To a degree, war has gotten to be impersonal. Better weapons mean that you can kill someone miles away. It's very different to kill somebody hand to hand, and much more personal.

Still, I hate the "I was more miserable than you" game. No one wins.

Wars are tragedies that are to be avoided.

Well cmon really? Were you in Fallujah 1 or 2? Because close hand to hand combat and extreme MOUT were in full effect there and thats pretty much exactly what it came down to when our pos was in a partially collapsed house previously shelled by M1s and Abrams directly across from another partially collapsed house occupied by Syrians and Chechens. When the ammo ran out you charged the windows and doors with knives, leathermans and whatever sharp object you had in order to reduce the threat.

Agreed, over 40,000 million died in that war. But to the point of the article, I think some of the veteran talk is the age old "my scar is bigger than your scar" talk. Human nature. One thing is for certain though, today's soldiers are doing more tours than the past ones with 4 and even 5 tours under many of their belts. That alone is not easy.

Older generations had harder lives in a lot of ways and it may have made them tougher. But it's not contest, ya know? And I'll bet most would not wish a lot of those hardships on their children.

Of course older Vets had it harder. They had far less programs in terms of health care and psychological support as well as tax breaks for businesses who higher vets. Vets have it pretty damn easy today. Of course vets prior to WWII had it harder than those vets because they didn't have things like the GI bill.

This entire argument is moot really. It's like stating that a cave man had a harder life than we do today. Well no sh!t. They lived in a cave, slept on dirt and animal skins and had to hunt for all their food. Tell me something I don't know. However modern vets have something in common with WWII vets. People recognize them as heroes. As opposed to Vietnam vets, who were treated like dirt.

The older soldiers had it clearly tougher in one respect only: the crude battlefield medical technology. All wounds hurt the same and do the same damage. The advent of immediate treatment and evacuation of casualties, however, has saved a lot of suffering and death.

Did somebody dare criticize the new Warrior Princess?

The only vetrans that had it harder than the others are the ones that never returned.

My father fought in World War II. My friends fought in Vietnam. My son's friends fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.

All three groups came home with issues. My father's generation did not talk about it. All of the WWII veterans I came in contact with locked up their experiences and did not talk about them. That was the '50's. During that era, there seemed to be an unconscious agreement that we do not talk about anything unpleasant. Alcohol was one major 'escape' -- but as children we were told not to bother Uncle ______, who had been drinking -- "He's not feeling well" was what we were told.

My friends fought in an unpopular war. Many were drafted. Many had surreal experiences akin to Apocalypse Now. Marijuana was a mainstay. Harder drugs mitigated the fear, the confusion, the sense of unreality. Returning home, they faced apathy and sometimes even condemnation from those who could not separate the people from the politics. There was an awareness that something was very wrong for a lot of the veterans, but not a whole lot of help was offered to integrate back into our society.

My son's friends were engaged in different aspects of both Iraq and Afghanistan. Marines. On the ground, in the intelligence office, still dealing with the fear and the uncertainty and the reality of what they were doing. Fortunately, none of them sustained physical injury. They are still finding their way back into mainstream America. I truly hope that if they need assistance, they will be able to receive it.

I hope that as our military commitments overseas decrease, the resources of time, energy and funding will go to helping veterans pick up their lives and move ahead with our support. NOT plying them with pills, but actually helping them reconstruct their lives in a healthy and satisfying way.

All veterans should have had that. WWII was a conspiracy of silence; Vietnam was a conspiracy of apathy; we can't change history but we can make it different for today's vets.

Hard to say which war experience was "harder" or "easier".

You could drink and hook up (with professionals) in wars up through Vietnam, which would definitely make the environment more positive and easier to handle for most soldiers.

Then again, the casualty rates have steadily gone down since Korea, so that's probably the bottom-line metric.

I think we have it a little bit better nowadays, but my opinion is less valuable than an Army infantry guy's.

Oh, and the Post 9/11 GI bill is pretty awesome too.

As an aging vet, I find it easy to criticize the treatment of the modern soldier. After Vietnam, some of us were literally spit on! You didn't talk with any "civilians" about your experiences. You would barely talk to your fellow vets. At the VA, I've seen the young guys coming in with fresh scars. They receive a MASSIVE amount of sympathy and admiration. AND, I have to admit, I feel a twinge of envy.

As for the "harder for us" feeling. It IS like comparing apples to oranges. When the bullets fly and the bombs go off, every vet will be a brother!

if i had to say the toughest war i would have say it is a toss up between the civil war and WW1.I know i would have a hard time standing there and blasting away like the civil war not to mention their medical survival rate of wounded.WW1 is hard to imagine life in the trenches with artillery,gas and machine guns day in and day out.Living in the same trench with the same death everyday for years,no way.better to die going over the top than rot in a trench.At least in WW2 you were on the move.

Actually, WWI was pretty terrible, too: In the Bruslov offensive, in what is now the Ukraine, between June and Sept. 1916 there were 1,600,000 killed. In the Battle of the Somme, also in WW!, between July and November there were over 1,100,000 killed. WWI was also infamous for the use of gas, which resulted in horrible lung injuries as well as blindness.

ww 2 vets will go down in history as the greatest generation since the revolutionary war. I have a older friend, much older, who was in Bastone ,during the battle of the bulge, his son is a good friend; every now and then he will say something about that time, (once he told a story of using dead fellow solders as sandbags, since they were frozen solid(he still hates the cold)

but think about our revolutionary war , the solders that died left family's to fend for themselves, no widow pension, they were paid in Continental dollars which were worthless, if you lost a arm leg ,foot hand,eye, you had to carry on to care for your family, no help from the government.

yes our troops today have it much better, I am glad for that.

If one wants an assessment of "who had it worse", look no farther than the death tolls for each conflict. WWII lost more troops in a few days than all of the Vietnam War. As such, we have lost fewer still in Iraq and Afghanistan than Vietnam in over twice the time.

I think if you see a friend killed, it is traumatic. I believe it is lifechanging to see most of your friends killed. Just a thought.

If you want to get technical, the Civil War guys were in the worst position. They had wholesale slaughter and didn't have the medical technology or resources to treat even the most simple gunshot wound effectively. I can't imagine the agony they went through. If they were still around, I think they would have a legitimate argument that they had it worst.

Morrigan

That is because what they may have done to survive or keep their buddies alive may be unspeakable.

My family has fought in every action since the Revolutionary War. One grandfather lost a hand in WWI. My father and several uncles were wounded in WWII. My brother and several cousins fought, and some died, in Vietnam. My son-in-law and several second cousins have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have never heard any of them claim to have it harder than any other. In truth, many, many Americans have sacrificed and too many have given all. To each of those and their families, the price was precious and is something for us to be grateful for, not something to be weighed against the sacrifice of another by degrees.

My son or daughter died harder than yours?????

With the bull@!$%# elections over ... who can the news pit against each other ...

SICK OF IT .................

NO Sam WW1 was even worse,even though they were in it a shorter time.They had war technology that they had no idea of what the hell they were doing with or really even how to operate!

WW1 was the real beginning of modern warfare!

Especially with weapons like mustard Gas!

Skeptic 7, I think you're right about WW1 being tough. Not only the gas (which helped my grandfather die a slow and horrible death drowning from fluid in his lungs) there was also the massive shift from an agrarian society to an industrial mechanized one. The shock of it would have been an unimaginable horror. Keats wrote about it...the story Lord of the Rings also had its roots there.

I think there are many things that can account for these feelings -- some are true, some merely perceptions.

As far as actual combat is concerned. I don't believe any one particular group had it "easier" or "harder" than another. The only mitigating factor now, which I believed someone mentioned earlier, is medical care. A wounded soldier now has it "better" because he or she can be immediately treated on the "battlefield" and then evacuated for more intensive care. No longer is an infection from a musket ball wound pretty much a death sentence. But I don't think that actual close combat is any more or less traumatizing whether it occurred against the Gauls, Germans, VC, or militants/terrorists.

I do believe that the "aftercare" of veterans has greatly improved. I think that veterans of today have it better than in the past. This is everything from PTSD and other medical treatment to the (marvelous) GI bill (yes, I have a twinge of envy here myself). But isn't this really a good thing? Doesn't it show we are improving the way we care for our troops?

I think the after care (and respect) for women veterans is truly improved. I had a female friend wounded in Vietnam. She was a naval corpsman. As a female, she was not supposed to go into combat, but one day there was no one else. So she went and got wounded. It took her 25 years to receive a Purple Heart and she always had difficulty with the VA.

War is hell and while you're there it doesn't really matter which particular corner you inhabit.

I think I have to agree with FrankLtree. In the civil war, if you were wounded, you might as well be dead. I believe that a vast majority of those wounded died from sepsis and infection as there was almost no knowledge about treatment of wounds other than pull out the slug and slap on a bandage.

Again though, I think it comes down to an argument as to which level of Hell is the hottest.

yet another Bull sh-it story by NBC. Which vets said that? One guy in Somewhere USA? I served in Vietnam and I don't think that any person who actually served would tell another vet that...I sure wouldn't. They just like to stir the crap here for some reason.

I hate the friggin' censor bot on here. What a joke.

Anybody who says the war in Afghanistan is the toughest, is a liar and misinformed!

The Japanese were worse. Their arrogance resulted in the greatest measures to stop violence in the name of civilization.. The Nazi's didn't help much either...

Some societies don't offer much good.. That's them..

life is hard - for all vets

.

War is hell... (General Sherman of Civil War)

Joe, I couldn't agree more, but I do remember coming home and listening to WWII vets tell me how easy my tour was. Maybe it was, I know that unlike vets today and in WWII, I was only required to do one tour and when it was time to get out, there wasn't anything like stoploss, or what ever they call it when the army retains you against your will after your service contract is up. Every generation is different, what I really see in this article is a setup to cut vet benefits to the current group in the upcoming session by saying they've had it easy.

I thought that we vets are all brothers. I didn't realize it was a contest.

I am happy to see our soldiers getting hot meals every day. I have a photograph of my husband in Vietnam eating cold corn out of a can. That was his Christmas dinner.

I think this is more about things being different today than being tougher or harder.

Personally I couldn't imagine standing just yards from your foe who is firing huge chunks of lead at you while your trying to reload your rifle. Or walking in a straight line into a fortified position like Picketts charge at Gettysburg.

Joe -- if you don't like NBC and Newsvine, why don't you go elsewhere? Pretty simple solution to your problem.

However "easy" my combat tour was, it is something that 95+% of the population cannot imagine because they haven't ever served in any branch of service. Try spending nearly 5 months in a tent in the Iraqi desert near the Iranian border and see how "easy" it is (the zippers on the tent entrances wore out and at the end, did NOTHING to keep the 120+ degree daytime desert heat, amplified by the Scirocco's or desert winds, out). Those who preceded us had it even harder with no A/C in their tents and those who replaced us had it easier because CHU's (basically subdivided trailers) were installed (we had them for our final two months in the desert, which would have been easier even in the tents since the summer heat had subsided). In many ways it's a matter of perspective but also a matter of luck in your combat assignment as to how "hard" your combat experience is or was.

I've had some issues with Vietnam Vets in the past, but that was due to basic disrespect that I won't tolerate without challenge from ANYONE. I served with plenty of Vietnam Vets in the Navy and am proud of the service of all I served with, regardless of what era they started in.

Dual Service (U.S. Navy, U.S. Army), Combat (2BCT 1AD OIF 08-09) Veteran.

As a vietnam vet, I think that todays "problems" stem from the modern soldier not really being allowed to fight the battle- if the Taliban stops firing we are required to also- our people are supposed to be cops, farmers, reconstruction workers, almost anything but soldiers, and if they screw up they are criticized by some Monday morning quarterback 10,000 miles away. The kids are responsible for everything , have control of nothing, and feel like every move they make is wrong. In Vietnam we may have gotten spit on when we got home, but we could actually kill the other guy without worrying about some lawsuit, the ACLU, or Congress stabbing us in the back.

This is an AWFUL article meant to do NOTHING but again pit one group against another. Where does one actually GO to hear veterans railing on each other? They don't. THey are ALL veterans and respect each other as brothers. But a so-called journalist can write a story to make it appear as if they do. I think news people should stick to real news, instead of writing pieces with no purpose other than stirring up dissension. Try bringing people together instead of trying to rip them apart!

I think part of this is that older veterans look at what today's soldiers go through with experienced eyes. They don't realize that their own experiences were so difficult because they were younger and less experienced when they had them, as are the young soldiers of today. It applies to all areas of life where older people believe they had it more difficult than younger ones. I'm sure there's more to it than that, but I think that's a factor.

My dad was in WW2, my husband was in Nam. My husband told of coming home on R&R-- also told of being able to go to the club while in camp between tours of going out into the boonies. A lot different from WW2. There was no R&R. My dad was in the Philippines when WW2 broke out. He was released from prison camp-- after being a POW for 39 months-- in August 1945. The war in the European Theater was considered more important, so that is where the concentration of equipment and troops went. The Japanese were more brutal than the Germans to those in their prisoner of war camps.

Those fighting today get to come home every once in a while-- is it rotation every year or so. There was no such thing in WW2.

But all the people who come into the vet center where I volunteer are "my guys" regardless of the war in which they fought-- and regardless whether they are male or female combat vets. I love them all-- and honor them all. They all have been through hell.

A number of men in my family served through these wars. Thanks to them and all of you who served.

All wars get personal.

I think physically WW2 and Vietnam vets had it harder than our "Post 9-11" troops.

I think mentally Vietnam and "Post 9-11" vets had it harder. Its much worse not having an end game and not knowing who your enemy is.

Vietnam was the hardest for our troops and they got the worst treatment when they got back to the States. Shame to all who did treated them so.

But, to our old war vets saying "We had it harder", I'd say thats a horribly bold statement to make given we don't choose the battles were given, the enemy does. Try patrolling the same muhalla's, same streets, same IED/EFP prone areas 2-3 times a day, every day for 15 months with no real task and purpose. Our BN lost 24 men in 15 months. Half of those burned to death in a vehicle. The other half, mixed IED/EFP wounds, snipers and general gunfire.

In my opinion, WWI would have been far worse than WWII. But I just don't see any point in arguing which vets may have had it tougher. You might as well compare apples to orangutangs. Everything is relative to the time it happened in. The isolation from home that vets felt up to and through Vietnam would have been severe. As far as the World Wars are concerned, there really weren't much in the way of tours or other forms of duty rotations; you just went and stayed until you won, lost, died, or came home disabled. The kind of enemy faced in Iraq and Afghanistan are more difficult in many ways, as are the rules of engagement. The sheer horror of Vietnam and Korea stand above all others. The Civil War wasn't exactly a cakewalk, either. There is just no realistic way to compare these things, and I just think to serve is to serve, and it's always tough. My hat's off to all veteran's and if I meet ya I'll buy ya a beer or six.

The average amount of combat days for a WW2 soldier was around 30 days. The average amount of combat for today's soldier is around 24 months - no contest as to which group faced more mental combat fatigue.

Russia did the majority of the heavy combat in WW2. My father-in-law saw no combat in WW2 - but boy does he play the Veteran role to the hilt...he has all the fancy hats...lmao!

My uncle, a fighter pilot, took us to the VFW for what he thought was the traditional Friday night fish fry - the old days at the VFW are long gone, they were serving frozen fish sticks and fries. I felt so badly for him - the place had maybe 8 people in it - all at the bar, I guess they have cheap booze.

The majority of WW2 soldiers were High School drop outs - the jobs selection they had back then was nothing like the jobs we have now - half of the males back then were pumping gas (or in some way working in the fuel/car business). My father-in-law went to work for the city of Phoenix on a work crew - he couldn't hack it and at the first opportunity he applied for another job - being the Book Mobile dude...yep, he's a bad ass alright.

Almost forgot - a large number of Vets also frequented the Red Light districts when deployed over seas - even Christian men have told me stories about there adventures (most were married at the time). It was grandpa's era that coined the phrase; sucky sucky boom boom.

You are so very wrong on almost all of your assertions, patches.

@ Patches

The problem with your line of thinking is that even within services...and within wars...there is a big difference between combat arms troops (the guys who really go out of the wire) and support troops (who generally stay on FOB and never experience combat.)

Averages don't work across these two types of soldiers. Combat arms Soldiers/Marines, of any war, spend 90% of their time patrolling and engaging in combat, period.

How to tell if your family member was a combat arms soldier or support? Easy...did he get out with a technical skill set? Cook, mechanic etc...he was supoort. If he got out and his only skill set revolved around personally destroying the enemy...he was combat arms.

What a sad article. Who had it harder? All of them! Who had it easier? All that haven't served and take for granted the freedoms they fought for! I have not served, but I respect all of their service equally because I still live in a free country.

"War is Hell" splitting hairs over the color of the flames does not change the location.

How many of you are actually US Military Veterans (Survivors) from since Vietnam until now (Still Serving).

What I have learned from then until now is that ever subsequent Generation of US Military Veterans owes the previous for the Earned US Military Veterans Benefits that were fought for by previous Generations of US Military Veterans. US Military Veteran Demonstrations at the US Capitol demanding Earned Benefits going all the way back to 1781. Why do you think that 18 year olds got the Right to Vote (Vietnam War, Old enough to be Drafted but cannot even Vote).

The significant differences between World War I, World War II, Korean War, and Vietnam compared to today, is that only 1% of all US Citizens are currently doing their Civic Duty as US Citizens while 92% of US Citizens NEVER Served versus the percentages of US Citizens that Served in previous Wars, Police Actions and Conflicts. 2008 Candidate Obama, "US Military Service is a Civic Duty" and "US Citizenship is not an Entitlement".

First Lady Michelle Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e1R0lliFHc

SomewhereintheUSA! - NO Sam WW1 was even worse,even though they were in it a shorter time.They had war technology that they had no idea of what the hell they were doing with or really even how to operate! WW1 was the real beginning of modern warfare! Especially with weapons like mustard Gas!

Not the start of "Modern Warfare" but the implementation of Conventional Warfare (Civilian Rules of Warfare to make War "Civilized" by Convention, like the 1908 Hague Convention). Quite similar to the Napoleonic Era Rules of Warfare (stand in nice pretty rows and columns and get shot at, being at the appointed battlefield at the scheduled time and place).

As far as Chemical Warfare you were not a participant of the Iran Iraq Wars (US Ally Iraq use of Chemical Weapons to end the Iran Iraq Wars) nor Operation Cyclone (USSR 40th Army routine use of Chemical Weapons). By the way those of us that were on the US Military Training Teams attached to the CIA's SAD/SOG sent to US Ally Iraq during the Iran Iraq Wars later rotated to Operation Cyclone, trained then lead the units we trained into Combat, during the height of the Iran Iraq Wars things turned into World War I Trench Warfare, unfortunely for the Iranians they had purged all their Military trained in "Modern Warfare" as suspected Loyal to the Shah of Iran; so they were grabbing anyone off the streets, handing them weapons (that they did not know how to use, by removing from safe or even loading) and resorted to Human Wave Attacks like World War I against the interlocking machinegun fires, and supporting fires of Mortars and Iraq Artillery (what we trained the US Ally Iraqis to do).

riley-1759556 - Well cmon really? Were you in Fallujah 1 or 2? Because close hand to hand combat and extreme MOUT were in full effect there and thats pretty much exactly what it came down to when our pos was in a partially collapsed house previously shelled by M1s and Abrams directly across from another partially collapsed house occupied by Syrians and Chechens. When the ammo ran out you charged the windows and doors with knives, leathermans and whatever sharp object you had in order to reduce the threat.

Everyone's belief in President Obama's Bayonets and Horses non factual political comment negated your Factual Post. Just like the Fact during UN Mission Somalia II as Operation Continue Hope and the Battle For Mo(gadishu); we ran out of ammunition, started picking up weapons from dead including Somalis, when those ran out of ammunition, we started using bayonets, combat knives, etc.. Those of us that survived Somaliaand were later sent into Afghanistan October 2001 and ended up in the Afghan Cities, ended up running out of ammunition and handgrenades, except this time unlike Somalia there was no where to run, so in fierce Military Operations In Urban Terrain (MOUT), it ended up with us fighting using bayonets (that do not run out of bullets) until the first group with the Northern Alliance came to the rescue literally as the Calvary on Horseback reinforced us and we drove the Taliban, Al Quada Army out of Afghanistan, some fled into Pakistan while the majority of hundreds of thousands fled into Northern Iraq via the Old Silk Road with us after being resupplied killing them with extreme prejudice while they fled.

And most will wonder why this happened at both Somalia and Afghanistan. It was because President Clinton believed that the Cold War Era Intelligence Agencies and US Military were not necessary; so he Gutted the US Intelligence Agencies as previously built up by then Director of the CIA Bush (later President Bush (41)), and then Ordered his Cut to the Bone Reduction In Forces of the US Military. While volunteering the US Military for more UN Missions. President Clinton's Gutting of the US Intelligence Agencies left the US Blind and Deaf to the Events leading up to the 9/11 2001 Attacks, we did not know anything about what was actually happening on the ground at Somalia nor Afghanistan (fact that the Taliban and Al Quada "Militias", were actually the size of a fully equipped Army fully supported by the Fundamentalist Islamic Shia Republic of Iran) as all the previous US Local Somalis and Afghan Intelligence Assets as well as most of the others Worldwide were gone, or to survive (make an income to support their families) had turned into those Nations Intelligence Agents (Hostile to the US And US Allies as Counter Intelligence).

Just like when we went into Iraq to conduct President Clinton's US Law H.R.4655 "Iraqis Liberation Act of 1998" Justification Section 2 Weapons of Mass Destruction, Section 3 Overthrow of President Hussein (aka Regime Change), with US Congressional Appropriations, we went in Blind without any US Intelligence Asset link ups; with the previously abandoned Iraqis US Intelligence Assets being the Iraqis Intelligence Agents attempting to locate and kill us. Same reason later on why President Clinton's US Military Operation Desert Fox Failed (US Military Cut to the Bone, not capable of even conducting a sustained War, as to why later on it took President Bush (43) one year to rebuild the US Military just to accomplish President Clinton's US Law as 2003 Operation Iraqis Freedom, while our arses were left unsupported during 2002 Operation Hotel California, as Companies of us without USAF Air Support fighting Full Strength Divisions of Iraqis Armor and Mechanized Infantry ).

And by the way we have MORE Horses than the Korean War and Vietnam, mostly as Pack Horses, and we do use Pack Mules also to conduct US Military Asymmetric Mountain Warfare. To the point that we even had to have some of us trained as Mule Skinners with Veterinary skills (specific to horses and mules).

The above and other things that I ended up participating in are why I laugh at the comment at the photo of the article "Cultural fault lines clearly run between the generations that saw action in different conflicts or that wore the uniform in different eras, including peacetime. " WHAT "peacetime", just because no one told the US Civilians that there were US Military Fighting and dying someplace, means we (US) were at "peacetime".

aquatone; you are correct - the average amount of combat days for a WW2 soldier was between 40 and 44 days.

Are you disputing what WW2 Vets (mostly co-workers) told me about using Hookers?

Are you disputing the role Russia played in WW2?

Are you disputing the current atmosphere at the VFW clubs?

Are you disputing the drop out rate of enlisted WW2 Vets?

Maybe you just read more into my post than what is there????????

aquatone; your post says nothing - I'm thinking I hit a raw nerve that you can't defend.

The ones that had it bad were the ancient warriors. Battle of Thermopylae for instance. None of it is good, and war should be avoided if at all possible.

J_P_PatchesPal_1,

Stop spouting your NONSENSE.

Most of the US Citizens later involved with WWII, were still suffering the results of the Great Depression.

What could 5 cents ($0.05) buy back then compared to TODAY.

Could this have some bearing on who had it harder than who:The average combatant during WWII saw aproximately 40 days of actual combat. During Korean war, the average was approximately 180 days. During the Vietnam war the average was approximately 240 day per tour - most serving one tour, some number serving more. In Iraq and Afganistan, average is 310+ days facing actual combat.

Now, I used to have to walk to school barefoot, in the snow; while my father had to walk to school barefoot in the snow backwards all the way, uphill both ways while carrying his younger brother!

Guess when the bad GOP is at bay you news folks must find some other issue to generate controversy. Fact is, as anyone who knows the sound of bullets snapping by, that ALL who serve in combat know the sense of comradeship, adrenaline rush, crushing sadness of loss, that the most all encompassing event of their lives brings. Some as in the trenches of WW One or the misery of the beaches in WW2 or the agony of the cold ridges in Korea to the jungles I knew in Vietnam found to their surprise and sometimes guilt that they got home mostly in one piece only to find that the REAL divide exists between those who served and those who did not. Words will never be able to replicate the sense of smell, fear and wonderment of such a place in time...only those who shared it can remotely relate to it.

David, you didn't do dick because you weren't there.

I was in the USAF 1972 to 1976 and the man in the article was talking about being the a fox hole and having a friend blown away and also his jeep blown through a wall. No body ever even mentioned a fox hole during my training in the Air Force. I really think the Army and the Marines had it worse than anyone, no matter which era you are speaking of.

The USA was only in 40 of the more than 200 battles during WW2 - only a hand full of those battles lasted more than a month.

It isn't that one war is better than another but who endures how much misery before being killed, wounded or going home. With that in mind the newest veterans will always have it easier considering some of the past wars as the Civil War, WWII and Viet Nam.

My Viet Nam experience for 13 months was hell and without any modern comforts, but it wasn't near as bad as my uncle's Marine WW II island hopping experience. In the end we are all veterans and have that in common.

David; I wouldn't know if what you posted is nonsense - nobody is going to read your 11th grade term paper...lmao.

I believe basic training was harder back in the older days even during Vietnam. Back then Parris Island was hell. The way I read it today they get off easy when it's to hot. If you don't believe it ask any Marine.

A colleague from a military museum told me that he was reminded every day of how upbeat and self-effacing the WWII veterans were compared to his own siblings, who saw no action, yet whined, complained, and acted entitled. And that is who should remember that vets (all of them) had it harder - the rest of us, we civilians who did not choose to go fight and, thank goodness for our men and women in uniform, did not have to!

The older vets have a message for our spoilt, entitled "mommy bloggers" who whine because someone gave their out-of-control brat the stink eye in a restaurant, and the more recent vets should write books, talk in schools, and run for political office. All of you had it much harder than me. For this, all vets have my eternal gratitude!

cheetah-822547 - David, you didn't do dick because you weren't there.

So says someone that was NOT a LRRP/Ranger calling in Airstrikes at Plei Can at the end of the Vietnam War and everything since then (except UN Mission Bosnia and the brief interlude while getting my College Degree via Vietnam GI Bill).

On the one hand, today's soldiers are volunteers; and doing work that is a choice is probably easier than being drafted. On the other hand, today's soldiers have endured multiple deployments to places that can only be described as hellholes. I say lets be thankful to all who served and hope that in the future our leaders think twice before putting our citizens in harm's way!

Terry-753375 - I was in the USAF 1972 to 1976 and the man in the article was talking about being the a fox hole and having a friend blown away and also his jeep blown through a wall. No body ever even mentioned a fox hole during my training in the Air Force

To those that did NOT Serve during Vietnam, the term that replaced "fox hole" during the Vietnam War was (General) DePuy Bunker.

Just one more detail from firsthand experience that people that were NOT around during those times (Vietnam and later) would NOT know like, J_P_PatchesPal_1, cheetah-822547

Who had it harder in war? It depends on who you are. After the Revolutionary War, our soldiers wore uniforms and the opponents wore uniforms until Vietnam. Yes, the Vietcong wore uniforms, but there were a lot of Vietcong supporters who didn't. And to us, they all looked the same. But, the current war is a little different. None of the enemy wear's uniforms. Plus, our service men and women have to worry about the political PC that didn't exist until My Lai. Let's face it, it's a heck of a lot harder to fight for your country when you have to fight the enemy and your own country. The fiasco that was Abu Ghraib would never have been a fiasco until recently. Lynndie England would never have been prosecuted. What did she do? She posed for a picture holding a gun over naked prisoners! Oh the horrors! What would those who were naked have done to her? Raped her! Beheaded her! Torture her! So, she's sent to prison by the government she puts her life on the line for and is trying to protect. That's got to create tremendous anxiety among our troops. Of course, now we have awards given out for not shooting. Go figure!

David, you're as phony as a three-dollar bill. You repeat what you've read along the way and left a discussion a few months ago implying you had to brief Leon Panetta. Take your alter Jonathan and go have a dinner conversation.

Kevin C-752389..........100% Correct ! We are all brothers ! Anyone who steps forward to defend their country is part of the brotherhood.

Actually folks, war is not bad at all. In fact, it's loads of fun. That's why we keep doing it. Ask George W., ask Dick Cheney, ask Mitt Romney, ask his Dad. You can almost hear them cursing that they missed the chance to be a glorious hero for the Motherland. Fighting for freedom. Keeping dominoes from falling. Keeping crusades alive. Making rich people richer.

David lotsanumbers:

I was really worried that you weren't going to mention asymmetric warfare. I had to read almost to the end of your post to see it. Why oh why don't the powers-that-be listen to you? I think that's a good question, but here's an even better one. Knowing that these ne'er-do-well warmongers are refusing to listen to you, why do you keep going into these terrible situations?

As a combat veteran of only one war, I cannot make a fair judgement call on who had it tougher than whom. Regardless of the statistics kept by the DOD, it is a moot point anyway. Those who served, in whatever capacity required, served and the greatest part of them served honorably. It has never been about "ticker-tape parades" or even gratitude, but a bit of respect would be greatly appreciated. Articles of this nature are disrespectful in the vilest way. You have no right to attempt driving a wedge between veterans. The bond is far too strong for such disgraceful reportage anyway.

cheetah-822547 - You repeat what you've read along the way and left a discussion a few months ago implying you had to brief Leon Panetta.

There you go the anticipated name calling and outright LYING.

David Walker - why do you keep going into these terrible situations?

Like I have a choice. I previously explained that (no replacements trained and why no replacements were trained).

I also explained why I even post on Newsvine, as the informal means to record what is happening or has happened just in case I do not survive this time.

At the end of this tour I will resubmit my Retirement Packet again to go back on Retirement again, and if they refuse to accept and process that, I will Tender my Letter of Resignation (again).

I believe WW1 and 2 where our weapons were no better and in many cases inferior and we didn't outnumber our adversaries was clearly tougher as was our casualty rate. In WW1 we lost 119,000 men in a little over a year and in WW2 we lost 292,000 in a little over 3. In Korea we were facing below zero weather and were massively outnumbered. In Vietnam, Iraq and Afganistan we had massive superiority in all areas. For those who died it didn't make a difference but for those in our modern wars who were well fed and most of the time when not patrolling were in little danger. The other wars they were always in danger.

I agree with an earlier post that compared killing somebody up close and personal that would be much tougher than using the present technology often from a distance. Certainly this is not always the case.

Talking only is only beneficial if it helps. For many boxing up the emotion and storing it away is the ONLY way to cope. My parents, both born in 1910, endured a horrific event in their lives and never again spoke of it. The loss was too unbearable and tucking away those painful feelings was the best solution. They did amazingly well considering what they experienced. Oddly, I talk of their tragedy often and cry for them, something they were unable to do.

I salute all our veterans.

seems like a divisive malevolent artical to me.

You know, it is real hard to say who had it tougher on the front lines. It is real easy to say who had it easier behind the lines, at home, who never served! Everyone!

Ya got George W. Bush, whose daddy got him a deferment to fly in the Texas Air National Guard so he wouldn't be drafted for Viet Nam. Of course, he couldn't serve the full term of his commitment. Then ya got Dick "deficits don't matter" Cheney, who said "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service". But both were happy to send other young men to do their duty to God and country, for 3, 4, 5 reups to increase Halliburton's profits! And last, but not least of all, Mitt Romney, who really, really supported our war in Viet Nam, until it came to serving, at which point he spent all of the Viet Nam war in a mansion in France proselytizing for the Mormaon church. But, "by God", he was willing to start a war with Iran, as long as his sons never had to serve!

Thank you, NO! I want no more warhawks in the president's seat! Especially none of the Republican variety, who seem to exist on hypocrisy!

At the beginning of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan I truly felt those guys and gals were not having it as hard as in Nam, Korea or WWII. I finally realized that they are being shot and killed and watching their friends being killed or maimed. That qualifies for as hard as it gets. Support these people and don't tell them they don't have it as bad as prior vets.

From a long line of military people, (none heroes, but all proud to serve their country,) EVERY war is hard. Each one has it's own particular hardships. And the politicians, and media, contrary to THEIR ideas, have no idea of the reality of the situation, no books can prepare one for the realities of each situation, and no high school or college social studies teacher/professor can fully understand it.

And right now, since the "war for our hearts and minds," better known as elections are over, the fight for our dollars is on, with each and every politician striving to reduce the military, regardless of the consequences, and the best way to do that, is to get the veterans fighting amongst themselves. Get the veterans infighting, thus not concentrating on what the politicians are doing, they have a major head start on robbing the veterans, and the current military, of their well deserved benefits, limited as they may be.

I retired in 1998 after 22 years active duty and yes I do have my opinions about this, but I just think an article like this is very divisive and this is a conversation between vets and not the world. This whole notion of Post 9-11 Vets versus everyone else has been brewing for sometime, but we're all vets and there should be no difference in how anyone is treated as opposed to another.

“We had it harder”

And their father fathers had it harder too. But no matter which war they fought in, the thought of seeing an arm being cut off or blown off is unimaginably horrific. Furthermore, the survivors carried those images and memories for the rest of their lives.

These days things may be easier for some on the battlefields, not having to see the carnage first hand, but the result is always the same the pain, misery and death never changes!

I admire all who put their hand up selflessly to serve the people, both in war and in peace. Think of it, you don’t need to be on the battlefield to see the carnage, blood and guts. Our streets are our battlefields; just ask the police or the ambulance service people, they’ll tell you first hand a thing or two about what’s hard or who’s got it harder…...

Whether it's hand to hand, sword to sword, musket to musket or tank to tank, I don't think cojones size is an issue. When it's kill or be killed every warrior has it hard. Every one of our brave troops deserves our honor and respect.

War, regardless of the reason, is fought on the battlefield. Recently we have politicized our armed forces which is never a good idea. As a result, ever since WW II, most of our conflicts have been less than successful. Despite this, our courageous men and women in uniform can never be blamed, they simply follow orders.

There will always be comparisons, this is what makes history so important. What we need to simply remember is to be proud of and appreciate the service and sacrifice our veteran's and current enlistee's have given us to maintain our freedoms.

It also helps to thank and shake the hand of any service member you see, they do appreciate it.

Mike Schmidt-4866286

Imagine if Dubya had to ride in front of his armies when he decided to invade Iraq.

At least “Dubya” knows how to ride a horse.

I’m not sure Barrack Husseins mom jeans could handle the wear and tear.

Mike Schmidt-4866286

Imagine if Dubya had to ride in front of his armies when he decided to invade Iraq.

Same goes for Saddam Hussein when he decided to murder thousands of kurds and invade Kuwait.

I know where I was and what I did and it is not up for comparison or discussion - It's over.

A proud Korea and Nam vet.

Come on, veterans. Don't allow yourselves to be divided and conquered. All war is hell.

a little common sense, with new technology, everything gets a little easier. Try getting air support using and old school radio on an AM band compared to what they have now. etc. etc. there was no air support at Valley Forge. weapons improved, medical treatment on field improved, warmer uniforms for cold weather etc etc. not like trekking to valley forge with wool clothing that got wet and trying to keep your powder dry in a world of no plastics or even rubber. :)

Comparing the horrors WWII vets had to witness and the hardships they had to endure with todays vets....there is no comparison.....it's not even close.

It's not a competition. It was hard then and continues to be hard for all Vets from every generation. The bottom line is that they all put their lives on the line for each and every American so our country can remain free.

First all of these people paid their entry dues, this does not mean you are accepted as a member of the group. Just like when you served the older guys look at you and want to know if you meet the standard. You all have been in the same place and came back but you still have to fit the mold. That is how you become a member. The people writing the article are trying to compare who had it tougher, it reminds me of my uncles all combat vets who used to debate each other who had it tougher. It was never in any way disrespect for each other but the only way to share what they experienced without having to cry about it. The kids today are tough just like those that came before them, just different experience. That is the only difference. An article like this attempts to put it all in a nice little package. But I am here to tell you there is none. All returning veterans have it tough.

2833,

It's obvious that you never had the experience of war. The dead are done with their war while the living are still dealing with theirs.

My First Sargent defined "The Old Army" as being ~~~ After I signed up (or was drafted) and Brfore you signed up (or was drafted). Of course, that bit about being drafted didn't apply to either of us, but the rest was right on.

It's not bad enough MSNBS has everybody at each other's throat...but now it's vets/vs./vets? ENOUGH!

As a prior Soldier in Iraq, I believe we generally had it better than the average Vietnam Soldiers did, and so I bet we had it better than the Soldiers in WWII too. I say "generally" because I truly believe that there were Soldiers in all 3 wars that had it worse than the rest in any war. So generally, conditions improve with technology, but individual situations can't be compared, stabbing people to survive is horrible in any era . I can't imagine what it would be like to have my clothes wet weeks on end in Vietnam, nor can I imagine what it would be like to be always cold in the snow in Europe without all the gear we have now.

In the end though, we should ask the fallen about which generation had it worse.

MacGyver-2750749

As a prior Soldier in Iraq, I believe we generally had it better than the average Vietnam Soldiers did, and so I bet we had it better than the Soldiers in WWII too.

My observation:

1. I do not believe in "we had it tougher". You didn't have it tougher, you didn't have it better...you had it different. There isn't a "typical" experience.

2. Many of the soldier who fought in Nam were draftees. All that really means is that Vietnam wasn't a planned experience. They didn't want to be there but they went. For the most part 365 days later they were done. No redeployment...done. What they experienced in country was fighting an enemy they couldn't see as often as not, an uncertain mission with no exit strategy beyond 365 days. Unknowing exposure to substances that would kill them 30-40 years later. And a return to a nation that dumped their collective guilt and anger on the veterans.

3. OEF/OIF Veterans were volunteers. They may not have planned to visit beautiful downtown Baghdad or Kabul...but there it is. Initially the tours ranged from 12-18 months and finally pretty much set at 12 months (for the Army anyway). Here's where it gets weird; IMHO it pretty much came down to psychological warfare against the soldier...especially National Guard and Reserves. Their experience in-country was the same as their AC brothers/sisters but not their experience at home. The divorce rate is a little higher with NG and Reserves and adding to the stress, they have to earn a living between deployments. The more deployments/the more injuries/the more medication/the less employment opportunities. And now we have the RIF (Reduction in Force). This is something we've always had after a major military campaign but one of the problems now is the soldiers awaiting their Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) or Med Board. A lot of these folks are in the Warrior Transition Battalion but a lot of others are on Permanent Profile at their unit. The Army (really all the services) are under pressure to reduce strength and they want to get rid of these folks in the worst way. The easiest way to reduce their number is to Article 15 them out. They're already pumped up on meds so documenting infractions is a piece of cake. Document a few and bang...General Discharge, no need to wait 2 years of the Med Board.

My point is not that anyone necessarily has it better or worse...just different. I had an Uncle who fought in the Battle of the Bulge. He would occasionally talk about it with a few beers in him. I wouldn't have wanted to be there either.

There are better treatment for PTSD now than in the past. You don't have to just "suppress" the memories hoping they will go away (which they usually don't).

EMDR is an up and coming treatment for PTSD, and should be encouraged for anyone that served in a war and is bothered by what happened.

That's it.... Better living through Pharmacy or at least until you find out after 10 or 20 years you're growing a third nipple or lost both of your kidney's.

Look guys & gals (I know personally) it is better to "Suck it up" than start a "Life Long" dependency on Big Pharma to melt your "Fears" away.......

It is SOooo much better for you to get out get active in your community and fight the night sweats & terrors naturally with heart felt exhaustion!

Remember No matter how bad you had it or feel, there are Men & Women who have had it worse and still recovered to a "Normal" life once home without poisoning themselves with Big Pharma......

PTSD is a "State Of Mind"....After a while you'll even start to miss it (the good times anyway)! When you do lay down with a cold wash rag on you forehead and count to one hundred and think about all those people you love!

A man is but the product of his thoughts what he thinks, he becomes. ~Mahatma Gandhi

Those who served in the trenches of WW1 had it worse than any WW2 vet with the possible exception of those who fought the Japanese in the jungles.

JimBob and MUW are forgetting something. What happens to the other victims of PSTD? Spouses, children and other relatives or friends that have been hurt or killed because veterans couldn't come to terms with their experiences. Responsible doctors have patients come in monthly or more often once a chemical regimen is started to make sure it actually helps. Just handing someone a bottle of pills and telling them "Good luck!" doesn't help.

Sucking it up is all well and good as far as it goes. But when a veteran is homeless because he or she cannot adjust to being back here, it's on all the rest of us to help. Don't begrudge them the help they need. There's enough fat in the military budget to pay for programs.

Yes, every generation looks at their own experience as unique. In a sense it is. But we know more now, than we did after the Civil War, and the others that came after it.

blueunicorn..... Don't get me wrong America owes the "Best" only the "Best"!

Bu not only do I speak from Personal Experience on PTSD my Daughter is a US Army NCO Combat PTSD Councilor in Afghanistan today!

She has to "Deal With PTSD" Pre/Post and On-Going every day and to be honest at times it is "Overwhelming" for her. The best advise I can give (and have given her) is what I told my "Brothers & Sisters" here.

You are who you are and you will "Recover" or you won't....You Choose!

There is far too much "Enabling of Excuses" coming out of our "Current Society" by Big Pharma & CIA Drug Cartels for any ones Mental Health!

The rest of this nonsense is merely a "Crutch" at best, use it if you have to in your "Time Of Need" but try not to depend on it too much and get off of any "Drugs" as fast as you safely can because that is the quickest path to destruction!

Some Combat Veterans choose to go on to be Congress Men & Women( including 9 news ones just elected)....Some choose (or not) to live under a Bridge Drinking and Popping their lives away.....

Again none of what I've said relieves US of our "Duty" to help them "Suck It Up" as best we / they can!

Psst....Especially those Vets in Congress....They've probably got the hardest "Suck It Up Job" of all...To Defend Their Fellow Brothers & Sisters from the Corruption of Washington DC!

A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history. ~Mahatma Gandhi

The resistance of admitting to PTSD in the military centers around the need (want) to keep soldiers fighting through thick and thin. Unfortunately, the military isn't into adjusting to reality unless it is on the battlefield. There probably should be a civilian agency (Veteran's Administration?) that is more in tune with reality and will seek the solutions to injured soldiers that most of us think they so direly need and deserve. Fully funding the Veteran's Administration and putting it into the hands of veteran friendly administrators would help.

The VA has improved, but has a long way to go. It reflects the attitude of disposability that we have in America.

I feel the biggest problem is the daily communications.A man is in a war zone for a reason to concentrate on staying alive and helping the guy next to him, not that his son just got arrested or the bank is ready to forclosue or his wife is running around. We got mail every week or two and only called home when on R&R. A man cannot concentrate when he is getting bombarded with outside distractions.

Jem,

I'm now 68, but remember asking my great-uncle about the holster and pistol hanging on his wall. He said it was from the war, WW1. Now this great-uncle was very strange and the whole family shunned him. I asked what he did during the war. He told me that it was his job to slide out of the trenches with wire cutters and go into no-man's land to cut the barb wire before the next charge. It never dawned on me until I grew up just what that meant. No wonder the man was a little strange.

For every Vietnam vet who says we just dealt with it, sucked it up, came home and got to work - there's another one who's been living under a viaduct for 30 years. There is no such thing as a good war or a bad peace.

World War II veterans were fighting a war they believed in. Veterans since have had a much more complicated experience.

Come on, this is a joke. WW1 was a horror beyond any ones imagination, with the birth of tanks, and machine guns. MILLIONS upon MILLIONS died. No other war was even close to the deprivation and horror of that war, over 2 million horses were killed, people by the millions maimed for life. Read history, and get educated. There is NO comparison, none.

"The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was over 37 million. There were over 16 million deaths and 20 million wounded ranking it among the deadliest conflicts in human history."

I appreciate all the service of today's modern army, thank you. But to compare today with a war like WW1 is ABSURD!

Imagine if Dubya had to ride in front of his armies when he decided to invade Iraq. Think we would've gone on such little evidence?

Or Bill Clinton, for that matter....or Hillary or Johny Kerry or Harry Reid or Joe Biden...or any other democrat that VOTED for it.

Funny, the evidence you claim was lacking was the very same evidence Bill Clinton used for bombing Iraq in 1998. I love the way the left likes to pretend they never voted for Iraq, when they clearly did, and also try to claim that Iraq had WMDs when Clinton was in office, but not when Bush was in office.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

JCB-1236504

I appreciate all the service of today's modern army, thank you. But to compare today with a war like WW1 is ABSURD!

You know what JCB...dead is dead! It doesn't matter if it was in a trench in France...a German 88 round or an IED and ambush in Fallujah...dead is dead and widows are widows. To compare wars and imply...well this one wasn't as bad as that one IS ABSURD!

You are right, pj. However when you get knowledge of

• THE CONS-ervatives BLOCKING the bill 3457 ( The Veterabs Jobs Bill ) it seems pretty hard to understand

How can they ( THE CONS-ervatives ) MISLEAD US INTO WAR UNDER FALSE PREMISES and then filibuster the bill in order to deny them ( our veterans ) a fair chance to be even MORE USEFUL ?

As civilians the CONS-ervatives stick us with the bill while they'd forbiden their own kids to enlist.

@wcritiquing - couldn't agree more with you.

This is called "Divide and conquer". The "reporters" in the corporate media know that as a part of the "Grand Bargain" Veterans benefits as well as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are on the chopping block so they are softening up the opposition to these draconian and completely unnecessary cuts by turning veterans against each other.

Likewise when they talk about cutting Medicare or SS they say the if you are 60 years old (or whatever) or older you won't be affected but if you are younger it will.

Same deal.

Divide and conquer.

Or when they slash wages and benefits at work. New hires have get the shaft while the older workers are (for the time being) mostly unaffected.

It divides the opposition.

Divide and conquer one of the oldest tricks in the book for ruling classes all down through history and still useful to them today.

Unfortunately, for the neo-cons, the people have gotten fed up with the divide and conquer tactic. We, the 47% and the future 47%, the women, the hispanic, the minority, the veterans, the people who built America and defend America have voted, and the majority have rejected the neo-cons and their lackeys.

wcritiquing, PJ-1795048, ArchStanton, IMHO-2730490,

FOS (Full Of Sh!t).

Voters
Politicians manipulate voters every day with half-truths -- or outright lies -- about taxes, spending and many other issues that directly affect the nation's prosperity.

Too many voters embrace feel-good propaganda that they want to hear instead of learning the basic facts about issues they care about. They should do a better job of calling out dishonest politicians -- and shunning media outlets that stoke political food fights.

http://money.msn.com/investing/11-things-wrong-with-congress

Why don't you ask Senator Harry Reid if he has eyes in his arse hole so that he can read all the Jobs Bills he is sitting on.

AND;

Why aren't you b!tching about President Obama demanding "Across the Board Budget Cuts" to all previously budgeted for Programs (like Medicare), Projects (like US Infrastructure of the US Army Corps of Engineers), Agencies (like FEMA, Veteran's Affairs, Department of Education, etc.), including chopping the Entitlements and Benefits of the "47%" (actual 49%) to pay for his previously spending $2.1 Trillion that was not previously Budgeted for.

AND;

Why aren't you b!tching about President Obama as Commander In Chief Ordered previously chopping of the US Defense Budget in April 2009 during Two Wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) and President Obama's Secret Wars resulting in the US Military loss of Maintanance Funds (Repair Parts, Vehicle, Aircraft, Ships, Facilities Maintenance) and Sustainment Funds (Food, Water, Ammunition, Fuel).

AND;

Why aren't you b!tching about President Obama as Commander In Chief Ordered Reduction In Forces of the US Military of 90,000 US Military to be thrown on Unemployment and further straining the already strained Veteran's Affairs. And adding to that the 108,000 US Civilians employed by the US Military also thrown on Unemployment.

AND;

President Obama in his President's Proposal to US Congress demanding a US Defense Budget Cut of 11%; even after his stating "A 10% Defense Budget Cut will result in a Million (US) Civilians becoming Unemployed".

AND;

Before you even attempt your nonsense "Obstructionist Congress" as just another lame excuse. What President Obama has done to circumvent the US Congress "Will of the People", keep clicking "Next", see anything Unconstitutional, TOUGH that is what YOU voted for:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions

YOUR GRADES wcritiquing, PJ-1795048, ArchStanton, IMHO-2730490: F MINUS.

Why don't you ask Senator Harry Reid if he has eyes in his arse hole so that he can read all the Jobs Bills he is sitting on.

What jobs Bills? Those Republican bills stuffed with giaveaways to Republican donors? Let 'em die!

...to pay for his previously spending $2.1 Trillion that was not previously Budgeted for.

Ah, BS! Bush's last budget was $1.3T in the red! Ever since, Obama's budgets have been smaller! Bush doubled our nationasl debt in 8 years! And, no matter what you say, the Republican party knows it! When was the last time a living ex-president was not invited to campaign for his party's presidential candidate? Hmmmm?

Why aren't you b!tching about President Obama as Commander In Chief Ordered previously chopping of the US Defense Budget in April 2009 during Two Wars (Iraq and Afghanistan)

Both wars were winding down (no thanks to Bush). What would you do? Keep spending? And yet you say you are concerned about the national debt!

Why aren't you b!tching about President Obama as Commander In Chief Ordered Reduction In Forces of the US Military of 90,000 US Military to be thrown on Unemployment...

But, but, wait a minute, Republicans always say that governments don't create jobs! Are you now saying they do?

President Obama in his President's Proposal to US Congress demanding a US Defense Budget Cut of 11%; even after his stating "A 10% Defense Budget Cut will result in a Million (US) Civilians becoming Unemployed".

Bald-faced lie! The cuts weren't in current spending, only in increases in spending! Go check your facts!

Unconstitutional, TOUGH that is what YOU voted for...

Yes, it is! And we got it, thank you very much! Certainly better than what we voted for before, George W. Bush/Dick Cheney... unconstitutional AND total failures!

No matter what you say, we already saw the Republican policies in action under Bush! And, no matter what you say, the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, lost because he had nothing better than Bush policies to offer as an economic policy.

EEngineer,

ROTFLMAO:

You have NO idea about the Democratic Party Jobs Bills that Senator Harry Reid is sitting on.

You have NO idea what President Obama spent $2.1 Trillion on.

April 2009 both Wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) were still going, not "winding down". And you have NO idea who, what, where, why, etc. about President Obama's Secret Wars.

Lame excuse, blame the Repugnants for slashing the US Military. Which is the direct opposite of what the Repugnants stated. Don't even attempt to group the US Military in with the US Government (the ignorant self serving Politicians you hired).

Nice FAILED ATTEMPT go to youtube.com and listen to what President Obama stated about the 10% US Defense Budget Cuts, and then read his President's Proposal to US Congress.

Good you deal with all the Unconstitutional of President Obama: Monitoring and Censorship of All US Communications. Preemptive Detentions of US Citizens. US Military Use of Deadly Force Against US Citizens. US Military Tribunals (renamed by the Obama Administration as US Military Commissions). Legalization of the previously defeated as Unconstitutional S.1959 and H.R.1955 aka the George Orwell 1984 Thought Crimes Laws inclusion of the definition of "Anyone Stating a Radical Change to (US) Government is a Homegrown Domestic Terrorist". Expanded Presidential Powers. US Military Indefinite Detentions of US Citizens.

Wake the f**k up, EEngineer, you don't even know about the above do you.

And pertaining to the current US Economy NAME THE US LAWS That were Eliminated that made Illegal the Causes of the previous Depressions and WHO eliminated them.

YOU HAVE 30 MINUTES TO POST THE CORRECT ANSWER BELOW. NONE OF YOUR LAME EXCUSES.

EEengineer is correct. The defense budget should be cut drastically still. Engineer do not bother trying to inform those who are less intelligent and unteachable.

Before WW2 we were barely an Army, but built up the the greatest Army, same after every war. We can vut a lot and still be a force to do the job, and if not spend more if we need to attack another country that had nothing to do with attacking us.

I was in the military for 14 years, collect no disability, no education benefits, or retirement. I serve in the infantry, and spec ops. I know many typewriter repair types that never deplyed getting all that plus disability for back pain they got for sitting all day.

We need to compensate the miltary for the type of service they did and quit equating desk jockeys with combat troops when it comes to retirement and disability. That wuld reduce 90% of over payed people who retire at 38 years old and live off the government tit cause they worked in finance at Fort lost in the Woods and never saw/fired a rifle except during basic training.

Maybe then the wounded soldiers can get the care they need.

John Raymond. BCD?

Get your facts straight. The Vietnam War began on Tuesday, November 1, 1955 and ended on Wednesday, April 30, 1975. MANY did have to re-deploy several times and MANY of them never got to leave. stayed the whole time they were in service. When they did come home half the country hated them and calling them baby killers, being spit on, seen as villians and direspected in just about every way they could be by many.

Agreed, I will never take away from their sacrifice (WW1 and 2, Korea and maybe Vietnam had it much worse) they did their part, We never question or compare with them. They have no right to say "we had it harder than you do", So what? You don't have your boots in the sand now. Just like we can never know what you have been through (WW2, Korea, Vietnam) you can't entirely know about what we are going through either. Thanks for your service and all but your time is over. It's all in the past now. And if you really did just put your heads down and get back to work with no whining, then why are we even reading this article?? I thought we were all part of a certain family, with a comaraderie that could not be broken.

Frobisher, they didn't deploy 4, 5, 6 times because they stayed till the end...they came home when it was over or dead! They didn't get a nice WTB to come back to, medical board for a life time disability payment, and they whine all the time...a feeling of privilege, that " you owe me something "...no one owes you a damn thing, you do it for pride, for your country and your way of life!

Although ""they didn't have to redeploy 4, 5, 6 times"....they served for duration with no R&R leave...That being said we are fighting a different war today where there are no defined front or rear lines...you are constantly on guard because you are surrounded by your enemy 24/7...for them there were no IED's...but we with few exceptions we were never in sustained battles that lasted for days;let alone weeks with artilery and motars constantly being fired at our positions...who had it tougher it is hard to say...but I do know we are doing it with less than one percent of our total population serving...where as they had 9%...Yet we have a congress and president that sees fit to begin all federal cuts with those of us who serve...The mentality seems to be let those who bore the burden of freedom, be the first to bare it twice.

Actually, the article is balderdash.

There are about 22 million vets, 6 million of whom are combat vets and at least 1 million do have nightmares and serious physical health problems as a result of war. Over 55,000 desert storm veterans, mostly VII Corp, are now (finally) beginning to be evaluated and treated within VA.

There are no veterans here who disdain our current army and marines. One reason is that we are burying too many here. 7 this calender year: 6 combat engineers and one medic from 101st airborne.

The second reason is that we do intently listen. I do laugh off the ww2 airborne who jumped with over 400 pounds of gear from 385 feet above the orchard. But I am also very patient listening to those who were owners of the night in Iraq and Afghan, who sat in an Afghan ravine as bait for taliban, etc.

Kindly listen for remarks that indicate a troubled soul. If you detect great sadness, you are correct, do not be afraid to arrange help for the soldier - right now if need be.

Work IS solice for the ex-soldier. So is supportive family, community, education and churches.

Yeah the "greatest generation" is starting to sound a little arrogant to me. I did a report in high school and came across a statistic that Vietnam vets saw 3x as many combat days than WW2 vets in any given month on average mostly due to the tremendous mobility of helicopters. WW1 seems like it was substantially more brutal than WW2 given the use of chemical weapons and that soldiers were treated like cannon fodder. Oh and they had to deal with the Spanish flu on top of that and fewer medical treatments. Even if the current wars are "less violent" I'd bet my life that the soldiers of today wouldn't let anyone down if they were sent back in time and had to fight in WW2.

The "Greatest Generation" didn't call themselve that, Bill Moyers did. But he wasn't just talking about the war but the over all accomplishments. Now, you did a "report in high school" whoopee f'n doo. And what uniform did you wear? I mean other than McDonald's?

Frobisher:: You won't speak to a Vietnam vet? You think the WW2 vets don't speak to other vets, especially OEF/OIF vets? Guess you have never volunteered at a vet center and seen how ALL combat vets interact with other combat vets. A combat veteran is a combat veteran, regardless of which era they were in.

BTW, I was a child during WW2 (my late father was a WW2 prisoner of war) and I lived through WW2. My late husband was a Nam vet. I volunteer at a vet center and there is no difference between war eras there. The only difference is that some of them are more quiet and reserved-- but that is the person and not the war era. They all get along. Some of the younger ones are regular cutups, but that is their age.

The older vets are growing fewer in number. One of these days there won't be any of the WW2 and Nam vets for you to have to hold in disdain.

Susie, first off, thank you from the bottom of my heart for your service to veterans. None deserve my respect more than one who shares so selflessly. You have been living with war and it's effects all your life. Believe me, none of us desire to burden you with our troubles, in fact, never wanted trouble to begin with. It is my belief that WW2 was the last conflict with a clearly defined purpose and an identifiable enemy. Since then, our military has been shamelessly utilized for purposes other than those stated, by people whose agenda had little to do with freedom or security.

For those commenting from a political standpoint; We've been electing republicans and democrats to positions of public responsiblity for a very long time, against the better judgement of our first three Presidents. How's that workin' out for ya? Do you feel more secure lately? Does the economy make you feel as though it has any value for the time you put into working toward your personal goals? What legacy have you to proudly bequeath to the next generation? For myself, I can barely look my grandchildren in the eyes though I feel their unconditional love. It troubles me greatly.

First off. I've been around thousands of vets over the years, and I've never heard WW2 vets talking down to anyone. I've never heard Korean Vets talking down, and they probably have had the least amount of praise given to them, and I've never heard any Nam Vets talking down to anyone.

WW2 Vets buried over 400,000 KIAs = Don't tell me they didn't see @!$%#

Korean Vets had to fight using weapons and supplies left over from WW2 at the start. Read up on the deficiencies those men faced.

Nam Vets buried over 58,000 and were demonized by their own country upon returning

Iraq / Afgahnistan Vets have had to fight with the most screwed up rules of engagement and civilian gov't could provide. There was also a time when, due to Clinton cutbacks, they had to deploy multiple times to cover the ground.

I have played online games with guys sitting in FOBs, so having skype and internet access to families is sure a helluva lot nicer than waiting for mailcall.

But once again, Vets don't talk about this... reporters do to piss off people.

Tatonka Smith: You may not have ever heard WWII or Korean War vets talk down to other vets but I have within a couple days of returning from RVN and many times over the years since then. Speak of what you know and don't add things that you don't. General knowledge that it happened in Veterans organization for years until the organizations started to die out and needed the Vietnam vets to stay active. You doubt it, check the posts that closed over the years due to lack of membership.

I stand with you, trainee. To quote our first CIC; "The willingness with which our young people will come to the aid of the country in time of war, is directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of previous wars are treated."

Don't thank the veterans. It makes them feel awkward because they were doing a job they were told to do.

no it really isn't. it's just an article about generational differences in veterans. you're reading too much into it.

XJ, You are right on. The WWII vets without a doubt went through the most difficult war, followed by Korea, and Vietnam. If today's military was faced with a real enemy with the advanced weapons that we have it would be a much different proposition. The U.S. talks tough and is real macho when faced with Iraq and Afghanistan forces who only have AK-47s, IEDs, mortars, etc. No contest. And every person who has served in any capacity is instantly called a hero. Give me a break. I served in the Navy in the 50's for four years and I never saw any heroes. Just guys serving their hitches and doing their job. The word hero is thrown around all the time way too loosely and makes me sick. Everybody should be required to watch documentaries about Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Guadalcanal, Normandy and all the other WWII battles and then tell me they weren't the toughest.

I agree...I knew a guy who was in Kuwait for 6 months, came home on leave for a skin problem and got in the medical board...he tried for a year to prove to everyone he had PTSD...HE WAS A FRIGGIN COOK...and it's even worse when we are talking Guard and Reservists...it's easy money!

Wow. I have seen some folks like that in my career as well. Although I am not one who was in combat, I served as a Navy Corpsman, nearly half of my career in direct support of the USMC. I collect a little disability for knee and back problems from all the ground pounding I did with them, but it would never even occur to me to try and get something for PTSD. That's always been kind of a sacred ground that I feel I have no right to even consider. I do have a very light anxiety that I have been diagnosed with as well, I really did not know I had it until I did my VA physical after I retired and next thing I knew I was talkig to a shrink, I asked why and they said I answered some questions a certain way and wanted me to talk to someone. Turns out dealing with Helo-crashes, burn victims, Jumpers, car accidents and shooting range mishaps affect you over a 20 year career as well. Not unlike what paramedics go through.

you know what? you are right. The son of someone I went to highschool with just went to bootcamp, (Air Force) and before the kid even left he was designated a hero from friends and family. I of course kept my mouth shut and told him good luck.

Hey xj8777,you are so right,if we had the army today,fighting back in WW2,Hitler would be wiping his azz on the front lawn of the white house,and pushing Roosevelt down the handicap ramp off the capital.Most think of it as a job,and a way to get ahead with some free schooling.There is nothing wrong with that, and is fine for todays military,because the government has there many different agentcies and tech equipment to take up the slack.

My uncle is 93 and a survivor of the Battan Death March He never talks about but sends money back to thye PI, to help someone that no one in our family has ever known. When asked he said it is none of your business. He is a tough guy from a time when life was difficult in Amerika.He makes an annual pilgimage to Arlington with the same woman that he has been married to since for the past 60 years. He does not like anything about Japan, and said once they have not changed one bit, it is just that we forgot how bad they were. He will carry hismemories to his grave, but told me when I came back from Vietnam, bury it so deep that it will never resurface and get on with your life. You did what you had to do now get married, raise a family anbd contribute to society. I did, no regrets.

Yes the Vietnam war was the worse, kids were drafted right out of high school and were thrown into a war that the military knew nothing about the ememies fighting tackticks. Where the our troops were thrown out of Vietnam they held sighs Yankees Go Home, we lost 55,000 military personal over their and they were not freed from the communist after this Liberal War. They came home to idiots over here calling them names and Jane Fonda had a picture that she took over their sitting on a cannon suppoting the other side. These vets have still not gotten the prober care they all deserved. So I am sick of hearing that the Repulicans do not care about vets, you Liberals did not give a @!$%# about Vietnam vets, they are still living on the streets, If Obama cared he would just bring home all the troops and stop giving money to all these Muslim countries. He had 4 years, now another 4, lets see how much he cares. All the money that is spend giving to the Muslim Brotherhood, could be going to help vets, So just remember Vietnam war was the stupidty of you Liberals. Now whats going on in Egypt, Libya, Syria is Obama's mess.

I have no disrespect for Korean, Vietnam, or Middle east war veterans, not for those serving in conflicts and skirmishes. World War II was the last DIRECT threat to the USA (other than the Cuban missile crisis and Bay of Pigs failure) that honestly secured the freedom of this country. The Nazi's would have certainly moved here, and if not, the Japanese would have done the same. North Korea is still a joke and Viet Nam is a world away. Fighting terrorism is fine and all, but I don't really feel all that fearful in my small midwestern town.

But still, I'm arming up and digging in for the Zombie Apocalypse!

I've been saying that for decades. Throw the ones who want war into a pit. let them do what they gotta do, and the rest of us go on with our lives.

That sounds good until the ones who want war dig the pit in your back yard.

I think they are discussing wars that people actually REMEMBER.

...or at least have living American veterans that can talk about it.

Just medical care and rescue... are 1000% better now... alot more exposure to everything in past wars.... technology has come along way in helping... not "talking crap" kev... just the facts... I know tough for you ... those pesky facts!

War is War and Veterans are Veterans. That is the bottom line which any Veteran can tell you. But don't ask the man you have as an avatar, he dodged the war claiming an exemption he didn't deserve and hiding in France.

I AM a Vet Who works with Vets from WW2 on and I speak first hand on this.

And I guess those same facts alluded you as I explained it was 1000% better in WWII than it was in the Revolutionary war for the patriots that fought against England. We had technology in WWII that the patriots had no idea would exist.

So some patriot that had to fight with a musket would have the same argument that my war was tougher than yours to the WWII vet. That was my point, it is valid and factual. They did not have jeeps to whisk you off the battle field in the revolutionary war. They did not have wound care that a WWII soldier had, just a saw.

Did you read my post or just jump to a response? This "we had it harder" argument is not restricted to military, but the economy as well.

Granny: Back in my day we didn't have no microwaves sonny boy, we had a stove.

Great Granny to Granny: Well we didn't have a stove, we had a campfire outside.

Homo habilis would say it was harder 2.2 million years ago because didn't even have fire let alone a Kindle Fire Hd and lived in caves. He would have said this if they had the English language at that time but they did not. That was the umph of my post. What part of it is not so?

jonjojon....... the avatar is the one that says......"and then I told the bitc h go make me a sandwich...... I love sandwiches". Its a meme and a funny slam on ole Romney. I served a decade in the US Army and I am a disabled vet myself. Next time take time to click a profile pic and not just make an assumption. When you make an assumption you make an ass out of u and mption.......

Kevin I blew up the icon and did read it that is why my statement is worded the way it is.

I said, "But don't ask the man you have as an avatar"; I did not say "Don't ask the man you supported". It doesn't matter to me either way who you support, what's important is YOU did your Duty and he Dodged his.

It sickens me to even think that we veterans have to subject ourselves to who has the bigger d— _k. I am not here to dispute the many contributions of veterans who fought in past and present wars. Whatever their contributions, it should be left to the historians who are better equip to put it all in perpective.

As a recently retired veteran I resent the fact that we are even having this discussion. While I have great admiration for all veterans of past wars I will challenge anyone to minimize my contributions and those of all veterans currently serving. Anyone that has served and has been in harms way would never wish that on anyone else; especially their children. If WWII and Vietnam veterans feel unappreciated they only need to think of the early patriots and civil war veterans who paid the ultimately price. If not for them we would not be having this discussion.

Instead of glorifying war let us discuss ending these senseless wars that only benefit the corporate elite of this country. Veterans today don't get to choose what wars they fight; they just follow there last standing order and do as they are told regardless of their personal or political beliefs. I didn't think I would be fighting for oil yet I carried on smartly and served as best I could. Not because of patriotism or love of country but because I had soldiers, sailors and airman who depended on me to get the job done. When I lost shipmate to a bombing I can assure you I was not thinking about how much worst I had it than my buddy who died or past veterans who have served valliantly in defense of their country.

So let us cut the B.S. and honor all veterans who have served. Grow up!

john-ryan;

That was beautifully stated. I could never have articulated each point as eloquently as you. I am humbled. Whenever I write or speak of my experiences in Vietnam, my mind gots bogged down to the point where I can't even make sense of my own thoughts, so I can relate to you thinking you had been rambling. But I assure you, that was not a ramble.

The Boomer generation caused the economic meltdown we are now suffering through. They emptied out
Social Security, Medicare, all the Pension funds, voted for and supported the programs that led to our $16trillion debt and are spending their childrens inheritances through reverse mortgages. They have robbed their children into early graves in order to enrich themselves.

The Boomers are the worst generation ever. They have probably set this country on a path towards genocide. Thanks a lot Boomers.

You are welcome! Yea we used up all the cheap gas and destroyed the ozone layer. Politicians borrowing out of SS and throwing an IOU back in the box is what busted SS. Remeber Al Gore's lock box, it ain't like we never put the money in, we did. The politicians took it out and all they are having to pay back is what they stole from it. The system with it's lousy 2% interest would have been solvent for 200 years if they kept their sticky fingers out of it..SS is off budget dummy has nothing to do with the federal budget. Roosevelt should have set it up with a lock box, declared war only reason for raiding it...

No, thank you very much. You have just defined your generation with your unnecessary rant. I t is also plain to see that you too have never served. What ever generation you belong to, if you have served you have the right to point fingers. Otherwise you know where your finger can point.

are you confused or what??? today's generation has no clue they can't even dress themselves they can only pull their pants up half up their thighs, they have issues with a simple ball cap, they don't care about anything or anybody the "current generation is in serious trouble" my idiot 22 year old son was recently fired from Micky D's I have NEVER known anybody in any generation that got fired from MacDonalds my own McD's career was only 3 hours long and I was not fired I walked away from that job in 1973...Idiot Boy was fired Tell me again how bright and successful today's generation is by your standards and in all actuality it was not the "boomers" that caused this most recent collapse that was caused by several generations, each systematically abusing the system for all it was worth, oh yeah and by the way I served my time for my country 4 years in the Navy, how about you Larry and jem, after 4 years I left I did not like military life something about being stuck on an aircraft carrier in the middle of the Atlantic for months at a time no longer appealed to me

No! The give me Generation of the 80's is the worst, the boomer generation was raised by WW2 vets ,an very demanding and strict set of Men, I see young men playing video games and other activities that we felt guilty if we did not work and contribute to the family instead. The Boomer generation is full of Real Men, Husbands, and productive People. Congress passed a law that took our Social Security Money and used it. To Blame the Boomer Generation is wrong, How many in that Generation had the Power and Communication to change things? None!!! it was always the good old boys and Corp's that ran America not the People. The same People that Play the People against People, to distract from the real Problem. GREED.

So Jem, what you are saying is that the Boomer generation has contibuted nothing to humanity for the last 60 years? Thank God you have given us Justin Beiber and the Kardasians.

yea it went from sex, drugs and rock & roll to aids, crack and Justin Beiber....bunch of whiners!

JEM --- Not to worry because your generation's Savior, the Lord Obama, will lead you to the promised land of milk and honey and unlimited"freebies".

WOW u r retarded if u think old school vets didn't have it wayyyyy tougher. Let's see, did WWII or Nam vets have body armor? No! they had flack vest which DO NOT stop bullets! Did old vets have the luxury of spying on/killing the enemy with unmanned drones? No! They flew missions in much less capable aircraft and suffered extremely high casualties! What happened in one single battle a Nam vet or WWII vet took part in? Oh yea they lost as many comrades in ONE DAY THAN WE HAVE LOST IN TEN YEARS OF WAR!!!! What about when they came home? Nothing compared to the pampering today's vets receive, PTSD wasn't even discovered until after Nam so tough luck! I ain't saying some modern vets didn't have a tough time in the desert but what I am saying is I guarantee they didn't have it as near as bad as the vet's in Japan, war torn Europe, and the jungles of Nam! Seriously people get real, I mean honestly, people in general had a tougher time living in those era's let alone fighting in a war during those times! Still not convinced? Who's job was tougher, a farmer from the 40's or a farmer from today (in America of course)?

My age is 49; the last year of the boomers. I expect to face retirement with no
Social Security, Medicare, Pension, IRA, or any other means of support. My retirement plan is little more than the grave.

It is you OLD PEOPLE who elected the corrupt politicians who bought your vote with my old age leaving me to die at least 20 years younger than if you had not robbed me.

You are to blame for the corrupt politicians as any politician who spoke the truth that Social Security and Medicare were intergenerational ponzi schemes was systematically voted out of office in favor of someone who would rob your children into early graves to buy your vote. This issue was beaten to death in the columns of NewsWeak and Readers Digest going back at least as far as the late 1970's so don't bother saying you didn't know what was happening.

You could have saved your honor and voted LIBERTARIAN thus saving this nation from tyranny, but you instead chose the corrupt easy way out instead. If you want to see forgiveness, look to god but I do not fancy your chances there either.

Granted their are a few decent people in your generation such as Ron Paul, but as a group you have set the nation up to commit genocide against your children in exchange for more benefits and entitlements than any economy could ever sustain.

Military service does not excuse treason.

Do a Google search for THE WORST GENERATION and see how history will remember you. I am hardly alone in my opinion.

you would'nt have been a 16 Charlie would you?i hated being referred to as a scope dope.If it flies it dies.

A new rule went into effect during the Iraq war that all solders killed in action would be autopsied. It was found that the ventelation tubes used to treat sucking chest wounds were too short for todays solders to enter their chest cavities.
The reason is that today's solders have a lot more muscle than those who served in Vietnam. They train harder and on average are far more potent.
Today's solders train far harder than the Boomers did, or the pre-boomers before them. They no longer have time to waste waste polishing shoes or ironing shirts or picking up cigarette butts.

Folks...it does not matter how man stress cards they soldier has, if the boots are shined..etc, etc. Ag Grunt is a Grunt it does not matter if you were a pencil pusher or not. one team, one fight. I was a medic in a Light Infantry unit 29thID 1-115 INF got deployed 4 times....got hurt! Good to be alive. Glad to be writing these words!! But the words of Erine Pyle speaks clearer than any thing that I could ever write! WE ARE ALL ONE!! This was written in WWII; I believe is still true today as it was back to WWI...here it is:

"Now to the infantry – the God-damned infantry, as they like to call themselves.

I love the infantry because they are the underdogs. They are the mud-rain-frost-and-wind boys. They have no comforts, and they even learn to live without the necessities. And in the end they are the guys that wars can’t be won without.

I wish you could see just one of the ineradicable pictures I have in my mind today. In this particular picture I am sitting among clumps of sword-grass on a steep and rocky hillside that we have just taken. We are looking out over a vast rolling country to the rear.

A narrow path comes like a ribbon over a hill miles away, down a long slope, across a creek, up a slope and over another hill.

All along the length of this ribbon there is now a thin line of men. For four days and nights they have fought hard, eaten little, washed none, and slept hardly at all. Their nights have been violent with attack, fright, butchery, and their days sleepless and miserable with the crash of artillery.

The men are walking. They are fifty feet apart, for dispersal. Their walk is slow, for they are dead weary, as you can tell even when looking at them from behind. Every line and sag of their bodies speaks their inhuman exhaustion.

On their shoulders and backs they carry heavy steel tripods, machine-gun barrels, leaden boxes of ammunition. Their feet seem to sink into the ground from the overload they are bearing.

They don’t slouch. It is the terrible deliberation of each step that spells out their appalling tiredness. Their faces are black and unshaven. They are young men, but the grime and whiskers and exhaustion make them look middle-aged.

In their eyes as they pass is not hatred, not excitement, not despair, not the tonic of their victory – there is just the simple expression of being here as though they had been here doing this forever, and nothing else.

The line moves on, but it never ends. All afternoon men keep coming round the hill and vanishing eventually over the horizon. It is one long tired line of antlike men.

*

There is an agony in your heart and you almost feel ashamed to look at them. They are just guys from Broadway and Main Street, but you wouldn’t remember them. They are too far away now. They are too tired. Their world can never be known to you, but if you could see them just once, just for an instant, you would know that no matter how hard people work back home they are not keeping pace with these infantrymen in Tunisia."

Today's solders train far harder than the Boomers did

Oh really? Were you there, training with them? Did you see the conditions they had to train in or the lack of equipment and resources they had to deal with? No.

this is written by someone who has no clue as to what veterans have gone through. once youve been in combat then the rest doesn't matter. you are all combat veterans and this is from a combat veteran of vietnam and i am sickened by the way the vets are still treated and ridiculed by the media

rbjko174s

Todays solders carry more muscle from their training. That is why they on average have thicker chest walls than the solders of previous wars. Autopsies prove this.

Also, volunteers naturally train harder and better than draftees. That is why the military has never pushed to reintroduce the draft.

Why are you not even able to give our current servicemen the credit they are due?

jem,

Are you really serious about what you're saying? "Autopsies prove this"? And "volunteers naturally train harder and better the draftees. Thats' why the military has never pushed to reintroduced the draft."

I have never heard (in this case read) of such a line a pure sh!t in my life! You have absolutely NO IDEA of what you're talking about.

But you last statement "Why are you not even able to give our current servicemen the credit they are due?" really raises my blood pressure! You are obviously not a Vietnam vet or you wouldn't have made SUCH A F'N IGNORANT statement as that! By comparison the vets of today are way, way, way better appreciated then I or my fellow vets were.

You must still be living in mommy and daddys basement playing video games.

Richard-3165941
Autopsies proved that the chest tubes used to treat chest wounds were too short to penitrate the muscle of the solders serving in Iraq. In response, the tubes were lengthened. This issue came about because the solders in Iraq, on average, carry more muscle than US solders of previous wars. I accept this as hard evidence that they train harder than the draftees/slaves of previous wars.

The sad truth is that most Vietnam vets fought to avoid prison or the penalties of desertion. They were in effect slaves and their performance relfects this. Those who fought in Vietnam in various special combat units for which one must volunteer were as good as our solders of today, but the bulk of what fought in Vietnam was a slave army that performed as such.

In Vietnam, those who were officially drafted suffered higher casualty rates. Since an official draftee is likely to see less combat than a volunteer (nobody is drafted into the Seals), one can conclude that draftees on average saw less combat while suffering those higher casualty rates.

Military drafts are pure evil. Drafts violate the concepts of liberty, freedom and everything else this once great nation used to stand for.