Two editorials today ask two different, but equally important questions surrounding the scandal at Walter Reed Hospital in Washington.
The New York Times links the “shameful neglect of wounded soldiers” to the overall war effort, once again reminding its readers that an administration puffed up with its own power callously and unnecessarily sent American troops into battle without considering the consequences.
(T)he fundamental responsibility rests with the president and his former defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, who stubbornly insisted on going to war without sufficient resources — and then sought to hide the costs of their disastrous mistakes from the American public.
Is it any surprise that the war’s wounded have been hidden away in the shadows of moldy buildings by an administration that refused to let photographers take pictures of returning coffins? Or a White House that keeps claiming that victory in this failed and ever more costly war is always just a few more months away?
The paper goes on to say that the “president needs to learn that the horrors of this war can no longer be denied or hidden away.”
The Record offers this:
Once again, the Bush administration is unprepared for the aftereffects of its rush to war in Iraq. The veterans’ health system is obviously unable to cope with the huge strain of treating so many unforeseen casualties, many of whom will need care for the rest of their lives.
Like the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, this deplorable situation once again raises profound questions about the administration’s management of government agencies. The White House has sought to limit the cost of treating wounded veterans and has underfunded their care.
Is Walter Reed the tip of the iceberg? That’s what outraged Americans are asking, and that’s what Congress and independent investigations must find out.
South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick
The Cranbury Press Blog
E-mail me by clicking here.
Hank Kalet 