Six veterans on Tim Walz’s and JD Vance’s military service: Letters to the Editor in Election 2024 forum and not Military forum.

[Dante]

No Ballz Walz is a coward and all but a deserter. Per his own unit and commanding officer. Claiming to be on combat he was never close to. Claiming a rank he didn't have. Now you Dems love people running from military service. It'd be funny if you people weren't so predictable.

Wow! 8 neg rep hits in a row AND a drive by post. Sorry you've been triggered so badly

What it means to be ‘at war’

A disappointing aspect of the flap over Gov. Tim Walz’s description of his military service is the failure of the media, including The Post, to explain what it means to “carry weapons of war at war.” This reflects a broader public failure to distinguish “war” from combat operations and to understand that the enemy gets a vote.

When I taught two generations of military officers at National Defense University and Air University, we studied the national security strategies issued by various presidents. Neither strategy documents nor joint doctrine uses the imprecise and misleading term “combat zone.”

What qualifies as a combat zone, after all? Did Northern Virginia on Sept. 10, 2001? Honolulu on Dec. 6, 1941? No, but those regions became combat zones the following days. What about the evening of 9/11? The men and women who patrolled the Potomac and Hudson by land, sea and air did not know if they were still in a combat zone, but they most assuredly carried weapons of war at war.

Despite the unfortunate American tendency to think of war in terms of “over there” and to assume that we will determine if and when combat operations take place, the armed forces after 9/11 did not share that illusion. They were (and still are, I hope) prepared for possible terrorist attacks, whether in the homeland or overseas. The base to which Mr. Walz deployed did not, as it turned out, become a “combat zone.” Other U.S. military bases did.

Whatever one’s political views, using imprecise terminology and sloppy language to discuss U.S. national security hurts us all.

Edwina S. Campbell, Sonoma, Calif.

The writer is a former U.S. Foreign Service officer and the author of multiple books about diplomacy.

 

[lantern2814]

Posting without reading? Drive by posting? Okay.


Honor without heroism

Although I was happy enough to serve in the military, I never would have volunteered for duty in Vietnam, unlike my boyhood friend Lee Herron. If I had received orders, I would have obeyed — but not as a “happy camper.”

I was unhappy about being sent to Okinawa in 1972, not because of fighting there but because it was an “unaccompanied” 12-month tour, and I was not permitted to take my wife and 1-year-old daughter. I was a Marine judge advocate, and when I arrived in Okinawa, JAG officers were still being sent from there to Vietnam for temporary duty, though I was neither asked nor ordered to go.

So unlike Lee, who volunteered for Vietnam and for front-line duty once there, I am no hero. But I am proud that I did serve honorably for three years in the Marine Corps. However, I purposely always make it clear that I did not serve in Vietnam. I am particularly offended and disgusted whenever someone falsely claims to have some military service that they did not have.

At least for now, it does not appear to me that comments made by either Sen. JD Vance or Gov. Tim Walz would come anywhere close to being classified as “stolen valor.” Both men served the allotted time required by their enlistment contracts. Neither man has claimed to have been in battle, and neither one claims to have received a medal for valor.

David Nelson, Houston

No dumbfuck. We read your bullshit and are rightly calling it out as bullshit. Walz claimed to have been in combat stupid. HIS OWN WORDS. He LIED. And of course you and the usual suspects lap it all up and ask for more shit. Remain an ignorant sheep...

 

[lantern2814]

Wow! 8 neg rep hits in a row AND a drive by post. Sorry you've been triggered so badly

What it means to be ‘at war’

A disappointing aspect of the flap over Gov. Tim Walz’s description of his military service is the failure of the media, including The Post, to explain what it means to “carry weapons of war at war.” This reflects a broader public failure to distinguish “war” from combat operations and to understand that the enemy gets a vote.

When I taught two generations of military officers at National Defense University and Air University, we studied the national security strategies issued by various presidents. Neither strategy documents nor joint doctrine uses the imprecise and misleading term “combat zone.”

What qualifies as a combat zone, after all? Did Northern Virginia on Sept. 10, 2001? Honolulu on Dec. 6, 1941? No, but those regions became combat zones the following days. What about the evening of 9/11? The men and women who patrolled the Potomac and Hudson by land, sea and air did not know if they were still in a combat zone, but they most assuredly carried weapons of war at war.

Despite the unfortunate American tendency to think of war in terms of “over there” and to assume that we will determine if and when combat operations take place, the armed forces after 9/11 did not share that illusion. They were (and still are, I hope) prepared for possible terrorist attacks, whether in the homeland or overseas. The base to which Mr. Walz deployed did not, as it turned out, become a “combat zone.” Other U.S. military bases did.

Whatever one’s political views, using imprecise terminology and sloppy language to discuss U.S. national security hurts us all.

Edwina S. Campbell, Sonoma, Calif.

The writer is a former U.S. Foreign Service officer and the author of multiple books about diplomacy.

Not triggered asshole. We don't take kindly to stolen valor liars like Walz. YOU are triggered because your blatant bullshit got called out as blatant bullshit. Though you should be used to having your face shoved in your own pile by now....

 

[OKTexas]

No Ballz Walz is a coward and all but a deserter. Per his own unit and commanding officer. Claiming to be on combat he was never close to. Claiming a rank he didn't have. Now you Dems love people running from military service. It'd be funny if you people weren't so predictable.

And what really says what his command thought of him, he didn't receive the MSM on his retirement. That's pretty much a lock for anyone who retires at E-8 or E-9.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Posting without reading? Drive by posting? Okay.


Honor without heroism

Although I was happy enough to serve in the military, I never would have volunteered for duty in Vietnam, unlike my boyhood friend Lee Herron. If I had received orders, I would have obeyed — but not as a “happy camper.”

I was unhappy about being sent to Okinawa in 1972, not because of fighting there but because it was an “unaccompanied” 12-month tour, and I was not permitted to take my wife and 1-year-old daughter. I was a Marine judge advocate, and when I arrived in Okinawa, JAG officers were still being sent from there to Vietnam for temporary duty, though I was neither asked nor ordered to go.

So unlike Lee, who volunteered for Vietnam and for front-line duty once there, I am no hero. But I am proud that I did serve honorably for three years in the Marine Corps. However, I purposely always make it clear that I did not serve in Vietnam. I am particularly offended and disgusted whenever someone falsely claims to have some military service that they did not have.

At least for now, it does not appear to me that comments made by either Sen. JD Vance or Gov. Tim Walz would come anywhere close to being classified as “stolen valor.” Both men served the allotted time required by their enlistment contracts. Neither man has claimed to have been in battle, and neither one claims to have received a medal for valor.

David Nelson, Houston

How many times are you going to repost these same things in the thread?

.

 

[Dante]

And what really says what his command thought of him, he didn't receive the MSM on his retirement. That's pretty much a lock for anyone who retires at E-8 or E-9.

.

Keep misrepresenting things.

go ahead.

According to records by the National Guard, the 1st Battalion of the 125th Field Artillery received an alert order on July 14, 2005, – two months after Walz retired. The mobilization order came in August and the unit mobilized in October.

Joseph Eustice, another retired command sergeant major who served with Walz, tells ABC News that while there was speculation of a deployment around that time there was no firm indication that Walz’s unit would be sent to Iraq until that July alert order.

Eustice says he remembers Walz struggling with the timing of wanting to serve as a lawmaker but also avoiding asking for a deferment so he could do so.

"He had a window of time. He had to decide. And in his deciding, we were not on notice to be deployed. There were rumors. There were lots of rumors, and we didn't know where we were going until it was later that, early summer, I believe,” Eustice told ABC News.

quote:
Second, the U.S. Army’s current practice of officially notifying a unit ahead of an upcoming deployment via a “Notification of Sourcing” wasn’t implemented until 2009. Back in 2005, any hint a unit might mobilize that made its way out of the Department of the Army Headquarters would be considered unofficial and subject to change pending actual mobilization orders.

Minnesota National Guard officials weigh in on Walz service

Walz has come under sustained fire over his decision to retire, following 24 years of service in various Guard units, while his battalion was allegedly under orders to deploy.

www.bostonherald.com

Nope.

Right-wing media are reviving old smears pushed by political rivals of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz about his retirement from the military, accusing him of “stolen valor” and misleading their audience about the reality of his 24-year service record with the National Guard. Specifically, right-wing media are claiming that Walz resigned and “abandoned” his National Guard unit and resigned after the unit received deployment orders to go to Iraq when in reality, Walz resigned two months before the unit received orders, and Walz likely submitted his retirement papers even earlier.


According to a copy of his service record obtained by Military.com, Walz enlisted in the Army National Guard in 1981 and reached the rank of command sergeant major before retiring in 2005, following a reenlistment after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks. Walz retired honorably as a master sergeant — a lower rank than command sergeant major — since he did not complete all of the necessary coursework for the higher rank before his service ended. Walz went on to successfully campaign for Congress, where he served for multiple terms, helping veterans exposed to toxins during their military service, sponsoring a veterans suicide prevention bill, and advocating for more GI Bill benefits.


During Walz’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign, retired Command Sgts. Maj. Thomas Behrends and Paul Herr wrote a “paid endorsement letter” just days before the election accusing Walz of “abandon[ing]” his unit in order to run for Congress. Specifically, they claimed that he retired in mid-2005 to dodge a unit deployment to Iraq the following year. This smear was repeated by Walz’s gubernatorial opponent in October 2022.

Right-wing media push old debunked smear of Walz’s military record despite his 24 years of service

www.mediamatters.org

 

[Dante]

How many times are you going to repost these same things in the thread?

.

The same amount or time (really much less) than you people post the same lies, misrepresentations, bullshit? Your attempts to flood pages with your sicko weirdo shit fails, as long as I too have the power-of-the-keyboard. LOL

 

[Dante]

And what really says what his command thought of him, he didn't receive the MSM on his retirement. That's pretty much a lock for anyone who retires at E-8 or E-9.

.

Walz enlisted in the Army National Guard in 1981 and reached the rank of command sergeant major before retiring in 2005. That is a fact.

 

[OKTexas]

Keep misrepresenting things.

go ahead.

See post 33 asshole propagandist.

.

 

[OKTexas]

The same amount or time (really much less) than you people post the same lies, misrepresentations, bullshit? Your attempts to flood pages with your sicko weirdo shit fails, as long as I too have the power-of-the-keyboard. LOL

The commie MF said what he said, deny it all you want, it won't change the facts. It just shows how little honor you have. BTW why didn't you answer my question in post 37?

.

 

[Dante]

See post 33 asshole propagandist.

.

stfu asshole propagandist.

 

[Clipper]

No Ballz Walz is a coward and all but a deserter. Per his own unit and commanding officer. Claiming to be on combat he was never close to. Claiming a rank he didn't have. Now you Dems love people running from military service. It'd be funny if you people weren't so predictable.

Good thing Trump's Daddy had that podiatrist write a report saying that sonny boy Donny had bonespurs so he could countinue his high end lifestyle out slumming in N.Y.C. acting like an asshole & a wannabe limping playgoy, halftard.

Walz served his Country but Sonny Boy claimed bonespurs. Too bad a few years ago in an interview step & a half Trump couldn't even recall which foot it was.

 

[OKTexas]

stfu asshole propagandist.

So now you're reducing yourself to the pathetic parrot category. Good job commie. LAMO

.

 

[Dante]

What can I do or say about this? I choose not to make it a partisan political attack or defense. I searched each of the 6 letters to see if any of these people would. I don't see that here. I do see some criticisms that go to what we know candidates and partisans have said. All six letters seem to have avoided what we mostly see here @ usmb and in the media in general.

I salute the patriotism, decency, virtue, and honor these six individuals display here.

But is about the election and campaigns.

Opinion - Letters to the Editor - August 18, 2024

Six veterans on Tim Walz’s and JD Vance’s military service

What do ‘stolen valor’ and ‘at war’ really mean? And what do veterans owe each other?

First of six:

As a military veteran, I find it both disheartening and deeply disturbing to see the disparaging comments made by one set of fellow veterans aimed at others who served honorably, claiming that difficult personal decisions constitute “stolen valor” or even traitorous behavior.

I served as a commissioned officer for 42 years, almost 34 of which I spent on active duty. I did not serve in direct combat nor formally deploy, though I did take assignments in 13 locations — two of them overseas — and numerous trips to combat zones in the Balkans, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. My career was punctuated by many choices I had to make to balance my service with personal demands.

My colleagues and I served alongside countless National Guard members and reservists, without whom we could not have delivered lifesaving and rehabilitative care during numerous wars and humanitarian crises. I remain in awe of these soldier-citizens who balanced jobs and family and community responsibilities with the demands of national service. The injuries, illnesses and wounds they suffered — most of which were the result of training or strenuous military jobs and not direct combat — often changed their lives forever. Many lost their lives.

For any of us fellow veterans to find fault with personal decisions made by these dedicated public servants about how and when they served is beyond unfortunate.

I did not have the opportunity to work with the Republican vice-presidential candidate, despite helping to care for many of his fellow Marines. I am grateful for his service. I accompanied then-Rep. Tim Walz and members of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee to visit Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom. Mr. Walz’s work ethic, communication skills and grasp of the tactical to the strategic were remarkable. As a retired Army National Guard senior noncommissioned officer, he understood the military and military families.

The military branches have clear guidance about the characterization of service in uniform, regardless of the length of time served or the component in which one served. “Honorable” best describes what all of us aspire to achieve and ought to be the sole descriptor for those who do so.

Eric B. Schoomaker, Silver Spring

The writer is a retired lieutenant general who served as Army surgeon general and the commanding general for the U.S. Army Medical Command.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/18/tim-walz-jd-vance-military-service/

Let's try to


What can I do or say about this? I choose not to make it a partisan political attack or defense. I searched each of the 6 letters to see if any of these people would. I don't see that here. I do see some criticisms that go to what we know candidates and partisans have said. All six letters seem to have avoided what we mostly see here @ usmb and in the media in general.

I salute the patriotism, decency, virtue, and honor these six individuals display here (in their letters).

They are all brave men. Not anonymous nobodies posted on social media or failing message boards.