Letter: After 50 years, Vietnam veterans still disrespected - LaGrange Daily News -...

To be fair, all who served during the Vietnam era were tarred with the same brush. In fact, those who were posted anywhere in CONUS during the war years suffered more abuse than even those who returned home after serving there. At least while in Vietnam, we were spared having to face the daily trials and tribulations of navigating civilian places while the peaceniks assaulted them. We only ran the gauntlet from the time we disembarked the airplane until we could reach an airport bathroom and change into civies. And every service member was a risk for being stationed in Vietnam. So, yes, I can see some rationale for acknowledging those who served during the actual war years without setting foot in Vietnam. Extending such recognition to those who served during other periods? Not so much. Of course they may be honored for their service but not as Vietnam vets.

COL Mikel J. Burroughs this is very interesting, and a topical issue many states, to include this one - Missouri.

I see this issue as similar to the GWOT Service and GWOT Expeditionary Medal, and then the GWOT Service vs. the Campaign Medals. I agree all service matters, but I also believe there is difference between supporting the war from a far, or even from Qatar, Kuwait, etc vs. being in Iraq or Afghanistan. This has happened other places too. To me, the campaign medals should be the difference maker between service and combat service. We have had similar issues with Allied Force (Kosovo), OEF, and OIF, and I am sure many others.

I don't have a dog in this fight, as it was not my era, but I do see a huge difference between a Vietnam era veteran (served during the time, but never entered the Area of Operations), and Vietnam Veteran (someone who had boots on the ground or directly supported boots on the ground from with the Area of Operations).

I have a friend, who was in the Air Force for severals at the tail end of the Vietnam era but never set foot in southeast Asia. At the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War commemoration, he was a wearing a Vietnam Veteran hat. We were there (our JROTC Cadets) to read the names of the over 1000 service members who were killed in the Vietnam War. I did not realize he was a Vietnam Vet, and a few weeks later I was a talking to a mutual friend, a retired CSM, who said he was not, he never set foot in Vietnam or supported the war, but he was just in the Air Force during the period covered. The CSM told him he as misrepresenting his service and should not wearing it; he stopped immediately.

Without meaning to disparage anyone, but I believe there is and should be a difference between service during the era and actual campaign credit.

I, (while not being a Nam Vet), think that govna is in the wrong, and I am offended for my Nam brethren.
It is just another politician screwing around with other people's lives for votes.