# What does the word "veteran" mean?



## Marauder06 (Jun 7, 2015)

Using whatever logic you wish, and in as much detail as you want, explain what the word "veteran" means in a military context.


----------



## HOLLiS (Jun 7, 2015)

Someone who served in the Armed Forces.   IMHO, it is sort of a blanket term.   I don't time served or what their discharge was is much of a part of it.


----------



## medicchick (Jun 7, 2015)

I tend to think of it as someone who served in the Armed Forces and was assigned a MOS.  They type of discharge after completing training don't factor much into things, unless you want to include it as a disclaimer (honorably discharged veteran, dishonorably discharged veteran)  .  I don't really consider anyone who didn't make it through basic/boot as one.  My ex brother in law washed out of Marine Corps boot and is not a veteran in my eyes.  It was fun watching him talk about "his time in the Corps" until RP walked into the room...lol

Combat veterans are a different class and are self explanatory.


----------



## Totentanz (Jun 7, 2015)

HOLLiS said:


> Someone who served in the Armed Forces.   IMHO, it is sort of a blanket term.   I don't time served or what their discharge was is much of a part of it.



Agree 99%. The only alteration your definition has from mine is that I would qualify "served" as someone who has graduated from AIT (or the equivalent).


----------



## HOLLiS (Jun 7, 2015)

Totentanz said:


> Agree 99%. The only alteration your definition has from mine is that I would qualify "served" as someone who has graduated from AIT (or the equivalent).




  OK I will agree to 99.5% (agreement war is on).     What happens to Private Jones who is injured during boot or AIT or equivalent and is medically forced out of the service?


----------



## SpitfireV (Jun 7, 2015)

Over here it generally means someone who has served overseas but it's a term in disuse really- I've only really heard it applied to Vietnam and before returned servicemen.


----------



## DA SWO (Jun 7, 2015)

181 days (or more) of service.
or
Someone who has completed AIT/Pipeline/etc.


----------



## Marine0311 (Jun 7, 2015)

Someone who has served in the Armed Forces and has a Honorable Discharge.


----------



## Totentanz (Jun 7, 2015)

HOLLiS said:


> OK I will agree to 99.5% (agreement war is on).     What happens to Private Jones who is injured during boot or AIT or equivalent and is medically forced out of the service?



In my view, IET Soldiers are training to serve, rather than conducting the service itself.

The issue of IET release is a complicated one (whether it be from injury, other medical issues that come up, or the myriad of other reasons) I don't have a "good" answer for.  If your question is whether or not PVT Jones should be eligible for benefits, that comes down to which benefits and the circumstances of separation.  But would I would bestow him/her with the title of "Veteran"?  No.


----------



## x SF med (Jun 7, 2015)

I'll have to agree with the others, with qualifications.  Any person that has completed Basic, AIT, been assigned to a unit, and either completed an enlistment honorably, or been discharged medically.   A Combat Veteran has to have served in a combat zone.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jun 7, 2015)

Regarding MC's mention of my SIL's Ex?  Yeah, that little shit shut up pretty quick. Was actually comical, he was prattling on about ra ra Corps ra ra Boot and literally shut up tighter than a fucking lug nut after an overzealous mechanic.

For me, it's simple. Honorably discharged, regardless of duration of service.

Anything other.... well, it ain't exactly easy to get a general or anything lower, and any UN-characterized discharge from failure to complete training gets you VA benefits if you got jacked up enough, but it's nothing more than a thanks-for-coming in my opinion.


----------



## AWP (Jun 8, 2015)

99% of the time I'd say "with an MOS/ AFSC/ Rate." The other 1% are those rare cases who were physically  injured during their IET. I'm talking about guys who are shot or fall off a tower or something...directly injured because of the training. That's a small, small percentage but worthy of an explanation. Given the number of frauds walking around today, personally I'd be very skeptical of such claims.


----------



## HOLLiS (Jun 8, 2015)

Thanks, something I never really tho


Freefalling said:


> 99% of the time I'd say "with an MOS/ AFSC/ Rate." The other 1% are those rare cases who were physically  injured during their IET. I'm talking about guys who are shot or fall off a tower or something...directly injured because of the training. That's a small, small percentage but worthy of an explanation. Given the number of frauds walking around today, personally I'd be very skeptical of such claims.




The frauds are a problem.    IIRC if you have 13 people telling you that they served in Viet-Nam,  the odds is that only one did.   I don't think it is done for people who are in the military, but for civilians.   First it was Door gunners, then being a combat vet was enough.   Then Viet-Nam vet meant the same,  then SEA vet, then Viet-Nam era vet.   I think the heck with the frauds.  IF we worry too much about who is who, it can lead to a witch hunt mentality, which it has.    A person claiming Vet status is not saying he/she was a door gunner on the Space Shuttle, just that they served.    Maybe that want the 10% off at Home Depot or Lowes or that free meal at Applebees on Nov. 11.  

Freefalling I am like you, skeptical.   

I think the best story that sort of explains why this happens.   Gunny Halfcock was giving a talk in California.   After a person asks the Gunny, "Do you want to meet Clint Eastwood?"     Gunny responded, "Who is he, how many men did he kill".    Nothing against Clint, but he played a role.. so maybe the wannabes think the same.   I am just playing a role.  

The good thing is,  It is better to be a Vet today than in the 70's and 80's.


----------



## digrar (Jun 8, 2015)

Like NZ a veteran is someone who has served overseas on operations.


----------



## RetPara (Jun 8, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> The other 1% are those rare cases who were physically  injured during their IET. I'm talking about guys who are shot or fall off a tower or something...directly injured because of the training. That's a small, small percentage but worthy of an explanation.



So... by that logic if you injured your back (40% + with fused vertabrae) during the final phase of SSDG Primary Training because you allowed yourself to be thrown out of your Shuttle's Door Gunners Station while the craft was performing sub-light maneuvers to avoid simulated Klingon fire....  you would be a Veteran?


----------



## AWP (Jun 8, 2015)

RetPara said:


> So... by that logic if you injured your back (40% + with fused vertabrae) during the final phase of SSDG Primary Training because you allowed yourself to be thrown out of your Shuttle's Door Gunners Station while the craft was performing sub-light maneuvers to avoid simulated Klingon fire....  you would be a Veteran?



Not if you were at fault. I'm pretty sure there's a safety gram out there about wearing your harness while in the shuttle.


----------



## RetPara (Jun 8, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> Not if you were at fault. I'm pretty sure there's a safety gram out there about wearing your harness while in the shuttle.



There is a Air & Space Safety Notice on the potential failure of the M862 Pressure Suit Hard Attachment points for the M328 Space Shuttle Door Gunner Safety Straps.  There is a requirement for the Aircrew Safety Engineers to stress test each of the hard points to 850 Kilos since the stress on the four hard point links to the internal suit harness can can exceed 500 kilos when the SS is performing sub light, evasive maneuvers.  The ASSN also requires the testing of each strap to 850 Kilos also.  The ASSN was sent out after two SSDG's in primary training had strap failures and one hard point failure while attempting to maintain target lock while the SS was performing an Immelmann combined with a Scissors.  The involved trainees went into null weight situation then receiving a 4G stress that left them hanging loose along the external skin of the SS involved with only one or two straps still connected. 

Freefalling....   you really need to keep up on your publications son.....


----------



## AWP (Jun 8, 2015)




----------



## x SF med (Jun 8, 2015)

RetPara said:


> There is a Air & Space Safety Notice on the potential failure of the M862 Pressure Suit Hard Attachment points for the M328 Space Shuttle Door Gunner Safety Straps.  There is a requirement for the Aircrew Safety Engineers to stress test each of the hard points to 850 Kilos since the stress on the four hard point links to the internal suit harness can can exceed 500 kilos when the SS is performing sub light, evasive maneuvers.  The ASSN also requires the testing of each strap to 850 Kilos also.  The ASSN was sent out after two SSDG's in primary training had strap failures and one hard point failure while attempting to maintain target lock while the SS was performing an Immelmann combined with a Scissors.  The involved trainees went into null weight situation then receiving a 4G stress that left them hanging loose along the external skin of the SS involved with only one or two straps still connected.
> 
> Freefalling....   you really need to keep up on your publications son.....



Bro, you forgot to add the new notice that only the braided unobtanium strap/harness combination in fluorescent green with reflective threads in the braid (M238-A4-E5,Mod7, Mark19) are authorized for use after 12 May, due to the issues with strap breakage from wear on the  newly reinforced hard points on the suits and the new structure lock points for attachment to the Shuttle frame, and they can be used as a PT belt when on the flight line and in the Death Star.


----------



## Etype (Jun 8, 2015)

HOLLiS said:


> I think the best story that sort of explains why this happens.   Gunny Halfcock was giving a talk in California.   After a person asks the Gunny, "Do you want to meet Clint Eastwood?"     Gunny responded, "Who is he, how many men did he kill".    Nothing against Clint, but he played a role.. so maybe the wannabes think the same.   I am just playing a role.


My wife always gives me hell when I talk about artists/athletes/actors... I give a similar response in how they are pretending or playing a game for a living. 

-How many rappers have shot someone? 

--How many actors have actually been in said situations?

-Pro athletes are still doing what I did for fun in middle school- turns out, sports were just there to prepare me for life (SOF).


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jun 9, 2015)

its too early for me to be laughing this hard.


x SF med said:


> Bro, you forgot to add the new notice that only the braided unobtanium strap/harness combination in fluorescent green with reflective threads in the braid (M238-A4-E5,Mod7, Mark19) are authorized for use after 12 May, due to the issues with strap breakage from wear on the  newly reinforced hard points on the suits and the new structure lock points for attachment to the Shuttle frame, and they can be used as a PT belt when on the flight line and in the Death Star.


----------



## Etype (Jun 9, 2015)

x SF med said:


> Bro, you forgot to add the new notice that only the braided unobtanium strap/harness combination in fluorescent green with reflective threads in the braid (M238-A4-E5,Mod7, Mark19) are authorized for use after 12 May, due to the issues with strap breakage from wear on the  newly reinforced hard points on the suits and the new structure lock points for attachment to the Shuttle frame, and they can be used as a PT belt when on the flight line and in the Death Star.


Does that have the cobra style buckle or a locking carabiner?

Would I be wrong in making the assumption that if you are wearing a jet pack you don't need to be tethered? Kinda like in an aircraft with the doors open, you either need to be tethered or have a chute on.


----------



## x SF med (Jun 9, 2015)

Etype said:


> Does that have the cobra style buckle or a locking carabiner?
> 
> Would I be wrong in making the assumption that if you are wearing a jet pack you don't need to be tethered? Kinda like in an aircraft with the doors open, you either need to be tethered or have a chute on.



I'm not breaking any more OPSEC on the SSDG Program.... we've said enough.


----------



## AWP (Jun 9, 2015)

Let's try to drag this thread back on track.


----------



## Theirb123 (Jun 11, 2015)

IMO anyone who volunteered to serve and didn't quit. I have a buddy that shattered his forearm in Marine Corps boot camp, and he's struggled in life ever since. Kept trying but they wouldn't bring him back. He was made for it. So at less than 13 weeks active I refuse to think of him as anything other than a veteran.


----------



## x SF med (Jun 11, 2015)

Theirb123 said:


> IMO anyone who volunteered to serve and didn't quit. I have a buddy that shattered his forearm in Marine Corps boot camp, and he's struggled in life ever since. Kept trying but they wouldn't bring him back. He was made for it. So at less than 13 weeks active I refuse to think of him as anything other than a veteran.



So your argument is that if somebody joins the service and is thrown out during basic, doesn't quit, but failure to adapt, inability to follow orders, creating multiple dangerous situations for other trainees...  as long as that person doesn't quit, they are a veteran.

I'm not sure I agree with you.   The injury to your buddy sucks, but he did not finish basic, does he get disability from the military? did he earn his EGA?  A training injury in Basic does not make you a veteran unless it is in the last week, and that individual is already set to go from 'recruit' to Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, or Coastie.


----------



## Theirb123 (Jun 11, 2015)

x SF med said:


> So your argument is that if somebody joins the service and is thrown out during basic, doesn't quit, but failure to adapt, inability to follow orders, creating multiple dangerous situations for other trainees...  as long as that person doesn't quit, they are a veteran.
> 
> I'm not sure I agree with you.   The injury to your buddy sucks, but he did not finish basic, does he get disability from the military? did he earn his EGA?  A training injury in Basic does not make you a veteran unless it is in the last week, and that individual is already set to go from 'recruit' to Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, or Coastie.



I didn't mean it as literal as that by a long shot. All those you listed are quitting if you ask me. A person fails to adapt by choice. Doesn't follow orders by choice. If you're part of the .5 % of this country that volunteers to serve and it doesn't happen because of something out of your control, basically, you get injured and they won't let you wait to heal, you've earned a little more respect than the average joe.


----------



## x SF med (Jun 12, 2015)

Theirb123 said:


> I didn't mean it as literal as that by a long shot. All those you listed are quitting if you ask me. A person fails to adapt by choice. Doesn't follow orders by choice. If you're part of the .5 % of this country that volunteers to serve and it doesn't happen because of something out of your control, basically, you get injured and they won't let you wait to heal, you've earned a little more respect than the average joe.



You would be surprised by the number of recruit injuries that are self inflicted, or self initiated in order to get out of a contract. Everybody that went through Basic knows people who got injured and or recycled and or recruit medical dropped.  Like I said, if it is in the last week of training, and that person is good to go, they will probably graduate with their class if there is any chance of recovery.  And I know a guy who had an ammo box fall out of a truck during range week...  maybe 4 weeks in to Basic - it broke his femur - and he got recycled (the class he recycled to was nearly a year later) after 6 weeks in the hospital and time in a rehab unit.  Your buddy isn't telling you something.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jun 12, 2015)

76 turned into 52 over the course of 13 meager weeks. All of them chaptered out for various shitbaggery.   Honestly, if someone didn't even pass their associated AIT then calling them a veteran is like calling a police academy washout "officer" when he's back working at winchells handing hot ones to the real badges.

If ya broke in mere initial entry training of any service...... generally speaking you're either physically incapable of doing the necessary duty, or mentally incapable of doing it right/safely.... in either case, it's best for the team as a whole to be a man down rather than a derp up.


----------



## Theirb123 (Jun 13, 2015)

I see your point and you're right, mistake on my part. I guess my optimism for people to be honest about what truly happened got the better of me. Very hard for me to relate to dishonest stories and embellishment, because as I see it, what's the point? Sorry for the ignorance.


----------



## x SF med (Jun 13, 2015)

Cynicism and a jaded outlook, with a healthy dose of reality... that's my secret.


----------



## Brill (Jun 13, 2015)

Theirb123 said:


> IMO anyone who volunteered to serve and didn't quit. I have a buddy that shattered his forearm in Marine Corps boot camp, and he's struggled in life ever since. Kept trying but they wouldn't bring him back. He was made for it. So at less than 13 weeks active I refuse to think of him as anything other than a veteran.



Your buddy is a veteran of boot camp? Insert golf clap.  Here's what Federal law says (24 months of AD or service connected disability):

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.12a

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42324.pdf


----------



## Theirb123 (Jun 14, 2015)

lindy said:


> Your buddy is a veteran of boot camp? Insert golf clap.  Here's what Federal law says (24 months of AD or service connected disability):
> 
> https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.12a
> 
> https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42324.pdf



So you come at me about a post I just admitted to being wrong about 9 hours earlier? thanks for opening my eyes.


----------



## Brill (Jun 14, 2015)

Theirb123 said:


> So you come at me about a post I just admitted to being wrong about 9 hours earlier? thanks for opening my eyes.



Oh damn, my bad. I thought I posted that in the open forum vice going to a PM.


----------



## racing_kitty (Jun 14, 2015)

Alright, knock it the fuck off, both of you.


----------



## reed11b (Jun 17, 2015)

I have a confession. While I agree with the majority that serving a complete enlistment honorably is the definition of "veteran", I have a hard time thinking of fuzzy sleeved senior NCO's as "veterans" after we have been at war for over a decade.
Reed


----------



## The Accountant (Jun 18, 2015)

I feel this is a good fit for the thread.. what criteria does a national conflict need to have in order for one to consider themselves a veteran of that specific period. I'm asking because yesterday I heard somebody who was referred to as a "Cold War Veteran". I am not discrediting it, yet I was puzzled because I never heard someone referred as a "Cold War Veteran".


----------



## The Accountant (Jun 18, 2015)

K9Quest said:


> I feel this is a good fit for the thread.. what criteria does a national conflict need to have in order for one to consider themselves a veteran of that specific period. I'm asking because yesterday I heard somebody who was referred to as a "Cold War Veteran". I am not discrediting it, yet I was puzzled because I never heard someone referred as a "Cold War Veteran".



Note: Yes I forgot "?". Realized that right after I hit post.. doohh!


----------



## HOLLiS (Jun 18, 2015)

K9Quest said:


> I feel this is a good fit for the thread.. what criteria does a national conflict need to have in order for one to consider themselves a veteran of that specific period. I'm asking because yesterday I heard somebody who was referred to as a "Cold War Veteran". I am not discrediting it, yet I was puzzled because I never heard someone referred as a "Cold War Veteran".



There is even a "Cold War Medal"....... kind of a iffy thing,  Reading about it, is also confusing.  Probably no different than the various ERA veterans.


----------



## RetPara (Jun 18, 2015)

Depending on what and where you were... the Cold War got awfully damn hot at times.  There were the recon bird shootdowns, kidnappings, and a LOT of other nasty stuff that went on.   This is the third time a Cold War Service Medal has been introduced into the House.


----------



## Salt USMC (Jun 29, 2015)

Here's an interesting conundrum: http://klfy.com/2015/06/28/veterans-want-apology-from-sheriffs-candidate-mark-garber/

A candidate for a Southern Louisiana parish is stirring up a bit of controversy.  Some local veterans are a little pissed because they think that Mark Garber, who is running for the sherriff's office, has mis-represented himself as a military veteran.

Garber apparently DID deploy to Iraq as a civilian interrogator for AFOSI, attached to a SOTF in northern Iraq.  His bio says that he conducted a number of interrogations at the point of capture, and was even hit with an IED on two separate occasions.  For his actions, he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal   It appears as though he never claimed to be a military veteran, but a statement on a partner attorney's website stated, “Mr. Garber and Mr. Murry [the partner] are military veterans.”  Also, it seems as though he was present at a banquet recently, and when military veterans were asked to stand and be recognized, he stood.  It's not clear what the exact wording was.

Last but not least, his campaign material prominently displays his BSM, as well as a his picture of him in military gear (presumably in Iraq)





His qualifications are listed here, along with his BSM citations.

So what's the verdict?  Mr. Garber is certainly an accomplished man, and his service in Iraq speaks for itself.  While he clearly is a veteran of OIF, and he never explicitly claimed military status, one could conceivably be fooled into thinking that he was in the military at some point.  With that in mind, I think this situation poses two interesting questions: 1) *For his service in Iraq, does Mr. Garber qualify as a veteran? *and 2)  *Is he misrepresenting himself as a military veteran with the intent to influence voting?*


----------



## Marine0311 (Jun 29, 2015)

No and yes.


----------



## Brill (Jun 29, 2015)

He fucking asked questions in Iraq. 

BSM worthy? Maybe but intentionally portraying himself as a combat vet: poor judgement in my opinion.


----------



## reed11b (Jun 29, 2015)

meh, not outraged. He took more risk then some of the "combat" vets that are butthurt about it. At least he left the FOB.
Reed


----------



## Marauder06 (Jun 29, 2015)

How did he earn a Bronze Star if he was never in the military?


----------



## medicchick (Jun 29, 2015)

Marauder06 said:


> How did he earn a Bronze Star if he was never in the military?


I'm trying to find an official release/copy of the citation but here is what he has on his Facebook page along with a photo of the certificate.



> CERTIFICATE & CITATION TO ACCOMPANY THE AWARD OF THE BRONZE STAR MEDAL TO MARK T. GARBER
> Special Agent Mark T. Garber distinguished himself by meritorious achievement as an Interrogator, Special Operations Task Force while engaged in ground operations against the enemy at Joint Special Operations Command, Iraq from 24 March 2006 to 26 July 2006. During this period, Agent Garber conducted over 300 interrogations and tactical questionings of known members of Al Qaeda and other insurgent groups in Iraq. His interrogation skills proved vital in acquiring intelligence that led to the capture of regional leaders of Al Qaeda in Iraq. On numerous occasions, Agent Garber's actions proved to be the difference between mission success and failure in capture and kill missions of Al Qaeda Operatives. As the senior interrogator for Northern Iraq Operations, he trained and instructed new interrogators on mission tactics and ensured they met the strict standards for humane detainee treatment while accomplishing the mission. He accompanied operators on over 70 missions and conducted tactical questionings at the point of capture resulting in the detention of numerous high-value targets. He was twice targeted by road side bombs, one of which disabled the military vehicle he was riding in. He also routinely provided rear security and cover for tactical raid operations. Agent Garber was personally responsible for a significant degradation of Al Qaeda capabilities in Central and Northern Iraq. The exemplary leadership, personal endeavor, and devotion to duty displayed by Agent Garber in this responsible position reflect great credit upon himself and the United States Air Force.



https://www.facebook.com/markgarber...41841.784601964952082/812277892184489/?type=1

As for how, it's not common but also not unheard of.  Joe Galloway was awarded one as was Ernest Hemingway.  Mark Garber was working for the AF so according to below he qualified.   I quoted the USO page, trying to find an official DoD reg but it'll be a few, Bibby needs to get ready for bed.
http://usoonpatrol.org/archives/2010/09/25/the-infrantrymans-medal


> The Bronze Star Medal may be awarded to individuals who, while serving in any capacity with the Armed Forces of the United States in a combat theater, distinguish themselves by heroism (on a level less than to be awarded the Silver Star) or by meritorious service (less than to be awarded the Legion of Merit medal) not involving aerial flight.




*edit*  Some digging found the law/rule/criteria was changed in 2011 to say only service members could be awarded it after 2000.  At the time he was eligible for it but it seems like it has been revoked.  Someone in JAG would have to answer better then I can.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE...1-title10-subtitleA-partII-chap57-sec1133.htm


----------

