Poll for active duty , retirees and former service persons.

[Lex_D]

Should commissary privileges and Veterans Administration care be restricted to military retirees only or should all combat veterans not making the military a career have full commissary privileges?

We have many retirees never in combat or in combat zones. Why should a retiree or spouse or a retiree never in harms way take advantage of commissary privileges and full VA care while combat veterans with only two or more years service are denied commissary privileges?

To me it borders on free loading for non combat retirees and spouses of non combat retirees to get tax supported breaks on commissary goods while denying the same for veterans going through the hell of combat but not making the military a career.

As for me I served my two years as a mechanic- never in combat but sleep with my weapon within reach.

I realize this will hit a sore spot for many on this board. I'm sorry but I believe in fair play and feel that retirees never in harms way are the takers and not the givers.

 

[GordonGecko]

Don't ALL military personnel face the POSSIBILITY....of being in combat?

 

[Lex_D]

Question was non combat retirees

Don't ALL military personnel face the POSSIBILITY....of being in combat?

have full commissary while combat non retirees get ZERO.

 

[GordonGecko]

have full commissary while combat non retirees get ZERO.

Sorry, mis-read...then that's a travesty.

I'm for every vet, combat and non-combat, and every active duty, combat or Stateside, getting the full priveleges...especially with an all-volunteer force. In a major war, nobody is "assured" of non-combat status and that was true in the past with those now retired.... so everybody should get the priveleges.

 

[Lex_D]

Sorry, mis-read...then that's a travesty.

I'm for every vet, combat and non-combat, and every active duty, combat or Stateside, getting the full priveleges...especially with an all-volunteer force. In a major war, nobody is "assured" of non-combat status and that was true in the past with those now retired.... so everybody should get the priveleges.

GG- I came home with all my body parts and I hope sound mind. Thank goodness I didn't have to kill or be killed. I served but do not believe I should have commissary the way I feel all combat vets should have but do not get for not staying in for 20 or more.

 

[Lukey]

Should commissary privileges and Veterans Administration care be restricted to military retirees only or should all combat veterans not making the military a career have full commissary privileges?

We have many retirees never in combat or in combat zones. Why should a retiree or spouse or a retiree never in harms way take advantage of commissary privileges and full VA care while combat veterans with only two or more years service are denied commissary privileges?

To me it borders on free loading for non combat retirees and spouses of non combat retirees to get tax supported breaks on commissary goods while denying the same for veterans going through the hell of combat but not making the military a career.

As for me I served my two years as a mechanic- never in combat but sleep with my weapon within reach.

I realize this will hit a sore spot for many on this board. I'm sorry but I believe in fair play and feel that retirees never in harms way are the takers and not the givers.

You sure you were in the military? The VA is the VA because (non-retired) veterans don't get access to the fully staffed (and free) active duty military medical system. So active duty and retirees don't have to use the VA. As for the commissary - it is like the full active duty medical service facilities in that it is only available to active duty and retirees. It seems you would like just to create another entitlement here...

 

[Lex_D]

You sure you were in the military?

You sure you were in the military? The VA is the VA because (non-retired) veterans don't get access to the fully staffed (and free) active duty military medical system. So active duty and retirees don't have to use the VA. As for the commissary - it is like the full active duty medical service facilities in that it is only available to active duty and retirees. It seems you would like just to create another entitlement here...

Lukey I served my two years and came home live and all in one piece. Five brothers also served one enlistment. I bet you voted for the draft dodging lied us into war Bush.

Cousin in for twenty two -- full commissary. Brother in nearly four--1942-1945. Medic in Pacific. Brother 82nd Airborne Division - D-Day. 1942-1945. Neither brother had commissary after service. My point was and is non combat retirees should never have right of way over combat veterans - even veterans with only two or more years service.

Many on this board birtch about what Rush and FAUX NEWS call Obama care while enjoying freebies.

 

[IndependentinWis]

I served from 1969 through 1972. I was an officer in the Active duty Air Force. For my service, I get zero benefits. I would have gotten some limited benefits if I would have signed up early enough as a Vet. Prior to the start of the war in Iraq, servicemen like me could sign up and get some limited benefits. I did not as I was working and the benefits given to vets who has served less than twenty years and get full retirement were already covered by my job. I did not want to take from those who really needed the help. When the Iraq War began, there were so many of those Vets coming back needing help that they changed the entire system and now I get zero. Although I think this is not entirely fair to me, I am still proud of my service to my country and even if I knew this was happening would do it all again.
As far as those vets who did not serve long enough to retire or did not get discharged because of injuries due to their service, they have never had BX or commissary privileges.

 

[MaryAnne]

Lex,Good points,but I cannot speak for Retirees fom the Military. I know many of them have full priveliges and have heard quite a few complain about Medicare.

Truthfully,there is jealousy all over. People think ex Military get too much, Folks think Unions are bad, then complain when they lose out. But rest assured not one of the complainers turn down anything they get.)

 

[Lex_D]

Lex,Good points,but I cannot speak for Retirees fom the Military. I know many of them have full priveliges and have heard quite a few complain about Medicare.

Truthfully,there is jealousy all over. People think ex Military get too much, Folks think Unions are bad, then complain when they lose out. But rest assured not one of the complainers turn down anything they get.)

MaryAnne my point is this. Combat vets deserve far more than twenty or thirty year retirees never in combat or combat zones.

I could have use the VA for some of my operations -- but it would not have been right for my medical problems came not from combat.

 

[Lex_D]

I served from 1969 through 1972. I was an officer in the Active duty Air Force. For my service, I get zero benefits. I would have gotten some limited benefits if I would have signed up early enough as a Vet. Prior to the start of the war in Iraq, servicemen like me could sign up and get some limited benefits. I did not as I was working and the benefits given to vets who has served less than twenty years and get full retirement were already covered by my job. I did not want to take from those who really needed the help. When the Iraq War began, there were so many of those Vets coming back needing help that they changed the entire system and now I get zero. Although I think this is not entirely fair to me, I am still proud of my service to my country and even if I knew this was happening would do it all again.
As far as those vets who did not serve long enough to retire or did not get discharged because of injuries due to their service, they have never had BX or commissary privileges.

You underscored my point. Many retirees and spouses never in harms way have commissary privileges while D-Day, Battle of the Buldge and other battles haven't . This discharged E-5 (E-4 on leaving army -- E-5 at end of reserve )salute you sir for your service.

 

[Lukey]

Lukey I served my two years and came home live and all in one piece. Five brothers also served one enlistment. I bet you voted for the draft dodging lied us into war Bush.

Cousin in for twenty two -- full commissary. Brother in nearly four--1942-1945. Medic in Pacific. Brother 82nd Airborne Division - D-Day. 1942-1945. Neither brother had commissary after service. My point was and is non combat retirees should never have right of way over combat veterans - even veterans with only two or more years service.

Many on this board birtch about what Rush and FAUX NEWS call Obama care while enjoying freebies.

Nope - as a veteran I try to vote for veterans. And I voted for the real vets (Gore and Kerry) over the "champagne reserves" guy (Bush). It's not a freebie if you earned it. Combat vets who have verified combat disabilities are retired, not separated - so they have all the privileges of a 20 year guy. If you served one tour in combat and came back unscathed I'm not sure you earned anything but your pay and the benefits you enjoyed while you were active duty.

 

[Lex_D]

Nope - as a veteran I try to vote for veterans. And I voted for the real vets (Gore and Kerry) over the "champagne reserves" guy (Bush). It's not a freebie if you earned it. Combat vets who have verified combat disabilities are retired, not separated - so they have all the privileges of a 20 year guy. If you served one tour in combat and came back unscathed I'm not sure you earned anything but your pay and the benefits you enjoyed while you were active duty.

Gore is a cousin of mine- in fact both sides of my family. Albert senior in hius second term in the House. As an elected office holder he was exempt from the draft. After Dec 7, 1941 he notified his local Smith County draft board to call hium up when they come to Albert Gore. FDR call for all members of congress in uniform to return to Washington. Albert obeyed -- only to return to his US Army duties. He served under fire. Distant cousin by the name of Westmoreland in command in Vietnam.

Lukey, the point I wanted to make is this -- combat vets and most of all wounded in my opinion have far more right to commissary privileges than retirees never in combat or in harms way. I stand by this for I believe it is right ( and I don't mean political right )

 

[Gramps]

Take a moment sometime to look into the stats regarding the percentages of those who end-up in actual combat compared to those who don't. You might be surprised. But, it's the breaks of the game just like those who died on the beach at Omaha and those who somehow manaaged to make it all the way thru to D-day without a scratch. The potential of being slain or disabled is ever present for those in Uniform like, let's say, a guy I knew who was in he Regimental band but was handed a rifle and sent into combat when he was needed. Now that's a tale a guy could toot his horn over.

Those who served are those who served. It's really quite simple.

Gramps

Should commissary privileges and Veterans Administration care be restricted to military retirees only or should all combat veterans not making the military a career have full commissary privileges?

We have many retirees never in combat or in combat zones. Why should a retiree or spouse or a retiree never in harms way take advantage of commissary privileges and full VA care while combat veterans with only two or more years service are denied commissary privileges?

To me it borders on free loading for non combat retirees and spouses of non combat retirees to get tax supported breaks on commissary goods while denying the same for veterans going through the hell of combat but not making the military a career.

As for me I served my two years as a mechanic- never in combat but sleep with my weapon within reach.

I realize this will hit a sore spot for many on this board. I'm sorry but I believe in fair play and feel that retirees never in harms way are the takers and not the givers.

 

[Lex_D]

Nope - as a veteran I try to vote for veterans. And I voted for the real vets (Gore and Kerry) over the "champagne reserves" guy (Bush). It's not a freebie if you earned it. Combat vets who have verified combat disabilities are retired, not separated - so they have all the privileges of a 20 year guy. If you served one tour in combat and came back unscathed I'm not sure you earned anything but your pay and the benefits you enjoyed while you were active duty.

Lukey, we don't agree on politics -- but I salute you for serving.

 

[BitterPill]

Sorry, mis-read...then that's a travesty.

I'm for every vet, combat and non-combat, and every active duty, combat or Stateside, getting the full priveleges...especially with an all-volunteer force. In a major war, nobody is "assured" of non-combat status and that was true in the past with those now retired.... so everybody should get the priveleges.

I agree.

 

[Friday13]

Distinguished, patriotic family there, Lex.

 

[MaryAnne]

MaryAnne my point is this. Combat vets deserve far more than twenty or thirty year retirees never in combat or combat zones.

I could have use the VA for some of my operations -- but it would not have been right for my medical problems came not from combat.

I have a friend who served in Panama during the Korean war. He uses the VA because he had a situation with a Romney like loss of pension. That and a few more who were Officers and served in several wars are my only experience. So,I cannot judge.