Investigation critical to protecting welfare of soldier
Times-Mail Editorial Board
October 3, 2009
Needed movement has been made in the push to examine the U.S. Army’s response to exposure of troops in Iraq to deadly chemicals.
Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind, reports the Department of Defense inspector general has announced that an investigation has been initiated. The investigation is critical and every responsible Hoosier should demand nothing less than thoroughness and resolve as the probe takes place. Nothing less than that is owed to the hundreds of U.S. soldiers, including 142 members of the Indiana National Guard, exposed to the deadly chemical sodium dichromate.
A complete investigation is necessary for a number of reasons — reasons that have immediate impact, as well as far-reaching ramifications.
At the forefront is the health — and associated care — of those soldiers who were exposed and have experienced illness, or will become sick, because of it. It’s important to have a plan in place to assure that soldiers who might not experience related health difficulties until years down the road still get the care they need — and the respect they’ve earned — without having to fight for either.
The situation involving the sodium dichromate exposure is very relevant to the people of Lawrence County. Retired Indiana National Guard Lt. Col. James Gentry, 52, formerly of Mitchell and now of Williams, is fighting cancer. He led the National Guard unit in Iraq and told the Times-Mail in December he’s convinced his wartime experience involving exposure to the chemical caused his illness.
Bayh is adamant, as everybody should be, that the right steps be taken to deal with the huge misfortune that took place. To describe what happened, in 2003, Hoosier troops were guarding the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in Iraq as it was being rebuilt by the Houston-based construction firm KBR. Despite on-site assurances that the dust spread throughout the facility was a “mild irritant,” it was later revealed to be sodium dichromate, which contains hexavalent chromium, one of the world’s most carcinogenic substances.
Capitol Hill hearings on the issue have subsequently revealed a number of failures by contractor KBR to warn troops of the exposure and to properly clean up the contamination. Hearings also exposed multiple failures by the Army either to hold KBR accountable or to inform and test soldiers once the Army did learn of the contamination.
Bayh is absolutely right in his assertion that it is “essential that the Defense Department take a hard look at this incident to learn the lessons of Qarmat Ali and make sure that service members are never again needlessly exposed to hazardous chemicals while deployed.”
It’s critical that the Department of Veterans Affairs properly treat veterans for a “service-connected” sickness that could take years after the initial exposure to develop.
Bayh also is pushing for a registry for U.S. military personnel exposed to hazardous chemicals while serving in the line of duty.
“If you serve in combat conditions, you are entitled to the best care possible,” Bayh said. “We must diligently track which soldiers may have been placed at risk and ensure they have access to the best care our country has to offer.”
Nothing less than that will be acceptable.
The Times-Mail
Other Related Posts From Ms Sparky
- “Staff Gasket” admits in court it used cheaper parts on critical Defense systems
- Mission critical products available on eBay?
- Robert Gates’ mission failure in protecting female soldiers
- Soldier’s death raises questions about troops’ chemical exposure
- Oregon Soldier’s Electrocution In Iraq Under Investigation
Tuesday, October 6th 2009 at 9:36 am |
General Patraeus has been battling Prostrate Cancer and can’t help but wonder if there might be a link between the Burn Pits in Iraq and/or the Drinking Water-Untreated-provided by KBR. I remember that General Westmoreland downplayed Agent Orange during Vietnam, but later when his son came down with cancer from Agent Orange the Generals opinion change.
Ms Sparky’s Response:
According to this article http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-10-06-voa28.cfm General Patraeus has in fact been undergoing treatment for prostrate cancer. It is so difficult to say what he might have been exposed to that “might” have triggered it. I do not believe they know what causes prostrate cancer.
When General Patraeus was officed at the US Embassy Annex at the Republican Palace in the IZ he as well as all others was exposed to Baghdad city water. We showered in it, many were never told the tap water was contaminated (LIKE ME!!) and brushed their teeth in it and drank it. NASTY!! The burn pits is a whole different pile of gross and nasty exposures. So who knows. I do wish for the General a full recovery!