[ruesrose]

If you served in Vietnam during time of war and you would be a Vietnam Veteran.
If you served in the military during that war but were not stationed in Vietnam, you would be a Vietnam era veteran.

[muawiyah]

One of the differences between WWII and Nam is that if you died in training during WWII you were still identified as a veteran of WWII. Folks who died in training during Nam were accorded only the distinction of being "another dead Viet Nam Era Veteran"

Doesn't seem fair ~ dead is dead ~ and whether you reached the battle field or died along the way in training, it was certainly YOUR WAR.

None of those guys who died in training are on the Memorial.

[yetidog]

So what if you were stationed in Thailand, Formosa, Philippines etc. in support of the war flying or otherwise?

Maybe lots of TDY from the states to Vietnam?

I guess it kind of depends on what your DD214 says.

[mosesdapoet]

“If you served in Vietnam during time of war and you would be a Vietnam Veteran.
If you served in the military during that war but were not stationed in Vietnam, you would be a Vietnam era veteran”

That is exactly the way service organizations including The American Legion, the VFW, and AMVETS view it. You cannot join any of those organizations if your DD 214 (which a member presents for verification) doesn’t state that. The exception is the VFW where you must have served overseas and issued an overseas campaign ribbon issued during that era.

I am a member and have been an officer in the Legion and the VFW because I served in time of a declared conflict (Korea) and met those requirements .

[quadrant]

Would a WWII vet who spent the war working at the Pentagon be a WWII vet or a WWII era vet?

Would a vet who worked - say - at 8th Army HQ in Tokyo and never set foot in Korea be a Korean War vet or a Korean War era vet?

[usacon]

I concur, having served from 1970 to 1992 I consider myself an era veteran.