Question for military people on "self-inflicted wounds"

[yellowcanine]

If a soldier gets hit from shrapnel from a grenade he threw at an enemy position during combat is that classified as "self-inflicted and does that mean he doesn't get a purple heart? How is that different from getting hit from shrapnel from a grenade that the enemy threw or one of his comrades threw for that matter? And how would one know anyway? It seems to me that this "self-inflicted stuff from the swifties is a bunch of crap. I always thought "self-inflicted" means you deliberately shot yourself to avoid combat. How does one deliberately wound oneself with shrapnel from a grenade without standing a good chance of killing oneself? If I have it correct, wouldn't any vet see this as a crock of shit, regardless of how they felt about Kerry?

[Jo March]

1. A true war vet would, yes

Vets who served behind a desk - well, they might buy into it.

The military as a whole will see through this. Accusing a soldier of injuring him/herself is a pretty serious charge.

[trogdor]

10. This 22-year desk jockey also thinks they're full of shit.

[Jo March]

11. I meant the ones who sat behind a desk but claim that they

were in battle. Sorry for the confusion there.

I've met a lot of folks who talk about the war and they never saw a day of combat in their entire military career. Yet they seem to relive the war and can't get our troops sent into danger fast enough. Those are the types who would believe this kind of crap.

[wurzel]

2. Normally referred to as "friendly fire".

"Self-Inflicted" usually means exactly what the "swifties" want people to believe.

[zbdent]

13. Whoops, rescind Bob Dole's medals

Most of his damage came from friendly fire . . .

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. try this...

www.purpleheart.org

[BlueEyedSon]

4. Are Kerry's records online?

[veteran_for_peace]

7. Yes

http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_records.html

[fishface]

5. Read it here...

http://www.purpleheart.org/Awd_of_PH.htm

most important:

(6) It is not intended that such a strict interpretation of the requirement for the wound or injury to be caused by direct result of hostile action be taken that it would preclude the award being made to deserving personnel. Commanders must also take into consideration, the circumstances surrounding an injury, even if it appears to meet the criteria. Note the following examples:

(a) In case such as an individual injured while making a parachute landing from an aircraft that had been brought down enemy fire; or, an individual injured as a result of a vehicle accident caused by enemy fire, the decision will be made in favor of the individual and the award will be made.

(b) Individuals wounded or killed as a result of "friendly fire" in the "heat of battle" will be awarded the Purple Heart as long as the "friendly" projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment.

[PsN2Wind]

6. Google "Purple Heart criteria"

It is directly stated that a "self inflicted wound", that occurs in the heat of battle, qualifies the individual for the Purple Heart.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. All This Talk About Purple Hearts

made me go into a cabinet in a room of my home to look at my dad's Purple Heart that he received for taking shrapnel and losing the sight of his right eye in the North African Campaign during World War 2....


He's gone now.... I watched him cry when our POWS came back from North Viet Nam.... He'd be crying now to see what the Swift Boat Veterans For Bush have done to Kerry on behalf of a man who did everything he could to avoid service...


Times like this remind me of Jefferson's admonition that "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."

[veteran_for_peace]

9. Ask Max Cleland about Grenades at close range

What happens to a human body when a grenade goes off close to you? Typically a little more than a piece of shrapnel in the leg.

[lonewolf0507]

12. Sharpnel is Sharpnel

If a member of the Armed Forces is injuried in battle, he is eligible for the Purple Heart. It does not matter how he received the injury. The main point we are all missing is that the injury was received in battle with the enemy. If a member injuried himself, he could possibly faced charges under the UCMJ for injuries considered self inflicted. He could face the following charges:

Article 108- Destruction of Government property (Members are considered Government property).

Article 124- Maiming

Article 134- General Article

I am a retired USN Chief Petty Officer who worked in the Legal office and processed many Court Martials.

[PsN2Wind]

14. Hi Chief

Might want to change that to "intentionally injured himself".

[markses]

15. There is no such thing as an "accidental self-inflicted wound"

One dawn, our wire patrol
Carried him. This time, Death had not missed.
We could do nothing but wipe his bleeding cough.
Could it be accident? - Rifles go off...
Not sniped? No. (Later they found the English ball.)
-Wilfred Owen, S.I.W.

In military parlance, the term "self-inflicted wound" has always contained within its definition purposive action. That is to say, it has always been used to refer to a wound purposely inflicted on oneself - usually with the end in view of avoiding further action, or suicide. Since its real emergence in the British trenches during the First World War - where the practice was so common that even the great war poet Wilfred Owen has a poem entitled S.I.W. - the term meant only this: A wound purposely inflicted on oneself with the end in view of avoiding front-line service.

One cannot contemplate an "accidental" self-inflicted wound any more than one could contemplate an "accidental" suicide. If it is classed a suicide, it is by definition purposive. We may not have other words for accidental deaths caused by oneself (by bad luck, chance, or foolishness - i.e., all those accidental asphyxiations as parts of sexual acts are NOT suicides), but they are certainly not called suicides. The term "suicide" - BY DEFINITION - means purposive action: it means you did it on purpose. The same goes for "self-inflicted wound." A wound that happens by accident (rifles go off), even if you caused the accident, is not technically a "self-inflicted wound," since the term "self-influcted wound" does not include accidental wounds, and never has. Purposiveness is an essential (which is to say, necessary) element of the term.

Needless to say, Ms. Malkin is perfectly aware of this fact, so trying to imply that a 'self-inflicted wound" doesn't necessarily mean purposive action is even more of her dishonest mealy-mouthedness.

[wurzel]

17. Malkin isn't the only one. The "swifties" say the same thing.

On the Lehrer Hour, Lehrer challenged (is his name Eliot, the "swiftie in chief"?) on using the phrase. And he was soooo innocent!! Acted as if everyone knew he didn't really mean "self-inflicted"!

[fknobbit]

16. When discussing self-inflicted wounds

Sleaze boat guys would do well remembering that when Nam got to be a threat to G.W. that he considered "blowing out an eardrum with a shotgun", snarf ; ), or going to CANADA, except he couldn't find the way. Need not have worried cause daddy had the pull.

[yellowcanine]

18. Related question - even if fire is not returned, isn't it still combat if

one is in a situation where the enemy is believed to be? One of the things the swifties seem to be claiming is that Kerry was wounded by his own fire in a situation where he was not under fire. Whether or not that is true, and I doubt that it is, isn't it moot, as there must be plenty of cases of friendly fire injuries where the enemy wasn't returning fire. Obviously if you get hit from shrapnel from your own or a comrade's grenade but the grenade took out an enemy position there is going to be no return fire. But it was still combat, right - and you still deserve a purple heart?

[DrFunkenstein]

19. George Bush Isn't Worth The Shrapnel In John Kerry's Ass

And that's all I've got to say.

[polmaven]

20. I don't know why it even matters.

The charge is clear that the shrapnel wound occurred earlier in the day than when Kerry is claiming. It does seem to me that his crew mates who were actually on the boat with him would have known if he was injured and bleeding before the time he was pulling Mr. Rassman on board, or if the injury occurred during the incident.

The argument here should be WHEN the injury occurred, not weather or not it was "self inflicted".

[yellowcanine]

21. My understanding is he was wounded in the same mine explosion that

blew Rassman off of his boat into the water. So yes, it was before he pulled Rassman aboard, and what of it?

[polmaven]

22. I agree with you..almost..

My point is that the injury occurred during the incident which ended with Lt. J.G. Kerry pulling his crew mate back aboard the boat. It does seem to me that those crew mates would have known if the injury had occurred EARLIER IN THE DAY!!!

These guys are despicable. In doing this, they are downplaying many, many medals and citations that were earned, as were John Kerry's, honorably and admirably. And they say Kerry dishonored those veterans. BAH!!!!! It is THEY who are trashing the wounds of thousands of vets.

[NavajoRug]

23. In the scenario presented, the "self-inflicted" wound . . .

. . . is no different than a "normal" combat wound.

I'm not sure about this, but I think the real issue is whether there was an attempt on the part of Kerry and/or his superiors to falsify the cause of the wound or something else about the combat action in which he was wounded.