Letters

Vietnam Reading List  

Col. Phillip Meilinger was absolutely correct  [“Readings on Vietnam” April, p. 54] when he stated “… the Vietnam War continues to haunt the U.S. military, veterans, policymakers, and families.” I know because I was there. Like most veterans, I simply got on with my life and tried to forget being blamed for that war by my fellow citizens. But the memories never went away. 

I am an author and always wanted to write the great American novel of the Vietnam War. After years of false starts, I finally finished a novel titled “The Trash Haulers.” The plot is based on an air evacuation of wounded Marines that I flew in 1966. It wasn’t what I had envisioned, but it captured the war that I experienced. 

The story ends with a l’envoi that describes what remains of the laterite runway at the heart of the story. “In a generation, it will be gone, swallowed by vegetation, climate, and time, and the land will again claim its sovereignty, humbling the proud with a mute lesson—this was no place to fight a war.”

Maj. Richard Herman,
USAF (Ret.)
Rio Vista, Calif.

 We became pawns in long drawn out high-level conflict negotiations between Washington and Hanoi.

I was assigned to the 17TRS, Udorn RTAFB (1967). The squadron had 12 KIAs, five POWs, and one shot down twice and recovered. His Southeast Asia tour ended with 89 missions over North Vietnam. Fifty-five pilots completed their 100 missions tour.

I had follow-on assignments to England, Germany, 12th Air Force, Austin, Texas, University of Pittsburgh and CINCPAC as a planning officer on the J5 [Strategy, Plans, and Policy staff], where I helped plan the evacuation of Saigon in 1973.  

Col. Roger W. McLain,
USAF (Ret.)
Austin, Texas

Colonel Meilinger’s reading list is on the mark. I urge that Peter Braestrup’s “Big Story” be added to the list. For those wondering how America was turned, this book tells the story.  

How the American press and television reported and interpreted the crisis of Tet 1968 in Vietnam and Washington, has never been told as well.  The book is hard to find.

Maj. Gen. Bill Doyle,
USAF (Ret.)
Papilllion, Neb.

“Readings on Vietnam” by Col. Phillip S. Meilinger, USAF (Ret.), including “The Air War” section was “on target,” with one significant omission regarding Laos. The rules of engagement for the covert USAF bombing campaign in Laos that targeted North Vietnamese forces traveling the Ho Chi Minh Trail required in real time the personal authorization of U.S. Ambassador to Laos, William H. Sullivan (1964-1969). 

All 7th Air Force activity in Laos from airstrikes to aerial reconnaissance to rescuing downed Airmen had to be approved by (our 7th Air Force nickname) “Field Marshal” Sullivan.

In 1966-1967, I was assigned as an air intelligence officer to the Directorate of Targets, 7th Air Force headquarters (Saigon), and detailed as the daily Operation Rolling Thunder “out-country” operations and bomb damage assessment (BDA) briefing officer to U.S. forces Commander Gen. William C. Westmoreland and the Military Assistance Command-Vietnam (MACV) general staff.

Capt. Rollie Sterrett,
USAFR (Ret.)
Simsbury, Conn.

Fatigued

 Reading the April 2023 issue of Air & Space Forces Magazine, I realized that almost every picture of the Airmen, enlisted to officer, were dressed in what we used to call “fatigues!” I guess now they’re called “BDUs” even when we’re not battle dressed for imminent warfighting!

 Whatever happened to dress Blues? I felt proud and part of the Air Force when I put them on (believe it or not, even the garrison hat!). Of course when maintaining the fleet on the flight line I was rolling around in engine oil and hydraulic fluid in fatigues, so putting the Blues on was a privilege.

Parting shot: Consider the picture on page 34 of the swearing-in of new recruits, wouldn’t it be better if the officer performing the ceremony was dressed in Air Force Blue, inspiring them by the real look of the Force?

Peter Hansen
Torrance, Calif.

Editor’s Note: The BDU was phased out in 2011 in favor of the Airman Battle Uniform, or ABU, which themselves were phased out in 2021. Today’s combat uniforms are dubbed OCPs, for Operational Camouflage Pattern.

Help Wanted

The April 2023 Editorial [“Why Recruiting is in Crisis,” p. 2] comes up will all sorts of excuses as to why the military is having a tough time recruiting individuals. “Americans are having fewer children,” “Americans are more protective of our children,”  and “more 18- and 19-year-olds are going to college” are just three of the excuses used. How about putting all the excuses aside and really telling the truth! The military is having trouble recruiting partially because it has become “woke!”

The U.S. military needs to wake up and get their head out of the sand. Trying to appease everyone because you might hurt someone’s “feelings” is NOT doing the military any good. The job of the military is to kill the other guy before they can kill you!  End of story.  The Chinese do not care if they “hurt your feelings” as they are marching into your city/town/country.  

I joined in 1974 and we had members of the LQBT+ among our ranks. The difference is that they kept it to themselves.  We have enough things to worry about in today’s world.  Our recruits are suffering more injuries in Basic Training than in the past because they are out of shape. The military has had to change their rules on tattoos, lowering their standards to who can and cannot join. When will it stop? 

The United States of America was once a feared country. The U.S. military, there was nothing finer—not anymore. 

TSgt. Bruce D. Knoblock,
USAF (Ret.)
Sumter, S.C.

Although Tobias Naegele brought up a few plausible reasons for the decline in recruiting, I truly believe he left out  one other important reason: In today’s current society, being in uniform, whether it’s becoming a police officer, a border patrol agent or in military uniform, seems to be frowned upon.

My DOD job allows me to work closely with military recruiters of all branches, and we discuss this very topic all of the time. When you have parents, school teachers, college professors, and even dozens of politicians freely voicing their negative opinion about the military and law enforcement, what more would you expect than low recruitment? In many places schools and colleges do not allow ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) testing or military recruiters or even security guards on the school grounds because the school staff thinks seeing a person in uniform, may “upset” the students. Really?  

I have been to several schools where the Pledge of Allegiance is no longer said because it may offend someone.  

I’m sure Naegele did plenty of research before getting his editorial published, but maybe in the future, he should speak with some military recruiters that actually have contact with potential recruits and ask them why young people don’t want to join the military.

Chief Warrant Officer 5 Casey Davis,
USA (Ret.)
Colorado Springs, Colo.

Tobias Naegele’s editorial was good, but the situation is worse than he describes. My employer required me to be in a dozen high schools of mostly Black and Latino students. The jobs I had on offer weren’t for all students, and I would suggest the U.S. military as an alternative. The response I got 90 percent of the time was, “that’s a White man’s military.”

When I would point out the fact that there are more Blacks and Latinos in high responsibility positions by percentage in the U.S. military than in corporate America—I was greeted with silence. The response from female members was like asking them if they’d volunteer to eat rocks. In schools where the student body was predominately White, the suggestion of a military career was accompanied by laughter.

I agree that a major problem is that many Americans today do not personally know service members nor do they encounter them in church or social settings. This is a problem that the Air and Space Forces must solve on a personal level; it has to be the responsibility of each service member, including the officer class, to raise their visibility in those venues or to accept that said services will wither.

One other fact skipped by the editorial is the “let someone else do it” attitude adopted since the end of the universal draft. The era of having a known service member in every family ended, and Americans have wholly grasped allowing someone else’s son or daughter to protect and serve this country. They have heard no call from their government, military, or social organizations to enlist their children, and it’s obvious that even with college, social,  and citizen’s duty benefits, the concept does not appeal.   

If the Air and Space Forces and our other military services don’t soon change these things, we’d better pray for real innovations in robotics, because there won’t be any “live” volunteers left.

Norman E. Gaines Jr.,
Hartsdale, N.Y. 

Unclear Clearances

Regarding the May Editorial [“Youth and Consequences,” p. 2], while I certainly understand the premise of “430 risky parties” even if 99.99 percent of those cleared could be trusted, perhaps part of the answer is not in the 99.99 figure, but in the “just under 4.3 million” number cited as holding a security clearance or granted a clearance but not accessing classified material.

 Each clearance requires an investigation, and sometimes multiple investigations—and that is a manpower intensive effort. While several attempts have been made in the past to balance investigations and clearances, we still have too many clearances out there.

 Maybe we should do a complete position-by-position review to ascertain which positions actually warrant a clearance and eliminate those that don’t —thus freeing up that manpower to concentrate on truly needed investigations.

Lt. Col. David C. Mason,
USAF (Ret.)
Williamsburg, Va.

As a former Air Force officer who held a top secret clearance during my military service (1964-68), I’m appalled by this huge security failure. How does a National Guard Airman with just two stripes on his sleeve gain access to some of our nation’s most sensitive information? 

No one below the rank of staff sergeant in the Air Force, Army or Marines, or petty officer 2nd class in the Navy, should have access to highly classified data.    

 [Those more junior] are generally too young, inexperienced, and immature to act responsibly. It’s time to raise the bar for security clearances. Our military leaders must shape up or ship out.

Security clearances for civilians must also be substantially limited. You noted that nearly 3 million people held U.S. security clearances as of October, 2019. How can we protect highly sensitive information when so many people have potential access to it? The number of security clearances for civilian federal government employees and private contractors working for the government should be reduced.

Clearances for those in both categories must be revoked immediately after they leave government service. Failure to do so increases the risk of compromising our nation’s most vital data.

Richard Reif
Flushing, N.Y.

It is very troubling that a 21-year-old released secret documents. It should be remembered that some of the more serious security breaches occurred with people older and more senior. 

John Walker was a Navy officer who, along with many in his family, gave secrets to Soviets. Daniel Ellsberg, a Marine officer, released the Pentagon Papers.

Joe Domhan
West Babylon, N.Y.

Modernization

In “13 Programs That Define the Future” [April, p. 40], sure enough, the upgrade of the nuclear ICBM force didn’t make the cut. However, I see we need another bomber that can get to strategic targets in about 8 hours and a transformer look-alike Combat Rescue Aircraft.  

Additionally, we will keep (modernized again) KC-135s and KC-10s and try to get the KC-46 fully combat operational while we punt and plan another follow-on tanker plus a stealth follow-on. I realize the mission of the Air Force is to promote every kind of hairbrained flying vehicle we can dream up down near the purple water fountain in the Pentagon and then soak the national treasury with their cost overruns for years and years. 

 However, what scares the hell out of our enemies is a proven capability that can deliver weapons on target in the shortest time at many times the speed of sound with the greatest accuracy and in the most cost- effective manner. No weapon system in the history of the Air Force has been more cost effective as a deterrent than the ICBM force. Therefore, we better get off our cans and field the new ICBM system because that is what the enemy fears. 

Col. Quentin M. Thomas,
USAF (Ret.)
Woodstock, Ga.

JROTC

Regarding “Recalibrating JROTC,“ [May, p. 36], I would like to see more military in our nation’s schools. If we have a peaceful draft our students are woefully unready. My ideas to improve military recruitment and the teacher shortage at the same time:

Reactivate the High School Victory Corps of 1942.

Follow the lead of our new NATO member Finland. They require all healthy 18-year-old males to dedicate one year of military service to their country. They have until age 30 to fulfill this requirement. We should do the same. Finland, a small country, can immediately call up 280,000 troops if needed in an emergency.

We also need to pressure all state departments of education to eliminate most certification rules and simply hire good teachers, instructors, and tutors. This would also help recruits pass the ASVAB exam in mathematics and electronics.

Implement these ideas and I believe our nation will be better positioned to engage in warfare if needed.

Staff Sgt. Norman North, 
USAF (Ret.)
Springdale, Ark.

The Fight Continues

I read with interest the well-crafted article [“Rescue & the High-End Fight,” May, p. 28] on rescue’s future.  I have three observations supporting the weapons officers’ commentary countering the ill-advised senior leader opinions and resultant POM prioritization and Combat Rescue Helicopter (CRH) program termination. 

1. Cutting the force structure to 66 percent of the current helicopter forces will condemn the community to that program of record (POR) size now and in the future when some new technology is realized because that will become the “Whiskey POR.” Where are those positions going? And how will they be recovered? This cut is a violation of the moral imperative to leave no one behind. Have we learned nothing from post-Korea, and post-Vietnam interwar CSAR eviscerations? Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall’s claims that any DOD vertical lift asset can do PR is not just wrong it’s refuted in history (downed F-16 Iraq, Feb. 27, 1991) and Joint Forces Command Joint CSAR capabilities assessment from 2009.

JFCOM’s Assessment of Combat Search and Rescue Requirements in a Joint Context force structure analysis directed by RMD-802 advised 171 aircraft to meet moderate deployment dwell risk, 146 to meet high risk. [Norton] Norty Schwartz unilaterally chopped the CRH POR to just 112, an unsustainable structure according this JFCOM study.  This recent program termination puts CSAR in unsustainable extreme risk  according to the study, history, and demand signal realities.

2. The rationale for the cuts: “Divest to Invest” is suspect at best for CSAR because there are no commercial off-the- shelf ready or viable technologies for the mission. Further, just what problem set are these electric vertical takeoff and landing innovations supposed to solve? Certainly not INDOPACOM range, speed, and survivability concerns. How does an injured survivor get in the unmanned aircraft and how does this aircraft defend itself when it’s manned with the survivor on board, becoming an enemy’s strategic target?

3. The April 27 House Armed Services Committee Air Force budget hearing coverage of this topic was plagued by a misleading statements. One question, stated as premise that the CV-22 was the only USAF aircraft capable of accomplishing the INDOPACOM CSAR mission.

That premise is shamefully wrong. In fact, the CV-22 is physically incapable of accomplishing the CRH specification mission profile at only 195 nautical miles, let alone the INDOPACOM ranges in which the CV-22 proponents claim it to be uniquely capable. While the [Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft] tilt-rotor may be a future CSAR candidate, a properly equipped variant is likely 15 years from IOC leaving CSAR pathetically gapped until then.

My congratulations to the morally courageous weapons officers quoted in the article who are doing their duty as Weapons School graduates to set the record straight technically and tactically. They should have been consulted by USAF senior leaders before the poorly informed decisions we made. Let’s do our part to make sure Congress reverses those bad decisions. 

Lt. Col. Steven D. Colby,
USAF (Ret.)
Former 34th Weapons Sq. Commander
Owego, N.Y.

Pride

I enjoy every issue of the Air &  Space Forces Magazine, and was very glad to see and read the letter by Col. Charlie Simpson [“Letters,” May, p. 6]  about his time with Gen. Curtis E. LeMay. Another great recognition of the best general officer of all time. I too served 22-plus years of my 30 years in the Strategic Air Command under General LeMay. My time started in 1954 and ended when he retired.

I had the privilege of meeting LeMay in the mid-1950s at Hunter Air Force Base in Georgia when he came in to the crew briefing after the first launch off alert configuration (ROMEO) of the KC-97G Tankers.

I was crew chief on Tanker 56-6648. He was a great people person, leader and took care of his people—especially his enlisted ranks. 

CMSgt. Donald W. Grannan,
USAF (Ret.)
Benbrook, Texas

I was privileged to command Combat Rescue in the early 1980s. It’s deja vu all over again.  At the time we were still flying aging Vietnam-era Hueys, H-3 “Jolly Greens” and H-53s.

I remember pounding the halls of the Pentagon trying to convince the “Fighter Pilot Mafia” on the Air Staff that the next generation of fighter pilots should be provided the same protection they had when fighting in Vietnam. That is, knowing that should they go down in hostile territory, an elite force of highly trained heroic Airmen would risk everything to bring them home.

It was an uphill battle. They saw every new helicopter as one less F-16.  Eventually we won them over.

Next I testified before Congress, a much more receptive audience to modernizing the fleet.

On Dec. 7, 1982, I personally took delivery of the first USAF UH-60A Black Hawk and flew it out of Stratford, Conn.

Even in peacetime we recorded over 2,000 rescues each year … everything from lost civilian hikers to plucking downed Naval aviators from the ocean.

The rescue motto … “These things we do that others may live,” and the concept of never leaving anyone behind, are values and concepts unique to America. The bean counters should keep that in mind when contemplating the future of rescue.

Maj. Gen. William J. Mall Jr.,
USAF (Ret.)
Fullerton, Calif.

Gratitude

I would like to thank Nick Adde and Air & Space Forces Magazine for a fair article about the very long delay in restoring the grade of my father.

The White House tapes which exonerated my father were first disclosed in 2007 in Air Force Magazine by Lt. Gen. Aloysius Casey and his lawyer/son Pat Casey—obtained while doing research for a book on Gen. Jerry O’Malley.

We are forever grateful to Gen. Ed Rodriguez, Col. Gordon Wilder, Mr. Casey, Myers, Brier & Kelly, LLP and Professor Mark Clodfelter for the thousands of hours they have all worked to correct the record.

John D. Lavelle Jr.
Basye, Va.

Correction: The article “Clearing the Air” (May 2023, p. 41) incorrectly described President Richard Nixon’s 1972 visit to Moscow as the first by an American President since President Franklin D. Roosevelt. As alert readers recognized, Roosevelt never visited Moscow. Nixon’s visit was the first by an American President to the Soviet Union since Roosevelt’s trip to the 1945 Yalta Conference, 800 miles south of Moscow on the Black Sea. 

Reunion Notice:
Berlin Airlift Veterans Association (BAVA) Reunion, to include the 317th Veterans Association and the Burtonwood Association
Sept. 27-30, 2023, in Little Rock, Ark., at the  Hilton Garden Inn, Little Rock Downtown.For additional information and details, Contact: Eddie Ide, Reunion Chairman (eddieide@adeda.net) (828-304-5369 or 828-238-6297).