I take exception to Brian McGrory’s attempt to discredit Colonel Scott Brown’s two weeks of service in Afghanistan by stating that it “was more like a visit” than having “served” in Afghanistan (“Real concerns,” Metro, Oct. 12). Whether it was two weeks or two years, Brown served in a war zone. He wasn’t on the front lines, but he was still subject to mortar attacks and suicide bombers.
McGrory apparently doesn’t realize that the largest number of our military forces are “in the rear with the gear,” as he quotes one unnamed analyst. For every brave soldier on the front lines, there are hundreds in the background providing support, from food servers to tank mechanics.
Comments
Gee, I thought Scott said he was nearly separated from the Guard until the suddenly realized what a mistake that was....oh, wasnt't it about the time he wanted to play senator?
I'm also a Vietnam Era veteran of the Navy and served with a helicopter squadron that provided training for the Navy helo pilots and for the door gunners who were on their way to Vietnam. Just to clarify, it wasn't two weeks in Afghanistan but only about seven or eight days. The problem with what Scott Brown said during the debate was the implication that he did a typical tour in the Afghanistan combat zone. I guess he was subject to the "possibility" of mortar attacks and suicide bombers but I would also guess that military brass ensured that he was never in danger. The short time that he was there probably didn't even give him time to get over the jet lag he would have incurred for the trip. It seems clear to me that his getting himself assigned to spend his duty requirement in Afghanistan was pretty much a publicity stunt. Though it is not the same anymore, during my time folks (like George W. Bush) joined the Guard to avoid having to go to Vietnam. Senator Brown comes off as a duplicitious person trying to capitalize on a claim of being a combat veteran when he really is not one.
Thanks for your service but coming from an Army, Navy and Marine family... I would say many in my family would disagree with you.
Scott Brown is plagiarising heroism.
Senator Brown played soldier while in Afghanistan. The Master Sergeant knows full well the extraordinary precautions that would have been taken to keep a United States senator safe while he enjoyed his war fantasy. Senator Brown was in the rear with no gear. He was building a political resume on the dangers faced by ordinary soldiers in a war zone. I am glad Brian McGrory wrote of it. Keep in mind that real soldiers would have been placed in danger to guard the one who was acting.
Senator Scott Brown's long-time service is not the issue here. It's how he's exploited this service in order to gain votes. You know very well what having served really means, and it's NOT a short two week visit. Members of the Guard receive ribbons for having served their time in Afghanistan. Scott Brown did not receive a ribbon because he did not qualify for "having served". What he did receive was lots of publicity, and photographs while in combat fatigues, from the press when he arrived at the airport.
Courageous members of the Massachusetts National Guard have fought with valor and some have died in Afghanistan and Iraq and their dedicated service will never be forgotten. Politicians who dare to exploit these war zones for publicity in order to gain votes deserve to lose and deserve to be forgotten.
The left assumes he has exploited his service because he has happened to serve. It's something they cannot fight and their attacks on his service is deplorable. They should be ashamed, but I'm afraid many on the left have no shame. The ends justify the means.
Scott Brown's annual active duty spent in Afghanistan was nothing but a photo-op.