Image via Buzzfeed.
Clint Eastwood’s American Sniper has instigated some serious controversy over the war in Iraq, and critics love to call Chris Kyle, the movie’s protagonist, a murderer. However, despite (or because of) the dispute over the movie’s content and Kyle’s character, the film has brought in $337.2 million at the box office. A Buzzfeed article published on March 8 points out that the vast majority of this sum was earned in 2015, despite the fact that the movie is technically a 2014 movie. Beating out The Hunger Games – Mockingjay Part I, American Sniper is the highest grossing film of 2014.
All of the debated domestic and international political nuances aside (should we have gone to war? etc.), American Sniper is a testimony to our veterans. Moreover, Chris Kyle’s murder at the hands of a fellow veteran truly highlights the need to focus on taking care of them once they are home. Discussion on whether or not our soldiers should have been sent to war in the first place is ultimately irrelevant for these suffering veterans once they are home. They need our care and support, not accusations of murder – those claims belong in Washington, and to the political offices responsible for those decisions.
From the huge profits made with American Sniper’s release and the press surrounding the conviction of Kyle’s murderer, Eddie Ray Routh, it is at least evident that people are talking about veterans’ and their care. It’s a good first step – but there are so many more to that need to follow.
Whether men and women are sent to war is hardly “irrelevant”. Especially now when many are once again beating the drums of war. Soldiers with problems have always been treated poorly when they return. That is nothing knew. (I knew a POW form WW2 who worked with other POWs to try to get benefits which the US had systematically denied them).The politicians see them as “bad PR” for the next war. There is no excuse for Congress not funding the VA and not providing adequate medical and psychological services. But it does point to the fact that these loyal Americans are nothing but pawns and disposable as far as Congress is concerned. It is pretty sickening to hear the “support the troops” rhetoric when they are sent into battle, followed by the “we can’t afford it” slogans when they need help.
The answer is to not send US soldiers into ground combat except when the US is attacked. Period.
Joseph Urban wrote, “There is no excuse for Congress not funding the VA and not providing adequate medical and psychological services.”
There is no excuse for Joseph Urban not conducting one minute of research prior to writing false and inflammatory statements like the one above.
(1) Record levels of congressional VA funding:
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2014/05/23/az-fact-check-obama-va-funding-increases/9464699/
(2) The Obama administration was fully aware of systematic healthcare service deficiencies but did nothing:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/26/us/politics/high-level-knowledge-before-veterans-affairs-scandal.html?_r=0
Congress funds the VA. The executive branch spends the funds as it chooses by; for example, providing healthcare services, or paying non-healthcare related expenses such as senior staff bonuses.
Nice try, JU.
David. Nice try. But your article actually makes my point. thanks. In 2005, in the midst of the GOP inspired Iraqi debacle, the VA undersecretary Nicholson said the VA was adequately funded. Later that year, the Bush administration was forced to admit that, in fact, the VA was underfunded by $3,000,000,000 (That’s $3 billion) for 2005 alone. Services to veterans were not being provided due to the massive under funding.
Who sent the troops to war ? Who refused to fund the VA to take care of those troops? Who was in charge of all three branches of government
from 2001-2006. (Do some “basic research” and you will find out).
This same administration, by the way, was responsible for the Walter Reed hospital debacle . Shameful.
As the Arizona Central article accurately states, it was only after President Obama took office that funding has been increased to take care of soldiers for Vietnam, Iraq 1 and Iraq 2. Thanks for making that point. Those record levels are needed to make up for the past lack of funding. Thank god Mr Obama has convinced Congress to finally act more appropriately.
Regarding your second point (an attempt to blame Mr Obama for the VA issues). You are correct that Mr Obama is still trying to get Congress to help solve these problems. That is why he has asked for major increases in funding to help our veterans (Refer to your first article for details). Of course, the VA problems did not start under Mr Obama. In 2002 VA managers were given “bonuses” to shorten the appointment time to less than a 30 day wait. Of course, since they were given “bonuses” they were able to show, ON PAPER, that times had been shortened. In reality, of course, veterans were simply re-assigned to a secret list of paper (non-electronic) appointments as a way of gaming the system. When this was discovered in 2005 by the VA inspector general, he asked that the Bush administration solve the problem. In 2007, two years later, another inspector generals audit showed that the problem still existed. That practice continued into the Obama years. Now, it has been stopped. As I correctly stated, those who sent the troops to war ignored their needs when they returned from war.
Of course, one of the problems of under funding the VA was caused by Mr Obama. In 2010 he opened up the VA to include servicemen from the Vietnam War suffering from PTSD. This did flood the system. While these heroes had been denied coverage under presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush at least now they are able to get help. Same with Agent Orange sufferers. Once again, those who beat the drums of war did not want to help the troops who returned. A common theme.
Finally, after Mr Obama got involved, are we seeing progress in this area. Yes, it costs money to help our troops. But that is the price you should pay for sending them to these excursions.
Of course, a little research on your part would have enlightened you to these facts.
Nice try, DB 🙂
JosephUrban: irrespective of your lengthy and parsed explanation/clarification/amplification, my prior comment still prevails. Congress provides funds to the VA, but congress does not decide how to administer the money. That is done by the executive branch. I will not be revisiting this topic.
I don’t blame you. If I were you I would not “revisit” it, either.