Honor to those who came forward

BUFDRVR wrote:

Those who expose themselves to enemy fire
do not have the same regard for those who don't.

Hogwash! I've got several friends who have missed (just due to poor timing and
luck) DESERT STORM, ALLIED FORCE, ENDURING FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM and I hold
them in the same regard as I do those that saw action. In fact, many of those
that have missed out I hold in higher regard then many of the crewmembers who
have logged combat time.

You don't have a special affection for the crew(s) with which you flew in combat? If
not, I believe you are in the decided minority. And the historical and literary
references abound (e.g., "Scots who have with Wallace bled," "And gentlemen in England
now abed . . .") Keegan wrote an entire book on it (though I can't recall the title,
and frankly didn't care for it much). I wouldn't throw it into others' faces, but
denying the phenomenon exists is, IMO, unsupportable.

BTW, it's nice to see someone can strongly disagree without being disagreeable.

rgds,
KTF

"Richard Lamb" wrote in message
...

Never explain youself.
Your friends don't need it
and your enemies won't believe it.

Taken literally, newsgroups would disappear. Maybe it would be for the better.
(^-^)

George Z.

In message , Richard Lamb
writes

Never explain youself.
Your friends don't need it
and your enemies won't believe it.

Your friends may well need it, otherwise "Why the Hell did he do that"?

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Subject: Honor to those who came forward
From: "M. J. Powell"
Date: 7/6/03 11:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In message , Richard Lamb
writes

Never explain youself.
Your friends don't need it
and your enemies won't believe it.

Your friends may well need it, otherwise "Why the Hell did he do that"?

Mike
--
M.J.Powell



Because he is the officer in charge. It is his decision to make and he made it.
He need onty be called to explain by a superior officer in the chain of
command. Everyone else is outside the loop.

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

From: artkramr@


Because he is the officer in charge. It is his decision to make and he made
it.
He need onty be called to explain by a superior officer in the chain of
command. Everyone else is outside the loop.

During the Korean War some platoon leaders from the 3rd ID were being briefed
in the field on an imminent action while an Air Force Tactical Air Control
Party slumped against a jeep. The company commander, a grizzled vet of WW2
infantry fighting, was outlining an alarmingly risky operation that was just
too much for one recent ROTC graduate. He stood up and began to question why
the operation was necessary. The CO stared at him in icy fury. Everyone
thought this green pea was about to get the butt reaming of all time. But all
the CO said was, "Shut up. Sit down." Four words only, but said with such
quiet, rock solid force and authority that the ego of that 2LT ceased to exist.
He shut up. He sat down.
Then the CO continued on as if nothing had happened.
An Air Force TSgt leaning against the jeep turned to one of his buddies and
remarked, pointing a thumb at the 2LT, "He thought he had a vote."


Chris Mark

On 06 Jul 2003 16:26:49 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

Those who expose themselves to enemy fire
do not have the same regard for those who don't.

Hogwash! I've got several friends who have missed (just due to poor timing and
luck) DESERT STORM, ALLIED FORCE, ENDURING FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM and I hold
them in the same regard as I do those that saw action. In fact, many of those
that have missed out I hold in higher regard then many of the crewmembers who
have logged combat time.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Well said BUFDRVR, I agree completely. Not to mention that in today's
military some of the most dangerous missions do not make it to the
headlines (or any other place of publication).

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 13:27:02 -0400, Cecil Turner
wrote:

BUFDRVR wrote:

Those who expose themselves to enemy fire
do not have the same regard for those who don't.

Hogwash! I've got several friends who have missed (just due to poor timing and
luck) DESERT STORM, ALLIED FORCE, ENDURING FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM and I hold
them in the same regard as I do those that saw action. In fact, many of those
that have missed out I hold in higher regard then many of the crewmembers who
have logged combat time.

You don't have a special affection for the crew(s) with which you flew in combat? If
not, I believe you are in the decided minority. And the historical and literary
references abound (e.g., "Scots who have with Wallace bled," "And gentlemen in England
now abed . . .") Keegan wrote an entire book on it (though I can't recall the title,
and frankly didn't care for it much). I wouldn't throw it into others' faces, but
denying the phenomenon exists is, IMO, unsupportable.

BTW, it's nice to see someone can strongly disagree without being disagreeable.

rgds,
KTF

Many of the most dangerous missions occurred during the build up to
ODS, by units which have never been and probably never will be
acknowledged. I was there during Earnest Will, and I know of what I
speak. What about the Scots who bled before/after the "battle"?

Al Minyard

Don't know much about casualties in Earnest Will or the buildup to ODS, but I suspect
the front line combat units had comparable risk. But again, the point is that the
shared risk perception exists, not that it makes a lot of sense. In some of its least
sensible forms, infantrymen will claim pride of place over airmen, who historically have
much higher casualties (in most conflicts, obvious exceptions exist). USMC leadership
seminars belabor the point to death (and as a bonus you can usually find a couple of
guys who can quote the whole Agincourt speech by heart) while discussing how to use it
to build camaraderie. Or how personnel policies (e.g., individual rotation) can destroy
it.

rgds,
KTF

"Whether it was the oneness of man and acrobatic flying machine, whether it was the
equally shared risk of officer pilot and enlisted crew member, whatever the reason, the
men of the helicopters kept their discipline and their spirit. As the French
parachutists became the paladins of that earlier war, so the U.S. Army aviators became
the dark knights of this one."
From: A Bright Shining Lie by Neil Sheehan

In message , ArtKramr
writes
Subject: Honor to those who came forward
From: "M. J. Powell"
Date: 7/6/03 11:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

In message , Richard Lamb
writes

Never explain youself.
Your friends don't need it
and your enemies won't believe it.

Your friends may well need it, otherwise "Why the Hell did he do that"?

Mike
--
M.J.Powell



Because he is the officer in charge. It is his decision to make and he made it.
He need onty be called to explain by a superior officer in the chain of
command. Everyone else is outside the loop.

Oh, well. Different air force!

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

You don't have a special affection for the crew(s) with which you flew in
combat?

Yes and no. Yes in that I'll always remember my ALLIED FORCE crew and some of
the things we saw and did. No, in that the co-pilot was a nightmare in the jet
(horrible Crew Resource Management case) and not a very good co-pilot to boot.
Just because he was sitting next to me over Belgrade doesn't mean I hold him in
higher regard then my very first co-pilot who was outstanding in every aspect.
Will I ever forget his name? No, probably not. Do I hold him in higher regard
then those with zero combat hours? Hell no, and I would do my best to avoid
flying with him again. As luck would have it, he left the B-52 shortly after
ALLIED FORCE. Since my first combat sortie I've flown with at least four other
crews, including two over Iraq. The majority of the crewmembers from these
crews were hard working stand-up guys and gals. A couple were lazy, no caring
idiots who just happened to be lucky enough to be in the right place (right
unit) at the right time (a conflict going on and they are not in the process of
upgrade training, PME or other issues which keep you at home). Just being in
the right place at the right time earns you no additional stature in my book,
you're conduct while deployed as well as before and after do.

I wouldn't throw it into others' faces, but
denying the phenomenon exists is, IMO, unsupportable.


I was not trying to throw anything in anyones face. Simply stating that I
disagreed with the notion that those with combat time hold others with combat
time in higher regards then those without based solely on combat time.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

BUFDRVR wrote:

You don't have a special affection for the crew(s) with which you flew in
combat?

Yes and no. Yes in that I'll always remember my ALLIED FORCE crew and some of
the things we saw and did. No, in that the co-pilot was a nightmare in the jet
(horrible Crew Resource Management case) and not a very good co-pilot to boot.
Just because he was sitting next to me over Belgrade doesn't mean I hold him in
higher regard then my very first co-pilot who was outstanding in every aspect.
Will I ever forget his name? No, probably not. Do I hold him in higher regard
then those with zero combat hours? Hell no, and I would do my best to avoid
flying with him again. As luck would have it, he left the B-52 shortly after
ALLIED FORCE. Since my first combat sortie I've flown with at least four other
crews, including two over Iraq. The majority of the crewmembers from these
crews were hard working stand-up guys and gals. A couple were lazy, no caring
idiots who just happened to be lucky enough to be in the right place (right
unit) at the right time (a conflict going on and they are not in the process of
upgrade training, PME or other issues which keep you at home). Just being in
the right place at the right time earns you no additional stature in my book,
you're conduct while deployed as well as before and after do.

I wouldn't throw it into others' faces, but
denying the phenomenon exists is, IMO, unsupportable.


I was not trying to throw anything in anyones face. Simply stating that I
disagreed with the notion that those with combat time hold others with combat
time in higher regards then those without based solely on combat time.

BUFDRVR

Well, that's not quite the same thing. The statement in question was:
"Those who expose themselves to enemy fire do not have the same regard for those who
don't." And the context was a unit in which the aircrews fought (with a particularly
high casualty rate) and the ground crews mostly didn't. I maintain that in any such
scenario there will be a dynamic between the two groups. And that it's not based on
rank, but on perceived risk.

Your experience may differ, but there is enough historical precedent to convince me my
own experience (in a different scenario in a ground unit--the interaction between
support troops and trigger-pullers) wasn't a one-off.

rgds,
KTF