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
There aren’t that many songs being written about Cindy Sheehan and a few middle aged war protesters at Crawford, Texas.
That’s the difference, Elaine. Also I was listening to NPR the other day and there was a program on about the differences in military equipment. It is so much better that only 3000 were killed verses the huge number of people that were killed in Vietnam. I sat next to a young military man on a plane who kept signing up for more tours of duty. He liked the money, and said it was tax free. A lot of people look on a military career now as a job, and they don’t think about whether a war is “just” or not.
I love that poem! Thank you for sharing it!
” Young people are certainly not interested in street fighting or protesting in the year 2010. They seem to prefer to work within the system and get a job with google, buy the latest apple products,and travel the world.” (Swarthmore mom)
Why is that? I mean, it gives we adults less to worry about when it comes to our kids and grandkids (jail, police batons, etc) but ….
Swarthmore mom,
They’d probably be out on the streets protesting if compulsory military service were required.
I lived in Chicago at that time and witnessed some of the protests. Young people are certainly not interested in street fighting or protesting in the year 2010. They seem to prefer to work within the system and get a job with google, buy the latest apple products,and travel the world.
Songs is good–so’s poetry…
The End and the Beginning
Wislawa Szymborska
(Translated by Joanna Trzeciak)
After every war
someone has to clean up.
Things won’t
straighten themselves up, after all.
Someone has to push the rubble
to the side of the road,
so the corpse-filled wagons
can pass.
Someone has to get mired
in scum and ashes,
sofa springs,
splintered glass,
and bloody rags.
Someone has to drag in a girder
to prop up a wall,
Someone has to glaze a window,
rehang a door.
Photogenic it’s not,
and takes years.
All the cameras have left
for another war.
We’ll need the bridges back,
and new railway stations.
Sleeves will go ragged
from rolling them up.
Someone, broom in hand,
still recalls the way it was.
Someone else listens
and nods with unsevered head.
But already there are those nearby
starting to mill about
who will find it dull.
From out of the bushes
sometimes someone still unearths
rusted-out arguments
and carries them to the garbage pile.
Those who knew
what was going on here
must make way for
those who know little.
And less than little.
And finally as little as nothing.
In the grass that has overgrown
causes and effects,
someone must be stretched out
blade of grass in his mouth
gazing at the clouds.
Szymborska received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1996. She is one of my favorite poets.
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/archive/poet.html?id=6744
Woosty’s still a Cat,
Whoosh … went over my head so fast it mussed my curly locks! 😳
Buddah….one of my favs! funny how those songs become more relevant as time goes by….
Woosty’s still a Cat,
Never been on the site … I know, I know
Probably just leave it all in the attic for my grandchildren to find and wonder about …
__________
I was thinking about your ‘other attic’
😉
Buddha,
Ah, the protest songs of my youth … they don’t write ’em like that anymore.
Woosty’s still a Cat,
Never been on the site … I know, I know
Probably just leave it all in the attic for my grandchildren to find and wonder about …
To Buddha, Scribe, and James M, thanks.
HenMan, having lived through that era, I know exactly how you feel.
Also, Kuwait was 1991. [No edit function here].
I meant Afghanistan abandoned to the Taliban in 2001-02,not 1981.
Blouise,
You reminded me of one of my favorite songs of the era and it happens to be by one of Stephen Stills compatriots, Graham Nash.
“Chicago”
So your brother’s bound and gagged and they’ve chained him to a chair
Won’t you please come to Chicago just to sing
In a land that’s known as freedom how can such a thing be fair
Won’t you please come to Chicago for the help that we can bring
We can change the world
Rearrange the world
It’s dying
To get better
Politicians sit yourselves down there’s nothing for you here
Won’t you please come to Chicago for a ride
Don’t ask Jack to help you ’cause he’ll turn the other ear
Won’t you please come to Chicago or else join the other side
(We can change the world)
Yes we can change the world
(Rearrange the world)
Rearrange the world
(It’s dying)
If you believe in justice
(It’s dying)
If you believe in freedom
(It’s dying)
Let a man live his own life
(It’s dying)
Rules and regulations who needs them
Open up the door
Somehow people must be free I hope the day comes soon
Won’t you please come to Chicago show your face
From the bottom of the ocean to the mountains of the moon
Won’t you please come to Chicago no one else can take your place
(We can change the world)
Yes we can change the world
(Rearrange the world)
Rearrange the world
(It’s dying)
If you believe in justice
(It’s dying)
If you believe in freedom
(It’s dying)
Let a man live his own life
(It’s dying)
Rules and regulations who needs them
Open up the door
FFN said: “Vince Treacy, Congratulations on being the second person in this thread to draw the ‘peace = giving in to Hitler’ connection. And on your inability to distinguish Vietnam from WWII.
“Incidentally, I would like to see an analysis of the whole ‘failing to militarily confront Hitler in the years leading up to 1939 would have prevented WWII’ claim. Just the very reason that it’s a sacrosanct tenet of Conventional Wisdom cited by every politician that is drooling for another use of American military force makes me suspicious of its validity.”
Since FFN aimed this post at me, I will respond.
I think there is little or no doubt about the validity of the thesis that failure to confront Nazi aggression led to World War II.
The Treaty in effect at the time Germany occupied the Rhineland limited it to 100,000 troops. If it had been opposed, its military threat would have dissolved.
In the United States from 1939 to 1941, the isolationists and pacifists opposed all efforts at preparedness, including the repeal of the Neutrality Act in 1939, the Lend Lease Act, the allocation of 50 destroyers to Britain in exchange for leases on Atlantic bases, the military draft, and the extension of military terms of enlistment for a year in 1941, which passed the House by only one vote.
The isolationist, pacifist positions would have left America completely unprepared for World War II.
Of course, after Pearl Harbor, FFN would have simply apologized to the Japanese for having any ships in the Pacific, withdrawn the fleet to San Francisco, and given the Pacific to the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.
It appears to be FFN’s view that United States military people should have simply laid down their arms and bowed their heads. I am happy to hear and discuss FFN’s views of this historical period.
The next accusation by FFN is my “Inability to distinguish Vietnam from WWII?”
Well, I think that depends on the leaders of the country, and the people who elect them, doesn’t it, now?
Why does Mr. or Ms. F.F. Nothing vent his or her spleen so maliciously and gratuitously on the victims of the war, on the draftees, the people who volunteered under the compulsion of the draft, and the people who were already in the military?
Why does FFN take this lofty sanctimonious, supercilious, holier-than-thou stance anonymously?
Why should anyone pay attention to these ridiculous, carping criticisms aimed at an individual, the Chief Master Sergeant,who acted selflessly for his fellows? How was the CMS to know that his actions were illegal. He was not a lawyer, and there were no lawyers there to advise him.
Where was FFN at the time. Was FFN available to advise the CMS on “international” criminal law of war, whatever that may have been?
Significantly, I have yet to count any poster in this thread who has supported FFN’s views.
I have actually spent a lot of time studying World War II, the Cold War, and the post-WWII world.
FFN seems to be fixated on Vietnam, to the exclusion of everything else that has occurred since 1945. I have stated my views on the origins of WWII, and would be happy to hear FFN’s.
As for Vietnam, perhaps FFN should study the actions of the leaders, of the people who elected them, and of himself and herself, and leave the individual soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines out of it.
And, finally, we have yet to hear from the Olympian, anonymous, FFN about his or her own actions during the Vietnam era.
Ordinarily I would not raise this issue, but FFN has brought this entire issue up.
If FFN thinks that the CMS failed in his duty, let’s hear how FFN lived up to his or her ideals.
James,
I have taken just about every regular here to task about something at one time or another. Even the Prof. The one guy I’ve never taken to task?
Vince Treacy.
He’s a real “measure twice, cut once” kind of logician and debater. If he’s not one of your heroes now, just wait. He’ll win you over eventually. 😀
BTW, speaking of personal heroes, nice icon.
I haven’t been around long enough for Vince to be one of my heroes, but that was extremely well said.
What BIL said, above. Vince, you nailed it, and a tip of the hat to HenMan too.
FFN and people who think like that keep throwing up irrelevant arguments, red herrings and strawmen. My old philosophy prof would be horrified at the number of logical fallacies in the several comments left by FFN. How do you cram that many logical fallacies into a half-dozen comments anyway?
Yet another example of why Vince is one of my heroes.