Hello Lisa Lomas You are certainly welcome. You know what. I have to go to the V.A. hospital in Butler PA several times a year for psychiatric care and physical care as well for my back and knees. Every time I go there I meet some new friends. Disabled vets from WW2 are still around. I see them pushing themselves up and down the hallways of the hospital and I think, my God, WW2 ended in 1945 and these guys have been living like this all those years. Veterans from Viet Nam, Korea, Desert Storm, they're all there every time I go. Then I wonder how they manage to survive in this world. Not just physically but monetarily as well. I am a non service connected disabled vet. I get my SSD. About a thousand bucks a month. No VA pension because they say my SSD is too much for me to qualify. It is bad enough for what our verterans have gone through while on active duty but, to come home all banged up and be treated like a sublevel human being is just too much.Uncle Sam should be taking better care of his veterans but actually, under GW Bush things are getting worse. A lot worse. Iraq vets will end up with even fewer benefits than us Viet Nam era vets. Come Christmas time, send a Christmas card to a VA hospital somewhere and tell a vet thank you for his or her sacrafice for our freedom. There will be disabled veterans there to open the card. Some of them have lived there since their war. Thank you Lisa for your kind words and campassion.

Hello Jim Yes my friend, this is a truly evil war involving many lies and deceptions. In this post I want to begin to explore yet another facet of this terrible war. Not all of our troops that die in this war are being killed by terrorists. Many are being killed at their own hands and a big part of the reason is, they can't live with the guilt of having taken another life. We will have thousands of oour troops comming home and suffering PTSD and our present metal health care system is not set up to help them. We need to advocate for their right to treatment. They deserve treatment and they should be able to get it now. Defense Hidden Toll of the War In Iraq Mental Health and the Military by Stephen L. Robinson September 14, 2004 Download report in PDF The alarming number of suicides earlier this year among U.S. troops serving in Iraq has raised a red flag about the mental strain on our service men and women as they face grueling battles and a conflict with no clear end in sight. These suicides are only the most visible manifestation of the rising mental health toll from the Iraq war and other U.S. combat operations abroad. Studies indicate that troops who served in Iraq are suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and other problems brought on by their experiences on a scale not seen since Vietnam. These figures have mental health professionals and veterans groups worried, and with good reason. At a time when our troops are working hard to answer the nation’s call, their own needs remain unmet. Barriers to mental health care persist both in the field and at home, leaving mental health problems to fester. The personal burden on troops affected by mental trauma and on their families is enormous, and these mental health problems have consequences for communities and the nation as well. The full extent of this hidden cost of war will not be apparent for some years to come, but experts believe it may involve tens of thousands of service members. Preparing for the challenge at hand and extending the appropriate care and respect to our troops must be a top priority. Download report in PDF Features from our event, The Hidden Toll of Iraq: Mental Heath and the Military September 14, 2004 • Audio: Mental Health and the Military • Video: Larry Korb | Dr. Sue Bailey | Kaye Baron | Stephen L. Robinson | Q&A • Press Release

Hi Jim If you think it was upsetting to hear that we have lost 2,000 of our troops in Iraq just wait untill you read about what our President and his croonies are doing to the veterans when they do make it home. Republican Budget Cuts Target Veterans…again By Joel Wendland -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Related stories: Your health 10-27-05, 8:03 am The Bush administration has expanded its order to cut veterans’ health care benefits. Meanwhile, a Pentagon survey indicates that tens of thousands of returning war vets are reporting high rates of mental trauma and physical ailments. USA Today reports that Pentagon screening shows that nearly 1,700 returning vets say they had thoughts of hurting themselves or that they might be better off dead. Close to 4,000 told military health screeners they feared they might hurt someone around them. About 20,000 described having nightmares and bad memories. In total, says USA Today, 28 percent of those returning from Iraq have battle wounds, health problems, a range of mental health issues, and serious problems in their personal relationships. In total, the war has adversely affected the health of 50,000 service men and women. The figures were derived from military surveys of about 190,000 returning servicemembers between January and August of this year. The 50,000 estimate includes 2,000 killed and over 15,200 wounded. A 2003 survey conducted by the Army found that 15 percent to 17 percent of front-line troops suffered depression, anxiety or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Studies from past wars show that PTSD diagnosed veterans have higher rates of suicide or other fatalities than other veterans of the same conflicts do. For many veterans, this means that the war will continue for them literally even after they come home. Meanwhile, the administration has ordered the Veterans' Affairs Department to pursue vigorously deep cost-cutting measures. Included among potential cuts, says the VA, is $4.3 billion in health care benefits distributed to veterans for treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The VA claims that it provides too much in benefits for this ailment and will review and withdraw benefits for thousands of veterans diagnosed with PTSD. Cuts in benefits for veterans was rationalized last January by Pentagon spokesperson David Chu who told the Wall Street Journal that the cost of veterans' benefits is "hurtful" to national security. The Pentagon feels that spending to care for veterans shifts money away from other pressing needs such as more weapons. And with a ballooning federal budget deficit, "savings" have to come from somewhere, the Defense Department rationalizes. Meanwhile, a Knight-Ridder story published just last week shows that the Pentagon’s outsourcing of its military procurement projects is gouging taxpayers by billions of dollars each year and is enriching a few favored corporations. Still further, the Bush administration and congressional Republicans continues to push for more tax cuts for the rich and to make previous tax cuts, overwhelmingly beneficial to the very rich, permanent. In the view of the administration and the Republican leadership, it is not the wealthy or the corporations, their favored constituents, who must sacrifice for the good of the country. It is the suffering vets and their families who must continue to sacrifice. --Reach Joel Wendland at jwendland@politicalaffairs.net.

Greetings My Friends The following is yet another story about another fallen hero. Each day as the death toll mounts I continus to ask myself how long will this continue. How could it be that human nature would have us love all mankind and yet , the governments of the worls must turn us all against each other. The other other day I was thinking about what would have happened, when my daughters were just little girls and I introduced them to a little girl from Iraq. I know exactly what would have happened. They would have become good friends and playmates and over time they would have grown to love each other. Will we always allow the governments of the world force us to kill each other? I would really like to hear your thoughts about why you think there are wars. Who starts them? Who won or lost them? Surely we all have feelings about war, Here is a chance to share those feelings. E-mail article Print article Subscribe Get e-mail alerts HONORING OUR OWN Marine buddies had faith in this go-to guy Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 10/30/05 BY LARRY HIGGS STAFF WRITER To his fellow Marines, Lance Cpl. Jourdan Grez was the guy they'd want to go on a mission with them. To his commanding officer, he was the go-to guy. To his parents, he was a talented son, brimming with potential. Grez's life was cut short on May 11 at age 24, when the amphibious assault vehicle he was riding in ran over a roadside bomb while on patrol in Karabilah, Iraq, killing six Marines in total. Some of the words used to remember him — brother, friend, go-to guy, a selfless man, a loving father — came from his fellow Marines, who signed a scrapbook of photos given to Jourdan's parents, Armand Grez Jr. and Andrea Grez of Brielle, when 1st Platoon, Bravo Company returned to Virginia earlier in October. "It was a difficult decision to make, whether to go to the "welcome back,' " Andrea Grez said. "We prayed on it, and we were glad we did. It was a wonderful opportunity to meet the men he served with, and to hear stories about him." In turn, the Grezes found themselves supported and comforted by the Marines of Bravo Company, who nicknamed Jourdan "Rev." Baptized a Catholic, Jourdan got involved with a nondenominational religious group while a student at James Madison University, where he majored in finance and international business. "He had fallen deeply in love with Jesus Christ; he was very secure in his faith," Andrea said. "He was often called on to do services in the field for other Marines and was considered a lay chaplain." Jourdan spent most of his childhood in the Shore area. He went to nursery school at Tower Hill in Red Bank and to grade school at Holy Cross in Rumson, before the family moved to Virginia. His parents returned to New Jersey, so Armand Grez could be general manager of the Oceanic restaurant in Long Branch. About a week before his death, Jourdan's biggest concern was sending flowers for Mother's Day — and making sure his mom didn't find out how much they cost. "He told us to be on the lookout for flowers," Armand said. "He told me, "Don't let her look at the finances.' " Jourdan was a combat engineer, considered one of the more dangerous assignments because their job is to find, defuse or detonate explosives, Armand said. "When I asked about what combat engineers did, he (Jourdan) told me they build bridges," Andrea said. "When I told my uncle, a former Marine, he just rolled his eyes." Jourdan wrote about it to his brothers, Armand III, 29, and Eric, 27, who both live in Virginia, but he shielded his parents from the dangerous truth, his father said. "They spotted land mines and detonated them," Armand said. "He'd tell his brothers about it before us." Bravo Company's primary mission was to protect a hydroelectric dam in Hit, which is the source of power for one third of Iraq. The company also was sent on missions with other units, because the engineers would spot and defuse bombs and mines, his father said. When Jourdan was 15, he was in a traffic accident in which his friend was killed, Andrea said. After that, he became an emergency medical technician and joined the local first aid squad in Virginia. In the Marines, Jourdan volunteered to be a corpsman, a front-line medic for his platoon, when it looked like the regular corpsman wasn't being activated. In a letter to the Grez family, Jourdan's commanding officer, 2nd Lt. Paul Mainor Jr., recalled him volunteering to be corpsman, saying, "Sir, I'll be the platoon's doc, and I'll take care of everyone." The words that constantly came to his mind, in describing Jourdan, were his loyalty, unflappable demeanor, trusting smile and maturity, Mainor wrote. "He saw things in ways many of the other Marines did not. This different look on life made him the go-to person for many other Marines. They knew he was always available to listen, regardless of how ridiculous the subject," Mainor wrote. "He knew other Marines were counting on him, just as he was counting on them." His Marine buddies remembered Jourdan's sense of humor and laugh, which uplifted his entire platoon. "Jourdan had an infectious laugh, and he made sure you heard it, even with the most minor of jokes," wrote a Marine in notes he used for Jourdan's battlefield eulogy in Iraq. "Each of us has our own Jourdan stories. I'm sure he's looking down on us and wondering why there is all the fuss." He loved to paint, and followed the New York Yankees and the Giants, but Jourdan's biggest love was his 2-year-old son, Colin Taylor Lovell, said his mother. Everyone, from his commanding officer to his fellow Marines, agreed that Colin was the center of his life. "He joined the Marine Reserve because he wanted to make sure his son was provided for," Armand said. "He picked the Marines because they are the best. Everything he wanted to do, he wanted to be the best." Jourdan spent his last two days stateside with his son and his girlfriend. In his journal, he said he was proud to represent them and that he was going to war to "secure some kind of family time," which he enjoyed, for another family in Iraq. His journal never talked about the danger he faced, and there are no complaints about the conditions in Iraq. In his last letter home, Jourdan's thoughts were once again about others. "I have already lost friends to mines, mortars and IED's (improvised explosive devices)," he wrote. "Pray for their families, please."

Hello Lisa Having read your post several times I think you seem to be particularly concerned about the lives of our soldiers in Iraq. I get continuous newsfeeds from Consortium News about the war and ways to stop the killing. Here is their latest news about a way to end the war. It may be the only answer considering the present administration's determination to continue this travesty. Make a secure online contribution -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keep up with our postings: register for Consortiumnews.com email updates Click here for print version Home Links Contact Us Books -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Search WWW Search consortiumnews.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Order Now Archives Imperial Bush A closer look at the Bush record -- from the war in Iraq to the war on the environment 2004 Campaign Will Americans take the exit ramp off the Bush presidency in November? Behind Colin Powell's Legend Colin Powell's sterling reputation in Washington hides his life-long role as water-carrier for conservative ideologues. The 2000 Campaign Recounting the controversial presidential campaign Media Crisis Is the national media a danger to democracy? The Clinton Scandals The story behind President Clinton's impeachment Nazi Echo Pinochet & Other Characters The Dark Side of Rev. Moon Rev. Sun Myung Moon and American politics Contra Crack Contra drug stories uncovered Lost History How the American historical record has been tainted by lies and cover-ups The October Surprise "X-Files" The 1980 October Surprise scandal exposed International From free trade to the Kosovo crisis Other Investigative Stories Editorials -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Below are several ads selected by Google. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is Impeachment the Answer? By Robert Parry November 1, 2005 Washington pundits are showering George W. Bush with advice on how to “restart” his presidency, but many Americans seem more interested in whether it's possible to “terminate” his presidency, removing him and other top officials from office. It is a question asked of us often. The conventional wisdom – virtually across Washington’s political spectrum – is that the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is unthinkable, and without doubt, it would be extremely difficult to engineer. But a better answer to Americans interested in holding Bush and Cheney accountable is that impeachment is possible – if enough voters want it to happen. Say, for instance, 75 percent of voters favored impeachment and considered it a decisive issue in how they will cast their ballots. Would politicians facing such a popular groundswell risk their own jobs to save Bush and Cheney? Or, put differently, what would happen if voters – beginning with state and local elections on Nov. 8 – rejected every Republican on the ballot? Would the public hunger for accountability begin to sink in then? Crazy? Well, there are signs that even in Red States, Bush is becoming a drag on Republicans. In Virginia, for instance, a Washington Post poll discovered that only 26 percent of voters said they were more likely to vote for Republican gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore because Bush endorsed him, while 47 percent said Bush’s endorsement was a negative, with the rest either saying it made no difference or they had no opinion. [Washington Post, Oct. 30, 2005] So, in a state that favored Bush in 2000 and 2004, barely one in four voters see Bush’s endorsement as a plus and nearly one in two voters see it as a minus. And what if Bush went from being a drag hindering Republican candidates to being an anchor pulling them under? What effect would that have in the congressional elections of 2006? Might the Democrats achieve more than incremental gains? Media Needed Yet, while a political tidal wave starting in 2005 and gaining force in 2006 would have the potential of making accountability a reality, the tougher challenge of impeaching Bush and Cheney comes from the lack of an adequate infrastructure that can make the case consistently with the American people. Despite some bright spots for progressives – from Internet blogs to Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart” to talk radio programs such as “The Stephanie Miller Show” and “The Randi Rhodes Show” – not nearly enough resources have been invested in media to reach enough Americans to transform the political dynamic from a general dislike of Bush into a collective decision to fire him. Conservatives, like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, still dominate the AM dial, while also holding important beachheads in TV, such as Fox News, and across dozens of print publications. Plus, the mainstream news media seems to have learned few lessons from the Bush administration’s exaggerated case for war with Iraq. While more and more journalists acknowledge they were duped in 2002 and 2003 on Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction, they continue to buy into Bush’s more recent exaggerations about the threat from al-Qaeda and the dire consequences if the United States doesn’t “succeed” in Iraq. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Bush’s Latest Iraq War Lies.”] Though progressives have long prided themselves in their “grassroots organizing,” that area also seems to be lacking when it comes to focusing on a specific political issue, such as demanding Bush’s impeachment. Many of the old divisions come to the fore. In an echo of the Ralph Nader campaign in 2000, some progressives refuse to unite behind Democratic candidates even to oust the Republican congressional majority, a change that would at least open the potential for investigating Bush’s misdeeds. Other progressives, who e-mail us, insist that balloting is now so thoroughly rigged that engaging in the electoral process is a waste of time. Then, there are liberals who warn that talk of impeachment sounds so radical that it could offend the political center and further marginalize progressive politics. Another argument is that it would be difficult to prove that Bush and Cheney committed specific crimes justifying impeachment under the constitutional standard of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The Impeachment Case Though there’s some truth to all these concerns, there are counter-arguments as well. While the Founders didn’t spell out exactly what they meant by “high crimes and misdemeanors,” certainly such offenses as violating U.S. treaty commitments – like the Geneva Conventions and the U.N. Charter – could be regarded as impeachable offenses. Bush and Cheney also have presided over an administration that bent the rules on torture and tolerated the leaking of a CIA officer’s identity as part of a broader strategy to silence dissent as the nation was led to war under false pretenses. Without doubt, Bush and Cheney either participated in these acts or had oversight responsibilities. Similarly, Bush and Cheney could be faulted for the crony-driven incompetence in handling natural disasters and the mismanagement of the federal budget, taking it from record surpluses to record deficits. Widespread malfeasance in office could well be regarded as an impeachable offense. In response to the tactical concerns about impeachment, it could be argued that holding Bush accountable would give momentum – and immediacy – to a political reform movement that otherwise might drift as it awaits the traditional electoral cycles. One of the reasons for today’s Republican dominance is that conservative operatives have long understood that modern politics has morphed into a year-in-year-out, day-in-day-out struggle, not a process that gears up for a few months once every two or four years. Over the past three decades, the Right has spent billions of dollars building a political/media machine that never rests. So, when Republicans were defeated in 1992, they didn’t withdraw and wait for the next election cycle. They turned to their expanding media apparatus, especially talk radio, to go on the offensive against the new Clinton administration. That aggressive strategy paid huge dividends in 1994 when the Republicans seized control of both houses of Congress and solidified conservative dominance over large swaths of the American countryside, now known as the Red States. Meanwhile, the progressive community largely ignored the need to build a counter-media-infrastructure that could compete with the conservative message machine. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “The Left’s Media Miscalculation.”] Today, a focus on holding Bush and Cheney accountable could act as a catalyst for increasing the number of media outlets and supporting the creation of journalistic content that could compete with the Right’s media machine. Then, even if Bush and Cheney do struggle to the end of their terms in 2009, the chances would be much less that their policies would survive them. By standing up now, the American people also could say to the world that when the U.S. political system went awry – when an administration invaded another country under false pretenses and when the White House winked at torture – the people didn’t treat such transgressions as business as usual. Indeed, if impeachment at least is put on the table, the American people could point to how they demanded accountability from those responsible and did all they could to set things right. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.