Posted on Jun 2, 2016
Should combat Veterans (those who were physically in theater) be given a prorated pension based on the amount of time they served?
15.4K
260
129
8
8
0
Retirement
Service
Pension
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 35
20
20
0
Staff I think this is a VERY dangerous question. It will split the community into two, and now we'd be splitting hairs on that. This type of question has been on here before and it did not go over well. We'd have to define "in theater" and have it equal across the services, "combat vets" vs. "non-combat vets". I see it if you did your 20, you get paid, you didn't do your 20 sorry. You were injured, you get paid, you didn't deploy but did your time, you get paid.
(20)
(0)
SPC Joseph Purcell
But med board doesn't mean to much, I'm 20% for knee injury amd had my va doc say i sshouldn't be trying to work, but puts in med file that i can walk normally. Then change my diagnosis every 6 months so that my rating can't be increased and SSI denies my claim since she kept saying its because I'm depressed and the pain is in my head. Had 4 private doctors prove her wrong, but the va still goes by her word.
(0)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
SPC Joseph Purcell - Get in touch with a VSO. There are folks who are in some of them here. Make a thread, and ask the community for assistance. Someone will get you in the right direction.
(0)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
the va is about money the less you get the more they get, they have a package that even active duty members dont get, us vso, dsv, and vfw dont give up
(0)
(0)
13
13
0
First, a Veteran is a Veteran is a Veteran. Hear the cautions posted. Start dividing us on how, where, and when we served and we will all suffer for it.
(13)
(0)
SSG Pete Fleming
I agree and that was not my point, and didn't even think about it until others pointed it out. I hate labels... and yet I have accidentally created one. I would not be offended if admin pulled this question.
(1)
(0)
SGT Matthew Agnew
SSG Pete Fleming - that's a very respectable and graceful standpoint, kudos brother!
(1)
(0)
10
10
0
That's a fine line to walk. So, do the cooks who make the food for 'combat' veterans (you know, so they can eat and keep fighting) deserve that partial? Or how about the supply guys that ensure that the 'combat' vets have bullets to fire...to keep fighting? Or what about the medics who patch the 'combat' guys up so they can either recover or keep fighting? Do THEY get that partial pension, too? What about the intel weenies who warn a unit off an area, thereby saving their lives from an ambush. Do they get it?
I really, really dislike the distinction between 'combat' vets and VETERANS. Everyone who wore the uniform wrote the same blank check that 'combat' vets did, and were ready to answer that call if called upon to do so. They shouldn't be left out simply because Uncle Sam had other plans for them.
I really, really dislike the distinction between 'combat' vets and VETERANS. Everyone who wore the uniform wrote the same blank check that 'combat' vets did, and were ready to answer that call if called upon to do so. They shouldn't be left out simply because Uncle Sam had other plans for them.
(10)
(0)
CPO Byron Sargent
Very nice reply SN Wright. It shows good reasoning and a careful thought process. Nice Job!
(2)
(0)
SSG Pete Fleming
If you were to read other comments, I have addressed this. It was not my intention to create an 'us verses them' mentality. All jobs are important in the military. No disrespect to any one who served was intended... but as so many pointed out, that is actually what a question like this creates. That is why debates are good. People often have great ideas until someone points out the flaws in their thought.
(1)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
SSG Pete Fleming - I know, Pete! I've said a couple of times that I know your intent wasn't malicious!
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google