Fort Hood victim still waiting for injuries to be called ‘combat-related,’ despite Army pledge

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by Misty02, Nov 16, 2015.

  1. Misty02

    Misty02

    Messages:
    8,706
    Likes Received:
    5,254
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Location:
    Florida
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-still-waiting-called-combat-related-despite/

    Six years after the Fort Hood massacre killed 13 and injured more than 30 others, at least one of the survivors says he is still fighting to have his gunshot wounds officially classified as "combat-related injuries," despite a pledge from the Army secretary to provide all possible benefits to the families.

    ______________________________________________

    This is just NOT right!
     
  2. DOC44

    DOC44

    Messages:
    15,725
    Likes Received:
    4,745
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Location:
    in my recliner

  3. D-Ric902

    D-Ric902

    Messages:
    14,517
    Likes Received:
    26,322
    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    If you are Hasan's attourney.

    And his victims get classified as combat wounds, received during combat action.

    Then the Ft Hood attack (your clients attack) was a combat action.

    Your client just became a POW, not a mass murderer.

    Lots of things change then. I think that is why they are delaying any kind of determination as long as possible.
    The thing is, it keeps getting press coverage and the 'Merican people don't like it.
    I'm sure somebody will come along and beat the patriotic drum.

    RA, RA, brave young men and women! Muzzie! Terrorist!

    But it's true, not pretty, but true
     
  4. mj9mm

    mj9mm

    Messages:
    10,267
    Likes Received:
    9,915
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    WI, i want my Walker back...
    Yeah, not liking the idea of him being treated as a POW. But, as he was in a US uniform, we have precedent to shoot him as an enemy infiltrator.
     
    DOC44 likes this.
  5. D-Ric902

    D-Ric902

    Messages:
    14,517
    Likes Received:
    26,322
    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    I like how you think :supergrin:

    Congress has a long and distinguished history of doing anything to look good but not solve anything. They legislated that the people involved in this specific incident would be awarded the Purple Heart. That was not a DoD determination, but congressional action.
    They could have included a provision to that those same specific personnel as "combat related" injuries, rather then "service connected" but that would cost money and open them up to criticisms from their opponents. So they didn't do it, just symbolic action and run for the cameras.

    The people injured right now qualify for a "service connected" disabilities but not "combat related" injuries. The difference in money is not that much. A combat injuries disability will be paid along with a retirement, a service connected disability will be removed from the retirement check until the disability is 50% or more, then both will be paid.

    So the argument is for retirement to be reduced by the disability payment or not.
    And bragging rights.
    The states may have differing benefits for combat vs service connected disabilities, but that is up to the individual states.

    See;
    https://www.hrc.army.mil/site/crsc/documents/CombatRelatedvServiceConnected.pdf

    Also;
    http://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/special-pay/combat-related-special-compensation.html
     
  6. Misty02

    Misty02

    Messages:
    8,706
    Likes Received:
    5,254
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Location:
    Florida
    Thank you for the explanation.