He's still a Vietnam Vet. Two vets within a week snapped and killed people in cold blood. Ban vets from owning guns.
NO...read carefully...he was not a Vietnam Veteran....he was a VIENTAM ERA VETERAN.... there is a distinct difference, but you know everything, so you already know that, RIGHT?
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
NO...read carefully...he was not a Vietnam Veteran....he was a VIENTAM ERA VETERAN.... there is a distinct difference, but you know everything, so you already know that, RIGHT?
Great, then disregard everything in the article box posted because they listed him as a Vietnam Vet, not Era Vet. What else in that opinion news article was embellished?
BTW, There was a law passed in 1996 making no distinction between in-country and other enlisted soldiers. They are ALL recognized as the same. Look it up. And you're welcome.
Great, then disregard everything in the article box posted because they listed him as a Vietnam Vet, not Era Vet. What else in that opinion news article was embellished? BTW, There was a law passed in 1996 making no distinction between in-country and other enlisted soldiers. They are ALL recognized as the same. Look it up. And you're welcome.
Veterans get a property tax exemption, combat veterans get a larger property tax deduction.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Great, then disregard everything in the article box posted because they listed him as a Vietnam Vet, not Era Vet. What else in that opinion news article was embellished?
BTW, There was a law passed in 1996 making no distinction between in-country and other enlisted soldiers. They are ALL recognized as the same. Look it up. And you're welcome.
(1) Box posted media quotes, not his, and clearly stated the facts might change with time (2) I posted the facts rec'd from the Navy clearly showing he did not serve "in-country" (3) I would be interested in the law you speak of and what it relates to..... I find it difficult to believe that if a Vietnam era soldier served stateside, that he would have received combat pay or campaign ribbons as those in-country did, as well as other things. Let's see the distinction you provide! (4) and once again, you have made an incorrect statement, but rather than admit it, you move the discussion...aka DEFLECTION !
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
(1) Box posted media quotes, not his, and clearly stated the facts might change with time (2) I posted the facts rec'd from the Navy clearly showing he did not serve "in-country" (3) I would be interested in the law you speak of and what it relates to..... I find it difficult to believe that if a Vietnam era soldier served stateside, that he would have received combat pay or campaign ribbons as those in-country did, as well as other things. Let's see the distinction you provide! (4) and once again, you have made an incorrect statement, but rather than admit it, you move the discussion...aka DEFLECTION !
Cic posts like he's a seasoned military expert... he knows all things military... and what a vet thinks and feels... it's as if he actually served. (I think he read a lot of comic books as a kid and played with a GI Joe)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cic posts like he's a seasoned military expert... he knows all things military... and what a vet thinks and feels... it's as if he actually served. (I think he read a lot of comic books as a kid and played with a GI Joe BARBIE)
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Combat veteran would be the distinction - not Vietnam Vet vs. Vietnam Era Vet as Joebxr suggested.
If you served in the military from (2/28/61 - 5/7/75), you are eligible for a Vets Exemption. (era vet) If you served in country, (combat vet) you are eligible for an additional exemption.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Combat veteran would be the distinction - not Vietnam Vet vs. Vietnam Era Vet as Joebxr suggested.
Splitting hairs...best you can do?
Calling someone "Vietnam Vet" is indicative of someone that served in Vietnam Calling someone "Vietnam Combat Vet" is someone that served in Vietnam and saw combat action Not all people that served in-country in Vietnam saw combat All people that served in-country however do get Combat exemption on property tax Calling someone "Vietnam Era Veteran" is someone that was in the Military during the Vietnam era and did not serve in-country
Does it register with you yet????
And just to be clear, "COMBAT VET" (as you have wrongfully stated) refers to more than Vietnam era combat veterans...you should know that! How's that for splitting YOUR hairs?!?!?
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
(1) Box posted media quotes, not his, and clearly stated the facts might change with time (2) I posted the facts rec'd from the Navy clearly showing he did not serve "in-country" (3) I would be interested in the law you speak of and what it relates to..... I find it difficult to believe that if a Vietnam era soldier served stateside, that he would have received combat pay or campaign ribbons as those in-country did, as well as other things. Let's see the distinction you provide! (4) and once again, you have made an incorrect statement, but rather than admit it, you move the discussion...aka DEFLECTION !
You are changing your argument. Nobody said anything about combat pay, it was about Vietnam veteran status. You are saying veterans that were stateside have a separate status and separate veteran benefits.
I questioned the article box posted that described him as a decorated Vietnam veteran. Now you are saying that would mean he was in combat or in-country. But then you say he wasn't in combat. I just want to know if the article was accurate. We've already accepted he definitely listened to right wing radio from box's post, now there is conflicting FACTS(as box puts it) whether he was a Vietnam Vet or not.
Just say box's article was inaccurate and misleading and we can move past this.
You are changing your argument. Nobody said anything about combat pay, it was about Vietnam veteran status. You are saying veterans that were stateside have a separate status and separate veteran benefits.
I questioned the article box posted that described him as a decorated Vietnam veteran. Now you are saying that would mean he was in combat. But then you say he wasn't in combat. I just want to know if the article was accurate. We've already he definitely listened to right wing radio from box's post, now there is conflicting FACTS(as box puts it) whether he was a Vietnam Vet or not.
I forgot to put a period at the end of one of my sentences... the whole post is now invalid. Cic is a nit picker... he doesn't care about FACTS or even OPINIONS... he cares about his agenda... facts never get in the way of his agenda.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
You are changing your argument. Nobody said anything about combat pay, it was about Vietnam veteran status. You are saying veterans that were stateside have a separate status and separate veteran benefits.
I questioned the article box posted that described him as a decorated Vietnam veteran. Now you are saying that would mean he was in combat. But then you say he wasn't in combat. I just want to know if the article was accurate. We've already he definitely listened to right wing radio from box's post, now there is conflicting FACTS(as box puts it) whether he was a Vietnam Vet or not.
Nice try....are you really that reading challenged? Are you actually DYSLECTIC? Sure seems that way! Do you read the posts and understand the words or do you need stick figure cartoons to help you. READ EVERYTHING CISSY....It's all there and very clear and NOT how you want to twist it! I can't help you anymore....if you can't understand everything right, then I guess that's you problem and beyond help.
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
I forgot to put a period at the end of one of my sentences... the whole post is now invalid. Cic is a nit picker... he doesn't care about FACTS or even OPINIONS... he cares about his agenda... facts never get in the way of his agenda.
Not your fact box, because your fact are heavy on opinion. The reporter of the original article you posted called him a decorated vietnam vet. And now both you and Joebxr are telling me that is inaccurate because that would mean he was in-country - which he wasn't. Yet you continue to quote statements in an article that you've argued with me to help prove the inaccuracy in the article. That's too funny.
Not your fact box, because your fact are heavy on opinion. The reporter of the original article you posted called him a decorated vietnam vet. And now both you and Joebxr are telling me that is inaccurate because that would mean he's in-country - which he wasn't. Yet you continue to quote statements in an article that you've argued with me to help prove the inaccuracy in the article. That's too funny.
Reporter took editorial discretion, much like you.... Guy was in the military during Vietnam and had 2 ribbons...SO...reporter embellishes a bit to make it more sensational (just like you do) makes the guy out to be a decorated Veteran. You know how that works...you are a master at this type of deception!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Not your fact box, because your fact are heavy on opinion. The reporter of the original article you posted called him a decorated vietnam vet. And now both you and Joebxr are telling me that is inaccurate because that would mean he was in-country - which he wasn't. Yet you continue to quote statements in an article that you've argued with me to help prove the inaccuracy in the article. That's too funny.
Hey cissaroooo thar goes nuther one of them thar Nits... Quick... go pick er up! Yaaaahoooo... this Cicero fella is a mighty good Nit Picker!!!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
