Should a Vietnam Veteran just be call a Veteran?

SGT Scott Bell — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:40:42 -0400

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Sep 4 at 2015 10:47 AM

SGT Ben Keen — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:47:32 -0400

Each era of Veteran classifies him or herself as a Veteran of that era. It is a way to quickly identify those that may have shared experiences. So why not refer to them as Vietnam Veterans?

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 10:48 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:48:49 -0400

Yes and no. I think every veteran should just be called a veteran. However every war will have veterans who associate more with each other than the veterans of other wars. I don't see in any harm in being a veteran and being a member of a group of Vietnam veterans.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Sep 4 at 2015 10:54 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:54:20 -0400

"just"?
First you are a Veteran, then you are a Conflict Specific Veteran, then you are a Combat Specific, Conflict Specific Veteran, then you are a MOS Specific, Combat Specific, Conflict Specific Veteran .... and so on, and so on, an so on

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 4 at 2015 11:00 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 11:00:06 -0400

Nope. Serving in Vietnam was an incredible hardship. Veteran can be applied to the guys who hid from the war in the reserves or guard. Vietnam vet is a badge of honor. Wear it proudly.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Sep 4 at 2015 11:10 AM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 11:10:34 -0400

This has been asked before of Vietnam Vets and most have said they just preferred being called Vets.... Although there's always some who still have an issue with how they were treated when they returned from Vietnam. And they don't like anyone who served during the "Nam" years 1960 - 1975 who call themselves Vietnam Vets, & were not in country but were stationed stateside or in another foreign country..

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Sep 4 at 2015 11:18 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 11:18:22 -0400

Do we need "Caveats" to our Service?

The Department of Veterans Affairs does it as a matter of Administration, because frankly it's "pragmatic." Veterans of certain "Conflicts" and "Eras" have conditions and are of ages that make treatment(s) easier if you keep them in the same "bucket" as all the other Veterans of the same Conflict/Era. Basically, it's just a simple means of organization.

Now, when we start applying "specialness" to any of these Caveats, we run into problems. There's nothing wrong with being proud of our Service. Nothing at all. But when we start comparing our Service to the Service of other vets... that's a mudhole I don't want to jump into.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 12:31 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 12:31:01 -0400

If you served, you are a veteran. If you served in Vietnam, you are veteran, but also a Vietnam veteran. If you served in Iraq, you are veteran, but also an Iraq veteran. If you served in Desert Storm, you are a veteran, but also a Desert Storm veteran. Same for Afghanistan, Korea, WWII, etc. If you would be condescending enough to dismiss an aged WWII veteran as just a "veteran", then sure. Dismiss the hardships specific to Vietnam. Personally, I won't do it. Too much respect.

Response by SGT William Howell made Sep 4 at 2015 1:03 PM

SGT William Howell — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:03:10 -0400

Absolutely not! This country turned our backs on these heroes for decades. Then the movies in the 80's made them all look like a bunch of drug crazed psychos. They have finally got the recognition they deserve as Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen.

When one of these vets says they are a Vietnam Vet they need to be proud of that honor. Just as I am proud to be able to stand next to them.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Sep 4 at 2015 1:17 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:17:38 -0400

He's a veteran the same as every other veteran from every other conflict. He rogered up to the call, served, and went home. Is a Nam vet better than a Revolutionary war or WW1 vet? Who had more suck than the other? When we start labeling each other as more special than the other by where we fought, then we've lost and all we're having is a d*ck measuring contest. I'm guilty of doing this, but in the end, we all served somewhere somehow. Be proud of that.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Sep 4 at 2015 1:21 PM

MCPO Roger Collins — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:21:34 -0400

No, they can have it both ways. No single group was vilified as they were during and after the VN WAR. I respect all combat vets, but these guys took in in the *** for the nation and received spit and insults. JMHO from a Viet Nam ERA vet.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Sep 8 at 2015 8:02 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 08:02:49 -0400

No. They are veterans of the Vietnam war

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Sep 6 at 2016 11:09 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 23:09:27 -0400

We have surviving Vets from several wars, nothing wrong with identifying which crap fest they were in.

Response by Col Dona Marie Iversen made Sep 6 at 2016 11:11 PM

Col Dona Marie Iversen — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 23:11:39 -0400

I believe the Vietnam vets had the worse homecoming, they deserve extra special support from us.