He would have to be in direct support of that mission to be designated a Korean War era veteran.
European theater veterans and stateside vets are not given that designation.
European theater veterans and stateside vets are not given that designation.
I'm way more socially liberal and supportive of gay rights more than most members of this board and even I think that it's total ******** to force hetrosexual sailors and Marines to serve aboard a shipped named in honor of a gay activist. And to answer the question asked earlier, yes, the name on the side of the ship could effect the morale of the crew which could effect the functionality of the ship.
If the Navy wants to honor homosexuals they should name tug boats after them.
If the Navy wants to honor homosexuals they should name tug boats after them.
Can't argue with this one bit. Only the Obama admin would think of some chit like this.....
On the flip side to all of this, we're a bunch of old men who aren't serving, the young men in today's Navy are likely much more open minded and possibly don't really care if their ship is named after a gay man. They may not even know who the worst 2A president ever was, but are proudly serving on the USS Reagan.
Congrats. You just won the internet.
Looking forward to the USN SS Gabrielle Giffords, should be built without guns or armament if we're staying true to the namesake..
Your ignorance on the subject is understandable, considering your lack of exposure to the U.S. Navy. You could Google United States ship naming conventions to learn more. In this case, oilers should be named after rivers with American Indian names. Frigates and Destroyers are named after U.S. Navy and Marine Corps heroes. If H. Milk distinguished himself in the Korean War with valorous service, using his name on a oiler is a huge disservice. If he merely served without distinguishing himself, then naming any ship after him is improper and begs the question, why?
All will serve as directed, but forcing a disservice upon the sailors required to serve on a ship may in fact harm esprit de corps, which can in fact effect overall performance. If the name of your ship is embarrassing because it fails to follow established conventions, it may effect morale.
History and tradition are HUGE in the Navy. I wouldn't expect you to understand as someone whose never served, but questioning those who have and do understand, well it doesn't sit well with a lot of vets. You should at least recognize the validity of their feelings on the subject and acknowledge them as valid.
If Milk's service was distinguished enough to warrant naming a ship after him and the naming conventions were followed, no reasonable sailor or marine would be upset serving on it, just because some troglodyte thought it was funny.
