Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Richard Etchberger has finally received the recognition that he deserved back in 1968. Etchberger will receive the Medal of Honor posthumously for his saving the lives of his comrades in a battle in Laos — at the loss of his own life. The problem is that his heroism occurred in a place where our government stated publicly that there were no combat troops. To cover that lie, Etchberger’s bravery had to be buried with the truth.
While the military wanted Etchberger honored at the time, President Lyndon Johnson refused to reveal that the United States had lied to the public and international community (even though Laos itself was aware of our troops).
Etchberger was part of a secret U.S. Air Force radar base used to guide bombers that was located just 120 miles from Hanoi in North Vietnam.
In March of 1968, over 3000 North Vietnamese troops attacked the site, called Lima Site 85, that was defended by fewer than a couple dozen U.S. airmen and about a thousand Laotian soldiers.
Eight Americans were killed and several more wounded. Etchberger deliberately exposed himself to enemy fire “in order to place his three surviving wounded comrades in the rescue slings permitting them to be airlifted to safety.”
Legislation was need to waive the usual rule that such honors have to be awarded within two years of the subject action. Rep. Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota (Etchberger was from Bismarck) helped push for the reconsideration.
Congratulations to the Etchberger family which deserves this recognition from a grateful nation. It is no replacement for their loved one, but it finally allows a nation to honor his selfless courage.
Well done, Master Sergeant, well done.
Source: CNN
“Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.” – Alexander Hamilton
Dear FFN
Yes he could have burned his draft card (do you even know if he was drafted) or disobeyed orders (which orders were illegal?) or simply gone AWOL. In essence, you are saying he is a war criminal so he deserved to be killed. You are also saying that no one who served in Vietnam should have received any medals because they were all war criminals?
The fact is that this man gave his life to save others. That’s a hero in my book and should be in your book too, assuming you’re a decent human being. The fact that it took place in a war which you personally object to is irrelevant.
RIP Chief Etchberger
VT,
I agreed with everything you have said and realize the last paragraph was said in sarcasm, unfortunately there are too many ASS HOLES doing just that.
Maybe as a just reward the Desperado’s or Hell’s Angles should decide to have a party in the clearing to settle all disputes when it is FFN’s or FFZ as you stated time.
After all we are only talking about nothing more than turf wars but on a global scale. Maybe FFN family can then have tattoos place on the arms and tears placed on the right eye…..How many more….
The Right Honorable Mr. F.F. Nothing has sadly neglected to mention one of his all time heroes, one of the greatest peace advocates of the Twentieth Century, who said:
“My good friends, this is the second time there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Now I recommend you go home, and sleep quietly in your beds.”
Neville Chamberlain, misquoting “peace in our time” from the Book of Common Prayer, as peace for our time, on September 30, 1938.
As mespo wisely said, “As for your implied assertion that every peace is a good one, I think history only shows every peace resulting in the triumph of the rule of law is a good one.”
Had FF Naught’s pacifist policies been pursued to their logical end in 1938 through 1941, we would have a nice world today, divided between Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and Imperial Japan.
The total hypocrite “Nothing” now has the nerve, gall, to demean the ordinary soldiers to pursue his folly of mindless pacifism. Let him take his theories back to his little discussion groups and preach them to the choir. Leave the soldiers alone.
Or perhaps FF Zero should really live up to his principles, and take his message to picket lines at the funerals of soldiers who have died in battle.
Marnie:
“Bottom line is he and his comrades died for nothing. We lost. And we were doomed to lose from day one.”
***************
Dying in an act of heroism and in service to our Country will never be considered death “for nothing” among those who value what this Country stands for in our finest hours. Take a stroll through Arlington one day hard past those 300,000 neatly situated marble monuments to American valor. You might learn more about your Country – and human altruism– than any book could say.
mepso,
Another job well done.
mespo727272 1, September 5, 2010 at 11:38 pm
———————
hear hear!!!!
bravo!
Marnie 1, September 5, 2010 at 11:45 pm
Bottom line is he and his comrades died for nothing. We lost. And we were doomed to lose from day one.
The lose of someone that generous and brave is a tragedy, to lose someone that generous and brave for no good purpose is obscene.
——————————————-
That man did not die for nothing…he died for his comrades, his friends, he died for you and me and he died so we could have a chance to make a decision to NOT make the same mistake again… Hero
Marnie, obscene is the definite word here….obscene because the lesson was not learned…now we are in Iraq and for oil…rather than having the mindset to begin freeing ourselves from the ugly chains of Big Oil interests we have allowed Corporate interests to plunder and spoil our shorelines, and sent, under the cloak of Halliburton and Blackwater [and all those other sheilded corporate beasts]our own force of destruction abroad at the expense of the ‘footsoldiers’ of the American economy. They have been traded for outsourcing and offshoring while a few greedy mindless profit. So we are making heroes everyday. I’d rather warm, living breathing people working towards a goal to uplift our lives in a better way…
I think that what constitutes illegal orders is being overlooked here – as I understand it US v. New says that unless orders are illegal on their face they must be followed – it seems likely that the Chief Master Sargent was never issued any illegal orders and thus would inevitably be court marshaled and punished under the UCMJ for any disobedience. FFN you also seem to be saying that the Chief’s presence at a base directing the bombing of the enemy is tantamount to a war crime. As Buddha pointed out, both heroism and it’s opposite are individual achievements (and I share your distaste for calling athletes heroes as well, Buddha). You are only guilty of a war crime if you commit it yourself or order someone else to do it. Heroism is the same except that you can’t order anyone to do it for you. In my opinion the tragic mistake of Vietnam protesters was to ever think that the soldiers were the enemy rather than the civilian leaders and others high in the chain of command. Heroism is not about how someone got into a situation, it is about how someone handled themselves once they were in that situation.
Marnie,
You’re wrong. Three of the Chief Master Sergent’s comrades survived because of his heroism. That’s why he’s being honored.
Bottom line is he and his comrades died for nothing. We lost. And we were doomed to lose from day one.
The lose of someone that generous and brave is a tragedy, to lose someone that generous and brave for no good purpose is obscene.
FFN:
“I’m trying to change the attitudes in this country that lead us to glory in war. As long as we look at dying for the state in the context of an aggressive war as a heroic act, we are condemning ourselves to invade many further countries in the future.”
********************
This is the falsest of dichotomies. One need not love war to honor heroism, self-sacrifice, and courage. Even the personification of non-violence knew that:
Strength in numbers is the delight of the timid.
The valiant in spirit glory in fighting alone.
~ Mahatma Gandhi
As for your implied assertion that every peace is a good one, I think history only shows every peace resulting in the triumph of the rule of law is a good one. The rest are merely interludes for on-going wars. Armed conflict is a potential of our existence, as every person walking alone along a dark alley instinctively knows. To deny that, commits one to a utopia tha has never existed nor is likely to exist. There are worse things that war. To do nothing against slavery and oppression, cower before inhumanity, stand-by mute at indignity directed at others, and failing to kick the ass of a bully, all seem far more damaging to the soul than any war could inflict. Patrick Henry knew that as did the majority of his brethren who mid-wifed this Country into its war-fathered existence. There are valid reasons to fight even if your own person isn’t threatened. Recall that the war we wage to protect ourselves may be waged with equal vigor in defense of others. We have an obligtion to fight and fight hard to defend ourselves and our countrymen. That is exactly what Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Richard Etchberger did on that lonely rock outcropping 42 years ago – and did so to his and our Nation’s credit.
Frater, ave atque vale!
If you wanna see how peaceful Chomsky is…why don’t you call him up on the phone. If you need his number I suggest you call MIT he is supposed to still be teaching classes. I found this on the web for you.
All requests, invitations, questions, and general correspondence should be directed to Professor Chomsky’s MIT email address, available at: http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/www/chomsky.home.html
I do not know if its valid or not.
I suffered from a course that he loved. This was the coarses’ course that I have ever taken, it was the most miserable elective I have ever taken in my life, so much for linguistics…..
No one is speaking about not having an honest discussion at all. What you stated and continue to state offends my sense of dignity which has a fairly high level. Hence, you can say a lot, before I take offense.
What you are doing is digressing about what shouldda, couldda, and didn’t happen. With that you are saying that this mans life and the fact that the US government has denied that this man died saving others and that even post-posthumously his family does not deserve a hero’s medal is beyond belief.
As Mike S has said…I commend you to re-read his post.
Mike,
I’m not trying to “intellectualize people’s suffering.” I’m trying to change the attitudes in this country that lead us to glory in war. As long as we look at dying for the state in the context of an aggressive war as a heroic act, we are condemning ourselves to invade many further countries in the future.
Of course it’s terrible that Etchberger died in Vietnam. I’m not trying to downplay his death (or anyone else’s death in Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia). It’s an awfully cynical thing for Kissinger (or whoever) to send people halfway around the world to die for an invading country. This obscenity is only compounded by trying to convince the world that such an activity is noble, and everyone on this thread is eating it up.
“[Chomsky] talks a good game but to him while he talks of human suffering it is an intellectual rather than a visceral exercize. Thus as brillient as he is, as cogent as his analysis is, he is really not helpful in changing a damn thing, but certainly has surrounded himself with a coterie of admirers who are also ineffectual in the fight against evil.”
This is just silly. He’s been one of the most effective peace activists on the planet. For someone that’s dedicated half of his life to preventing others’ suffering, you’re dismissing his work rather cavalierly.
You’re drawing a false conflict between having an incisive, critical analysis of US power and caring about people. The two coincide, they do not contradict each other.
Anonymously Yours,
I see, so any kind of principled criticism of the Vietnam War or its participants means that America would have been overrun by the Nazis. With nuance like that, it is no wonder that an honest discussion of American crimes in Vietnam has been effectively stifled.
And I never said anything like “he got what was coming to him.” File clerk or machine gunner, no one deserves to die in the jungle at the behest of the state which so callously squanders their lives.
Glad to see that your still eager for the visceral verbal barrage….or is that oral dysentery….
Mike S.,
Well stated and well played. I had forgotten about Nixonland….
“I take precisely the opposite view: the anti-war movement failed to prevent future wars like Iraq and Afghanistan precisely because there was a reluctance to have an honest look at what America and Americans did in the Vietnam war”
FFN,
Here is exactly where we differ and your reference to Chomsky only highlights it. My work in life and in protest politics was done with an eye towards saving real human beings from the suffering the powerful put them through. My ideals are at least the equal of yours or Chomsky’s, but my ego is such that I look to find means of improving people’s lot in life, or in the case of Viet Nam stopping an illegal and murderous war. To do that one has to assist in building movements that bring in people from divergent parts of society and saddled with divergent beliefs, much of which is propaganda.
In my struggles in the 60’s and 70’s I also ran into another type of individual, Chompsky-esque so to speak, who found it much more important to hold the most correct views and thus intellectualized people’s suffering. To me people of that ilk are little better than those they rail against. I worked with and for people suffering. Having the right political analysis (to my mind being hipper than thou) does not cut it when the object is to get people to coalesce againt evil.
Chompsky talks a good game but to him while he talks of human suffering it is an intellectual rather than a visceral exercize. Thus as brillient as he is, as cogent as his analysis is, he is really not helpful in changing a damn thing, but certainly has surrounded himself with a coterie of admirers who are also ineffectual in the fight against evil.
You want to understand the failure of the Movement to stop the Viet Nam atrocites then read Rick Pearlstein’s “Nixonland” which explains how the Movemnt’s hubris helped to continue and expand the war through the Nixon years.
It’s 35 years past and I’m still embarrassed by my being sucked into the ego games of people who I thought represented my side, but really were getting “their rocks off” to the detriment of a true Movement for justice that had a chance to succeed.