VETERANS’ AFFAIRS

Veterans’ affairs are largely a federal issue, but due to the fact that the state operates a national guard, there is this and several other areas of state governance that impacts on veterans.

The state, through its guard, provides several functions, in terms of disaster relief and service in time of civil strife. Most recently it has come to represent service to the nation in terms of troops being sent to war. While many blur the issue of warfare and soldiers, I do not. Warfare is a governmental decision; soldiers are to loyally enforce those governmental decisions.

Thus, in asking them to serve, our society indebted itself for such service. It really is that simple. We, the state and its people, have an obligation to the men and women who have served this state in terms of military participation.

There are various state programs for our veterans, but increasingly we are finding that they are lacking. We need to make certain that our veteran’s homes are properly maintained and staffed. We need to make sure that these veterans are getting the treatment that they deserve. Promises need to be met.

Military service is a sacrifice. As part of a repayment for their sacrifices those who served deserve what was promised. It is a social debt that needs satisfaction.

During their service, when active, the military men and women are away from their families, most earning military pay instead of their standard civilian pay. They are asked to serve when there is an emergency that requires action on behalf of the society as a whole. They are asked to put their lives on the line.

For those of us at home, we can choose to ignore their sacrifices. But we should not. I believe that it is true that if we do not pay the proper homage to our soldiers, we will never be able to depend on their being there in the future. A world without a military is idyllic but unlikely and misguided.

In speaking with veterans, the main concerns are taking care of families of those currently serving and honoring the efforts of soldiers during past calls to duty. It really is that simple.

Not being a veteran, I am not fully aware of their feelings, but I can understand that they pervade the military family circle. There is a sense of “military as family”. It is an interesting dynamic, but it came about as a need. While not outcasts in a society, they are not your typical family. Because of this, military families tend to band together in a mutual aid society.

These military families have a reliance on each other, a bond that is indescribable, but existing. These families live a different lifestyle. It is incumbent on those of us who have the comfort of not being in the military to respect the service they provide. And to do this we must consider the needs of the military family and support it through our government.

While various wars range in terms of popularity, there needs to be a clear distinction between the supporting the war and supporting the troops. While I have heard the argument that to support the troops one must support the war, I am not so moved by that logic. To me there is nothing so politically repugnant than using either troops or children to make political points.

Decisions to go to war should be kept in the political realm. Support for the people that are required to go to fight these political decisions should not waiver and should not be political. The troops did not bring on the war, government, elected government, did. Troops follow orders. It may not be a successful defense to simply follow orders, but it doesn’t shift the burden of war creation either.

It is for these reasons that I support programs within the state to give our veterans recognition. Our government asked (rightly or wrongly). The soldiers gave (blindly). Our government owes (greatly).

When we return to this subject, I will discuss the nuts and bolts of the state’s role in military affairs, the role of the military in state governance, and the future role of a state military force.