Questioning someone's veteran status (Why is this okay?)

The Veteran status question is an ongoing issue still. Thanks to congress, unless something has happened recently that I'm not aware of, service members from all five branches of the reserve components that qualified for a retirement after age 60 that didn't serve more than the 6 months are not considered Veterans under the law.

As far as i'm concerned I agree with the following quote " Definition of a Veteran- a Veteran- whether active duty, retired, national guard, or reserve- is someone who, at one point wrote a blank check made payable to The 'United States of America', for an amount of 'up to and including my life.'......." author unknown

Its not okay ever but some people feel the need to constantly "one up" someone else because of where they deployed to or what they did while on active duty. If your that insecure that you need to measure your "crank" then you have bigger issues than where someone served or how they served. And unless you were dishonorably, BCD or other than honorably discharged you are a veteran who did their time, did their duty and now your no longer serving. You can't change how some of these insecure people will feel but you don't have to feed their needs.

Sticks and Stones lol

Although I know that y contributions in the military helped the mission as a whole, I sometimes feel that I didn't fully serve my country because I never deployed. I know I am a veteran, but I wrestle with the fact that I never had the chance to deploy during a time of war. Now since I am out and I am unable to return to service because of medical issues I will never have the chance. Life goes on I suppose!

It is not OK. Every veteran took the oath - we wrote a check payable to the people of the United States, for any amount up to and including our lives. It was just a matter of luck or fate who went where and did what. By what measure is one type of service more valuable than another? Tell me which was worth more - strategic deterrent patrols under the north Atlantic, being hunted by Russian submarines; taking care of a company of Recon Marines; taking care of Marines wounded in combat and returned POWs on a military hospital ward.

None of them were more valuable than the other. They were just one guy, following orders and doing his duty the best he could.

Anything else is bullS&*!

I think people in general like to draw increasingly smaller circles to maintain superiority and authority when they find themselves on the losing end of an argument. Sometimes, it's put nicely but it's said for one specific reason - to set the target outside of the right to have an opinion or dismiss them.

I am not a combat veteran or a vet with a real world deployment. I enlisted during Somalia, had orders for a unit deploying to Haiti and served throughout the Bosnia peacekeeping mission. The Army, not me, chose to do different things with me.

As long as someone isn't claiming to be something they aren't, challenging or diminishing their service due to a difference of opinion (no matter how significant) should be completely out of bounds.

I totally agree CW3 (Join to see). Per the VA, anyone who served on active duty for 180 or more days, in a non-training environment, is a veteran for VA benefits purposes. Emphasis on the non-training environment. I say that because one of my co-workers is in the Air National Guard and has just over 2 years active duty time. However that time is all basic training and tech school. Because of that he doesn't (yet) qualify for certain veteran benefits such as the VA Home Loan Guarantee program.

Thanks for clarifying that Chief! I admit that I was one of the "naysayers" on this topic but I stand corrected. Here's to great Warrants and NCOs!!

I think what drives some of this, army guys (not just limited to army guys) seem to be a very 'genitalia measuring' group of people - uniform flair, tab checkers, 'light on the right,'

no matter how many deployments you have, it either wasnt enough, or wasnt hard enough, .

There was a thread on 'should the definition of veteran be changed' and I somewhat agree...6 months of active duty with an honorable discharge is a pretty low requirement, but opinions very.

on facebook comments to an article, people generally seem to think that veteran status makes their comment more valid. So many times, when someone disagrees with a comment, the accusation "probably never served a day in your life" is thrown out there...
I think its pretty damn weak...

A veteran shouldn't question the status of the next because we all did our time. However this changed when PVTs that did six months of service and gets medically discharged with more issues than you at 20+ In. I know privates parading around 80% disability and It took me 5 years and a bunch of APFT's later to get an MRI done to find out that my neck pain for the past 5 or so years was because of herniated disk in my C5-C7. So I can see where the questioning is coming from because really and truly what can someone so in 6 months to get 80% retired that I didn't do in my 9yrs of Serving or anyone else's 20 yrs?