No Dog Days Here

Thank you for the “Standing United” article in the August 2004 issue of Military Officer. It was good to see the men and women at the tip of the spear in the budget battles. I know I’ve benefited from their hard work. Please pass along my appreciation and thanks to them for all of the battles they have won on my behalf.

Col. James G. Kalanges, USA-Ret.
Chester, Va.

Many years ago I wondered why all the different military organizations didn’t get their heads together and become one voice. I made this suggestion to at least 20 military organizations. … The present 35 members of [The Military Coalition] is double what I was hoping for. Keep up the good work.

Capt. John W. Johnson, AUS-Ret.
Walldurn, Germany

I thoroughly enjoyed [“Battle Stars”] in the August Military Officer magazine. Not only was it well written, but it also represented an age and feeling that is obviously sorely missing among the majority of today’s Hollywood “stars.” It’s a shame the patriotism displayed by the stars in Parachin’s article can’t be found in Hollywood today.

Capt. Vincent S. Averna, USN-Ret.
via e-mail

“Battle Stars” states the commonly held belief that Audie Murphy was the most decorated combat soldier of World War II. To the contrary, here in the Buffalo, N.Y., area where I reside it is the belief of many veterans that Matthew Urban, after a 35-year delay, attained that distinction. Can you clarify this for me?

Lt. Col. David Doyle Jr., USAF-Ret.
via e-mail

Editor’s note: The article actually said Audie Murphy “will be remembered” as the most decorated combat soldier of World War II. Whether or not Urban has surpassed Murphy as the most decorated soldier of the Second World War, it is Murphy’s name most Americans associate with that distinction.

Keep Fighting for SBP

Over the past months I have informed you of my continuing effort regarding our fight to eliminate the “widows tax” connected to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Since November I have sent my letters to [New Mexico] Sens. Domenici and Bingaman plus Reps. Tom Udall, Tom Delay [of Texas], and Heather Wilson.

On Friday, July 30, I received the August issue of Military Officer. Immediately my attention was riveted to the up-to-date status on the SBP offset. Here we go again. I am at a loss to understand the thinking of our Congress. I really came unglued when I read the Pentagon [is resisting “widows tax” relief]. Wow! It seems the road to success is always under construction.

I am extremely impressed by the MOAA staff action in this fight. I belong to the right outfit. If doing what I can to make my feelings known on behalf of the many [will help], then I will keep staying the course. Just perhaps all of us can make sure that help is on the way.

Lt. Col. Frank Shogren, USAF-Ret.
Rio Rancho, N.M.

I certainly appreciate MOAA’s efforts in getting the Senate to amend SBP. Nevertheless, raising the minimum SBP annuity over 10 years is a travesty. I urge MOAA to continue its efforts to correct the injustice of the age-62 annuity reduction.

Col. John O’Halloran, USA-Ret.
Glen Allen, Va.

Mini-Coopers, Maybe?

In his excellent article on the SS Lane Victory [“We Deliver the Goods,” July 2004] author Ralph Wetterhahn is quoted on page 70 as follows: “the Lane Victory steamed into port to disembark 3,834 troops, 1,146 vehicles ...” Might I ask: What type of vehicles were these? The number of troops seems plausible, but the figure regarding the number of vehicles seems too large given the dimensions of the ship, unless of course, we are dealing with bicycles, mopeds, etcetera. Thank you in advance for your clarification.

Lt. Cmdr. P.E. McGinty, USN-Ret.
Fairfax, Va.

Ralph Wetterhahn replies: The paragraph should have read, “The Lane Victory’s war record extended to Korea during December 1950, when it distinguished itself on cargo runs disembarking 3,834 troops, 1,146 vehicles, and 10,013 bulk tons of cargo. Of particular note, on the Dec. 7 mission, while heavy artillery roared overhead from the cruiser USS St. Paul and destroyers USS Charles S. Perry and USS Zellers, the Lane Victory took on 7,009 Korean noncombatants and U.N. personnel.”

Flag Needs No Protection

I completed and returned my Military Officer magazine ballot and proxy as requested [August 2004]. I agree with and cast my votes accordingly for each director, bylaw amendment, and resolution presented, except for Resolution No.1, “The Constitution and the Flag.”

I cannot in all good conscience lend my support to any prohibitive constitutional amendment. In particular, I firmly believe that “Old Glory,” our beloved flag that we all marched and fought under, is much too strong and vibrant and has been the symbol of freedom and justice far too long to need the superficial and shallow protection of a constitutional amendment to keep some fool from showing the world just what an idiot he/she really is by burning our national symbol in some half-baked protest.
When the “Stars and Stripes” or “Old Glory” or the “Star Spangled Banner” is trampled, burned in disrespect, or sullied in any other manner, it hurts. But she will overcome. As a result, she flies a little higher and her colors become a little truer.

Our Constitution grants basic freedoms and rights, not prohibitions. The one prohibition set forth in the XVIII Amendment, ratified Jan. 16, 1919, banned the manufacture, sale, and consumption of alcoholic beverages. It was the most asinine tinkering of the Constitution ever. Fortunately, the XXI Amendment, ratified Dec. 5, 1933, repealed this bad idea of 1919 and restored the rights of the citizens of the United States. The Constitution of the United States is not a regulatory or restrictive document. Rather, it grants the rights of individuals to live as freely as they choose so long as they remain within the law. It has remained so since December 1933.

I urge this prestigious organization, the leader of The Military Coalition, to reconsider its support for any prohibitive amendment to our beloved Constitution.

Lt. Col. S.P. Morrison, USA-Ret.
Portsmouth, Va.

50 Years of Satellite Recon

Your story about the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency [“Lay of the Land,” July 2004] was a tremendous eye-opener to someone who helped start the satellite reconnaissance program 50 years ago.

This year marks the goldenanniversary of the initiation of the WS-117l reconnaissance satellite program, which was a United States effort to counter the [Soviet] threat in the Cold War.

Col. L.F. Rentmeester, USAF-Ret.
Melbourne, Fla.

Correction: On page 29 of the September issue, we incorrectly identified Maj. Gen. William Cugno, ARNG, and Margery LeTourneau.