Is it appropriate for a non-combat veteran to use the Vet Center and/or VA?

Our government uses a lot of ploys to keep veterans from being a very substantial adversary if we were all on the same page. So inventing delineations despite the facts that everyone who serves is subject to combat, and may or may not be based on time frame served or by fluke of orders. Denying anyone who has served honorably is an anathema - and buying into it hurts everyone. 22 million veterans, and 44 million dependents are a very large group of constituents - and no-one in Puzzle Palace would ever risk giving us that much combined critical mass. But divided - we are manageable - different wars, different VSO's, different eligibilities, etc.

When I was in the service I developed an "undifferentiated connective tissue disease" that never quite manifested itself into lupus. I got TDRL for five years and saw a doctor for evaluation every 18 months. at the end of the 5-year evaluation, I was told that I had rheumatoid arthritis and never should have been discharged. I was furious! I was forced to make a new life as a civilian. To then be told I should never have left the Army was a bit much for me. I was given the option to go back in or get a pension. I didn't feel right about getting the pension because I was not injured in combat.
Later at the VA I told a psychiatrist about this and her exact words were "We you CRAZY??" I wanted to punch her lights out, but did not. Now that I am older, I am having trouble walking due to arthritis and have had two flairs of lupus in the thirty years I have been out. I may need that pension later and try to get it when I can no longer work. Why? Because I have been and still remain a productive citizen and not accept a pension until I really need it. I wasn't trying to be noble, I just felt that combat-injured had a higher priority than me as a young woman. I will be 60 this year.

Service connected..any illness, disease, injury or condition that occurred or that was aggravated while in the service. All Veterans may use the VA and in some cases their spouse can be treated by the VA as well.

Is a non combat veteran not a veteran? Did they not sign up for and train for the same thing a combat veteran did? of course non combat veterans could/should/deserve to use the VA or Vet Centers.

It absolutely is appropriate for ANY veteran to use the VA. If you have a service related disability then you are owed medical care. The VA needs to be able to provide services to ALL the veterans who need them and not prioritize based on combat status. If a VA hospital has a waiting list longer than 2 weeks then we start cutting adminstrators pay. We reward them if they can get it under 2 weeks without lying.

Of course it is. Like many other have said, it's the Veterans Administration... No "Combat" in there anywhere.
When you take the oath, you don't swear to your position or your assignments.

My question is .... How the hell did you make it to the rank of Spc. by asking dumb questions like this? Anyone (man or women) that serves in any branch of any of the services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard) for any period of time after enlistment is considered a veteran. It doesn't matter if they deployed or not. If they served and got hurt while on duty, they can claim that injury with the VA and be seen and treated for that injury with the VA.

This is common knowledge among military members ....

Absolutely 100% OK, and encouraged.
Also, the Purple Heart Association can and should be utilized by ALL Service Members!!

In order to use the Vet Center you must be a Combat Vet. All veterans should use the VA, but if you are not service connected or under a income limit, very limited access.

Yes. You served in one of the branches of the armed forces, correct? You were released from active duty under dishonorable circumstances? One of the few things that can keep you from using a VA facility is not having actually served (I believe there is a minimum time requirement) and being dishonorably discharged.