expecting that there would be people here who would disagree with it. In this forum, we expect robust discussion and we welcome it. We discourage personal attacks. But, how that is defined will vary from person to person. So, all I can specifically say to your question is: Anyone who posts in response may (?) initiate some robust discussion. Outta Here 1 Quote Gregory
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted October 3, 2017 Author Moderators Posted October 3, 2017 When the U.S. sends its military into battle, it does not budget for the monies that it will need to spend on the wounded. In this day and age, fighting a war can be reduced to mathematical equations. In a given situation we can predict the actual numbers of our military who will die in order for us to win that battle. In the training that I have personally received, I had had to work such problems. In the same way, we can predict what we will spend over the lifetime of a person who is wounded in battle. In the old days, most simply died. Today, with modern medicine, we can keep people alive. I have a shirt-tail relative who took a bullet in his spine, from a U.S. soldier, in Viet Nam. He came back 100% disabled and lives his life in a wheel-chair. We spent one million dollars in the early years after he came back, simply keeping him alive. He is still alive today and the we spend large sums of money on him just giving him some sort of a life. A person can lose a leg due to an IUD and we can spend $30,000 to $40,000 giving him a single, high-tech artificial leg. Then there are ongoing health costs. Those sums are not generally budgeted. The idea simply is to ask Congress to provide them as needed. The costs of going to war are well beyond the initial costs of the munitions and transporting people to the battle zone. Then there is the cost of shipping our military and their families to overseas locations. I have been shipped to Korea twice to serve. One of those times was with family members which then included my automobile and my so called house-hold goods. Yes, to save shipping costs, they required that I leave furniture in storage at government expense back in the U.S. and they provided me with both a place for me and my family to live along with furniture to equip the home. On the time that I was shipped to Korea without family, they were allowed to move a government expense to a U.S. location. With that move I was paid expenses for their house rent and some other small amounts. I have also been shipped to Panama, along with my family under similar conditions. All of the above has then resulted in the costs to ship our stuff back to the U.S. The American public has little understanding of the financial costs that we Incur when we send our military overseas to fight a war and/or to protect those who support us. When we ask people to put their lives on the line, we should pick up the costs. LifeHiscost 1 Quote Gregory
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.