Wimpy Fists
I dissagree with what some call hero status. I respect all who serve and have served in our military with honor. President Bush included.
I served in the navy, but I'm no hero. I didn't have to put my life on the line, save a buddy from death or carry out a suicide mission and live to tell about it.
For me, to use the term "hero" to describe every average joe in the military is like spreading ketchup on everything in an attempt to make everything taste the same. It cheapens the meaning. What distinguishes those who have really earned the title of hero from the average joe? If we call all are armed services, "special forces", what then, makes the special forces so special? If we call all our military personal "heroes" what then, make real heroes special?
A Medal of Honor, the highest possible, or a lesser medal is only given to those who have earned it, to those who went above and beyond the call of duty without reguard to their own safty. If every service member were to be given such a medal upon leaving the service, then there is no distinction between those who have earned it and those who just received it for time served. I believe the title of hero and the medals that go with it should be reserved to those who have earned it by going above and beyond. It set's them apart from everybody else.
Even the year in Korea, away from my wife and kids, wasn't something I'd wanna do again, and I've have had numerous "nightmares" over the last 14 years since my return - they're always the same - I'm back in the AF and headin' back to Korea without the wife and kids - I'm ecstatic when I wake up and realize it's not real

Military life was probably way better for me than for many who sacrificed so much more than I did. I wouldn't take anything for all my experiences serving my country - from the nine years spent maintaining Minuteman ICBMs in Montana during -70 degree winters to that year in Korea. I cherish my memories of those times.
Scott



