What makes a "war hero"?

by: Thurman Hart

Thu Jul 24, 2008 at 06:39:41 PM EDT

Just behind this select group of veterans are those designated as "combat veterans".  These are men and women who served under direct fire of the enemy.  It doesn't mean that they are less worthy of respect than those designated "heroes" - it just means that their experience did not call for the same level of sacrifice and willingness to throw one's body into danger.  Al Gore is such a veteran.

There is a larger group of veterans who served, but never were deployed into combat.  Again, their service is just as honorable and it is no slight to them to say that they are not "combat veterans" or "heroes".  It is simply an accurate description of their service.  George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, to name two, are in this group.

This matters - this differentiation.  To blur the line between a veteran and a combat veteran is to say that actually being shot at is no different than, say, turning wrenches at the depot in Wisconsin.  

Meritorious Service Medal
Joint Service Commendation Medal
Joint Service Achievement Medal
Navy Commendation Medal (with V designator)
"several" Navy Achievement Medals
Combat Action Ribbon
Liberation of Kuwait Medal

There are two of those awards that stand out in my attention: the V designator of the Navy Commendation Medal and the Combat Action Ribbon (CAR).  The reason they stand out is that they specifically designate the recipient as having engaged in combat.

Myers served on two ships - the USS Mount Whitney and the USS Bunker Hill.  Of the two, only the Bunker Hill has been authorized to wear the CAR.  I'm not protesting the fact that Myers is claiming to have awards to which he is entitled.  But there's this little thing about the CAR:

The Combat Action Ribbon (CAR) is a personal military decoration of the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps, and which is awarded to those who, in any grade including and below that of a Captain in the Navy (or Colonel in the Marine Corps), have actively participated in ground or surface combat. The Combat Action Ribbon is also awarded to members of the United States Coast Guard when operating under the control of the Navy.

For that award to be valid, the men of the Bunker Hill must have engaged in ground or surface combat.  In actuality, the CAR was awarded through a waiver of policy by the Secretary of the Navy.  In other words, the men of the Bunker Hill was allowed to wear this ribbon although they had never actually seen combat.  What were they doing?

Support duty:

From November 1990 through March 1991, BUNKER HILL was deployed to the Arabian Gulf in support of Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The ship directed the tactical employment of 26 ships and over 300 combat aircraft from six nations. BUNKER HILL also launched a total of 28 Tomahawk cruise missiles against targets in Iraq. The cruiser was awarded the Navy Unit Commendation, the Combat Action Ribbon, and the Kuwait Liberation Medal for its exceptional performance. In July 1991, BUNKER HILL escorted the USS MIDWAY to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii for a turnover with USS INDEPENDENCE (CV 62).

To be fair, the Bunker Hill also "lobbed a few missiles":

In November 1990, Bunker Hill sailed in support of Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm and served as the multinational Air Warfare Commander (AAWC) and as one of the first ships to launch a Tomhawk Land Attack Cruise Missile against Iraqi targets.

Is this surface or ground combat?  It seems unlikely.  For comparison, my ship, the USS Saipan was involved in OPERATION: SHARP EDGE at roughly the same time.  The marines, and a few sailors, who actually landed at the US Embassy as we evactuated personnel were awarded the CAR - but not the entire ship.  And rightly so.  I was never in combat.

But neither was Chris Myers.  It is one thing for a civilian to conflate "veteran" with "combat veteran".  It is quite another thing for someone who has actually been there to do it.  He is not merely obscuring the line - he is blatantly walking across it and outright lying about his experience:

"As a veteran myself, I have literally walked in the boots of these brave men and women who have defended our freedoms in the past and continue to do so today.

No, like me, you served on board a Navy ship.  You never kicked down a door and tried to determine if the scared Iraqi was tossing a coffee cup or grenade.  You never watched the truck just ahead or behind you disappear into smoke and flame and feel that sickening thumping in your guts because you knew you just lost a couple of your best friends.  I am fortunate that I never have, either.  But I do not dare refer to myself as a "combat veteran".  You desecrate the memory of my grandfather and every man and woman in unform who has stood with bullets whistling by and shrapnel filling the air.

You are authorized to wear the Combat Action Ribbon because you served on a ship that was excepted from Navy policy.  Why are you authorized to wear a V designator that is supposed to denote valor in combat?  If it was honestly deserved, then you can display on your website the actual letter of award that comes along with the medal.

If not - and I suspect it wasn't because your ship was never engaged in actual combat and deprived you of the opportunity to be "valourous in combat" - then you should have the decency to quit calling yourself a "decorated combat veteran".  There is no dishonor in simplly saying you are a "decorated veteran".  There is a world of dishonor in claiming combat veteran status - whether decorated or not - when it is not deserved.