I need any military men, current or former to help answer something...

[fuzzykitten99]

My father in law was in vietnam (or so he says). I know he was in the Navy, but I am not sure if he really was there.

Anyway, he said that he was one of the guys that ran the engine room of the ship he was on. He then says he was actually sent into the field for some reason or another. He said he was handed a gun, and told to go to shore and then something else. He said that he started getting fired upon, and slipped, and dropped his gun. It wouldn't work right after that, and he saw a bigger, better gun in the hands of a dead vietnamese, so he grabbed that one, and left his assigned one. He said when he got back to his ship, he was almost court marshalled for coming back with a different gun than what was assigned. He said he finally convinced them to not proceed.

The specific details of this story are vague to me, because i have only heard it twice in the last 5 years.

Anyway, something about his story didn't sit right with me. For one thing, a part of the story sounds like a piece from a book I once read, but I can't remember the title. My hubby is a little mad at me, because I think his dad's story is mostly BS.

The points I make to my hubby are these:

*I don't think they sent people from the engine room to shore for combat
*This sounds like a piece from a book (fiction) I once read about vietnam
*I don't think they would court marshal you for the gun situation

Then there is another story he tells about vietnam, that i have never heard or read about, yet you think i would have, or anyone else. This one is about how the Vietnamese tried to fool our ships, by having someone who spoke English, announce over the wire that a typhoon/monsoon was coming. Well, being as the ships were close to shore, they started moving out to sea, so as they wouln't end up as lawn ornaments. They got pretty far out when somehow (details are vague-i can't remember) they found out it was a hoax, and they sent a bunch of planes to shore, bombing a bunch of stuff.

Someone please tell me how likely these stories are, and if my intuition is correct.

 

[Hobbit]

Not too far-fetched. The typhoon one sounds possible as the military sometimes depends on local meteorologists or networks that get some news from places that were controlled by the North Vietnamese. The other one is a little harder to believe, but still reasonable. Some places were itching for reenforcement, so they grabbed whoever they could and stuck a gun in their hands to hold the line until they could get proper replacements or pull out. The court martial also sounds reasonable. Our guns are state-of-the-art and we don't want them in enemy hands, so soldiers are taught to treat that rifle as they would their only child (more like a girlfriend, but you get the idea). In fact, during WWII, British airborne soldiers were not only court martialed for losing their rifles, they were prosecuted for treason and executed (few truly were. It was a threat to make sure they hung on to them).

 

[wolvie20m]

Yea but a engine room, my dad was a former Marine in Vietnam I'll ask him about that. Yes losing your gun is a punishable offense here's how the marines view their gun:

My Rifle: The Creed of a US Marine
by Major General William H. Rupertus (USMC, Ret.)
(written following the attack on Pearl Harbor)


This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.

My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I will...

My rifle and myself know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit...

My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strength, its parts, its accessories, its sights and its barrel. I will ever guard it against the ravages of weather and damage as I will ever guard my legs, my arms, my eyes and my heart against damage. I will keep my rifle clean and ready. We will become part of each other. We will...

Before God, I swear this creed. My rifle and myself are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life.

So be it, until victory is America's and there is no enemy, but peace!


give you an idea of how important it is.

 

[5stringJeff]

I don't doubt that someone would be in trouble for losing their rifle. That's a HUGE deal. It is your weapon, the only thing protecting you from the enemy.

 

[dmp]

If he was given a pistol, there would be no need to 'drop it, to pick up a larger gun'. (shrug).

 

[Mr. P]

My father in law was in vietnam (or so he says). I know he was in the Navy, but I am not sure if he really was there.

Anyway, he said that he was one of the guys that ran the engine room of the ship he was on. He then says he was actually sent into the field for some reason or another. He said he was handed a gun, and told to go to shore and then something else. He said that he started getting fired upon, and slipped, and dropped his gun. It wouldn't work right after that, and he saw a bigger, better gun in the hands of a dead vietnamese, so he grabbed that one, and left his assigned one. He said when he got back to his ship, he was almost court marshalled for coming back with a different gun than what was assigned. He said he finally convinced them to not proceed.

The specific details of this story are vague to me, because i have only heard it twice in the last 5 years.

Anyway, something about his story didn't sit right with me. For one thing, a part of the story sounds like a piece from a book I once read, but I can't remember the title. My hubby is a little mad at me, because I think his dad's story is mostly BS.

The points I make to my hubby are these:

*I don't think they sent people from the engine room to shore for combat
*This sounds like a piece from a book (fiction) I once read about vietnam
*I don't think they would court marshal you for the gun situation

Then there is another story he tells about vietnam, that i have never heard or read about, yet you think i would have, or anyone else. This one is about how the Vietnamese tried to fool our ships, by having someone who spoke English, announce over the wire that a typhoon/monsoon was coming. Well, being as the ships were close to shore, they started moving out to sea, so as they wouln't end up as lawn ornaments. They got pretty far out when somehow (details are vague-i can't remember) they found out it was a hoax, and they sent a bunch of planes to shore, bombing a bunch of stuff.

Someone please tell me how likely these stories are, and if my intuition is correct.

IMO, Not very likely Fuzzy..He may very well have been sent to shore but not for known
combat. If in fact he lost a weapon, in combat, there would not have been a Court Marshall,
a slap on the hand, maybe. If sent on shore (other than on leave say),
it was most likely in a non-combat situation, parts pickup maybe,
and you're expected to keep track of your stuff a bit more carefully.

As far as the Vietnamese fooling our ships... :rotflmao: ...NO.
We have meteorologist on those ships, plus being off the coast of Vietnam I'm sure they
could have been in contact with the U.S. Air force folks that were in Country and most definitely had
meteorologist on base, not to mention the satellite links they had.

And that's just my opinion.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Thanks everyone...I kinda had a feeling he was BS-ing on a lot of the stories.

I didn't know the gun thing was THAT serious...he said talked them out of enforcing it because his gun had been dropped in the mud, and it wouldn't work after that.

I knew the monsoon thing was BS, because something like that would have been talked about more, because it was not just his ship that was affected (in his story), it was like 3 ships.

I am wondering if he was even there at all, and he was just told these stories by some other veteran, because the way he talks, he doesn't sound like a vietnam vet. My hubby's boss was there (he has the scars to prove it), doesn't like to talk about vietnam much, so i am reluctant to ask him anything. I'm sure he wouldn't mind, but there's that feeling, because it is a sensitive subject. My hubby's dad will tell stories to anyone who wants to hear them.

 

[dmp]

dropped in the mud so it wouldn't work?

That's really stretching things....lots of mud here...he's still got his weapon

 

[fuzzykitten99]

yeah...go figure. my FIL is really a nice guy...he is pretty decent, and is more than willing to help out in any way he can. He helped me get my first car loan by co-signing. This was before my hubby and I were married.

Really, if you want a picture of his personality...he's a lot like Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter (a big story teller-usually about himself)...but he looks like he could be Elmer Fudd's brother. I kid you not. Here's a pic from our wedding of Tim and his dad...

 

[White knight]

The M-16 was notorious for not working properly when droped in mud and sand, the AK’s did not have this problem.

Anything is possible in the great game of War,.

 

[Merlin1047]

My father in law was in vietnam (or so he says). I know he was in the Navy, but I am not sure if he really was there.

Well, that is certainly an unusual account. That doesn't make it untrue. Here's some questions you can ask, then do a little research.

1. Name of vessel.

2. Dates FIL was assigned.

3. Date (month & year) of the incident which FIL detailed.

First, look up the history of the ship and see if it was deployed to the RVN during the time your FIL was a crew member. Next find out where your FIL came ashore and then see if the area was "hot" during that time. That may or may not prove anything because isolated incidents will not be recorded. But if the overall area was active, then it lends credence to the account.

The only part of the story that I can verify somewhat is the fact that your FIL would definitely be in trouble for returning without his weapon. He may not have been court-martialed, but he certainly would have received punishment under article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The fact that he received no punishment would indicate that he did have some legitimate reason for failing to return the weapon. A combat loss would be such a reason.

That wasn't much help, but given the circumstances, it's the best I can do.

 

[fuzzykitten99]

Well, that is certainly an unusual account. That doesn't make it untrue. Here's some questions you can ask, then do a little research.

1. Name of vessel.

2. Dates FIL was assigned.

3. Date (month & year) of the incident which FIL detailed.

First, look up the history of the ship and see if it was deployed to the RVN during the time your FIL was a crew member. Next find out where your FIL came ashore and then see if the area was "hot" during that time. That may or may not prove anything because isolated incidents will not be recorded. But if the overall area was active, then it lends credence to the account.

The only part of the story that I can verify somewhat is the fact that your FIL would definitely be in trouble for returning without his weapon. He may not have been court-martialed, but he certainly would have received punishment under article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The fact that he received no punishment would indicate that he did have some legitimate reason for failing to return the weapon. A combat loss would be such a reason.

That wasn't much help, but given the circumstances, it's the best I can do.

thanks. I am putting a family tree scrapbook together, and that is a perfect excuse to ask him several questions, including those. I'll post back what I find out.

 

[dmp]

The M-16 was notorious for not working properly when droped in mud and sand, the AK’s did not have this problem.
.

He was suggesting 'It's okay I Left my assigned weapon behind, because it would have never worked again'.

 

[gaffer]

He sounds like what we call a wannabe. He may well have served in the Navy off the coast of Vietnam but did not see any action and has made things up to make his tour there sound more interesting and daring. Its been done many times before. For some reason a lot of guys feel their service wasn't anything great because they didn't do anything spectacular.

The Navy ships at that time would have carried M-14 rifles.The M-14 is an excellent rifle that won't jam from a little mud and is actually a pretty heavy weapon. There would have been no reason for ships personel to go ashore in a combat role. Thats why they have Marines on all ships. Sailors would NEVER be sent in on an assault. They are not trained for that nor are the equipted for such actions.

As for the weather story. Everything said over the radio was varified in one way or another. No action would ever be taken based on someones broadcast over the radio without varifying who it was in some way. And a broadcast such as that would not go throughout the ship. It would be received by the communications room only.

I was in the infantry and didn't have much contact with the Navy but this incident he reffers to just doesn't fit right with a real combat situation.