It is hard for an ethical veteran to remain silent when that person see something wrong happening.  The fact that the veteran in the story remained silent for 35 years is no mistery to me, most veterans choose to do so.

He was the one doing all the bragging while he had James Carvel and Terry McAsshole spreading lies about Bush being AWOL.

Kerry said military service is a non-issue when Clinton was running against Bush I and oh how the Republicans were being so bad binging up Clinton's draft dodge.

I still think John Kerry was an opportunist and showed very poor judgement and stabbed the military in the back when he said in front of the sub-committee that war crimes were committed daily.  There were soldiers over there trying to survive when he said that.  That hurt the morale big-time Bubba.

I believe that John Kerry was a problem child military officer and that he is even more unfit to be president than anyone even dares think about.

I haven't chimed in on the Kerry Vietnam debate because I'm a novice when it comes to the workings of the military.  The debate all stems around the validity of the medals/awards John Kerry was awarded while serving in Vietnam; if they were legitimately earned.  Hopefully, there are some military members here (former or current) who can provide me some objective insight as to the disputed decorations.

What are the bronze and silver stars, and how are they earned?  Are they strictly based on heroism, as defined by the military, or can they be earned in other ways?  Does it matter what the circumstances are (under fire, not under fire, etc.) in order to be awarded one?  If there isn't any limitation regarding the circumstances involved, then what is all the fuss and controversy about?

I haven't followed the Kerry Vietnam saga closely at all, because as I stated in an earlier post, it doesn't have any bearing on my decision of who I will be voting for in November.  However, I would like to become a little more informed on it, just to have a better sense of what I'm reading about on the topic here on the board.

KCSHYGUY

-- Modified on 8/22/2004 12:19:04 PM

"Kerry said military service is a non-issue when Clinton was running against Bush I and oh how the Republicans were being so bad binging up Clinton's draft dodge."

    The issue of military service came up as Mr.Bush's campaign relentlessly attempted to paint Mr.Kerry as a person who was weak on defense and somewhat unpatriotic.  His service record was Mr.Kerry's answer, although I am sure that more about his policy positions will come out in the weeks ahead.
    As far as protesting the Vietnam war is concerned, that was his right.  Other people chose not to protest but were just as concerned about what was happening.  When protest about an issue that one feels strongly about is not allowed in this country then everything that any veteran fought for is lost.  This last observation seems to be something that you do not understand.

Look at his voting record.  Listen to his vague statements whenever asked how he will fulfill his many promises in regards to foreign policy.

Kerry is nothing but an opportunist.  Also, what he did was reprehensible.  He got in front of a congressional committee and lied(Plus, the dumb-shit was wearing utilities with his ribbons. He was out of uniform).  He said war crimes were committed every day and that he committed war crimes.  Ok, what were they.  He refused to say what they were.  OK JOHN KERRY; TELL US ABOUT YOUR WAR CRIMES. YOU OUT OF UNIFORM PROBLEM CHILD JUNIOR OFFICER SCREAMING FOR ATTENTION.

JOHN KERRY: HE'S ALMOST AS BIG A LIAR AS TED KENNEDY.  These facts are lost on you, Bubba, Mr. pseudo-intellectual. You don't know shit.  Ha ha ha

The vast majority of people with medals earned them and deserve them. But there is a very small but significant number of people who do NOT deserve them(maybe 1%).  

Lyndon Johnson got a silver star for taking a ride in a bomber.  That's right, 1 bombing mission ride with no flak and no enemy aircraft encountered.  Johnson would wear that medal on his suit coat(just like the soviets with their medals).  He was so proud of it. But it was most likely the most bogus silver star ever awarded.

Somehow, a number of generals got medals of honor for their tactical brilliance in Vietnam. Whow!! I would say that that cheapened the medal of honor for those that really earned it.  Of bogus medal awards, 95% of them went to officers. NOTHING AGAINST OFFICERS!

Also, the Navy and Airforce and Special ops debrief a little differently than infantry units in the Army and Marines and that effects medal awards.

One more attempt at giving you the nuance.  The rifle range is a perfect example.  There always seemed to be a little bit of fudging going on when people were qualifying. Not much but a little.  Kinda like golf.

P.S. I still think all of Kerry's medals are very bogus except the U.S. defense ribbon, Vietnam defense ribbon and the combat action ribbon.  Plus as Dole just said, he should apologize for his actions after he got back from Vietnam.

-- Modified on 8/22/2004 9:25:25 PM

I'm not surprised that some bronze or silver stars are also given out in an "honorary" or "ceremonial" fashion and not just an "earned" capacity, with your example of LBJ.  Sort of like celebrities receiving honorary degrees at universities.  They're just useful for display purposes (clothing, wall, desk, etc.).

I am still looking for clarification about the requirements for legitimately earning various military citations.

http://www.americal.org/awards/achv-svc.htm

Here's another one:

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/armedal/blarmedal.htm

The link Bri provides below has a good description of the requirements for various awards. But it's always been a subjective process. In regards to medals earned in combat, After Action Reports matter alot. A commander or platoon leader looking to make himself and his unit stand out can embellish the reports by exagerating the intensity of the fight, omitting critical errors, etc.

RLTW

in ensuring the accuracy of post action reports was incompetent and unfit to lead.  Anyone now saying that one junior officer embellished reports and was a superior officer to the junior officer should take all records of their military service and flush them down a toilet, because in my world, they gave no honorable service to their country.

Seriously, the links were helpful, and pretty much what I was asking for in my inquiry.  As already posted, though, awarding these citations has a high level of subjectiveness in its process.

My dad was wounded in WWII, and received a Purple Heart.  Given the life long disability he had because of the injury (which eventually led to amputation of the injured leg), no one would be able to convince me he didn't deserve it.

No one would want to convince you he didn't deserve it.

I would however think that the extent of your father's injury and disability would give you pause while contemplating John Kerry's superficial wounds requiring little more than a Band-Aid each.  To me, it cheapens the Purple Heart as much as if I would have been awarded one for a foot jungle fungus, which is plenty uncomfortable.

At the very least, you have to admit that the Purple Heart usually conjures up an image of a severe injury in combat.

Not really- my Father and Uncle told me that in WWII about 15% of the ones they saw were for minor shit.  Car crashes in combat zones, stray nicks from spent Shrapnel.  They said they were fairly common.  They kind of intimated that my Uncles was earned while getting it on with a Antwerpian when a V-1 hit nearby and he was blown out of bed.

I have to say that I generally ignore it as a "ooh/Aaah" medal unless it goes with another that refers to a specific deed.

Lots of guys in country got mortared while typing up loo paper requests.  They would be as likely to get it as the guys who got hit while flushing out said Mortar.  The counter fire team would have a better chance of the "mention in dispatches" tho'

Beleive me, the Dems only mention it a lot as it does tend to support that Kerry was THERE.  Not that it implies he's some sort of Rambo!

It does compare favourably with Bush's Viet Nam era awards.....

"the Dems only mention it a lot as it does tend to support that Kerry was THERE"

What nonsense, it is his resume!  And now we know it is bullshit!  He threw his medals over the Whitehouse fence, lied about what was happening, now want to pick them back up and have everyone forget about his subversive activities!  We are not going to let America forget!  And the best part, he did most of it before the cameras!

The Dem's are are doing their best to keep his lunatic leftist Senate career a secret.  But we won't!

Face it pal, the left of center democrats picked the wrong guy... again!