D
DGVREIMAN
Guest
"Dai Uy" <
> wrote in message
> news
ai-Uy-7A6B4B.04350711012008@news-server.hawaii.rr.com...
> In article <ofidnR_nMoyRBRvanZ2dnUVZ_s2tnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvreiman@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> My opinion:
>>
>> I must agree with most of what is written here. No one
>> wants to hear from anyone that uses fraud and false
>> claims
>> about their military service.
My opinion:
I must agree with most of what is written here. No one
wants to hear from anyone that uses fraud and false claims
about their military service. Especially someone that
defrauds the US Military or the VA for compensation or
benefits I know I do not. They should hang them out to
dry in my opinion.
That does not say that every "war story" I have ever heard
in a bar or otherwise was a lie. Claiming that everyone
that talks about their experiences in a war is a liar is not
something I can believe, nor should I believe. I have met
many vets that like to talk about their experiences just to
get them off their minds and chests, and to see if I
remember some of the same things they do. Are these men
imposters? Of course not, but we all must remember that we
all have "selective memories" when it comes to traumatic
events in our lives...and war is about as traumatic as it
gets.
But I am not about to paint very veteran that talks about
his war experiences a liar, and if I did I would need to
start with Audie Murphy and end with about a thousand books
written by veterans that saw and did things they remembered
that could not be verified by others. . . but were true.
Moreover, it is hard to prove a memory, especially 40 years
after the fact, but I am finding out it is possible as I
sift through all of the accounts of the dates of such
events, and I contact people I served with in the past, and
draw excerpts of my records and some of my training. I
am finding that many of the major events can be proved
today, if you wish to take the time and effort to do so.
But what about the other categories of imposters that use
fraud and false statements to bolster their own service at
the expense of real veterans? I believe real veterans
should address the harm that category of false heroes are
doing as well. Such as the harm they cause while painting
real veterans in a false light deliberately with the use of
fraud, forgeries and false accusations, and lies about their
military service and records.
I say that anyone that uses lies, fraud, false accusations
and forgeries to paint a veteran in a false light is worse
than those that use the same kind of fraud to lie about
their own service. These dregs are trying to falsely
bolster their own pathetic service by denigrating the
service of other real Veterans.
Yes there is another category of military imposters that
really should be held in contempt above all others, and that
is those imposters that falsely accuse others of being
imposters when they really were not...these are the dregs
that use fraud, forgeries, lies and false accusations to
denigrate real veterans, and to try to bolster their own
pathetic war time service by calling many that served
honorably and risked life and limb "rear echelon
mother****ers."
These are the real imposters, and fake "heroes" that bolster
and help write up their own medal recommendations, help
write the after action reports that falsely paint themselves
as heroes, and receive medals for what others do every day,
and receive decorations for "just showing up for duty." I
had the misfortune to witness many "officers" during the
Vietnam war receive their "medals" for precisely those
reasons stated above. And most of them were prone to lying
and using fraud and unethical claims, which does sound
familiar. (Note if a "commissioned officer" received a
medal in Vietnam you can believe he very likely had a hand
in the write up or at least the report that gained him the
medal - I personally saw dozens of these kinds of so-called
"valor awards" only to hear the NCO that was with the
officer during the action tell a different kind of story).
Not to mention those pathetic "officers" that actually
pander for medals from cowardly and defunct nations, like
RVN. Now who in the world would want to pander for and wear
a medal delivered by the most cowardly and corrupt nation
and Army in the world, the Republic of Vietnam? And who in
the world would want to name themselves after some of the
most cowardly and corrupt military officers in the history
of the world, ARVN officers? What some of these imposters
do is well beyond rational understanding. . .
These imposters (usually those that spend a very short time
in Vietnam but mysteriously obtain every medal possible -
sound familiar? John Kerry type officers abounded during the
Vietnam war in all branches) actually file document after
document to the Awards and Decorations division claiming
every medal from every source possible, and they are first
to waive, jingle and hold their "medals" up to the light so
they can somehow overcome their feelings of inferiority and
dishonor...I nor any of the men involved with me in Vietnam
ever respected anyone that pandered for medals, (especially
an officer) and I certainly do not respect those that need
to jingle them to prove their worth. And what is it about
all these "Airborne Badges" these same martinets like to
wear running up to their ear lobes?
The US Marines used to wear their underwear on their heads
and jump off tracks howling "I am an Airborne Ranger"
thereby reflecting their derision for the nonsense that
someone that can use a parachute is therefore some kind of
special soldier. Sure right. When I was in the
25thInfantry in Vietnam Airborne badges were the worst kind
of joke. "The jump that never failed to succeed" was the
general reference. Even guys I knew in the infantry that
were qualified to wear the Airborne badges would refuse to
wear them they were so ashamed of them.
Real Vietnam vets know the men that really deserve the
medals are the men that are still in Vietnam or never came
home alive. Everyone else did their duty, did what was
asked of them, and did what the military asked them to do,
and medals should not be awarded for simply doing your job.
We all drew the same amount of combat pay, and as far as I
am concerned, there were no "rear echelon mother****ers."
The real imposters that are doing the most harm are those
imposters and dregs that have the arrogance and inferiority
to call other veterans by that REMF name.
Another category of the worst kind of a military imposter
is those imposters that constantly brag about their "medals
and badges" when grannies on a Sunday afternoon earn more
"Airborne" badges than these jingling martinets have earned
for doing nothing more than a gaggle of grannies do for
sport every Sunday = and their badges are on order of the
"pink kotex" which should be the replacement badge for every
idiot that wears all those Airborne badges (has there ever
been a successful major jump in military history? Market
Garden - failure. D Day- failure. Operation Dumbo Drop
maybe, but that was just some guys bribing chieftains to
send their sons out to die as usual).
No doubt these pathetic American "Russian Colonels" who wear
their medals down to their navels will find a way to bring
up "medals" in every post or in every newsgroup, and wail
and cry and whine that anyone that did not pander and cry
for medals like they did is some kind of "rear echelon
mother****er" or "imposter" - when the truth is real
soldiers and Marines do not pander and whine for medals, and
those that were really in combat and under fire know the
reason why. The fact is we were all scared shitless, but we
still did our jobs anyway, and we all know there really are
no real heroes, just those that were lucky enough to get out
alive and those that did not.
I understand why officers beg, cry, whine and pander for
medals as they believe those medals will help their future
promotions and careers. Fine, we NCO's all knew the score
in that regard and we allowed these junior officers to
receive their underserved "medals for valor" each time they
wrote up their own accounts of their so-called "bravery" . .
.. which BTW enlisted men did every day and were lucky to get
hot chow for doing so.
But now since the war is over, please, PLEASE stop waiving,
talking about, jingling and brandishing all those "medals of
valor" and thereby falsely inflating the values of the
officers that received them. We all know the truth about
how many of those medals were awarded to officers in
Vietnam, and it sure as hell does not bear well now to try
and change that truth into some kind of fiction representing
real valor.
When I was in the military I never met a junior officer with
a chest full of medals that I liked, nor trusted, nor
respected, and in each case I was proved right. The really
good officers that did really brave (some would call stupid)
things never made it back, and they had as much distain for
those officers that pandered for all those medals as I did.
Real soldiers do not pander for medals, and they do not brag
about them, and they do not berate others for not pandering
for medals they same as they did. Period. End of Story.
And it is impossible for anyone to really know what another
Vet did or did not do in a War, not unless he was assigned
with him and rode in his pocket during the entire time he
was in that war. Claims otherwise are akin to claims of
"soothsaying" and "mind reading" and "reading the entrails
of small animals" and the same can be said for what an
author was thinking in context when he wrote anything, about
war or not. Any claim to the contrary is a complete and
total fraud. No one has the right nor the knowledge to
judge another real veteran, nor fraudulently claim what he
knows he did is somehow a lie. Those false accusations are
for smear and fraud merchants and con men, not for real
veterans.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Dai Uy" <
Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com
> wrote in message
newsai-Uy-1665AC.05440209012008@news-server.hawaii.rr.com...
>
>
> Finally. We agree.
Doug's First Rebuttal:
(Not a copyrighted article).
Smear Merchant Disclaimer: Please note this article (the
same as all of my past articles and exchanges with posters)
represents an editorial on contemporary issues and events -
my opinion. Nothing in this article represents in any manner
any asseveration of biographical fact, nor is about,
directed toward or against any particular person - other
than those specifically mentioned herein. If any person
finds this post personally annoying, abusive, defaming or
otherwise disturbing, please notify me of your specific
reasons for annoyance via email at legalcoach@comcast.net.
If we find your detailed objections reasonable (considering
the "reasonable person" doctrine and case law) we will then
remove this post, or the offending passages contained
therein, from the Google archive, publicly apologize and
retract. My intent is not to annoy, abuse, humiliate, or in
any way cause anyone emotional harm by posting on USENET or
elsewhere. Please note that defending myself from harassment
and obloquy with rebuttal posts has been deemed a "lawful
and legitimate" publication by my legal counsel. If I am not
attacked, defamed or harassed, or my copyrighted articles
not interrupted nor infringed upon, I clearly do not have a
reason to respond with a rebuttal. Please also note that I
intend to notify any and all ISP's and web hosts of any
annoying or calumnious post, web site or other similar
entity about me after I give the offender an opportunity to
retract, apologize and remove said post from the Google
archive).
Rebuttal and Response Invited by Dai Uy:
Although it is clear you are up to your typical vitriol,
false accusations and general defamation tactics, I am glad
that we finally agree on something. Especially the part
about how medals were handed out to officers during the
Vietnam war for what enlisted men did every day. You are
improving and your first step to rehabilitation is an
admission you have been wrong.
But enough congratulations for your sudden revelation of
truth. However, due to your recent epiphany in respect to
the truths I post, I will address your additional comments
responsibly, as if you are truly a rational person
sometimes, as your acknowledgement of the truth above just
might indicate:
In respect to searching out and exposing men without valor,
as you seem to believe is important, I do have a question
for you:
Comparing someone like John Kerry that received a tiny
scratch (probably self-inflicted) and thereby received the
Order of the Purple Heart Medal (not card, medal) compared
to someone that due to exposure to Agent Orange or Malaria,
and thereby died of Cancer or Fever or was sick for life and
did not receive a Purple Heart Medal, are you claiming that
someone like Kerry possessed and demonstrated more "valor"
because he received the Purple Heart Medal for his scratch
than a soldier that was inflicted with the Agent Orange or
Malaria? And/or do you believe the person that suffered the
reaction to Agent Orange was a "rear echelon mother****er"
as you have dubbed all those that did not have an
Infantryman's MOS, and John Kerry was a "hero?"
How about those "rear echelon mother****ers" (your words not
mine) that went out on RF patrols, volunteered for combat
duty, and guarded perimeters and fire bases dozens of times
yet never received a major wound, compared to a Lieutenant
that went out on a single patrol, received a tiny piece of
shrapnel in his foot, and received the Order of the Purple
Heart Medal (not card, medal) and the Sliver Star, and was
sent home due to his wound? Which solider was more
"valorous?" The trooper that was smart enough to avoid
getting killed or wounded seriously after dozens of combat
patrols or suffering though enemy fire on several occasions,
or the dumb-ass Lieutenant that exposed himself
unnecessarily to fire and received a tiny wound and got half
of his platoon killed or wounded in the process, and
received a Purple Heart Medal for the wound, and a Silver
Star because half of his platoon ended up killed or wounded?
Who was the real "hero" here Mr. Rau? The Trooper or the
Lieutenant?
The US Army, combat, and enemy fire were not and are not
"linear" Mr. Rau. Valor, death, disease, wounds and killing
are all a part of war, and nothing about war is unfogged,
nor travels in a straight and perceivable line that we all
can equally fathom and discern. One man's memories might be
completely different from another's although they served in
the same squad during their entire tour of duty.
We have seen these glaring contradictions in respect to the
Swift Boat Vets, and I have recently been digging out After
Action reports that I know were written up by the officer
that seemed to be the Hero of that action, but that version
was not the way I and others that were on the same action
remember the action. (I have been able to locate a few of
those that did serve with me, and two that were on patrol
with me and a few that were in my same hooch, and a few that
were in Can Tho with me).
(One good thing the smear merchants did was to motivate me
to run down witlessness. And I am being fairly successful in
doing so).
Yet it is strange how we all remember the same thing
somewhat differently: All trauma memories are built around
our own subjective perceptions, and that is the way things
are, and how humans are built Mr. Rau, especially during a
time of war. (As just one example, when that 122mm half dud
rocket landed within 15 feet of me, I remember it happening
as we were just walking out of the door of the Alamo at Cu
Chi, yet the two men that were with me at the time remember
us just about to walk out of the door and all of us hitting
the floor when it hit. In either case, my 15 feet estimate
was accurate -and this was not the other dud rocket that
apparently landed in the 25th Admin area that a former
student told me about, and I did not witness that event. I
have been subjected to multiple rocket/mortar attacks, but I
am positive I have only seen one half dud up close).
In my opinion there were only two medals that should have
been awarded in Vietnam: One for being lucky and one for not
being lucky. Trying to distinguish or determine valor
because of the amount of medals someone pandered for in
Vietnam is ridiculous. There were those than pandered for
medals (mostly officers that wanted them for their
promotions and careers) and there were those that did not
pander for them and just wanted to do their duty and then go
home and get the hell out of that **** hole. In most cases
BOTH types of Soldiers, at one time or another, demonstrated
true valor Mr. Rau, and not just those that pandered for and
thereby received medals.
I know the US Army has awarded the MOH to "officers" that
have, due to their incredible stupidity and ineptitude, got
90% of their men killed during needless exposure to enemy
fire or due to incredible stupidity. I don't know any
personally, but I have read about them, and I just shake my
head and remember some of the reasons why I decided to leave
the US Army for good. "The Right Way, the Wrong Way, and the
Army Way" - and that is how medals were awarded, and we both
know that is very true.
I also believed then and even more so now that we have a
serious problem with our Officer Corps, and a very serious
problem how they are selected and trained. I was aware of "
junior officers" that could not even read. They made it
through college and ROTC on a "psychical ed" scholarship,
and apparently someone else had taken all of their tests for
them. Give them a map, a command, and Charlie, and what you
had was a recipe for two things: (1) half or more of the
"officers" men killed or wounded, and (2) a Silver Star
medal for the imbecile officer that got all of those men
killed.
I am sure you disagree with my opinions, but you were not
where I was in Viet Nam, you were not in Viet Nam during the
1968 Tet offensive and counteroffensives months, and judging
by your "Gung Ho" bullshit and pro-Vietnam rhetoric, you
clearly did not see and do some of the things I did. (Not to
mention the fact you served in Viet Nam about one third of
the time I as I did). And of course you are bent to disagree
with everything I say regardless of how truthful you really
know it is. . . that is the only way you believe you can get
out of this briar patch unscathed, but deep down, you know I
am right.
I suspect you needed to spend some time outside of Special
Forces which I believe was a lark in the park compared to
straight leg infantry units Mr. Rau. ( I guess you already
know SF officers were passed over for promotion much more
often than regular officers, sorta like paying medics $10
less than regular soldiers during WWII don't you think)?
Playing "I want to win your hearts and minds" or " how much
bribe money or rice will it take for you to send your
village men out to become cannon fodder for me" is not
solidering Mr. Rau. . . And working with the Aussies,
(according to the Sydney Morning Herald) was a real "lark in
the park" as after their initial blunders they were pulled
so far back in the rear the Vung Tau whorehouses became
their front line. (And I have heard the same from some
former Aussie NCO's when I lived in Stanmore (NSW) so don't
start whining about the Aussies).
Now are you starting to understand why I rarely if ever have
serious conversations with anyone about Vietnam? I have not
said ten serious words to anyone outside of my immediate
family about my service in Viet Nam ever.
And do you now realize why I NEVER discuss autobiographical
events about my service with anyone outside of my immediate
family, other than of course to sarcastically quip or snarl
euphuisms (antitheses comments) satirical nonsense and/or
figures of speech like; "I was trained to take no prisoners
and eat the wounded" Or, "ask the CIA what I did in Vietnam"
or "I could tell you but then I would have to kill you" or
"I have no civilian skills, but if you need someone
assassinated at 1000 yards in the dead of night - I am your
man." You know, standard utter bullshit to get away from the
topic and move on to Blackjack, or Sports or something more
akin to rational thought than reminiscing about the number
one shithole in the world. (And PLEASE do not claim my above
satirical antitheses comment examples were "statements of
autobiographical fact about my military service in Vietnam"
like you usually do much to the chagrin of all rational
authors and readers everywhere).
BTW, speaking of sports, what the hell happen to the UOH
football team? Too many injuries I suspect.
I did not like my Vietnam experience Mr. Rau. I did not
enjoy it, I did not want to continue it, I did not want to
return to it, and I sure as hell did not respect the
Vietnamese nor their pathetic and cowardly Army and
Government. I extended my tours in Vietnam (twice regardless
of what Brooks says - he is wrong and I can prove it with
Morning Report entries now) because the Army asked me to
extend. (Not the entire Army of course but key high ranking
officers asked me to extend and accept duty in Can Tho).
Moreover, I would not wear, nor accept nor even get close
enough to smell any "medals" nor awards provided by that
cowardly and corrupt RVN government if they handed them to
me on a silver platter, replete with a bottle of Chevis
Regal and a good football game to watch, not to mention cry,
whine and pander for those RVN "medals" like many US
"officers" have.
In my humble opinion we should have never sent our troops to
Vietnam unless we were willing to win that war. Politically
correct wars can never be won, only lost, and although I was
not an "officer" set up on some lonely border and void of
any war stories, my memories of Viet Nam are more akin to a
bad nightmare than to some jungle garden of Eden with
beautiful and gentle people lollygagging through the saw
grass and the rubber plantations like you seem to remember.
Vietnam was a shithole Rau. Full of little evil shits that
lived in that hole. I hope they all stay there and continue
to play "who hid the commie" as they all deserve each other
as far as I am concerned.
I will address the rest of your post in another post. This
one is getting too long and I am remembering too much.
Another reason why I do not seriously discuss Vietnam.
Doug Grant (Tm)
> wrote in message
> news
ai-Uy-7A6B4B.04350711012008@news-server.hawaii.rr.com...> In article <ofidnR_nMoyRBRvanZ2dnUVZ_s2tnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "DGVREIMAN" <dgvreiman@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> My opinion:
>>
>> I must agree with most of what is written here. No one
>> wants to hear from anyone that uses fraud and false
>> claims
>> about their military service.
My opinion:
I must agree with most of what is written here. No one
wants to hear from anyone that uses fraud and false claims
about their military service. Especially someone that
defrauds the US Military or the VA for compensation or
benefits I know I do not. They should hang them out to
dry in my opinion.
That does not say that every "war story" I have ever heard
in a bar or otherwise was a lie. Claiming that everyone
that talks about their experiences in a war is a liar is not
something I can believe, nor should I believe. I have met
many vets that like to talk about their experiences just to
get them off their minds and chests, and to see if I
remember some of the same things they do. Are these men
imposters? Of course not, but we all must remember that we
all have "selective memories" when it comes to traumatic
events in our lives...and war is about as traumatic as it
gets.
But I am not about to paint very veteran that talks about
his war experiences a liar, and if I did I would need to
start with Audie Murphy and end with about a thousand books
written by veterans that saw and did things they remembered
that could not be verified by others. . . but were true.
Moreover, it is hard to prove a memory, especially 40 years
after the fact, but I am finding out it is possible as I
sift through all of the accounts of the dates of such
events, and I contact people I served with in the past, and
draw excerpts of my records and some of my training. I
am finding that many of the major events can be proved
today, if you wish to take the time and effort to do so.
But what about the other categories of imposters that use
fraud and false statements to bolster their own service at
the expense of real veterans? I believe real veterans
should address the harm that category of false heroes are
doing as well. Such as the harm they cause while painting
real veterans in a false light deliberately with the use of
fraud, forgeries and false accusations, and lies about their
military service and records.
I say that anyone that uses lies, fraud, false accusations
and forgeries to paint a veteran in a false light is worse
than those that use the same kind of fraud to lie about
their own service. These dregs are trying to falsely
bolster their own pathetic service by denigrating the
service of other real Veterans.
Yes there is another category of military imposters that
really should be held in contempt above all others, and that
is those imposters that falsely accuse others of being
imposters when they really were not...these are the dregs
that use fraud, forgeries, lies and false accusations to
denigrate real veterans, and to try to bolster their own
pathetic war time service by calling many that served
honorably and risked life and limb "rear echelon
mother****ers."
These are the real imposters, and fake "heroes" that bolster
and help write up their own medal recommendations, help
write the after action reports that falsely paint themselves
as heroes, and receive medals for what others do every day,
and receive decorations for "just showing up for duty." I
had the misfortune to witness many "officers" during the
Vietnam war receive their "medals" for precisely those
reasons stated above. And most of them were prone to lying
and using fraud and unethical claims, which does sound
familiar. (Note if a "commissioned officer" received a
medal in Vietnam you can believe he very likely had a hand
in the write up or at least the report that gained him the
medal - I personally saw dozens of these kinds of so-called
"valor awards" only to hear the NCO that was with the
officer during the action tell a different kind of story).
Not to mention those pathetic "officers" that actually
pander for medals from cowardly and defunct nations, like
RVN. Now who in the world would want to pander for and wear
a medal delivered by the most cowardly and corrupt nation
and Army in the world, the Republic of Vietnam? And who in
the world would want to name themselves after some of the
most cowardly and corrupt military officers in the history
of the world, ARVN officers? What some of these imposters
do is well beyond rational understanding. . .
These imposters (usually those that spend a very short time
in Vietnam but mysteriously obtain every medal possible -
sound familiar? John Kerry type officers abounded during the
Vietnam war in all branches) actually file document after
document to the Awards and Decorations division claiming
every medal from every source possible, and they are first
to waive, jingle and hold their "medals" up to the light so
they can somehow overcome their feelings of inferiority and
dishonor...I nor any of the men involved with me in Vietnam
ever respected anyone that pandered for medals, (especially
an officer) and I certainly do not respect those that need
to jingle them to prove their worth. And what is it about
all these "Airborne Badges" these same martinets like to
wear running up to their ear lobes?
The US Marines used to wear their underwear on their heads
and jump off tracks howling "I am an Airborne Ranger"
thereby reflecting their derision for the nonsense that
someone that can use a parachute is therefore some kind of
special soldier. Sure right. When I was in the
25thInfantry in Vietnam Airborne badges were the worst kind
of joke. "The jump that never failed to succeed" was the
general reference. Even guys I knew in the infantry that
were qualified to wear the Airborne badges would refuse to
wear them they were so ashamed of them.
Real Vietnam vets know the men that really deserve the
medals are the men that are still in Vietnam or never came
home alive. Everyone else did their duty, did what was
asked of them, and did what the military asked them to do,
and medals should not be awarded for simply doing your job.
We all drew the same amount of combat pay, and as far as I
am concerned, there were no "rear echelon mother****ers."
The real imposters that are doing the most harm are those
imposters and dregs that have the arrogance and inferiority
to call other veterans by that REMF name.
Another category of the worst kind of a military imposter
is those imposters that constantly brag about their "medals
and badges" when grannies on a Sunday afternoon earn more
"Airborne" badges than these jingling martinets have earned
for doing nothing more than a gaggle of grannies do for
sport every Sunday = and their badges are on order of the
"pink kotex" which should be the replacement badge for every
idiot that wears all those Airborne badges (has there ever
been a successful major jump in military history? Market
Garden - failure. D Day- failure. Operation Dumbo Drop
maybe, but that was just some guys bribing chieftains to
send their sons out to die as usual).
No doubt these pathetic American "Russian Colonels" who wear
their medals down to their navels will find a way to bring
up "medals" in every post or in every newsgroup, and wail
and cry and whine that anyone that did not pander and cry
for medals like they did is some kind of "rear echelon
mother****er" or "imposter" - when the truth is real
soldiers and Marines do not pander and whine for medals, and
those that were really in combat and under fire know the
reason why. The fact is we were all scared shitless, but we
still did our jobs anyway, and we all know there really are
no real heroes, just those that were lucky enough to get out
alive and those that did not.
I understand why officers beg, cry, whine and pander for
medals as they believe those medals will help their future
promotions and careers. Fine, we NCO's all knew the score
in that regard and we allowed these junior officers to
receive their underserved "medals for valor" each time they
wrote up their own accounts of their so-called "bravery" . .
.. which BTW enlisted men did every day and were lucky to get
hot chow for doing so.
But now since the war is over, please, PLEASE stop waiving,
talking about, jingling and brandishing all those "medals of
valor" and thereby falsely inflating the values of the
officers that received them. We all know the truth about
how many of those medals were awarded to officers in
Vietnam, and it sure as hell does not bear well now to try
and change that truth into some kind of fiction representing
real valor.
When I was in the military I never met a junior officer with
a chest full of medals that I liked, nor trusted, nor
respected, and in each case I was proved right. The really
good officers that did really brave (some would call stupid)
things never made it back, and they had as much distain for
those officers that pandered for all those medals as I did.
Real soldiers do not pander for medals, and they do not brag
about them, and they do not berate others for not pandering
for medals they same as they did. Period. End of Story.
And it is impossible for anyone to really know what another
Vet did or did not do in a War, not unless he was assigned
with him and rode in his pocket during the entire time he
was in that war. Claims otherwise are akin to claims of
"soothsaying" and "mind reading" and "reading the entrails
of small animals" and the same can be said for what an
author was thinking in context when he wrote anything, about
war or not. Any claim to the contrary is a complete and
total fraud. No one has the right nor the knowledge to
judge another real veteran, nor fraudulently claim what he
knows he did is somehow a lie. Those false accusations are
for smear and fraud merchants and con men, not for real
veterans.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Dai Uy" <
Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com
> wrote in message
news
ai-Uy-1665AC.05440209012008@news-server.hawaii.rr.com...>
>
> Finally. We agree.
Doug's First Rebuttal:
(Not a copyrighted article).
Smear Merchant Disclaimer: Please note this article (the
same as all of my past articles and exchanges with posters)
represents an editorial on contemporary issues and events -
my opinion. Nothing in this article represents in any manner
any asseveration of biographical fact, nor is about,
directed toward or against any particular person - other
than those specifically mentioned herein. If any person
finds this post personally annoying, abusive, defaming or
otherwise disturbing, please notify me of your specific
reasons for annoyance via email at legalcoach@comcast.net.
If we find your detailed objections reasonable (considering
the "reasonable person" doctrine and case law) we will then
remove this post, or the offending passages contained
therein, from the Google archive, publicly apologize and
retract. My intent is not to annoy, abuse, humiliate, or in
any way cause anyone emotional harm by posting on USENET or
elsewhere. Please note that defending myself from harassment
and obloquy with rebuttal posts has been deemed a "lawful
and legitimate" publication by my legal counsel. If I am not
attacked, defamed or harassed, or my copyrighted articles
not interrupted nor infringed upon, I clearly do not have a
reason to respond with a rebuttal. Please also note that I
intend to notify any and all ISP's and web hosts of any
annoying or calumnious post, web site or other similar
entity about me after I give the offender an opportunity to
retract, apologize and remove said post from the Google
archive).
Rebuttal and Response Invited by Dai Uy:
Although it is clear you are up to your typical vitriol,
false accusations and general defamation tactics, I am glad
that we finally agree on something. Especially the part
about how medals were handed out to officers during the
Vietnam war for what enlisted men did every day. You are
improving and your first step to rehabilitation is an
admission you have been wrong.
But enough congratulations for your sudden revelation of
truth. However, due to your recent epiphany in respect to
the truths I post, I will address your additional comments
responsibly, as if you are truly a rational person
sometimes, as your acknowledgement of the truth above just
might indicate:
In respect to searching out and exposing men without valor,
as you seem to believe is important, I do have a question
for you:
Comparing someone like John Kerry that received a tiny
scratch (probably self-inflicted) and thereby received the
Order of the Purple Heart Medal (not card, medal) compared
to someone that due to exposure to Agent Orange or Malaria,
and thereby died of Cancer or Fever or was sick for life and
did not receive a Purple Heart Medal, are you claiming that
someone like Kerry possessed and demonstrated more "valor"
because he received the Purple Heart Medal for his scratch
than a soldier that was inflicted with the Agent Orange or
Malaria? And/or do you believe the person that suffered the
reaction to Agent Orange was a "rear echelon mother****er"
as you have dubbed all those that did not have an
Infantryman's MOS, and John Kerry was a "hero?"
How about those "rear echelon mother****ers" (your words not
mine) that went out on RF patrols, volunteered for combat
duty, and guarded perimeters and fire bases dozens of times
yet never received a major wound, compared to a Lieutenant
that went out on a single patrol, received a tiny piece of
shrapnel in his foot, and received the Order of the Purple
Heart Medal (not card, medal) and the Sliver Star, and was
sent home due to his wound? Which solider was more
"valorous?" The trooper that was smart enough to avoid
getting killed or wounded seriously after dozens of combat
patrols or suffering though enemy fire on several occasions,
or the dumb-ass Lieutenant that exposed himself
unnecessarily to fire and received a tiny wound and got half
of his platoon killed or wounded in the process, and
received a Purple Heart Medal for the wound, and a Silver
Star because half of his platoon ended up killed or wounded?
Who was the real "hero" here Mr. Rau? The Trooper or the
Lieutenant?
The US Army, combat, and enemy fire were not and are not
"linear" Mr. Rau. Valor, death, disease, wounds and killing
are all a part of war, and nothing about war is unfogged,
nor travels in a straight and perceivable line that we all
can equally fathom and discern. One man's memories might be
completely different from another's although they served in
the same squad during their entire tour of duty.
We have seen these glaring contradictions in respect to the
Swift Boat Vets, and I have recently been digging out After
Action reports that I know were written up by the officer
that seemed to be the Hero of that action, but that version
was not the way I and others that were on the same action
remember the action. (I have been able to locate a few of
those that did serve with me, and two that were on patrol
with me and a few that were in my same hooch, and a few that
were in Can Tho with me).
(One good thing the smear merchants did was to motivate me
to run down witlessness. And I am being fairly successful in
doing so).
Yet it is strange how we all remember the same thing
somewhat differently: All trauma memories are built around
our own subjective perceptions, and that is the way things
are, and how humans are built Mr. Rau, especially during a
time of war. (As just one example, when that 122mm half dud
rocket landed within 15 feet of me, I remember it happening
as we were just walking out of the door of the Alamo at Cu
Chi, yet the two men that were with me at the time remember
us just about to walk out of the door and all of us hitting
the floor when it hit. In either case, my 15 feet estimate
was accurate -and this was not the other dud rocket that
apparently landed in the 25th Admin area that a former
student told me about, and I did not witness that event. I
have been subjected to multiple rocket/mortar attacks, but I
am positive I have only seen one half dud up close).
In my opinion there were only two medals that should have
been awarded in Vietnam: One for being lucky and one for not
being lucky. Trying to distinguish or determine valor
because of the amount of medals someone pandered for in
Vietnam is ridiculous. There were those than pandered for
medals (mostly officers that wanted them for their
promotions and careers) and there were those that did not
pander for them and just wanted to do their duty and then go
home and get the hell out of that **** hole. In most cases
BOTH types of Soldiers, at one time or another, demonstrated
true valor Mr. Rau, and not just those that pandered for and
thereby received medals.
I know the US Army has awarded the MOH to "officers" that
have, due to their incredible stupidity and ineptitude, got
90% of their men killed during needless exposure to enemy
fire or due to incredible stupidity. I don't know any
personally, but I have read about them, and I just shake my
head and remember some of the reasons why I decided to leave
the US Army for good. "The Right Way, the Wrong Way, and the
Army Way" - and that is how medals were awarded, and we both
know that is very true.
I also believed then and even more so now that we have a
serious problem with our Officer Corps, and a very serious
problem how they are selected and trained. I was aware of "
junior officers" that could not even read. They made it
through college and ROTC on a "psychical ed" scholarship,
and apparently someone else had taken all of their tests for
them. Give them a map, a command, and Charlie, and what you
had was a recipe for two things: (1) half or more of the
"officers" men killed or wounded, and (2) a Silver Star
medal for the imbecile officer that got all of those men
killed.
I am sure you disagree with my opinions, but you were not
where I was in Viet Nam, you were not in Viet Nam during the
1968 Tet offensive and counteroffensives months, and judging
by your "Gung Ho" bullshit and pro-Vietnam rhetoric, you
clearly did not see and do some of the things I did. (Not to
mention the fact you served in Viet Nam about one third of
the time I as I did). And of course you are bent to disagree
with everything I say regardless of how truthful you really
know it is. . . that is the only way you believe you can get
out of this briar patch unscathed, but deep down, you know I
am right.
I suspect you needed to spend some time outside of Special
Forces which I believe was a lark in the park compared to
straight leg infantry units Mr. Rau. ( I guess you already
know SF officers were passed over for promotion much more
often than regular officers, sorta like paying medics $10
less than regular soldiers during WWII don't you think)?
Playing "I want to win your hearts and minds" or " how much
bribe money or rice will it take for you to send your
village men out to become cannon fodder for me" is not
solidering Mr. Rau. . . And working with the Aussies,
(according to the Sydney Morning Herald) was a real "lark in
the park" as after their initial blunders they were pulled
so far back in the rear the Vung Tau whorehouses became
their front line. (And I have heard the same from some
former Aussie NCO's when I lived in Stanmore (NSW) so don't
start whining about the Aussies).
Now are you starting to understand why I rarely if ever have
serious conversations with anyone about Vietnam? I have not
said ten serious words to anyone outside of my immediate
family about my service in Viet Nam ever.
And do you now realize why I NEVER discuss autobiographical
events about my service with anyone outside of my immediate
family, other than of course to sarcastically quip or snarl
euphuisms (antitheses comments) satirical nonsense and/or
figures of speech like; "I was trained to take no prisoners
and eat the wounded" Or, "ask the CIA what I did in Vietnam"
or "I could tell you but then I would have to kill you" or
"I have no civilian skills, but if you need someone
assassinated at 1000 yards in the dead of night - I am your
man." You know, standard utter bullshit to get away from the
topic and move on to Blackjack, or Sports or something more
akin to rational thought than reminiscing about the number
one shithole in the world. (And PLEASE do not claim my above
satirical antitheses comment examples were "statements of
autobiographical fact about my military service in Vietnam"
like you usually do much to the chagrin of all rational
authors and readers everywhere).
BTW, speaking of sports, what the hell happen to the UOH
football team? Too many injuries I suspect.
I did not like my Vietnam experience Mr. Rau. I did not
enjoy it, I did not want to continue it, I did not want to
return to it, and I sure as hell did not respect the
Vietnamese nor their pathetic and cowardly Army and
Government. I extended my tours in Vietnam (twice regardless
of what Brooks says - he is wrong and I can prove it with
Morning Report entries now) because the Army asked me to
extend. (Not the entire Army of course but key high ranking
officers asked me to extend and accept duty in Can Tho).
Moreover, I would not wear, nor accept nor even get close
enough to smell any "medals" nor awards provided by that
cowardly and corrupt RVN government if they handed them to
me on a silver platter, replete with a bottle of Chevis
Regal and a good football game to watch, not to mention cry,
whine and pander for those RVN "medals" like many US
"officers" have.
In my humble opinion we should have never sent our troops to
Vietnam unless we were willing to win that war. Politically
correct wars can never be won, only lost, and although I was
not an "officer" set up on some lonely border and void of
any war stories, my memories of Viet Nam are more akin to a
bad nightmare than to some jungle garden of Eden with
beautiful and gentle people lollygagging through the saw
grass and the rubber plantations like you seem to remember.
Vietnam was a shithole Rau. Full of little evil shits that
lived in that hole. I hope they all stay there and continue
to play "who hid the commie" as they all deserve each other
as far as I am concerned.
I will address the rest of your post in another post. This
one is getting too long and I am remembering too much.
Another reason why I do not seriously discuss Vietnam.
Doug Grant (Tm)