UPDATE: Welcome Michael Yon sycophants! So much for moving on, huh? Kind of weird digging into posts a year old.
I originally wrote this for my blog, but then decided that perhaps it's information that I can better encourage debate on here.
Yesterday, the local morning conservative talk show host brought up a question about the status of veterans. He said that words mean things and he's right. The issue was the Stolen Valor Act (which I disagree with, believe it or not) and whether veterans that never served in Vietnam, but served in the military during the Vietnam War, can be called “Vietnam Veterans.”
The host was trying to make the case that if someone serves in the military during a time of war, there is nothing wrong with calling themselves a “[insert campaign/war name] Veteran.” I wholeheartedly disagree. I see his point of view, but military personnel don't think this way.
For example, I was in the Army during Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq, but I'm only an Iraq Veteran. I never served in those other conflicts (well, I head to Afghanistan in a few weeks) and would NEVER call myself a Kosovo Veteran or a Bosnia Veteran. I would never call myself an Afghanistan Veteran before serving there!
The next point was that many veterans are beginning to use the term “Vietnam-Era or Desert Storm-Era Veteran.” I'm confused by this. My father served in the Navy (32 years before retiring) during the Vietnam War and has NEVER called himself a Vietnam-Era Veteran. He's a Veteran!
The status of “Veteran” is already – or should already be – an honorable title. I don't understand why some veterans seem to want to inflate their status by saying that they served during a particular war. The way I see it is that these people aren't satisfied with their service and are trying to puff themselves up.
For the veterans out there, this is what I'd like to know. I think it confuses civilians who have no clue about military service. They hear Vietnam Veteran or Iraq Veteran and the assumption is that this Soldier or Marine or whatever served IN combat!
The host thinks it's okay for veterans to just call themselves veterans of a particular war just by virtue of serving during a time of conflict. Now, I can see his point. To some degree, everyone that serves in the military during wartime is to some degree helping the effort. We still have a stateside mission of training and equipping forward deployed units, but it's a completely different job entirely. You can't be a veteran of war when you've never been in potential life-threatening danger. And I think that just the act of serving in and of itself is an honorable endeavor worthy of respect from Americans whether that honorable service lasted a month or 32 years!!
Not everyone gets to serve in combat. Sometimes it's by choice and sometimes it's just the cards that are dealt. Just ask my wife how frustrated I've been that I haven't deployed since I returned from the Iraq War in late 2003! While others have 3, 4, and 5 deployments, I've been resting on ONE! It drives me nuts, but I kept getting slotted in positions that weren't deployable.
When I got home from Iraq, I was PCS'd (moved for civilians out there) to Fort Irwin to head up the Task Force IED to train deploying troops on how to recognize, identify, and react to IEDs. The position was a non-deployable position that I was in for about two years. I was chosen for the position based on my experiences with them in Iraq. After that, I was transferred to a unit in D.C. with a very specialized mission. I did have a chance to deploy to an interrogation billet, but that jackwagon John McCain ruined my deployment when he made changes to the definition of an “interrogator” and I was immediately considered “unqualified” despite my extensive training and experience. This, of course, was a response to the Abu Ghraib situation and qualified interrogators must have gone through the military interrogation school. I went through a defense-contracted interrogation course that basically taught the same thing, but wasn't good enough even though I was a highly successful interrogator in Iraq, capturing 8 of the top 55 in the deck of cards! After that assignment, I was assigned as a First Sergeant at a strategic unit in Huntsville, AL – another non-deployable slot.
So, I couldn't help it for the past six years. When it was time to move on, I ensured I would get deployed and chose a unit I knew was slated to head to Afghanistan. I want to do my part and I don't feel comfortable personally resting on my one deployment while so many others have sacrificed so much more.
There are instances where that happens, but the jobs that I filled during the past six years were just as important. It was a vital piece of the overall mission that SOMEONE has to do and there is nothing dishonorable or wrong with that. Why would any veteran want to call themselves a Vietnam Veteran, Desert Storm Veteran, Iraq Veteran, or Afghanistan Veteran when they didn't actually fight in those wars unless they were trying to mislead people? Why do some of our veterans feel the need to identify themselves as an “era” veteran? Have we really diminished the service of our great Americans that much that the mere act of serving and being a “Veteran” is no longer enough?
I don't think so.
Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act (VEVRAA) of 1974 (38 USC 4212) established the definition of a Vietnam ERA Veteran The definition was established for purposes of affirmative action employment preference, although it has been widely used for most other purposes, as well. (I spent most of my professional life in the human resources field.) They defined it as:
“A Vietnam era veteran is a person who
(1) served on active duty for a period of more than 180 days, any part of which occurred between August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975, and was discharged or released with other than a dishonorable discharge;
(2) was discharged or released from active duty for a service connected disability if any part of such active duty was performed between August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975; or
(3) served on active duty for more than 180 days and served in the Republic of Vietnam between February 28, 1961 and May 7, 1975.”
I think MOST people would agree that there is a difference between a Vietnam Veteran (someone who actually performed duties in Vietnam or support duty stations in Asia) and a Vietnam ERA veteran.
CJ, I agree that merely serving, and “veteran” status is a badge of honor… whether you were swabbing the deck of a carrier offshore from the front lines, a special ops member in the thick of it, one ID’ing locations of mines or IEDs on roadways ahead of a convoy, the medic who keeps you stable until you get to more extensive care, the mechanic who does the check on your aircraft or the flag man waving you in, or a woman yeoman back home at a desk on a computer doing mundane tasks and freeing a soldier to fight in the trenches. Someone has to do any and all of those jobs.
Personally, I’ve never differentiated in import in my mind. So I guess your post about attaching a particular era of combat before that honorable status of “veteran” comes as a shocker to me. Truth be told, I always thought of it as a way to pinpoint the approximate time of service… not how many bullets you were dodging – or not -when there.
Is that not what awards and medals do, above and beyond words? Are we then to start separating the guys who are on point from the mess hall cooks back at the base. waiting to provide them with a hot meal when (or if) they return? Where does this crazy nuanced one up-man-ship end?
My thought is, as I said to JV on another thread, I hold to an expanded view of Col. David “the Hack” Hackworth’s phrase, “free a soldier to fight” , which he used when he was talking about women on the front lines. To me, it’s much more than gender. Someone has to do the desk jockey job and not everyone can be the perceived “hero” on the battlefield or in the cockpit.
There is no dishonor in performing a task that is far away from the flying bullets in order to make sure the guys on the receiving end of those bullets have a solid back up team in our entire military process. Is it as dangerous? No. Is it less important? I don’t think so. It’s a well oiled machine that is inter-dependent upon all it’s internal moving parts.. no matter how small and seemingly insignificant.
Much of this strikes me as being way too PC for my tastes. If you feel you must only identify yourself as an Iraq veteran, hey… do what you want.
Do you know how I think of you? Career warrior that spans a multitude of US battles fronts… whether you were in the trenches or not. Rather silly to just say “Iraq veteran” when you’ve pulled your weight in your respective job thru far more conflicts than that, don’t you think?
I suspect I’d leave this PC stuff just to veterans and active duty warriors and their own personal preferences. If you want to tell me how to identify my former life as a military wife in a certain era that doesn’t offend you… I’ll do that. But, ya know, somehow I suspect it really doesn’t matter much to you active warriors, or veterans, that much anyway.
@MataHarley: That was pretty much my point when I called in and spoke to the guy. Why are we arguing over these distinctions?! I just disagreed with the host (and a previous caller) that someone calling themselves a Vietnam Veteran that never served in Vietnam is ok. You’re right, though. This is just more PC BS.
I think all of this came out from the Richard Blumenthal kerfluffle.
Remember it?
I think he twice referred to himself as a ”Vietnam veteran” while campaigning.
Truth was he was a veteran from that era.
He actually went so far as to say he ”served IN Vietnam,” when he really served elsewhere DURING that period.
Gentlemen, Listen the grunt can not do his job with the guys in the rear and the guys in the rear can’t do their job without the guys Stateside. Rockets and terrorist do not care where their target is located! We will see this very soon on our own soil. However the Military should have a way to distinguish between combat veterans and veterans who served in a era. This is true of other military forces like Israel, Russia, and South America.
@J V Hoffman, like this “gentleman” (LOL) says, all veterans share an inherent risk, as well as a function within the machine to make every endeavor successful. I think in this we agree.
As far as distinguishing between “combat veterans” and “veterans who served in an era”… where does the “combat lines” belong? Is the mess hall chef a “combat veteran” tho he/she may never have left the mess tent? Does that include those that were serving in various functions on foreign soil, or only those who were literally dodging bullets? Just what is a “combat” distinction in everyone’s eyes?
To my mind, if it’s literally on the front lines, there will be precious few who earn that distinction. And frankly, it seems to be a totem pole of import that may be a source of discontent for nothing but PC reasons. Most of the bullet-dodging types I know don’t place that stamp of distinction on their particular role in service. But it could just be those that I know… and who lived.
Hey… you guys decide. I’m just a simple ex spouse of the military circa Vietnam era. What you want, and what makes you happy, I’m good. I know my support role, and rest content.
@MataHarley: CJ, how do you classify those who control the UAVs in Iraq and Afghanistan from one of our western states? How about the crews who prepared the B52s out of theater for the work in Theater? There are many soldiers and other military members who train and prepare their whole military career for combat, but never get called. There are those who prepare those who do get called. What should we call them? War isn’t only fought by the combat soldier who travels to the battlefield. Many others sacrafice who do not go to the war zone. Those who do fight on the battle field get their right shoulder patch because they earned it in a combat zone. That is why we who have been there value those patches. We also get one of those “I was there medals” to decorate the left front of our dress uniform. While I value your comments and post, there are many more important issues that we can be addressing to honor those who served than quibling about what we call them.
@MataHarley: I have always been in combat situations. I commanded an elite unit until 5 years ago! I was of age that my men jokingly called me Granddad to my back. Only about 6% or less of most any military actually see combat, and to be a combat Helo pilot or an combat pilot takes a different breed of men, and if you are serving on an firebase then everyone is equal! Kicking doors down and getting shot at, at blank range or having to literally take a life with your hands is not the same as counting bolts in a warehouse. I was not complaining and was only stating there is a difference. I am satisfied to know that there are a few less little terrorist bastards reproducing today, and to know that the freedom that we enjoy has a price tag on it do few realize. I got out of it because your thoughts are not as quick after 48 years of age and your body does not move as quick either and I did not want no more than absolutely necessary dying on my watch! And above that whether you live or die is not according to your skill, it is literally in the hands of a higher power! Some may desire that distinguished status, I just want to know I did everything possible, and the job got done!
@Randy, I think you complement my point exactly. This is PC BS to me. And from what I gather, CJ is of no different mind. Playing the PC lines of distinction as to value of service rendered is beneficial to no one, save for political agendas or bizarre bragging rights at the expense of others post events. (I’m assuming you read my prior comments and are not picking on up one and thinking I actually place more value on one soldier than another because of their assignments, yes? And I’m not sure if you are addressing me or CJ with your hotlink to my comment)
@J V Hoffman says much the same, and confirms the same feelings of others I know post “dodging bullets” combat service…. I just want to know I did everything possible, and got the job done!”. There’s not any “my job was harder and more important than yours” attitudes going on.
So CJ…. who the heck makes up these arguments, anyway? Are they military? Or merely pundits wanting to do some shit stirring?
@MataHarley. These arguments are made by two groups of people: those who haven’t served and those that feel the need to bolster their credibilty for some reason. Real troops don’t really fight these fights they catch someone lying about their service. This stems from te whole Stolen Valor issue.
Well that answers the questions, CJ. It’s idiots on both sides of the aisle, totally uninvolved from a real perspective, or those searching for unearned credentials, searching for talking points to divide the troops.
So I guess our “debate” here is done now, and we all pronounce this a pile of horse manure from all aspects? LOL
Yup!
I consider myself a Vietnam Era Vet. I never got further than Travis AFB, nor did I want to. Personally I use that as a explanation of when I served and nothing more. I don’t deserve to be called a Vietnam Vet, I reserve that for those that were truely there. As an added note, I was 4F but I did want to serve so a friendly Dr. helped.
When you join the military, it is not your choice where they send you to serve. My dad served during world war II. He could have served anywhere and been a WWII vet but served in the states as part of the intelligence service looking over German communications because he knew the language. My son served during vietnam, but did not go to vietnam itself. He served as an instructor to train troops who went to vietnam and considers himself a vietnam vet because he served during that time in the vietnam war effort and would have gone if sent.
I think that’s one of the reasons they came out with the Cold War certificate a couple of years ago. Korea, VietNam, and Granada are sometimes considered to be “hot spots” in the much larger Cold War. They were in some ways proxy wars between the US and Russia. The US didn’t actually fight Russia, but their involvement can’t be denied. From the other side think of Russia in Afghanistan, that was the Russians in a proxy war against the US. So while I and many others did not actually fire weapons in anger we were part of the Cold War that ultimately ended in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
How do you guys feel about GW Bush being called a combat pilot during the second election even though he never saw combat ??? Moving planes from base to base is an important job, just not as important as being shot at.
I spend a lot of time with my model trains, But don’t ask people to refer to me as “Mr. Conductor ”
W
@MrBigW: @MrBigW: GW Bush was flying a combat aircraft as compared to a “trash hauler” (C 130, C5A, C-17, Etc. Soldiers in “Combat Units” are considered combat soldiers as compared to those in Service and support units. If you remember, women are not allowed in “combat units” even if they do not deploy. They can be in command and control elements of combat units, but they are not considered combat soldiers. Women are not elegible for the Combat Infantry Badge either. GW Bush was rightfully considered a combat pilot, he certainly was not a passenger plane pilot!
I enlisted in the Air Force in 1960. After six months or so of training, I was sent to Southeast Asia (the Philippine Islands). After that tour, I was sent to a small NATO base in Italy. Nine months after transfer to the Inactive Reserves, and accepted a civilian position with duty station outside Tokyo. While at the Japan base, I went on TDY to Vietnam, I Corps. I returned to Japan after 30+ days. Unfortunately, there was no official paper trail. Some years later, I wrote to the Air Force and requested that they issue me a Vietnam Service Medal. Thirty consecutive days in country entitles one to the VSM. While in Vietnam, I was still technically in the Inactive Reserves, but my unit at Selfridge AFB, MI, had no idea where I was. The Air Force denied me the VSM, but I still consider myself a Vietnam Veteran. I went back to Vietnam, working at a Special Forces Base at Nui Ba Den, but this time I was completely discharged and claimed no other decorations. Still, I WAS there, and the enemy was just outside the wire.
The distinction between Vietnam-era vets and Vietnam vets has to do with a certain commonality of experience unique to those who spent much time in-country. Being in that time and place left a permanent mark and a permanent sense of connection. For most of those who were there, the distinction isn’t about who’s entitled to which merit badges. It’s about something that runs deeper, and feels a lot more personal.
I imagine veterans of other wars know exactly what I’m talking about.
I’m sorry Greg. Are you speaking for yourself? Or are you assuming the right to speak for “most”… including CJ who disagrees wtih you… as well? And what are your own qualifications to assume that power?
As the pilot of an E-2B ( Tactical Airborne Early Warning) aircraft flying from a carrier off the coast of VietNam,
I had always considered myself a Vietnam Veteran. Now I’m not sure if I meet the criteria for combat or not.
I received hazardous duty pay, Air Medal due to flying the requisite number of combat support missions, and received the Vietnam Service Medal.
All I’m saying is it may not be an easy call, but I’m still calling myself a VietNam Vet!
@Jim: Close enough for me.
I was one of the generation to be on active duty in the Marines between June 1975 and 1995. Retired. The only really big conflict during that time was the first gulf war, and I was at the Pentagon for that . Oh well. So if you were in country, in the air, or on the sea in the designated zone of conflict you can claim so, even if you don’t get a campaign medal. The fall back if there is any doubt, if you rate the campaign medal you are good to go. But in the end so what. It is enough just to serve honorably, and claim the title of Veteran. All the guys I served with including me would have wanted to have had the opportunity to get a campaign medal, a combat action ribbon, personal decoration with a combat V. Oh well. And any brother in arms who looks down his nose at his fellow service members with disdain because they don’t have those awards, is someone who you need to stay away from.
@MataHarley, #23:
I’m not sure what it was I said that runs contrary to CJ’s comments. Maybe you mistook my meaning.
We chase wannabe and worked to see the Stolen Valor Act become law.. Doug & Pam Sterner at Home of the Heroes
were the original authors of the act in Colorado.. and I disagree with any one who feels that stealing Honor and Valor isn’t worth criminal prosecution. see: http://pownetwork.org/phonies/list_of_names.htm
The first set of names is wannabe PoW’s the second set is wannabe any thing you can conceive, military. I think the biggest bust I worked on was the Mayor of Atlantic City New Jersey. SF Don Bendell who earned a Green Beret led the way ( Google Don Bendell) He approached Bob Levey and Levy dissed him .. BIG MISTAKE. Next Levey “disappears” then he resigns. He was prosecuted and had stolen benefits from those who deserved by claiming Green Beret. (( http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300676,00.html ))
A friend of mine who passed away in 1999 ( He started the Just Say No to John McCain ) Col. Ted W. Guy has a few words he’d like to share from the grave concerning honor…
Teds leadership and guidance helped his fellow POWs survive their ordeal. Many of them referred to themselves as “Hawk’s Heroes” in honor of Ted Guy.
To the code of conduct, Ted added his own personal code that consisted of two points. The first point was to resist until unable to resist any longer before doing anything to embarrass his family or country. The second point was to accept death before losing his honor.
Ted once said “honor is something that once you lose it you become like an insect in the jungle. You prey upon others and others prey upon you until there is nothing left. Once you lose your honor, all the gold in the world is useless in your attempt to regain it.”
A mans man..
“The combative Guy had been [shot down] in Laos…was captured after shooting it out with some North Vietnamese soldiers, killing at least two of them. After capture he had been subjected to all the tortures which by this time the Vietnamese were routinely inflicting on their American prisoners. He had spent the next thirty-seven months in solitary confinement – first at the Plantation, then in Vegas, on to D-1, and back to the Plantation on November 25, 1970.”(Ted was one of the toughest in Hanoi).”
Ted Guy was transferred to the reopened Plantation on 25 November 1970. [There] torture remained much in vogue [from the time it reopened in 1970 through early 1972, the year before the POWs returned home]. [Guy] remained isolated, but was now in a cell from which he was able to at least see other Americans…SRO Guy found that the bulk of the prisoner population was enlisted men and that they wanted nothing so much as strong leadership. He promulgated policies virtually identical to the BACK US policy Jim Stockdale had established at Hoa Lo years earlier, but urged a gradual buildup of the resistance campaign in order to soften the Vietnamese reaction.”
Ted Guy was tortured during January/February 1972 [only 14 months before all of our POWs were returned home]. The torture chamber was filthy. For the first three days and nights Guy was allowed no sleep. He was stripped naked, locked in leg irons, and made to lie on his stomach. A guard stood on the backs of his legs, Cheese kept a foot on his neck, pinning his head to the floor, and another guard flogged him with a rubber hose. The beating lasted a long time. Guy lost control of his bodily functions, he vomited, and when the pain became more than he could bear, he screamed. Rags were crammed into his mouth and the flogging continued.”
“In the long days and nights that followed, torture guards who enjoyed their work took turns inflicting long beatings with their fists … During one stretch Guy was kept kneeling for approximately eighteen hours. His knees were swollen to the extent that he could not pull his trouser legs over them. When he refused to author a confession of crimes, he was made to kneel again, this time atop an iron bar…The torture ended for Guy when after ten days and nights, he produced an acceptable confession, an apology, and an agreement to do anything that was asked of him. Then he was asked to write a letter of ‘solidarity’ and encouragement to the Vietnam Veterans Against the War. When he balked at this, he was ordered back onto his knees and offered another round of torture.
The Vietnam “ERA” vs Vietnam Vet states this: 1st one: Never served In Country 2nd one: Served In Country
@EagleII: Very good write up! Thank you! As we say in Hebrew “A lie does not have legs and will always be discovered! But the truth always has legs and will carry on always!”
@J V Hoffman:
Hello JV…
It’s only a good write up thanks to the men involved who uphold honor – some while PoW. They deserve the credit.
Now let me preach to the choir:
May The Lord bless you and keep you. May the Lord make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you. May the Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace. — Numbers 6:24-26
God’s Shalom be with you from this day forth and always
ps: Did you know in 1970, archelogists uncovered a silver amulet with this blessing above etched upon it. The find is thought to date back to the seventh century B.C., making it the oldest known remanant of scripture.
This blessing above is known in Hebrew as the “Nesiat Kapayim” and is performed in Jewish synagogues by the Kohanim. These are priests who are direct descendants of Aaron — the older brother of Moses –.
Unmasking a fraud as patriots gather
Ventura County with its two military bases has a sizable population of veterans who have chosen to remain or to return here after their service — by some estimates, more than 65,000 of them.
All of the current active duty and former military members who reside here deserve our thanks for the sacrifices they made and the courage they showed in serving our country. Unfortunately, there are some among us who seek to garner this praise, without ever earning it.
Tuesday, a man who identified himself as Salhem Dreasden showed up at an event honoring Ladera School in Thousand Oaks for its patriotism and support of the military. He was wearing a Navy uniform bearing the words “SEAL TEAM,” the trident insignia of the elite unit and twin bars indicating he was a Navy lieutenant.
However, once his photo appeared in The Star, questions were raised and it was quickly uncovered that the man was impersonating a Navy SEAL. A check of several online data bases, including the Navy Personnel Command in Tennessee, turned up no one by the name of Salhem Dreasden or S. Dreasden having served in the Navy.
He clearly was not a SEAL. Not only did he apparently break the law — the unauthorized wearing of a U.S. military uniform is a federal crime — but he also thoroughly disgraced the men and women who have sacrificed life and limb in defense of America.
From time to time, military impersonators have cropped up around the country. But, it’s definitely an unwanted occurrence here.
As retired Navy SEAL Craig Powell of Thousand Oaks told a Star reporter, “It bothers me when anybody portrays themselves to be who they’re are not.” We agree.
There is one aspect of the Navy we’d like anyone found to have crossed that line by disrespecting our military heroes to experience — it’s called the brig.
Read more: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2011/jun/05/editorial-unmasking-a-fraud-as-patriots-gather/#ixzz1OWWNqoBA
@EagleII: I had written you a reply, but someone is screwing with this site! this time I will write it in word so that I can transfer it! HaShem ish-shmirekha ben-natayim! (that God will watch over you in the meanwhile!)
@EagleII: Dear Eagle II,
Thank you so much for your blessing and salutation!
I do not know if you know Hebrew of not but I will bless you as we do in Israel (transliteration) and translation to follow.
HaShem ish-shmir-rakha Tamid! Veh shie-eyeh lakha Ackh veh rakh tov! Veh shie-eyeh lakha shalom bayit tamid vey beh osher, veh beh brey-yut, veh it-ashir lekha beh shalom…lecha veh yelidacha veh yeledidechiy yelediy-cha le-aad!
Translation: May God watch over you always, and that only good will come to you always, And that you will always have peace in your household, with happiness, and in health, and that you will prosper in peace as well, for you, your children, and your children’s children for eternity!
EagleII the sacrifice some of us make is a cause that so many will never understand! Every person who has served in the front lines is humbled by the experience they encounter! Combat as so few people really know and experience requires the highest degree of unselflessness and fortitude not often found in many men. I gave up my name, my past, and my life as normal people know.
When you really understand what evil lurks in the world the price you pay begins to seem so insignificant. The part that amazes me greatly is that people even under oppression want to believe that their government is correct. Much the same that is happening in this country.
In so many parts of the world people are not afforded the luxury of illusion and the present leaders of this country know this. They are using it to make their work and they are planting the seed of revolution worldwide only to bring it to Israel and then here! Home in your front door! In the United States! All the praying in the world will not help us if we do not turn back to the principles our forefathers set for us, and rid ourselves of the God haters and Constitution haters of which are in office in this administration!
The United States law is quite clear on the subject. If you served anywhere in the military anytime during the Vietnam war conflict than you ARE a Vietnam Era Veteran. The Era stoped in May of 1975. I enlisted @ 21 in 1978. I could have enlisted @ 17 in 1974 and could have LEGALLY called myself a Vietnam Era veteran. My uncle flew over Vietnam and got an Air Service medal & became a Vietnam veteran, but if he had flown into Laos from Thiland he would not even though he was shot at. Many of us her were not in “hot” wars were in The Cold War which Reagan won. President Reagan did not win the War by himself. It was fought by Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Ford, and Carter. All of those Presidents were also veterans everyone of them. We Cold War veterans have never been recognized and many died unknown. We do not bitch about being Vietnam veterans or Vietnam Era veterans. It just is not done by by we “silent warriors”.
I served in the Navy from 74 to 78. I was a ASW5 in HSL35 ( WESTPAC) I am always a little uncomfortable with the whole Viet Nam Era thing . It was helpful when taking advantage of the GI Bill. Outside of that I am even a little uncomfortable when people thank me for my service especially on Veterans Day. My father was Marine in the Pacific in WWII and my brother was in the 101st in Viet Nam 66-68… I was in the last Draft lottery (’72)but my number was too high so I enlisted 2 years later after trying College. I enjoyed my service and the people I bonded with. It gave me a real sense of connection to my country in a way I can’t describe. regardless I can never claim to understand what my father and brother went through. My father earned the Bronze Star on Tarawa and my Brother earned the Silver Star.
I cringe when people associate me with Viet Nam Veterans. They are heroes and I am just guy who spent four years serving in the Navy. I especially dislike someone who lies about his /her military service. To me it is stealing part of a memory from those that made the ultimate sacrifice. So in a sense they are thieves.
I was in the Air Force from 1966-1970 serving on Guam during the Vietnam conflict with three TDY tours. The units I was in received three Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citations W/Palm and on March 2, 1969 my unit received an AFOUA W/V. I was told I was a Vietnam vet because of our direct support during the bombing of Vietnam. I have never wore anything with the Vietnam service ribbon on it because I never received it. My question is am I a Vietnam vet, Era vet or Wannabe?
Tom
Thomas Konieczko: Don’t think your a wannabe.. we chase them critters as a volunteer with the PoW Network. http://www.pownetwork.org
The Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm was issued to every Allied nation which provided military support to Vietnam between 1 March 1961 and the fall of Saigon in April 1975. The unit decoration thus became the most commonly awarded Vietnamese decoration to foreigners, second only to the Vietnam Campaign Medal.
The Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA) is an award of the United States Air Force which was first created in 1954. The award is presented as a ribbon to any command of the U.S. Air Force (including Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard) which performs exceptionally meritorious service, accomplishes specific acts of outstanding achievement, excels in combat operations against an armed enemy of the United States, or conducts with distinction military operations involving conflict with, or exposure to, a hostile action by any opposing foreign force. The “V” (Valor) device is authorized when awarded for combat or combat support service. Multiple awards of the AFOUA are denoted by oak leaf clusters on the award ribbon. The AFOUA ranks directly below the Meritorious Unit Award (MUA) and above the Air Force Organizational Excellence Award (AFOEA) in the precedence of Air Force awards and decorations. It is considered a personal award for personnel who were assigned or attached to the unit during period for which it was awarded, and may be worn whether or not they continue as members.
Vietnam veteran is a phrase used to describe someone who served in the armed forces of participating countries during the Vietnam War.
The term has been used to describe veterans who were in the armed forces of South Vietnam, the United States armed forces, and countries allied to them, whether or not they were actually stationed in Vietnam during their service. However, the more common usage distinguishes between those who served “in country” and those who did not actually serve in Vietnam by referring to the “in country” veterans as “Vietnam veterans” and the others as “Vietnam era veterans”. The U.S. government officially refers to all as “Vietnam era veterans”
According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 (VEVRAA) states, “A Vietnam era veteran is a person who
. served on active duty for a period of more than 180 days, any part of which occurred between August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975, and was discharged or released with other than a dishonorable discharge.
. was discharged or released from active duty for a service connected disability if any part of such active duty was performed between August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975.
. served on active duty for more than 180 days and served in the Republic of Vietnam between February 28, 1961 and May 7, 1975.”
The U.S. Census Bureau (2004) reports there are 8.2 million “Vietnam Era Veterans”. Of these 2.59 million are reported to have served “in country”.
A good summation and why you are a Vietnam Era Vet vs Vietnam Vet (InCountry)
The Definition of a Vietnam Era Veteran
By Bob Hanafin
A “Vietnam Era” Veteran is defined as any Veteran who served during the official time frame of the Vietnam War anywhere in the world as defined by Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
I would assume that even National Guard members who have achieved official Veterans status as defined by the VA would be considered Vietnam Era Veterans.
I’m basically familiar with this, because most of the VA benefits I applied for and got when I served during the war were because I was a Vietnam Era Vet. However, I know that Congress passed a law in 1996 just after I retired from the Pentagon that changed the definition as it applied to those who served in-country Vietnam proper, and those Veterans who served elsewhere. The time frames are different.
Those who served in-country Vietnam have a longer period of time in which they qualify to be a Vietnam Era Veteran (from 1961 to 1975) while those who did not serve in-country havOfficial Definition of a Vietnam Era Veteran – Google Searche a shorter timeframe in which they can be considered Vietnam Era Veterans (from 1964 to 1975).
The Veterans’ Benefits Improvement Act of 1996, Public Law (P.L.) 104-275, Section 505, enacted October 9, 1996. REFERENCES: Title 38, U.S.C., Chapter 1, Section 101 (29) and Chapters 41 & 42, Sections 4101, 4211 and 4212.
BACKGROUND: P.L. 104-275 incorporates provisions from a multitude of different bills resulting from compromise agreements between the United States House of Representatives and Senate. This letter amends the definition of the Vietnam era for certain veterans.
Section 505 states:
(a) In General — Paragraph (29) of section 101 (of Title 38) is amended to read as follows:
(29) The term `Vietnam era’ means the following:
(A) The period beginning on February 28, 1961, and ending on May 7, 1975, in the case of a veteran who served in the Republic of Vietnam during that period.
(B) The period beginning on August 5, 1964, and ending on May 7, 1975, in all other cases.”.
The definition also has legal meanings as well as determining access to Veterans benefits. Even the Department of Labor has an official, legal definition of Vietnam Era Veteran that goes something like this:
There may be quite a few Veterans out there who served between 1961 and 1964 who were once not considered Vietnam Era Veterans who are NOW. They of course had to serve within the Republic of Vietnam.
Not sure quite how this impacts the Blue Water Navy of Air Force Units that were flying over Vietnam (and of course North Vietnam) but did not have bases in-country. They flew missions from Thailand, Okinawa. maybe Taiwan??? and of course off Aircraft Carriers.
God Bless
I screwed that up… no matter, you served. Maybe not In Country – but you served.. and after rereading what I posted I am also confused. (g)
I still am too.
Tom
This is what the Vietnam Vets did for use, they cried and went to the Government to make all the other Veterans that servied during this time period Era vets because we didn’t fit their mold. This is what they had changed and who will be a called a Vietnam Vet from now on. This is from an article I read.
Number one – Vietnam Veteran any one who served in Vietnam and saw combat. They also want to be first in line at the VA over everyone else.
Number two – Vietnam Era Veteran any one who serviced in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and In – Country but did not see combat, also in this group the Navy off shore and anyone who flew over Vietnam and again anyone that served anywhere in the world during this time period.
Third and final – Wannabe anyone that served during Vietnam and calls themself a Vietnam Vet.
Remember there is a saying in the military community ” Let not one generation of Veterans abandon another” the so called Vietnam Vets abandoned us guys years ago. We didn’t run and we didn’t hide we went were we told and did our jobs with pride and this is how we get treated. I lost alot respect for the In-Country Vet a few years ago, so when they show respect to us then I’ll show respect to them again. There are alot of good guys in my VVA Chapter that saw all kinds of stuff in Nam and to be truthful they would tell all you In- Country Rambos to go to H–L. THESE ARE TRUE VIETNAM VETERANS.
Tom
I always wanted to be a army soldier when I was growing up… Great! Now that I have learn so much more about this subjet …I can finally said I’m glad i found what war era i belong to. . I really I don’t care anymore about this subjet, Is history. I just want to said Thank you, To all men and women’s out there who serve our country.I am so praud to be a “Viet-Nam era Vet” ps. Viet-Nam combat vets and all vets of the war era You will always be my heroe’s now and back then…After all we are brothers in arms… I admired you guys and I thank you for your service. Welcome home “Viet- Nam Vet’s” and all “vets of all the wars”!… Peace and God bless you all !!!…And God Bless America!!!!!!!!!
Spc4,
Thanks for bringing this topic up for discussion… My father saw combat in WWII as a Marine (Tarawa, Okinawa, Saipan) and was awarded the Bronze Star. My brother saw combat in Viet Nam as a 101st Airborne LRP SPC4 (66-67) (awarded the Silver Star). I enlisted in the Navy from ’74-’78 and was a AW5 and Rescue Crewman aboard an SH2 (Kaman coffin)… I was discharged a few months early due to Service related accident which gave me a 30% disability… Imagine my surprise after reporting to the VA when they stuck a “Disabled Veteran of the Viet Nam Era” in my medical file… I explained to one of disinterested filing clerks that I never served in combat let alone Viet Nam (the closest I got to combat was an occasional bar fight in Subic) I was told it was all had to do with serving over 180 day during the period mentioned earlier. Anyway I have always been uncomfortable when people mention my status .. As I said, both my father and brother were real combat veterans … I just served in the Navy, did my job and then got out… I wholeheartedly agree that this VN Era stuff is B.S.. I think most of the guys I served with would agree..
Crazy Otto
Thank you for your service, I just want to point out a veteran is not how long you serve or if you experince any actual combat. Serving over 180 day during the period beginning on August 5, 1964, and ending on May 7, 1975. Is consider by congress and the VA as Viet-Nam era Veterans. So, don’t feel uncomfortable anymore when people mention your status as a Viet-Nam Era Vet . Be proud of it just like you are about your father, and brother. In my book all viet-nam vets are heroes. It’s not their fault they were send over there to fight a war not too popular with our country. And let not forget they don’t called it the arm forces for nothing ! Its not just Viet-Nam combat veterans by themself but we were all there together as a team. Where ever you serve in the Republic of Vietnam or any where in the world for that period mention above.
ps. Otty, I consider myself now a Viet-Nam Era Vet Cuz I din’t go to Nam either. But I wont ever call myself a vietnam vet thast only for vets that were actually there in viet-nam.
Serve this period Army 1973-1978
Definition for Vietnam era veteran?
Many have stated that 1964 was the beginning date of the Vietnam War. I beg to differ, as congress and many veterans organizations recognize 1961 as the beginning. Vietnam era veterans can be in country or those who were assigned elsewhere for whatever reason. We all answered the call some had to do the bad work (in country) and some did not. A clerk typist stationed in some cushy job in country should have no more honor .bestowed upon him as those who were not sent but had critical MOS’s. A navy vet 5 miles off shore or a fly in fly out Air force Vet are good examples of how flawed some of this recognition is.
@Spc4:
Spc4,
thanks for the comments… I imagine there will always some disagreement about this. I do find it interesting that those sent over prior to ’64 are not included in the V.N. Vet definition.
Cheers and happy holidays!
“I totally Agree with you Otto”
Happy Holidays!
AFAIK the Navy Department (USN/USMC) is the only one that has an general award for serving in combat (the aptly named Combat Action Ribbon)…the ability to wear it is specifically controlled by your presence at such and such command (or location) during such and such dates as laid out in the Awards Manual…I’ve even seen the Marines issue a fancy certificate to accompany such award.
In the wider sense of this discussion, the evolved definition of “veteran” as a noun and an adjective in our language is really what all this hubbub seems to be about.
At one time in the not to distant past veteran was mainly used as an adjective to describe the level of experience or expected competency that a body of troops had…if you had “green” troops fresh out of training or if you had “veteran” troops that had seen some fighting and should handle themselves better (with “crack” or “elite” troops being even better.)
Troops could also be described as veterans of specific fighting that would qualify their worth in battle (i.e., “The 2nd SS Panzer Corps, veterans of the bitter Eastern Front, were transferred to the west…”)
As such, the adjective use seems to carry some vestigial remainder of this original meaning — that of a soldier seasoned in combat. (Seasoned being another great adjective with the same meaning) Within our language this adjective “word memory” (if you will) provides the fodder for discussions such as the one here, with all the crossing noun/adjective present/traditional(but word memory connotation) definitions clashing about.
The second component to all of this…the connotation of “era” as opposed to actual place…is another sticky point…it is often highlighted at the time by the use of colorful phrases by those at the pointy tip of things (“REMF”, “In the Rear with the Gear”, and more recently “FOBBIT”…and with a wider brush – “Real World (meaning CONUS)” vs “Here / Real World (meaning all the other messy places that CONUS bound civilians and personnel have zero point of reference about)”…my favorite: “doing the real job” as opposed to “playing at it INCONUS”)
Two examples of “WW2 era” soldier:
One guy spends four years in a Coastal Artillery group defending the shores of the nation.
Another does three years where he spends half that time trying to keep his feet from rotting off in some muddy OP wondering if there will be a Japanese infiltrator on his watch and if he can keep his dead tired eyes open another couple hours.
Both are veterans (n.) — in fact that first guy has a year longer service which clearly makes him more of a veteran by the noun definition.
Only the second guy is a veteran (adj.)
When you are talking about “eras” you are therefore using veteran in the sense of “noun” — more precisely (and this is the key point here) — you are using the noun as an adjective — but not in the sense of the traditional adjective usage.
Combining this implication with the perception of such-and-such era in the wider populace and you get the expectation that a “Vietnam Era Vet” likely carries these attributes (not necessarily in this order):
1) Fought in Jungles
2) Drug Use
3) Baby Killer
4) Spat On
5) PTSD
Yet these popular assumptions are entirely unfounded for the vast majority of “Vietnam Era Vets” — even for most of the veterans of the campaigns within Vietnam itself…but is the combination of flexibility in the English language and years of collective civilian ignorance/assumptions regarding military life, experiences, etc.
The whole segmentation, classification and sub-classification of Veteran Status has reached the point of silliness. No matter when you served (i.e. CDubbs point of 1975-1995) …. each and every one of us have served in some capacity of combat or combat support. Many served during Vietnam, the Cold War while stationed in Europe, Grenada, Panama, Desert Storm, those who were assigned or attached to “combat” missions in central and south America where there was no recognition or campaign medals, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan… the list goes on. Please pick any segment in time where the U.S. was either not in conflict or preparing for conflict.
The point is; all of us were on a constant state of alert, ready, willing, able to go or went. And let’s not forget that over the past ~40 years we’ve had an all-volunteer military. Let’s not forget that many have served within a defined “Campaign-Eligible” support role like Administration, Cooks, Truck Drivers and may have not been directly in combat, but served support roles for those who did. Ask any grunt how they liked eating, how they liked getting their weapons, and pay. Should their service be segmented classified as “In-Theater,” but not in a combat MOS? What about those who were in an Instructor role and prepared the military to go?
We are all veterans whether it was combat or not. Dying for your country whether in combat or on a training mission in the U.S… Well, ask the parents of any soldier (Active, Reserve or Guard) who died during training on U.S. soil if their son or daughter wasn’t a “Veteran.”
Everyone who supported me whether in combat or not; whether I knew you or not, whether you served in the same branch or not, whether you served before me and passed it forward or after me and I was able to pass it forward – Thank you, “Veterans.”
Note – I haven’t read all the replies on this blog yet.
I do feel strongly that I am a Combat Veteran of Desert Storm, even though now it is merly concidered a conflict rather than a war. I remember that President Bush said it was a War but that term got shot doen in the following months. The reason I concider myself a combat veteran of Desert Storm is: 1. I served on the frontline of battle and went into Irag on the second day that the graound assult happened. 2. On that day I was close to the scud missle attack and actually could see it explode from my advantage point. I did not know if one would strike our camp. 3. On the way to Kuwait, through Iraq, we where shot at, luckily by a tank that could not get its gun down. 4. After that I had to drive my semi truck through a mine field that supposedly in most parts had the mines exploded but there was mines in other areas surrounding the road. Upon trying not to get my truck stuck in the loose sand and after hitting the truck in fron of me a few times, that truck hitting the truck in front of them, so we would not get stuck, I veered off on another path in another direction, going north of Kuwait. I knew that I did not want to go there because there was supposedly Sadam Hussans elite army in that area, so I veered through an area that was not mined to get back on the road. I though I would hit a mine and explode but luckily that did not happen. I got stuck after getting back on the road but was later pulled out by some Eygptians. 4. I was at a Saudi camp in Kuwait and was a few feet from a mine and did not know it. The next day some Saudi soldiers got blown up. 5. I was in Riyadh Suadi Arabia, in the apartment where Sadam Hussan shot the scud missles at, one getting blown up by American missles over top the the apartment, one outside the window. 6. There was also other weird things that happened on my tour.
These are reasons why I concider my self a Desert Storm combat soldier. I am not sure if all soldier could be called this but I know that anyone who’s life is in danger when they are serving should be entitled Combat added to the conflit they served in. Thanks, Rowan
I served in Thailand (15 miles south of Laos) as Electronic Warfare Specialist (DF operator/high speed morse intercept.) I was there in 1975. My DD214 says “yes” on line 19 (Indochina service) Am I a Vietnam era veteran? I did not serve in Vietnam, but in direct support of effort. Thank you.
Maureen, in my eyes your a Vietnam Vet because you served in the Vietnam War time period, but the combat vets would say your Era because you weren’t in combat, right now that is the only criteria for being called a Vietnam Veteran. Thailand was also a criteria for the VSM so you are more of a Vietnam Vet then most of us. Thank you for your service.
@Thomas Konieczko: Thank you for your reply Thomas. I always considered myself a Vietnam Veteran, and am very proud to be able to have had the opportunity to be a soldier. I never had anyone dispute with me about my vet status… I only started to question it myself recently when I read some articles debating this issue. I do not want to offend any combat veterans ..I was a radio operator. I don’t want to anger or agitate anyone who might think I am a wannabe…(I go to biker places where there are combat seasoned Vietnam vets.) I only want to show my military pride and nothing more….Again, thank you for your reply…Maureen
@Thomas Konieczko: Hi again, Thomas! Well, I decided to call the VA hospital where I go to see how I am classified. I was informed that I am officially classified as a Vietnam Era veteran. I hope I have not offended any real Vietnam veterans by linking myself to you. I am sorry…I did not know , but now that I do, I will be sure my patches and motorcycle sticker has ERA VET on it. I am still proud to have served, only now I know what my role actually was. Thank you for you kind response to my question. Maureen
Maureen, if you served in Thailand you received the VSM that makes you a Vietnam Vet if the combat vets like it or not. The VA has everyone that served during the Vietnam War as Era it’s only when you go for benefits that they put you in different catogories. The VSM makes all the difference if you don’t have it your entitled to it. Welcome Home !