Congress & Combat Related Injuries

I can't tell y'all JUST how ANGRY this makes me!!!

Idiotic: Revision of Law Passed by Democratic Congress Defines "Combat Injuries" for Vet Benefits to Exclude "Non-Combat" Injuries... Such as Being Blown Up in an IED Ambush
—Ace

I imagine this will get fixed. But what the hell?

Technically, this occurs due to a Pentagon regulation-- but that regulation itself was promulgated to be consistent with the Democrat-passed law.

I think this is all just a big mistake, and not intended by anyone, but can anyone imagine the screaming Keith Olbermann would be doing had it not been the Democrats primarily responsible?

Marine Cpl. James Dixon was wounded twice in Iraq -- by a roadside bomb and a land mine. He suffered a traumatic brain injury, a concussion, a dislocated hip and hearing loss. He was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Army Sgt. Lori Meshell shattered a hip and crushed her back and knees while diving for cover during a mortar attack in Iraq. She has undergone a hip replacement and knee reconstruction and needs at least three more surgeries.

In each case, the Pentagon ruled that their disabilities were not combat-related.

In a little-noticed regulation change in March, the military's definition of combat-related disabilities was narrowed, costing some injured veterans thousands of dollars in lost benefits -- and triggering outrage from veterans' advocacy groups.

The Pentagon said the change was consistent with Congress' intent when it passed a "wounded warrior" law in January. Narrowing the combat-related definition was necessary to preserve the "special distinction for those who incur disabilities while participating in the risk of combat, in contrast with those injured otherwise," William J. Carr, deputy undersecretary of Defense, wrote in a letter to the 1.3-million-member Disabled American Veterans.

The group, which has called the policy revision a "shocking level of disrespect for those who stood in harm's way," is lobbying to have the change rescinded.

Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said the Pentagon's "more conservative definition" limited benefits for some veterans. "That was not our intent," Levin said in a statement.

Thanks to Ace at Ace of Spades


This is utter BULLSHIT !!! These IDIOTS in Congress need to get a frikkin clue !!! (or get them stupid bastards out of there!!) If it's a direct result of enemy action, it should be COMBAT RELATED!!!