Category Archives: military news

No ‘losers’ or ‘suckers’ here

(AP Photo/Brennan Linsley)

Hey, I want to revisit the “suckers and losers” story briefly one more time. It isn’t likely the final time, but I want to make a point.

I come from an extended family of individuals whom Donald Trump reportedly has called suckers and losers because they served in the military.

Let’s see: Dad saw combat in the Navy during World War II. Both of his brothers served in the Army; one of them served in combat during the Korean War, the other served in Germany between Korea and Vietnam. Mom’s two brothers also served; one of them served in the Army Air Force in the Pacific during World War; the other one retired as an Army Reserve colonel.

Three of my brothers-in-law served in the military. Two of them served in the Air Force, the third one served in the Navy during the Vietnam War era.

Four first cousins of mine served in our armed forces. One of them was a Navy fighter pilot; two of them served in the Army, with one of them serving multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan; the fourth served in the Navy intelligence, again during the Vietnam War era.

What’s more, I have one nephew who is currently serving in the Air Force and another nephew who served two Army tours in Iraq before separating from the military.

You know already that I served in the Army in Vietnam.

Where am I going with this? Not a single one of these family members of mine are suckers or losers. They served with honor. Many of them put themselves in harm’s way. I am immensely proud to be kin to all of them.

Donald Trump has truly pissed me off.

‘Losers’ and ‘suckers? My a**!

I am having a difficult time setting aside this latest reporting about Donald Trump’s hideous and profoundly despicable view of those who chose to serve their country.

The Atlantic magazine’s editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, has written a detailed account of statements that have come from Trump about those who were wounded in battle, those who died in battle, those who were captured and held as prisoner and, yes, even those who volunteered to serve in politically unpopular wars.

Goldberg is a first-rate journalist. He stands firmly behind the story he has written. He has sourced it meticulously. Yes, he granted anonymity to the sources, but I understand his reasoning: He wanted to protect them against retribution from Donald Trump.

Trump, though, calls him ghastly names. He denigrates the journalism contained inside the magazine’s covers. Goldberg is a pro and as practitioner of a fine craft, he has every reason to stand behind his reporting. Those who take up careers in serious journalism do so while pledging to always be truthful, accurate and fair. Donald Trump is none of that and we all know it.

I am simply astonished that a commander in chief could say the things attributed to Trump in this piece. It exhibits at so many levels what many of us have known all along, that someone with no public service experience prior to becoming elected president of the U.S. would harbor such miserable views about those who serve their country.

As I have re-read The Atlantic article I find myself muttering to myself that none of this surprises me. Trump cannot tell the truth, so his reported lie about skipping a World War I victory celebration because of “security concerns” is now revealed to have been because he didn’t want the rainfall to mess up his coiffed combover.

Trump infamously denigrated the Vietnam War service of the late John McCain and now we learn that he thought little of the late George H.W. Bush’s World War II service because he, too, got shot down over the Pacific Ocean.

So now Trump has gone on the attack against Jeffrey Goldberg, against a Fox News reporter who has corroborated Goldberg’s reporting, against The Atlantic, against Fox News itself.

The reporting of what Donald Trump has said cuts me deeply, as I am certain it cuts many of us who (a) served our country and (b) are members of families with others who have done their duty for the nation we all love.

I am not a ‘sucker’ or a ‘loser’

Donald Trump went too far long ago. He’s done it once again if what we understand is being reported is true … and I believe what I have read about the current president of the United States.

He has labeled those who were injured or killed in battle as “losers,” and has denigrated those who were captured by the enemy as incompetent warriors.

Trump infamously avoided service during the Vietnam War by finding a doc who would sign off on a medical deferment proclaiming young Donald suffered from bone spurs.

I’ve set the table a bit for what I want to say next.

I happen to be one of those “suckers” and “losers” who sought duty during the Vietnam War. I, of course, do not believe I fit either of those descriptions. Indeed, if there is a sucker and a loser among us, it would be Donald Trump and those like him who parlayed their family wealth and connections into avoidance of public service.

My U.S. Army training class finished its work in early 1969. All of those in our training battalion who learned how to service OV-1 Mohawk airplanes received orders for Korea. But then I developed a medical problem that forced cancellation of my orders.

I stayed behind to be treated for a training injury I suffered. While recovering from a minor surgical procedure, I volunteered for duty in ‘Nam. Why? Because I wanted to see for myself what returning servicemen had experienced during their tours.

The Army granted me my wish. Off I went and I reported for duty at Marble Mountain, Da Nang in March 1969.

Do I consider that an act of a sucker or a loser? No. I sought to serve my country. That’s what I did.

As for Donald Trump and other like-minded draft evaders, they chose another course for their lives. Trump, of course, is the one in the news these days, owing to The Atlantic article that details his loathing and disrespect of those of us who answered the call to duty.

I didn’t receive any medals for valor during my time in a war zone. I did my job to the best of my ability and then came home. At some level, though, the experience enriched me and helped me find my way through the life that awaited me.

That life hasn’t marked me as a sucker or a loser.

It damn sure enrages me when I hear a real sucker and loser like Trump portray my duty as something other than honorable.

Is this the deal breaker?

I once thought Donald Trump’s denigrating John McCain’s service during the Vietnam War would have ended his political career.

Or the time he ridiculed a Gold Star couple whose son, an Army officer, died in Iraq.

How about when Trump mimicked a severely handicapped New York Times reporter?

The coward survived all those missteps. He got elected president.

Now he reportedly has disparaged men and women who have been injured in combat. He calls them “suckers” and “losers.” He supposedly didn’t attend a ceremony at a storied World War I battlefield because the rainfall would mess up his hair. Trump reportedly stood at the grave of a young Marine who died in Afghanistan and said in the presence of the Marine’s father, retired Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, that there was “nothing in it for him.”

Does any of this signal the end of Donald Trump’s hideous tenure as commander in chief?

Oh, I do hope that is the case.

The commander in chief is supposed to revere the men and women he commands. This guy doesn’t. The commander in chief by definition honors their service. Not this one. The commander in chief traditionally speaks of the immense pride of leading the world’s greatest military. Not this guy.

Donald Trump must lose the upcoming presidential election.

Who’s the ‘loser’?

I went to sleep last night after having just read a horrifying tale detailing Donald Trump’s profound disrespect for men and women who have paid the price of defending our freedom against our enemies.

I awoke this morning still believing what I had read.

The Atlantic has reported a litany of examples of Trump disparaging the service that our military personnel have performed. Not to mention the price some of paid with their very lives.

The reporting by Jeffrey Goldberg appears to be well-sourced … and it is credible.

What gives the story its credibility, at least to me, are the words that Trump blurted out in public in 2015 when he was asked to comment on the service performed by the late Sen. John McCain. Someone asked Trump if he considered McCain to be a war hero. Trump’s answer spoke volumes.

McCain is a “hero only because he was captured” by the North Vietnamese after being shot down during the Vietnam War, Trump said. Then he said, “I like those who aren’t captured, OK?”

Can there be any more validation of what Jeffrey Goldberg reported than Trump’s own words? Of course, Trump denies disparaging those who served and died in defense of the nation. The White House has issued a denial as well. You would expect that from both the president and those who work for him.

However, the ring of truth to what has been reported is clanging in my ear. I happen to believe that the man with no public service in his pre-presidency background, the guy who sought bogus medical deferments from serving in the Vietnam War is fully capable of saying what has been reported.

I believe we have been handed a graphic and hideous example of this individual’s unfitness for the job he is trying to keep.

If you read the entire story that I have attached here, I trust you’ll be as horrified as I am. The real “loser” in this episode is the individual who has thrown the term around about our nation’s heroes.

Trump goes beyond reprehensible

The news story I have attached to this blog post says more than I am able to articulate.

It comes from The Atlantic. It is written by Jeffrey Goldberg. It contains multiple sources and it lays out for the entire world to see that Donald J. Trump holds no regard, no respect, zero empathy for those who have served in the nation’s military, let alone those who have been injured or killed in defense of the nation.

You can read the story here.

I will let Goldberg’s reporting stand on its own. It speaks clearly and unequivocally to what many millions have suspected, if not known outright, that Donald Trump is the most despicable individual who has ever sat in the office he now occupies.

I am one American veteran, someone who went to war briefly for the nation we all love, who is rendered virtually speechless at what I have read about the commander in chief.

It’s been 50 years? Wow!

Time has this way of reshaping attitudes toward institutions and the people who give them life and energy.

I returned to civilian life 50 years ago Thursday. I had been in the U.S. Army for two years. I left on Aug. 21, 1968, received my basic training at Fort Lewis, Wash., then my advanced training as an aircraft mechanic at Fort Eustis, Va., took a turn in South Vietnam, then returned to my final duty station back at Fort Lewis.

It was an uneventful tour of duty. It does, though, fill me with pride today as I look back on it.

My final duty station was with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, where I was assigned to a transportation company; I drove a five-ton cargo truck. Then I received a temporary duty assignment to North Fort Lewis, driving a 44-passenger bus that transported recruits to various training stations. The Army had this curious way of assigning soldiers to duty stations that had nothing to do with the training they had received. That’s what happened when I went to the 3rd Cav.

On Aug. 20, 1970, I processed out of the Army. Fort Lewis is just about 150 miles north along Interstate 5 from Portland, Ore., my hometown. I had my own car with me at Fort Lewis. It was my first vehicle, a 1961 Plymouth Valiant, with a slant-six engine and a three-speed manual transmission with the shifter on the floor. Kinda cool, you know?

I received my separation papers and then, dressed in my summer khakis, I drove home.

I was anxious to get out of my uniform. I mean, there were no “Welcome home” signs greeting me at the house. There was no party. Just Mom and one of my sisters were there. Dad was at work.

As I recall, Mom asked me to keep my uniform on and told me Dad wanted to see me at the store where he worked. I drove to the store. Dad greeted me and then introduced me all around. He was proud of the service I had performed and I remember fondly the reaction I got from Dad’s friends and colleagues as we walked through the store.

That was a different time. The America in August 1970 was a far different place than it is in August 2020. Americans didn’t embrace their returning servicemen and women the way we do now. I don’t recall feeling slighted in the moment.

I do recall, though, watching the change come over the nation years later as we welcomed home the men and women who served in the Persian Gulf War, when we greeted them with parades and ceremonies in city and town squares.

Watching those young Americans get that kind of welcome home filled my heart with joy and pride for them. Just as it does now when we see young Americans returning to the nation’s embrace from their fight against international terrorism.

We have grown up since those dark days when Americans somehow saw fit to blame the men and women who merely were doing what we were told. We took oaths to follow orders … and we did.

That was a long time ago. I am glad those dark days are gone.

Nothing to celebrate

The world changed forever 75 years ago to this very day.

That was when a B-29 bomber took off from Tinian Island in the Pacific Ocean and dropped a single explosive device on Hiroshima, Japan. In an instant, tens of thousands of people were vaporized; many thousands more would die from the effects of that nuclear blast.

The nation was involved in a world war with Japan. Another airplane would take off three days later and inflict the same level of destruction on Nagasaki, Japan. A week after that second blast, the Japanese surrendered. World War II was over.

They danced in the streets of this country. A few days after surrendering, Japanese and Allied officials met in Tokyo harbor to sign the documents.

We look back on this day with grimness. It’s not a moment to celebrate. It is an event to commemorate with somber reflection. I am not particularly proud to have been born in the only nation on Earth to have used nuclear weapons in war. Indeed, it is a grim reminder of the path we took to reach that moment.

We had been fighting Japan, Nazi Germany and (until 1943) fascist Italy since 1941. Then in April 1945, our commander in chief, President Roosevelt, died in Georgia and suddenly, a modest man from Missouri, Harry Truman, was thrust into the role of president.

He didn’t know about the atomic weapon being developed in New Mexico until someone from the Joint Chiefs of Staff told him about this new weapon that could end the war quickly. President Truman weighed the cost of unleashing this device against the cost of invading Japan; he chose to use the bomb.

I have long embraced President Truman’s decision. Why? I had skin in that game. You see, my father was in the Philippines when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were incinerated. He was a proud Navy sailor who might have taken part in that invasion of Japan had the order been given and, yes, he could have died in that effort. He had survived intense combat in The Med and likely figured he was living on borrowed time.

So, you must understand that President Truman’s decision allowed me to be born into this world.

Do I celebrate those twin events? Do I perform a happy dance just knowing a wartime president’s resolve allowed me to enter this world? I do none of that.

I merely want to echo the refrain we have heard in the decades since that fateful event: Never again.

‘Beautiful’ World War II? Seriously?

(CNS photo/Paul Haring)

Question of the Moment: Who in their right mind would ever place the adjective “beautiful” in front of the words “World War … “?

Answer: No one in their right mind would ever say that, which leads me to conclude that Donald John “Best Wordsmith in Chief” Trump is out of his mind. He’s gone loony. Bonkers.

He was asked on Fox News Sunday about the issue of renaming U.S. military bases that currently carry the names of Confederate army officers. He then launched into yet another incoherent rant about how those installatons had sent young Americans off to fight in two world wars … which he then described as “beautiful.” 

Yes, he told Chris Wallace that World Wars I and II were “beautiful” conflicts.

They were hideous, ghastly, monumentally tragic at every level imaginable. World War I veterans were subject to mustard gas while dug into trenches along a line facing their enemy.  World War II veterans were sent to battlefields that spanned the globe. The remaining WWII vets are in the 90s now, but ask any of them if they thought that conflict was a “beautiful” endeavor.

Yet the president of the United States, who sought to avoid service during the Vietnam War by claiming to have bone spurs in his feet, now calls the two global conflicts “beautiful.”

Donald J. Trump is batsh** crazy.

Strike the Confederate colors!

Defense Secretary Mark Esper wrote the following today in a memorandum that has gotten worldwide attention: “The flags we fly must accord with the military imperatives of good order and discipline, treating all our people with dignity and respect, and rejecting divisive symbols.”

You only get a single guess on which flag he targeted with this message. Time’s up.

Yep, it’s the Confederate flag, which has been banned at all military installations. Period. Full stop.

I am going to hand it to Mark Esper. His order flies directly into a headwind created by opposition from the commander in chief, Donald Trump, who has made no secret of his outrage over the Confederate flag being targeted as a symbol of hate and national division … which it most certainly is.

Trump has this peculiar affection for the rebel flag, which to my eye symbolizes bloodshed, treason and enslavement.

We fought the nation’s bloodiest conflict, the Civil War, with one side rallying under that flag on the battlefield, where more than 600,000 Americans died. The Confederate States of America committed treason by rebelling against the federal government, seeking to overthrow it … and why? Because the CSA wanted to retain the right of states to allow people to keep other people enslaved.

There you have it. Defense Secretary Esper says all flags that fly on U.S. military installations must comport with the ideals of the nation. Slavery and treason aren’t part of the package.

Now I am wondering at this moment whether the commander in chief is going to override that order. Donald Trump has the legal authority to do it. Will he dare?