John Kerry and medal throwing.

Great Debates
41

Please understand, too, that I am not criticizing John Kerry for protesting the Vietnam War. By the early 1970’s, most of the country wanted out.

I think our goals in Vietnam were noble, but badly pursued. And John Kerry had a valid point about asking a man to be the last one to die for a mistake.

But like I said before, it is possible to protest, and protest effectively, without throwing your medals. I consider it an abuse of a national symbol in a piece of political theater.

To then take the medals you once threw on the ground and treat them with renewed respect would imply a repudiation of their use in that way previously. But we haven’t seen a repudiation. John Kerry is proud of being an antiwar protester, which would presumably include all of the actions he took while he was one.

And no, the medals aren’t, strictly speaking, personal property. If they were, I could go to the exchange on the Navy base where I work as a contractor, order a Silver Star from the uniform shop, and put it on. No problem, right? It would be mine. I would have a sales receipt and everything.

I would also be in violation of Title 18, United States Code.

**PART I > CHAPTER 33 > Sec. 704.
Military medals or decorations

(a) In General. -

Whoever knowingly wears, manufactures, or sells any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for the armed forces of the United States, or any of the service medals or badges awarded to the members of such forces, or the ribbon, button, or rosette of any such badge, decoration or medal, or any colorable imitation thereof, except when authorized under regulations made pursuant to law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both. **

The penalty goes up to a year in jail for Medal of Honor impostors.

I think we all know that these medals aren’t just bits of cloth and metal. They represent the thanks of our country for acts of rare heroism. They are not given out often. They are meaningful tokens of thanks.

Throwing them back is, in essence, answering a “Thank you” with a “Fuck you.”

Again, like I have said before, sometimes such an answer is justified. But Kerry is trying to have it both ways here, leaving one set of his medals in the mud and another set shined up and on display.

42

It’s not a national symbol, it’s a symbol of personal recognition. It doesn’t belong to you, and the owners of the medals may do as they please. The tossing of the medals was shocking and effective and helped end the war. It was a noble act. It was a sacrifice of personal glory to save the lives of others.

Ther’s nothing to repudiate. He is still proud of being a protester AND he is proud of his service. There is no contradiction and Kerry has no obligation to justify anything to you.

This is really a joke. All your cite says is that medals cannot be counterfeited and that they can’t be sold to or worn by people who didn’t earn them. It says nothing about people who did earn them and they are, in fact, the personal property of those who did. There is nothing forbidding their desecration or mandating “respect” by those who earned them.

Kerry’s medals are his and his alone. You have no ownership over them and neither does the government. How “meaningful” they are is a matter of opinion, not law and Kerry was under no obligation to imbue a few pieces of cloth with the same meaning as you do or with any meaning at all.

I think there is something to the idea that he was rejecting the ribbons because they represented part of the uniform, part of the military, while the medals themselves are a non-uniform award and are intended to be kept as civilian tokens. One could argue that he was accepting the thanks of the public while rejecting the empty and insincere symbolism of the government.

43

I fully agree with you that there is at least some apparent/arguable discrepancy/inconsistency/contradiction concerning Kerry’s behavior towards his medals over time.

I guess each voter needs to decide for themself how big of a deal they consider this to be.

I would be surprised to hear of any candidate for state or national office whose past did not involve inconsistencies/contradictions/vacillation of at least this magnitude.

I would also be surprised if anyone on either side of the fence thought this issue alone was sufficient to make up their mind one way or another concerning Kerry the candidate.

Sure, it is a valid factor to consider. In my mind, however, it just isn’t that big of a factor.

Do such choices in an individual’s past say something meaningful about their overall character? If so, I would expect additional examples of similar choices to suggest a pattern of behavior.

I believe we could forego all further discussion of medals or national guard service, and neither you nor I would change our minds concerning who we intended to vote for. So why do ostensibly intelligent folks like us keep discussing such matters?

44

The contradiction, in case you haven’t been reading along along, isn’t between service and protest. It’s between throwing medals and displaying them.

How many pieces of your personal property rate entries in the United States Code. And why, exactly, is it illegal for you and I to wear a Silver Star. For that matter, why would it be illegal for John Kerry to wear a Navy Good Conduct Medal, a lesser award that he never earned but that I am, in fact, allowed to wear.

It is because these awards do, in fact, have a meaning, enshrined in law and custom. Just because you don’t know what the laws and customs are, don’t make it any less meaningful.

Stand back for an education.

The Silver Star is the nation’s third highest military award designated solely for heroism in combat. It is granted “For distinguished gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States or while serving with friendly forces against an opposing enemy force.”

The Bronze Star is awarded “For heroic or meritorious achievement of service, not involving aerial flight in connection with operations against an opposing armed force.” John Kerry’s Bronze Star carries the “V” device, to show that it was granted for heroic achievement of service in combat.

The Purple Heart is “Awarded for wounds or death as result of an act of any opposing armed force, as a result of an international terrorist attack or as a result of military operaitons while serving as part of a peacekeeping force.”

Source: http://www.homeofheroes.com/medals/by_branch/medals_navy.html

For the record, John Kerry can’t wear a Good Conduct Medal because they’re only given to enlisted personnel.

What your personal take of these meanings is, I can’t help, Diogenes. But it’s very much a matter of law.

The full medals are very much part of the military uniform. In fact, when you are awarded the medal, they pin the big one on your chest. Full dress uniforms include the big medals, and are often worn by naval officers of John Kerry’s stature.

They are not civilian keepsakes, and I can guarantee you that John Kerry would not have seen them as such.

45

Note to self:

Dinsdale, you ignorant boob. You should know by now that it is folly to attempt to present a reasonable position to a true believer, and expect reason in return. In fact, the best you can generally expect is for your contribution to be ignored. Won’t you ever learn, you shithead?

(Apologies to mods and all if it violates GD rules to direct well-deserved insults in my own direction. And if it helps any, I’ll even apologize to myself. Dinsdale, I am ever so sorry you good looking son-of-a-gun you!)

46

The medals themselves are intended to go beyond an emblem of dress and to survive as tokens of display once military service has ended.

The reason the medals are awarded has nothing to do with whether they must have inherent meaning for the recipent. The recipent has no obligation to imbue them with any meaning or to respect them or to care about them in any way. Whether Kerry can wear medals he didn’t earn is beside the point. the ines he did earn are his. Show me something in the UCMJ that says a soldier may not throw his medals in the garbage or wipe his nuts with them.

A soldier is also under no obligation to imbue the ribbons and the medals with equal meaning. He is permitted to think that the ribbons suck but the medals are cool. They may be equivalent in terms of dress but personal sentiment is not bound by the UCMJ.

You also haven’t shown how any of this would affect Kerry’s ability to be POTUS or even that you care about the answer to your OP.

What would be an acceptable answer to you? What explanation would make you vote for Kerry?

47

Spiny Norman, of course, has an entirely different point of view.

48

IIRC, for an award that high you’d have to have to produce the citation before they would sell it to you, and you’d have to wait a while while they got it to you. Also IIRC, you can’t even get a replacement Medal of Honor, or at least not without help from a member of Congress.

Military awards are taken very seriously.

49

Hey Dinsdale.

For me, the person who opened up this shoebox, I’d be inclined to let it all go, except for one thing. Every time John Kerry is asked about it, the answers get more and more confusing.

I wouldn’t even care that he threw the medals, really. I only care that he threw them, made a big deal about it, but is now displaying them again.

And I’m only mixing it up with DtC because he’s accusing me of having much baser motives than I actually do (if that were true, why would I have made my affiliations fully known at the start). He’s also caught in a contradiction, arguing on one hand that the medals are essentially meaningless, but that the veterans throwing them back was a powerful symbol.

50

Mr. Moto,

We have a president who stampeded us into a war based on patently juiced intelligence (a fact which was well-known before the war but which has recently become controversial among those with short memories and those who depend on those who have them) despite the fact that we had inspectors on the ground in Iraq who could have easily been directed to all those sites were absolutely 100% certain has chemical and biological weapons. So far over 500 of our soldiers are dead, over 3,000 are wounded and we have squandered $200 billion of our national treasure for no visible gain.

On top of that Bush has given the rich so many tax breaks (while offerring musical justifications and lying about the exact magnitude) that we are well on our way towards having the finances of a banana republic.

He based his campaign for being elected president (which he wasn’t) on the idea that, even though he might not be as bright as Al Gore he was a staright shooter who could be trusted. He is now denying that he went AWOL in the national guard even though, to date, not one witness has been found who remembers seeing him on base during the time in question. The White House has been selectively providing records under the pretense that it is providing all available records.

He also ran as a politcal moderate which he means he was given power (not elected) under false pretenses.

Why on earth are you obsessing over Kerry and his medals?

51

How about this, from U.S Navy Uniform Regulations.

Cite: http://buperscd.technology.navy.mil/bup_updt/upd_CD/BUPERS/Unireg/chapter1.pdf

**(1) Members of the Armed Forces (including
retired members and members of reserve components). Wearing
of uniforms is prohibited under any of the following
circumstances:

(b) During or in connection with
political activities, private employment or commercial
interest, that imply official sponsorship of the activity
or interest.
© When participating in activities
such as public speeches, interviews, picket lines,
marches, rallies or any public demonstration which implies
the service supports the principles of the demonstration
or activity. This rule may be waived by the service.
(d) When wearing of the uniform would
discredit Armed Forces.**

Of course, failure to follow regulations is punishable under the UCMJ, especially under the infamous “conduct unbecoming” and “general article” articles. Even you should know that, DtC.

**933. ART. 133. CONDUCT UNBECOMING AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN
Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

  1. ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
    Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court. **

Source: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

I didn’t say that was my aim. What I’m after is an explanation as to why medal throwing was justified thirty years ago, when the medals are valued today.

And listen, DtC, I have honest political differences with John Kerry that would prevent me from voting for him anyway. But I’d like to like him a little more. Is that a good enough reason for you?

52

I see no contradiction here. I’m saying that the meaning is subjective. It’s not necessary for a medal to have meaning for the soldier who throws in order for that gesture to be meaningful to others.

To draw another example, flag burning has absolutely no emotional significance to me. I don’t care one way or the other about it but I know that if I were to burn a flag I would get a reaction from others even though the act would be meaningless to me.

The point of the gesture with the medals was the reaction it got from others, not from any personal significance that the medals may or may not have had to Kerry.

53

What does any of this have to do with medals? This is about what you can do in uniform. It’s totally off point.

I didn’t say that was my aim. What I’m after is an explanation as to why medal throwing was justified thirty years ago, when the medals are valued today.
[/quote]

Because he was making two non-contradictory points with them.

In your OP you said you were asking as a “concerned voter” and that you were “entitled” to an explanation. Now you’re saying you might just hate him a little less. That’s hardly a compelling case for why Kerry needs to explain his actions to you.

Where does pulling strings to get placed in a cushy post and then going AWOL rank on your scale of disrespect for the military? How about sending troops to die under false pretenses? How about daring the enemy to kill your own soldiers?

54

Those are not the facts. You have already been told what the facts are. Why are you repeating something you now know to be untrue? Why should your motives for doing that remain unquestioned?

55

Medals are governed by uniform regulations.

56

Because it’s easier than justifying why he’d support George W. Bush, it seems.

“Being AWOL from duty is no big deal to me, but if you throw away your medals, I’ve got no respect for you!”

57

Medals are governed by uniform regulations. They are part of the military uniform.

Active-duty service members cannot wear any part of that uniform, including medals, to the function listed in my post.

58

Nobody is ever going to charge George W. Bush with abusing his medals of heroism. Of course, the most hazardous action he saw with the National Guard was flying to Washington for a date with Tricia Nixon.

Looks like we’ve fully established that if showing respect scraps of cloth and hunks of metal are more important to you than lying to start a war, then you definitely don’t want to vote for Kerry.

59

Cite?

He didn’t wear them, he threw them away. The point of the rgs you quited is to keep soldiers from making political statements in uniform or from appearing to make a political statement in any official military capacity. There is no regulation against throwing ribbons on the ground while in civilian dress.

60

Let’s be clear about this: Almost nobody on the planet gives a fuck about this issue which is so very anally important to Mr. Moto. And anybody who treats like he does — as if it were the determining issue over who one should vote for for president— is irredeemably committed to voting Republican, anyhow.

Mr. Moto, Kerry’s act may have been an outrage to you but it was a symbolic outrage. Why is that so much more important to you than the very real damage Bush is doing to the country? Our finances are in shambles. We are in what shows every sign of being an ever-more costly military quagmire — the justification for which appears to have been hyped beyond the point of mendacity. Our arrogance has lost us the respect of the world. And, furthermore, if character is such an important issue to you, why don’t you care about the fact that Bush is a blatant, amazingly consistent liar?

C’mon, big guy. You can tell Daddy. What’s the real issue here?