Pam, telling sea stories is one thing; never having been to sea is another. People claiming "elite" service, like SEALS or Green Berets, is more common than we might think. They can always claim their missions were "classified."

During all the wars prior to Viet Nam, veterans were classified the same, whether REMFs or combat veterans. The US Dept. of Labor was responsible for segregating Nam vets as "Viet Nam Veterans", or Viet Nam 'Era' Veterans", for the purpose of giving preferance in competition for Federal Jobs. The first group received 10 points preference, while us lesser types received 5 points preference.

While I was never "in country", I went through the same training and preparation. We suited up for the Tonkin Gulf when I was in the Japanese Detachment of the Pacific Fleet Combat Camera Group, but didn't go. I was all around the area; in the Philippines, Okinawa, and several ships for short missions.

While in the Naples, Italy, Detachment of the Atlantic Fleet Combat Camera Group, then known as a Mobile Photo Group, I spent 46 days covering the search for four atomic bombs lost by the Air Force in a mid air collision, plus a couple of missions that were classified, but posed no immediate danger.

My point is that I was ready, willing and able to be sent to Nam, and probably would have, except I got out a few months before the Tet Offensive. I retired as a Chief Petty Officer, and was just as much a Vet as those who served in combat, though I certainly don't compare my service to theirs. I have a bullet in my arm to this day, but it was received in a training accident. Some people, I believe, may need to inflate their contributions to feel better about themselves. Someone asked John McCain why he thought Blumenthal made his false claims, and McCain said, "I haven't a clue." Maybe that's the best place to leave it. Stan