I'll try to keep this short.
I don't think one is being disadvantaged over the other because of resources. There is a knowledge gap as well in terms of us knowing very little on how to predict the development of operational stress injuries. There are no foolproof tests in terms of screening, so there is a knowledge gap there as well.
Even afterwards, with some of the research that we've definitely used and based the program on, with some of the meta-analysis to look at the predictors of PTSD, some of the best predictors are not the things that occurred before but the things that occurred at trauma time and after that. The things that occur afterwards that are more predictable are peer supports and the level of stress in someone's life. Maybe these things then tell us that it's important to put the money into the events that take place afterwards, but that doesn't mean we need to totally disregard the prior events.
I hope that answers your question.