South Dakota redefines “veteran”
According to our friends at Weaselzippers, in a link sent by MustangCryppie, the State of South Dakota has redefined the term “veteran” to include reservists and National Guardsmen.
Overwhelmingly supported in the Legislature during the recently concluded 2015 session, House Bill 1179, signed into law by the Republican governor on March 13, changed the status of the title “veteran” to include military reserve or National Guard members, which means those individuals can qualify for additional benefits.
Of course, there’s opposition among veterans;
A number of combat veterans in the state have spoken out against the bill, arguing that the measure means war veterans will get less of the benefit pie and that it waters down the meaning of the title.
“It makes things more difficult for legit combat veterans,” said Ted Fowler, a Vietnam War veteran from Aberdeen who served in the U.S. Army. “If this were high school, what they’d be doing is passing out letterman jackets to junior varsity players who have never seen any varsity action. Those folks haven’t earned the title.”
As the author of the article at WZ, Dapandico, notes, in the picture at the link, there are at least two guardsmen with combat patches and there are career active duty soldiers walking around today who haven’t deployed, some who actively avoided deployments to the war on terror. While I understand Mr Fowler’s concerns, things have changed since Vietnam. The reserve side of the house has been pulling their weight over the last twenty years or so.
TSO was a guardsman, yet he has deployments to the Balkans and to Afghanistan. The Guard and Reserve isn’t the weekend keg party that it was in the past. In fact, the Pentagon plans to use the reserves to cover deployments as they draw down the active force.
I’d remind Mister Fowler, the Vietnam veteran quoted above that there are ninety-nine Guardsman who are named on the Vietnam Memorial.
Category: National Guard, Reserve Issues
If the reservist have Combat patches, it usually means that they were on Active for more that 180 days making them Vets.
True. But one can get shot at a lot and even killed in less than 180 days.
Not exactly true. The rule for combat patches (Shoulder Sleeve Insignia- Former Wartime Service) is the same for active duty and reservists, and there is no minimum time. It does, however, require duty in specific hostile fire zones.
A reservist or Guardsman earning a combat patch these days most likely did the full meal deal, just like their active duty counterparts.
In fact most Reserve or NG units spent a full year in country, with time on each end to for train up and out processing, so it added up to much more than a year.
Aren’t you just a special little snowflake! Again, we are to accept your expert testimony in spite of knowing that few, if any, of your previous statements were close to being truthful?
Whatever. Either provide documentation of data such as this or continue to expect ridicule from folks who just might know more than you on any number of topics.
Regarding the SSI-FWTS:
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/uniform/docs/SSI-FWTS%20ALARACT%20Message%20055-2007.pdf
“THERE IS NO TIME-IN-THEATER REQUIREMENT TO BE AUTHORIZED TO WEAR THE SSI-FWTS.”
…and the reg is AR 670-1, so it applies to the reserve components as well.
Regarding tour lengths, my total time on Title 10 was 381 days, I believe. Of that, 10 months and a few days were spent in theater, two weeks of that in Kuwait. Add in three months of training on the front end, a week of demob, and then a few weeks of terminal leave to decompress, I was gone from my job for 14 months total.
AR 670-1 was actually updated on Friday, and learned a couple things – first, it specifically addresses the reserve components (which surprised me – normally it’s assumed to apply across the board); and second, I didn’t realize you could only get one per deployment now. I know early in the war, folks would rake in SSI-FWTS like candy…
AR 670-1, para 21-7 (4)
“Soldiers of all Army components (Active, ARNG, and USAR) who deploy during periods of service designated for wear of the SSI-FWTS are authorized to wear a SSI-FWTS. There are no time-in-theater requirements for authorization to wear the SSI-FWTS. Soldiers may not earn more than one SSI-FWTS during the same deployment.”
USAF – Alabama Air National Guard here. In the USAF, they are called short tours(180+) You get a ribbon and devices for multiple short tours. I have three, in the sand pit, and am classified as a veteran by federal law.
Additionally, I think this is a good thing.
Oh, I’ve heard this before: if you didn’t go to Vietnam or serve in a combat zone, or you are a ‘guy’, you aren’t a veteran.
My response was and always has been: well, what am I? French fries?
If you put your time in, there should be no argument.
You put the uniform on and served honorably, you’re a vet… should be as simple as that.
Agreed
Amen.
Hear, hear!
Right. How many of the WWI WWII KOREA era folks are allowed to be called “Vets” without hint of where they served geographically. However those who served during VietNam Era caught the same amount of crap as those who did from the folks back home. Plus these tend to be looked down on by those who did serve in country and others. I know of men who were killed in Cold War ops outside VN but most think that was a keg party in Germany. {Yes I missed that one but served in two after that not counting Baltic operations.}
The VA considers everyone that served to be a vet, without regard to deployment time. This is where we get the term term ‘Korean War’ or ‘Vietnam’ era vet. Honorable but not combat service.
No, it doesn’t. It depends upon how you define “everyone that served.”
Are you seriously claiming that the VA coined the words “Korean War” and “Vietnam era vet?” Seriously??
In my community, cryptology, we paid the price on USS Liberty, USS Pueblo, the EC-121 shootdown, EP-3 Hainan Island incident.
And lots of other incidents no one will ever hear about.
And that’s just the USN.
Word!!
Federal law already defines what a Veteran is. Strange. Must be to make them eligible for state benefits. Massachusetts has a similar law.
Massachussetts follows closely the Federal Definition of Veteran. They do not consider a non deployed Guardsman as a Veteran, unless they have been activated for more than 90 days (during War Time).
http://www.mass.gov/veterans/benefits-and-services/chapter-115.html
It was just so weird to see this story. It’s something that never ever crossed my mind.
If someone signed on the dotted line and raised their right hand, they automatically become a veteran on my dim noggin.
Under Federalism, states can do this. However, personally I wish all the states would adopt the Federal definition of a “veteran”. This new definition is a less restrictive than the Federal one, and is going to cause confusion. Some people will qualify for one but not the other.
Under this definition, ALL members of the Reserve Components will now be considered veterans in that state. Previously, active duty service other than for training was required.
For what it’s worth: assuming a reservist or Guardsman doesn’t get sent home early from a voluntary or involuntary mob tour, they qualify as a Veteran under the Federal definition. A full 2 years service (or a med discharge) is only required if the individual signs up for voluntary Regular service.
Having served on both active military and reserve military contracts, I agree.
Referencing some of the comments in the original article from the opposition. Yes, a combat deployment makes one a war veteran. However, those active duty personnel that don’t make a combat deployment, but still do a certain amount of time as active duty, are also veterans.
This is true for active duty and reserve personnel.
I could understand the move, on the federal level, to add reservists with 20-year-letters to the list of veterans. They hopefully made themselves ready for a call up that may have never happened. Those that chose retirement instead of getting out would be subject to call up during retirement.
For the remainder? Just doing IDT and AT/ADT for training outside the combat theater, nothing counting as an actual active duty non training tour, shouldn’t get that “veteran” title.
That puts us in the same category as many of the spoiled brat kids that I see in the Army Reserve today, with no combat deployment or any other real active duty time behind them, that bitch, whine, moan and groan about having to do basic soldier things… even describing the garrison portion of those expectations as “creating a hostile atmosphere”. 🙄
I saw one of these Reserve Soldiers posting a picture of herself in military uniform during Veteran’s Day. 🙄
Also, those signs above saying, “One weekend a month my ass” are spot on. Even during the reset mode, while in garrison, you can’t do everything during a Battle Assembly weekend. In order to get taken care off administratively, you have to engage the other Soldiers, and the unit, between drill weekends. The higher up you go in rank, the more taskers you’re going to be subjected to that have to be done long before the next drill.
Make that photos below.
Having been Active, Reserve and finally Guard and retired out after 3 deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, you wouldn’t believe the number of senior NCOs and Officers at state HQ that have absolutely nothing on their shoulders. I can remember laughing when I came back from Afghanistan when one of ’em told me how tough they had it on State Active Duty for a week :). There are many Guard that have deployed 3 or 4 times, but even more that never went (even though you can volunteer to go with a deploying unit in the Guard).
I remember a great pix from one of the Gulf Wars of a vehicle with lettering that said “One Weekend a Month My Ass”.
Probably one of these (smile):
Bingo! #2 and #3. How do you know all this stuff? /smile.
My guys and I got a helluva chuckle out of one of those last two photos (maybe both) in 2007-2008 – when we were over there.
All but three of us were USAR. (smile)
As a veteran of active duty service, non-combat, I support this. While I would have willingly gone to a combat zone, I was not called. When I requested 101st Airborne,(jump status era), I knew fully that I could find myself in a warzone. That a Guardsman served tells us that he/she, could have been activated to go to a combat zone. Since the beginning of the war on terror, (or what in hell ever it is called these days), we have seen most guard and reserve units get some combat time. Those that didn’t were not slackers, but just weren’t of the MOS needed at the time. If we raised our right hands and took the oath, we are veterans. I have a higher regard for those who did see combat, but we all served.
I agree. I know several National Guard with more time in combat than my regular Navy son. He spent 7 months in Afghanistan with the Marines as a Hospital Corpsman. His unit lost 2 men, our NG unit lost 15 members.
Can I get an “AMEN” from the congregation for Brother CEE!
If you raised your right hand and took the oath, then you are a veteran. You took the same risk as anyone else. After all, we lost plenty of folks throughout the Cold War, and all sorts of times between combat actions. A guy serving whose a/c goes down is just as injured or dead as someone who gets shot.
When we begin to set categories of veterans, then we play right into the hands of those who are trying to “victimize” us, trying to show us all as damaged goods or as some sort of danger to “normal” society. It needs to stop.
If you raised your right hand and took that oath, then you are a veteran, and my brother or sister. Period.
Agree 100%, shipmate!
That’s the way I always thought about it.
Sorry, but if you did not serve on Active duty for anything other than Training, and especially the Guard which is State. Unless activated by the Federal Government, you are not a Veteran for purposes of obtaining VA Benefits.
If the State wants to grant them benefits, that is something else all together. However, I think the point can be made, that it is taking away from those who did more than just train.
Yes the Guard and Reserves are being relied on more, and do deserve a lot more respect…it is kind of like the petition I saw earlier to grant “all disabled veteran” access to the PX and Comissary. I just do not feel it is earned.
Its pretty plain as mentioned above. 180 consecutive days of Active Duty qualifies you as a Veteran. No combat needed. You cant get VA benefits unless you meet that requirement no matter what the state does. That is also listed on the VA site as a requirement.
Actually, MSGRetired, that changed in 1980. Now, either (a) 24 months continuous active duty, (b) serving the full period of active duty to which recalled, if less than 24 months, or (c) a medical or hardship discharge is required. There are a few exceptions (early outs, Purple Heart, etc . . . . ).
This doc from the Congressional Research Service is concise, and explains the matter fairly well.
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42324.pdf
This doc from the American Legion gives more details.
http://www.legion.org/documents/pdf/section2_chaps4_thru_8.pdf
When I innocently raised this selfsame issue regarding the definition of Veteran here some time ago, a few commenters took umbrage and got their noses bent out of shape. Perhaps now they will see the legitimacy of the question.
It is actually South Dakota. If you have questions concerning this bill I urge you to call the SD Departmental Secretary Larry Zimmerman. His number can be found at their website at http://vetaffairs.sd.gov/aboutsddva/contactus.aspx
I used to be an employee there and was in adamate opposition to this. I am now the DSO for the VFW in MN. This will only convolute things regarding what Federal Law states, and what these newly created “veterans” see as earned entitlements. Just wait and see. It will iron out in the end, but initially I’m pessimistic.
I came off 4 years of active duty and New Jersey told me I wasn’t a veteran. I had to be in a combat zone. Luck of the draw meant I spent Desert Storm in Germany. In the Guard I went to Iraq and all of a sudden I was a veteran. It was ridiculous. You put on the uniform and serve honorably you are a veteran.
Wow! So does that mean that my 25 years of service wouldn’t count if I didn’t have any campaigns under my belt?
Unbelievable!
25 years and no campaigns sounds next to impossible to me; but I’m finishing out my third without one, so hey. YMMV.
Hey, it was Joisey. It don’t gotta make no sense.
The Weaselzippers article links to another article by Stars and Stripes that gives more details.
http://www.stripes.com/news/veterans/sd-governor-s-signing-of-bill-broadening-definition-of-veteran-leads-to-protest-1.339725
I didn’t link to the S&S article because they pissed me off when they started charging me for their content.
While I think it’s important that our Guard and reserves do get benefits based on their service, I do think it should be based on the federal definition of 181 consecutive days service.
Any folks who have deployed would therefore easily qualify.
Then again, I think anyone on active duty who hasn’t yet made a deployment shouldn’t make above E-6 or O-3, unless their MOS precludes them from doing so. We have too many senior officers and NCOs who never deployed telling the junior troops to suck it up and get ready for hitting the bricks, while they simply sit around waiting for retirement.
Oh, great, here we go again. Will simplify my response to just saying that guys who must quantify their service as more important than that of others have much greater issues than whether the rest of us who served honorably are also veterans.
I had several MOS’s at the same time. I guess the 0151 part of my ass is not a veteran. When I go to South Dakota does that mean I am a ‘Half Assed Veteran’?
I totally agree with you and I hate this constant need to quantify whose service was more honorable.
We are in a World War and we now have terrorists targeting military members in the United States so where exactly is the battle line any more? Does Johnny Jihad understand that a weekend warrior isn’t a “real Soldier or Veteran” according to some?
I get the impression Viet Nam Vets resent the “bling” and high profile the modern era Vet receives and that attitude is exactly why I haven’t joined the local VFW.Way too many BS stories and a constant drum beat about the modern Vet having it easy and we obviously weren’t in a real war because of the low KIA count.
I would characterize whether they are a Veteran based on the Federal statute but more importantly their honorable service.I did 16 years Active Duty Marine Corps and 9 years as an Active Duty Guardsman and served combat tours with each. The blood I saw spilled looked the same to me.
Didn’t I read that something like 90% of the folks who went to Vietnam never heard a shot fired in anger? Most were support folks. (Not to mention that while they honorably served, they had to be drafted kicking and screaming to even be there. I know at least a few who did nothing but bitch when they were drafted and tried every tactic they could to get out of going… and today walk around like they were Audie Murphy. Let’s just say the years have somewhat altered their perceptions – they aren’t fully lying but they are not historically truthfully accurate, either.)
You are so correct. As a side note ever notice how many of our young men never in military started sporting beards and ‘contractor’ caps after Zero Dark Thirty and Lone Survivor were released? I LMAO when I run into them. Sad on the one hand, BS on the other.
Fewer than 1/3 of the people in Vietnam were
Drafted. War is hell when it was 1,000 bc and is hell in 2015. When I look back at previous wars they all seemed worse mine. Hell WWI had battles where more were killed than all of Vietnam and we had months that approached the total of either of yours but if you are one of the dead it doesn’t matter.
DAVID wrote: “Didn’t I read that something like 90% of the folks who went to Vietnam never heard a shot fired in anger?” __________________________________ @ DAVID, Et Alii: If you read that, I’d like to know who said it and why? I simply can’t understand how anyone could reach such a conclusion. Having volunteered twice to extend my tour of duty, I spent two (02) straight years in the old Republic of Viet Nam, as a Field Radio Relay and Carrier Equipment Repair Specialist (MOS 31L20) in Signal Corps units, i.e., “in the rear with the gear”, throughout the old Republic of Viet Nam, from Saigon to the DMZ. I heard and saw plenty of shots fired in anger, and I reckon just about every guy in Viet Nam also, at one time or another, came under fire, regardless of where they were, when they were there, or what their job was. Having personally “Been There, Done That”, I just don’t see how such a thing could have been possible. But, that was my experience, and this is my observation. Due to my background as a youth locked up in state mental institutions, neither the United States Marine Corps, nor the United States Army would let me enlist. So, I volunteered to be drafted into the United States Army, and when my two (02) years as a draftee were completed, I reenlisted, opting for an assignment in the old Republic of Viet Nam. I wasn’t “kicking and screaming” to get out of going. History was being made, and I wanted desperately to be a part of it. Still, the reality was, and is, that I’m no hero. All the time I was there, even though I wanted to be there, I was terrified, although after a little while of being constantly terrified, the mind sort of goes numb, and you just ignore the fear and do your job. Ninety percent never heard a shot fired in anger? Maybe it’s just that some veterans don’t want to talk about the war. When I discuss my experiences in the war, my focus… Read more »
Agree fully with your last point. A discharge under honorable conditions – that is, an “Honorable Discharge” or a “General Discharge (Under Honorable Conditions)” – should be required to receive squat from the VA.
And I’m not all that sure about the latter. Doing one’s time and getting out with an Honorable Discharge just isn’t that hard.
If someone receives an OTH, BCD, or a DD, IMO that individual SHOULD forfeit all VA bennies. (I lean towards that for a General/Under Honorable Conditions, too.) Presently, only a DD is an absolute bar to receipt of VA benefits.
Word.
Good answer. Short and to the point. In Desert Storm half my unit went to Saudi Arabia, half stayed at McChord AFB. I felt guilty because I had it easy while many of my friends weren’t so lucky, but one of our senior NCO’s pointed out that if we weren’t doing our jobs here, they couldn’t do their jobs over there and if they weren’t doing their jobs over there, then the guys on the front lines wouldn’t get the supplies to do their jobs either.
As an aside, worked with some of those McChord folks during Desert Storm and was quite happy with the experience all around. Nobody was checking tickets about who was active or reserve prior to us landing in a sandstorm. We all just worked, except for a couple of active duty officers who attempted to empire build, and got laughed at a lot.
Had a most excellent duty relationship with a McChord officer. Maybe it helped that he was prior enlisted. His attitude made my job easier, which in turn helped his crew as well.
Was he with 62nd APS? I worked for a Captain, I think his name was Tremere or something like that. Good guy, former enlisted man. I’d have to dig through my old stuff to get his name so I’m just going by memory.
We may indeed be talking about the same guy – had been a loadmaster. Was a Major by the time I became acquainted with him.
Don’t worry about making the name public. We’re likely on the same page. He led his troops extremely well, effectively and all that. Had a realistic view of the capabilities of each and found ways to use them all to best advantage. It was a pleasure to watch.
Funny thing about this is I always agreed with the premise because I did nothing and saw no real violence during my time in the service I don’t consider myself a veteran and I’ve never attempted to collect any benefits, take a student loan or a home loan or visit the VA and nor will I.
I saw violence after my service in several different interesting geographical locations outside the US, and was paid nicely to keep the participants of that violence from the locations and personnel paying my salary.
We do what we do and serve how we serve, it makes some of us combat veterans and others of us just guys who spent some time serving.
Those who served in harm’s way, those who served long arduous hours in dangerous jobs and conditions, or those who just gave up some of their life for the country to me are all veterans deserving my respect and admiration.
If some guys or gals want to measure their dicks to see whose got a big one, go for it…after all with .8% of the population serving and being the first group of people the government looks to fuck out of promised benefits I’m sure lots of infighting over who is or isn’t a real veteran will really help move that issue forward.
“One weekend a month MY ASS”
Out!
Veteran comes from the Latin: veterānus. Vetur- meaning old and Anus- meaning asshole. As an Old Asshole I believe I am eminently qualified to hold the title.
Semper Fi.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
Fits me too!
Classic!
Twenty years ago I would have agreed with opposing this legislation. However, the National Guard has become a key player in meeting our military requirements and in Arkansas we will also recognize their service regardless if deployed or not. If someone puts on the uniform they are subject to activation. That should be good enough for all. Not every active duty service member served in Nam, Desert Storm, and the follow on bullshit our country is bogged down with. Are they not veterans? Lighten up folks.
“It makes things more difficult for legit combat veterans,” said Ted Fowler. I wonder if Ted also distinguishes between Veterans who actually engaged in combat and those who were potentially exposed to combat by serving in a combat theater. And, then, I have to wonder whether Ted himself actually ‘lettered’ in combat.
I was wondering the same thing; might be interesting to follow that up.
More participation trophies, except now you don’t even have to participate.
I actually looked it up and saw that there were more National Guard soldiers deployed for OIF 1 & 2 than there were active duty soldiers. I wonder what that vet would think about those stats?
I was one of those in OIF II. Served with Mass. Guard company and sent to a sunny little paradise north of Baghdad with the 1st Cav.
When were you there? 2/162 INF (Oregon ARNG) was with the 1st Cav in 04/05.
Long overdue, I think. I’ve seen this from both sides.
In the mid 80’s the National Guard, at least, was in many ways exactly the kind of slacking assignment that a lot of active duty types assumed it was. I could tell you about pencil-whipped rifle qualifications, PT tests where you exchanged cards with your grader and then each of you would say “how many pushups do you think you’re going to do today”, annual training camps where the most crucial member of the platoon was the one who made the beer run….all kinds of crap like that (then again, I’ve been in active duty units where we did PT only once a week, too. So not all the slackers were in the RC.)
I think it was Desert Storm that finally gave the wake-up call to the RC [Reserve Components, generic term for the Reserves and National Guard] that yes, they really COULD go to war. I was active by that time so I didn’t see from “inside” how the RC changed at the time, but I can tell you that when I left AD in 1996 and joined a USAR MP detachment at Fort Bragg, it was just about as squared away as an active duty unit. Ditto for when I rejoined the National Guard in 1998.
Final point: I’ve personally deployed to a hostile fire pay area 4 times. Once on Active Duty (Haiti), and 3 times with the RC (Bosnia with the USAR, Afghanistan and Kuwait with the National Guard.) And I’m sure my experiences are not atypical.
I’m a career Guardsman and Reservist. I was Army National Guard 87-93 and AF Reserve 99-14 when I retired. I was in an MP unit in the ARNG and from 87-90 it was a joke as described. The August 1990 rolled around and a month later we were getting desert uniforms and all of our vehicles had been painted an alarming shade of turkey shit brown. We deployed in November and came home on April 15th of 91. A lot of the old timers in the unit couldn’t get out the door quick enough when we came back because they realized they could again be deployed to combat. Most of these guys were Vietnam veterans also. I can assure you it was a drastic change in how weekend and annual tour business was conducted.
I recently served with a gentleman in Kosovo who resigned his commission as a COLONEL in the MDARNG so that he could take an appointment as a CHIEF WARRANT OFFICER 2 with the aviation unit that supported our active duty formation. I had no idea until then that a non-deployed/non-activated Guardsman was not a veteran under Federal Law. Ridiculous!
What’s your point, a Chief Warrant Officer2 is equivalent to a Colonel, don’t take my word for it, ask any CWO.
CW2, USA (Ret)
Shoot, ask any Colonel!
Hello everyone! I haven’t commented in awhile as 7 days of internet cost me 20$, but regardless, how is everyone? Anyway, I don’t understand, American Veterans are people who served but never went to a combat zone, and Combat Veterans went to combat zones, I don’t understand why they don’t just use that wording. The whole Active Duty vs Guard/Reservist shit is stupid, I am in the guard right now but I spent 4 years on Active Duty before, I love when people talk shit about the guard, most people in the guard were on Active and got tired of sitting by a smoke pit for 4 hours waiting to get off while the Arms room got 100% for the fifth time of the day. I am an 11B and when I went to basic, AIT / oscet / infantry school / whatever the hell it is called now I had a Drill Sergeant (Who was obviously an 11B) and that guy never deployed, fucking E7 in 2007 who never deployed, and spent his whole career on Active Duty. What also gets to me is these people who say “Well a Combat Vet isnt going to get as much recognition” look at history. I have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of those deployments comparable to what someone went through in Vietnam. And then look at the Vietnam Vets deployment, probably not comparable to what someone went through in WW2. Then, look at a WW2 vet, probably not comparable to a WW1 vets deployment. Either you served or you didn’t, it shouldn’t become a dick measuring contest because the only people who would win that contest are Revolutionary War Veterans and they are no longer with us, and that is just who would win that contest in US history. Anyways, miss you guys!
Glad to read your words again Jordan welcome back…
According to Mr. Fowler, 6 years in the Navy, where I spent almost 2 years in school in Illinois, Connecticut, and Virginia Beach, followed by 4 years doing 3 months on, 3 months off while assigned to an SSBN qualified me as a veteran, but my deployments to Bosnia and Afghanistan don’t because, technically, I was deployed as a mobilized National Guardsman.
Mr. Fowler would consider my friend, a veteran based on his time in the Marines in the late 70’s and early 80’s but wouldn’t count his time in Afghanistan, where he was wounded and ultimately died as a result of his wounds, as worthy of veteran status.
I’ve got a big plate of STFU right here for Mr. Fowler to enjoy. Maybe he needs to talk to some of those who he doesn’t consider veterans, despite their service, instead of assuming that the RC of Viet Nam is the same as the RC of today.
Agreed. Times change.
Something that might be pointed out, and this is what likely has Fowler annoyed, is that in the context of Viet Nam, the Reserve and Guard were both often seen as a means of avoiding the draft. There were waiting lists.
Personally, I never held it against them. Most of the AR and NG people I ran across at the time were typically guys who were newly married and had decent jobs waiting on the outside. You got a sense, more often than not, that a realistic worst-case scenario for them wasn’t coming home from I Corps in a bag; it was actually the prospect of trashing a marriage and civilian career by having to spend two years as a cook or clerk-typist at Ft. Bliss or wherever.
Did that make them the Junior Varsity? Fowler raises an interesting point, but it seems to beg the question: So what?
A way back in 1967, when I was going through my Basic Combat Training at Fort Lewis, Washington, our Drill Sergeant was explaining our assigned Army Serial Number stamped on our dog tags.
My number was, “US 56934312”.
The prefix, “US”, indicated that I was a draftee.
An “RA” prefix indicated the soldier had enlisted.
The prefix, “NG”, was for National Guard personnel, and the letters stood for, “NO GOOD”.
During the war in the old Republic of Viet Nam, guys joined the National Guard and/or Army Reserve to avoid being sent to Viet Nam.
When Dan Quayle was a candidate for Vice President, the fact that he was in our age group had many Viet Nam veterans wondering where he was when we over there?
As a matter of fact, his Indiana National Guard unit did deploy to Viet Nam, although he did not go.
When I got out of the Army, I briefly served in the Utah National Guard, and it really bothered me overhearing guys brag about their imminent discharge, having only joined to keep from going to Viet Nam.
When the war started in Iraq, those of us who served in Viet Nam were laughing at all the National Guardsmen and Reservists who were suddenly being activated and deployed, recalling those bitter days when guys joined those units to avoid any possibility of combat.
When I was living in Saint Anthony, Idaho, I learned that many of the guys I went to church with had served in Viet Nam with the local Combat Engineer unit of the Idaho National Guard.
In one of my books, “VIETNAM: ORDER OF BATTLE”, by Captain Shelby L. Stanton, I found the page devoted to their unit, and went around collecting their autographs on that page.
For those making statements along the linings of “except for training”, may I remind you that training is also a dangerous occupation, with a number of fatalities recently in the news, from sky diving to helicopter crashes.
As another example, my son is currently deployed as part of the Air National Guard, he does Electrical & Environment maintenance on F16s. His buddy was working on a jet a couple of weeks ago when an active duty guy goofed and blasted his buddy and another guy with hydrazene, a very nasty cancer-causing substance. A couple of days in the hospital was the result, who knows about the future. Others have been sucked into engines or fallen off the aircraft, among other fatal accidents. As an aside, the Guard guys there have reams more experience than the active duty guys they’re working with.
How are they not veterans? Even during training, they put their lives and health on the line for their country.
Also, after an in-country training deployment later this year, my son will have spent almost half the year on active duty orders. So much for “one weekend a month”. He’s fortunate to have a VERY supportive employer who even promoted him right before he deployed.
I stand by the “active duty outside of/except for training” stance. There are other dangerous jobs in the civilian world, some of these occupations continue to expose these folks to dangers long after your example has completed that dangerous AT/ADT training. Maybe we could call these folks veterans too, because many of them, by law, are members of the unorganized militia of the United States. They too could get called to militia active duty, to face combat related dangers should they also have been called up. Their current occupation could end up being what they would do as militiamen, in addition to combat duties. But, but, but, they didn’t volunteer for military service! OK, would these folks run instead of protecting their families and communities in case of an invasion? Would they fight for their families and communities? I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard civilians, with no military service, make that stance… that they’d fight against a foreign invasion. By law, many of them might just get that opportunity if crap hit the fan. Many people that immigrate legally, and go through the naturalization process, answer questions that amount to a willingness to be called up in cases of danger to the United States, either in a military capacity, or in a civilian capacity. This isn’t just testing loyalty to the country that they’re about to take an oath to. They’re “enlisting” into a different control group of the unorganized militia. Anybody here that tries to include reservists who weren’t called to active duty for a regular active duty tour, or for a combat tour, within the definition of a “veteran” just by doing IDT/ADT/AT (training) and nothing else must also accept a contractor’s word that his combat action as a contractor also makes him a “combat veteran.” For those doubting the militia aspect, the Dick Act calls for giving militia, wounded in the call to active militia service, compensation and treatment as if he were in the military and had gotten injured as a result of that military service. Heck, if they don’t want to be… Read more »
I admit that I have not read all of the posts, but here’s my $.02.
I am a retired active duty NCO. In Afghanistan 2006-2007 we packed up the remains of probably a couple dozen Guard and Reserve soldiers. They looked the same, smelled the same and were every bit as dead as our active duty brethern. And their families still mourn them as much as active duty families.
Call me old-fashioned and unenlightened – but in my book, to be a “vet” one should have put in the requisite time on active duty, or been forced out due to medical or compassionate reasons before doing so.
And before anyone says “but that leaves out everyone in the RC” – well, no it doesn’t. Get called up for a year (or 6 mo, or whatever) and serve the full time, under current law that counts. Ditto those killed or forced out due to injuries incurred during active duty, or during/traveling to/from training.
Just my $0.02, and many obviously don’t agree. That’s OK; it’s still a free country.
I hear ya, Hondo, but it’s rather difficult for me to grasp how my Air Guard brethren who flew all sorts of missions all over the world, just not in combat or for a year at a time over a 30-year or longer career, carry a retired ID card and get a very nice retirement check complete with other benefits, but they are not veterans? I would also point out that many flying crews and folks like me might do several months active duty each year, a few days or weeks at a time, and often would rack up considerable “points” in the process.
Factor in that is was not unusual for the active side of the house to deliberately cut our orders short and/or contrive situations which denied us credit for short tours, and you betcha, some of us had some heartburn about it all, especially after hearing one more story about how we weren’t “real” vets, as compared to a guy drafted who also saw no combat, was given an early out because the war was over while we had accumulated more active duty days in our first couplethree years duty.
Yes, it’s a particular sore spot with me, on behalf of the folks we left behind during DS/DS/DS who many here still think are not veterans, yet they kept everything running smoothly for all of us in theater, just from home station.
OWB: from what I’ve seen, you’re correct in your observation. IMO the USAF was (and presumably still is) indeed the worst of the services regarding what I personally consider “man-day games” that did a disservice to its RC individuals.
They do this because it benefits the service through keeping active end-strength lower and avoiding the need to activate RC units. The downside is – as you observe – the people involve get a short-term “bennie” (temp benefits and pay) at the expense of future benefits (qualifying for VA benefits).
Yeah, it’s authorized. And it’s arguably “smart management”.
But it screws the people involved, and masks a bigger problem (personnel shortages). IMO it’s NOT good leadership.
Most of my active duty time had no bennies other than knowing we were doing a job that needed to be done, with a paycheck considerably less than what I earned at my fulltime job. Only 4 or 5 times during my military time was I on active duty long enough to change ID cards, thus having full benefits.
When on active duty bases, most of the time we were not even allowed into base facilities unless our orders were constructed with the correct code. That did finally change, but it was stupid to land on a base late at night, then have to figure out where to get something to eat off base, and how to get there. Yes, I usually packed food, but depending on how long the mission took and how many times they changed the mission along the way, eventually you had to graze on the local economy.
My usual response to that silly “you’re not a real vet” meme was simply, “You have no idea.” Between concurrent building both civilian and military careers, there just wasn’t time to get into with the ignorant.
“[I]t’s still a free country.” Yeah, but not as free as it used to be!
Here’s my deal. I was (am, you know how us jarheads do it lol) an 0311 Marine Reservist. I deployed to OIF and was in Fallujah (OPF) when an ID went off and I woke up three days later at the field hospital in TQ. No purple heart still. A lot of that was because of the active vs reservist/guard mentality. I have been denied jobs and benefits I am qualified for because I am “just a reservist” (something a POG Hudson High graduate told me once). I think that if you go to combat, you should be labeled under the VA as a “combat Vet”, while all others who served in theater are “Vets” and if you’ve never deployed, whether through no fault of your own or you have the sharpest pair of skates ever, you should be labeled as a “Former Service Member”. Shouldn’t matter if you’re AD, Reserves or NG, you get the label “Combat Vet”, you earn the full benefits. I have had to put out thousands of dollars for my education when the “Vet” sitting next to me who never left Hawaii (true story) in his four years gets his school fully paid for. This needs to be reworked.
IED*
Apologies. Stupid autocorrect.
If you (1) were injured while deployed to Fallujah, (2) have an honorable discharge, and (3) have a VA rating for a service-connected disability resulting from that, under current law you qualify for at least VA medical care and the appropriate level of disability compensation. If you finished the entire USMCR tour for which you were ordered to active duty or were discharged early for medical reasons, I’m pretty you qualify as a veteran for all VA purposes.
I’d suggest you police up your documentation for the IED strike and related medical treatment and go see one of your local VSOs for assistance in getting things straightened out with the VA and the NBCMR. It sounds to me like they might be able to help.
If you don’t have hardcopy documentation, track down some folks who you served with and ask them for sworn statements concerning the attack and your injuries in same. (Ditto for anyone you can contact from the med treatment facility if you don’t have copies of those records.) Those will be useful both for the VA process and for getting a retroactive PH.
Hondo, yeah, after 4.5 years, I finally got rated. I’m putting together my package now for the retro PH. It’s just a pain. But that’s not the point I was trying to make. Apologies if that wasn’t clear. What I was trying to say is that I asgree/disagree with the bill. Reservist/Guardsmen get screwed royally. I only had one deployment. 7 months in country, and 11 months 25 days on orders (that’s because my admin effed me over. Long story.) The issue I wanted to talk about is the reality of what happens to guys like me. I rate 50% of the G.I. Bill, and I barely came back alive. That ain’t right. Some states have tried to rectify that. I believe Iowa law states that if you have a PH you can go to school for free. I understand the reasoning behind the VA decision to prorate R/NG education benefits. I don’t like it, but I understand it. I believe that if you’ve earned a MC/Navy CAR, CIB, CAB, CMB or AF CAR, you deserve full benefits no matter your length of time on active duty. What are the numbers? 10 to 1? When you have an almost equal number of R/NG to AD, it’s not like you’ll be spending that much more money. (Though granted, I haven’t done the math on it.)
Also, typing this on a phone royally sucks. Can we get an app for this blog already? The finally got one over at RallyPoint hinthintwinkwink