it's THEIR war

they created it (out of NOTHING i might add). they send our men and women into harm's way (while most of them either skipped service or were drunk and stoned the whole time they were serving their country in let's say a southern state instead of let's say viet nam). our men and women are coming back (the ones that ARE coming back NOT in a box) with health problems, maimed, with ptsd and OTHER issues.

king george and his court continue not only to spit on our constitution BUT spit on our service men and women as well
Pentagon’s Spin On GI Bill Is ‘Offensive Nonsense’
Posted by Jon Soltz, Think Progress
Yesterday, ThinkProgress highlighted the latest reason from the Bush administration to oppose a real GI Bill for troops, offered by Senators Webb and Hagel. The Pentagon spokesperson said, in part:
[W]e are certainly concerned that this would be eligible to them after only two years of service. We think pegging it to a longer period of service — the number we have in mind, at this point, is six years of service — that the longer you stay in, the sweeter the benefits are to you. Six years would show a commitment to service. … The last thing we want to do is provide a benefit — or the last thing we want to do is create a situation in which we are losing our men and women who we have worked so hard to train.
Wow. There are a few very serious flaws in this logic:
First, the time of service isn’t a measure of commitment to service. What about the troops who served under six years, did a few tours in Iraq, and came back without a limb, and could no longer serve? Have they shown less of a commitment to America? I would love for this spokesperson to go to Walter Reed and tell anyone there who served three years, but now cannot continue their service, that they haven’t shown a commitment.
Second, no one is leaving the military after two years. I’d note that when you sign up, it’s for an eight year contract, most for four years active..........................