Perspective on D-Day

Thanks for the D-Day articles [“Remember, this is an invasion” and “Neptune’s Treasures,” June 2004]. Some interesting facts that were not mentioned: lci-326, lci-85, and lst-21 (pictured in the articles) all were manned by U.S. Coast Guard personnel. In 1945 there were 46,283 Coast Guard personnel operating 288 Navy ships and 6,851 Coast Guard members operating 262 ships for the U.S. Army. This is in addition to the Coast Guard cutters and small craft.

Currently the U.S. Navy has 258 ships “active in commission,” and the Coast Guard only has 39,000 active duty personnel. To put things in perspective, the U.S. Navy now has 30 fewer ships on active duty than the number manned by the Coast Guard during World War II, and the Coast Guard has 7,283 fewer personnel for all of the homeland security, law enforcement, aids to navigation, and other duties than it had assigned only to Navy ships during World War II.

Lt. Cmdr. K.R. Ball, USCG-Ret.
via e-mail

Expanding Debate

[“Expanding Mission,” May 2004] was extremely timely. ... [The State Department] has demonstrated, over the years, a blatant disregard for policies established by the executive branch and Congress. The State Department has conducted activities that would appear to be near treasonous. The various foreign affairs desks are led by individuals and their staff who are entrenched in the State Department dysfunctional bureaucracy, over which even Secretary of State Colin Powell has no control.

Because of this dysfunctionality and recklessness, you can see why the executive branch and Congress are willing to have someone to fill the void in diplomacy. I personally don’t believe this is the job of the military, but something must be done!

Cmdr. Kenneth L. Koski, USN-Ret.
via e-mail

“Expanding Mission,” by The New Republic editor Joshua Kurlantzick, is a disgrace. The political bias of The New Republic is well known. If I wanted to read left-wing articles about a “military coup,” I would subscribe. This scurrilous article is insulting to our military, whose subordination to civilian political authority always has been its chief dogma.

Lt. Col. John P. Seawell, USA-Ret.
Big Bend National Park, Texas

Adding Insult to Injury

A recent letter writer (“Your Views,” May 2004) has inadvertently rubbed salt into the wounds of many careerists on the matter of Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC). Not all military retirees served 20 years on active duty. Some of us are regular and reserve careerists of the combat arms, so severely wounded by enemy fire that we could no longer march, get into a Jeep, or even sit at a desk.

Multiple surgeries and long hospitalizations didn’t [correct] our disabilities. Unlike those who suffered lesser wounds, or none, and retired for longevity, we were unable to continue on active duty because of our handicaps and were retired before reaching 20 years. Many of us had 15 to 19 years of active duty and served in combat in both World War II and Korea.

And now, left behind by the president, the Pentagon, and Congress, we Purple Heart warriors do not qualify for CRSC because we did not serve 20 years on active duty. This is a catch-22 for [those of] us who bore the burden of battle and suffered the additional loss of careers because of our wounds.

Theodore Roosevelt once stated, “A man who is good enough to shed blood for his country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards.” Fortunately, Vice Adm. Norbert R. Ryan Jr., USN-Ret., recognizes the injustice, and in the spirit of the old Rough Rider has written, “We realize that time is critical to many deserving personnel. ... We will do our best to win this as soon as possible.”

Maj. Arthur F. Dorie, USA-Ret.
Cocoa Beach, Fla.

Defending Reserves

Perhaps [Col. J. Bruce Laubach (“Your Views,” June 2004)] forgets that during the Clinton administration, nearly 1 million active and reserve servicemembers were put out on the street as the result of a massive reduction in force. That draw down decimated the active components to a point where the United States cannot go to war without the reserves! Added to that, we have managed to get our military involved in every firefight imaginable around the globe, and we are not done yet.

When Pfc. Nichole Frye, a Wisconsin reservist, was killed in action next to an active duty soldier, shouldn’t she and her family have had the same equipment, body armor, pay, benefits, etcetera, as her active duty counterpart? They both died in service to their country and are equally dead.

Since the formation of the reserves, reservists have stepped up to the flag time and again. The frequency since 1990, as well as the duration of deployment, is at a record level since World War II. If we “run off those reservists,” as stated by Colonel Laubach, the results will be swift. They won’t reenlist! That will require Congress (that’s you and I as taxpayers) to either return to the draft or double the active component forces. How do you want it?

These young men and women are leaving their families and jobs not just for this deployment but for the third and fourth deployment in the past 10 years. As they lay their lives on the line, and as we pick up our retirement checks, why not just thank and support them for the job they are doing? I recently attended the visitation for Specialist Hoyer, a reservist from Ellsworth, Wis., killed in action. There was no distinction [made between] active and reservist. As he lay in his dress greens, he was simply a heroic soldier who answered the call and then made the supreme sacrifice for his country.

Col. Max Oleson, USA-Ret.
via e-mail

Sin of Omission

Former Army Capt. Phil Dyer neglects to mention credit unions as perhaps the best alternative available to military personnel to save on banking fees while paying a lower rate on credit cards (“Financial Forum,” April 2004). …

In addition to fewer fees and lower credit card rates, I would note that according to www.bankrate.com the average new car loan (48 months) at a credit union at year end 2003 was 5.84 percent, as compared to 7.14 percent for banks.

There are currently 82 federally insured credit unions nationwide whose primary field of membership is military and many others that include the military as part of a broader membership field.

Check out a daily comparison of credit union and bank rates across 29 financial products both by state and national averages at www.datatrac.net/nafcu/default_2.asp. In today’s financial services marketplace, it is foolish not to also check out credit unions as a potential component of wise financial planning.

Capt. Fred R. Becker Jr., USN-Ret.
President, National Association of Federal Credit Unions

Correction: Due to a database error, we attributed an incorrect rank and service status to Air Force veteran Robert F. Dorr (“Your Views,” 2004). We regret the error.
.

I recently read the June issue with D-Day on the cover. I also visited the D-Day Museum in New Orleans, and at no time did anyone know what “D” means in D-Day. I have an opinion that it means “disembarque.” Can you clear that up for me?

— Guy Erickson, via e-mail

 

Editor’s note: According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, “In U.S. military history, [D-Day is] any designated day for the commencement of a major operation. ... The designation apparently originated in World War I; its meaning is uncertain, though it is probable that the ‘D’ stands for nothing more than ‘Day.’ (The designated time for commencement of action on any D-Day was referred to as H-Hour.) The most celebrated D-Day occurred on June 6, 1944, the first day of the Anglo-American invasion of Europe in World War II.”