Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't think military records of individual soldiers are subject to general FOIA requests and will only release very limited information unless it is for the next of kin.

While lying about achievements is certainly deplorable, I can't help but feel disgusted at those who would dig around a dead soldier, whatever his failings. Attacking people after their death leaves a poor taste in my mouth. It's one thing to correct a record; it's another to claim someone a fraud or liar when it could very well be a mistake or case of last information and the target is dead and cannot make any kind of defense. The glee that some people have taken in this is sickening.

Mind you, I am no fan of glorifying death in general, especially of civilians. The veneration of sharpshooters is a relatively recent and somewhat curious thing as, traditionally, those who strike from ambush at a distance without fear of retaliation run counter to the whole warrior value narrative. Ancient heroes were generally those who overcame greater forces, formidable enemies, etc. by dedication, bravery, or some measure of cunning, but assassins didn't generally fit that mold.

Even in more modern conflicts, while sharpshooters may be highly skilled and perform valuable functions, they have also been reviled by enemy forces, and generally it is the infantry and armor/combat aircraft/warships that are viewed as the heroic equivalent as they face direct danger. Scouting functions are also historically distinguished, though modern snipers often fulfill both roles.

But such is the evolution of warfare and I fully expect that one day drone operators will be similarly honored as they are the next step along the path.

 jmurph wrote:
I don't think military records of individual soldiers are subject to general FOIA requests and will only release very limited information unless it is for the next of kin.

While lying about achievements is certainly deplorable, I can't help but feel disgusted at those who would dig around a dead soldier, whatever his failings. Attacking people after their death leaves a poor taste in my mouth. It's one thing to correct a record; it's another to claim someone a fraud or liar when it could very well be a mistake or case of last information and the target is dead and cannot make any kind of defense. The glee that some people have taken in this is sickening.

Mind you, I am no fan of glorifying death in general, especially of civilians. The veneration of sharpshooters is a relatively recent and somewhat curious thing as, traditionally, those who strike from ambush at a distance without fear of retaliation run counter to the whole warrior value narrative. Ancient heroes were generally those who overcame greater forces, formidable enemies, etc. by dedication, bravery, or some measure of cunning, but assassins didn't generally fit that mold.

Even in more modern conflicts, while sharpshooters may be highly skilled and perform valuable functions, they have also been reviled by enemy forces, and generally it is the infantry and armor/combat aircraft/warships that are viewed as the heroic equivalent as they face direct danger. Scouting functions are also historically distinguished, though modern snipers often fulfill both roles.

But such is the evolution of warfare and I fully expect that one day drone operators will be similarly honored as they are the next step along the path.

Exalted... and I'm disgusted that this is happening on the eve of Memorial-Day weekend.

People are attacking him as a fraud and a liar because he has a long and proven track record of such in numerous other respects (often in extremely deplorable fashion even if you disregard everything and anything combat related), and people are still using his name and claims for profit and politics. In fact, Springfield Armory is using his name to sell an absurdly overpriced "tribute" pistol right now. That's why he continues to get such attention.

It's interesting that his DD214 has so many discrepancies. However, if you look at the FOIA response, the letter states the request was partially denied. While that's certainly not a smoking gun either way, it does leave the possibility that his other awards were either not released or his personnel file was not complete. It is the service member's responsibility to ensure that their personnel file is up to date, and if he never submitted some of his citations, it is completely possible that he could have been given awards that are not in his personnel file. It's also possible that he was given an award or awards connected to classified operations, in which case they also might have not been released with the FOIA request. It's also possible that he simply lied and embellished his record. Based on the evidence provided though, I don't think there is enough to confirm either way at this point.

Or the awards are "sealed"

 Jihadin wrote:
Or the awards are "sealed"

That's what I was referring to when I mentioned the possibility of recieving awards connected to classified operations and not released with the FOIA request.

Well, the DoD told him directly that the claims in his books were wrong, so there is that.

 d-usa wrote:
Well, the DoD told him directly that the claims in his books were wrong, so there is that.

Which could have been based simply on what was in his personnel file. Which, had he not ensured that it was updated himself, could very easily have been inaccurate. It's also possible that if he had been given awards connected to classified operations and subsequently sealed, whatever records the DOD representative had access to might not have contained them.

It's still completely possible that he simply lied and embellished his record, and unfortunately he made other statements in his book that have called his credibility into question, but based on the evidence we have, and without knowing who actually made the statement at DOD and what records they actually had access to, it's not as definitive as the journalists who examined the FOIA response are claiming.

 d-usa wrote:
Well, the DoD told him directly that the claims in his books were wrong, so there is that.

Note we don't have that from a DoD spokesperson, only an unnamed source that is both without context and without direct quotes. And once again his DD214 has all the awards listed, anyone who continues to push the "fraud" term based on that is being intentionally deceptive.

Jerram wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Well, the DoD told him directly that the claims in his books were wrong, so there is that.

Note we don't have that from a DoD spokesperson, only an unnamed source that is both without context and without direct quotes. And once again his DD214 has all the awards listed, anyone who continues to push the "fraud" term based on that is being intentionally deceptive.

It's an easy thing to prove, his DD214 is available and they are free to counter the claims that he's a liar and a fraud. Based on his long history of this kind of stuff, it isn't that hard to believe that he lied about one more thing.

 d-usa wrote:

Jerram wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Well, the DoD told him directly that the claims in his books were wrong, so there is that.

Note we don't have that from a DoD spokesperson, only an unnamed source that is both without context and without direct quotes. And once again his DD214 has all the awards listed, anyone who continues to push the "fraud" term based on that is being intentionally deceptive.

It's an easy thing to prove, his DD214 is available and they are free to counter the claims that he's a liar and a fraud. Based on his long history of this kind of stuff, it isn't that hard to believe that he lied about one more thing.

Here's a link that includes his DD214. I got it from the original article in The Intercept. The DD214 is on the bottom.

link


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is also a Presidential Unit Citation listed on his eval reports that is not listed in his DD214. It's pretty clear that there are some issues with his record, not that that is unheard of.

I haven't read the book or seen the film. I remember some article about Jessie Ventura or something.

Astonishing that it's the most successful war film of all time. I've never heard of it.

One has to suppose that watching 100s of unaware people being shot in the head from half a mile away is very appealing.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Astonishing that it's the most successful war film of all time. I've never heard of it.

One has to suppose that watching 100s of unaware people being shot in the head from half a mile away is very appealing.

I'm curious why you feel the need to attempt a clumsy description of a film you haven't even heard of.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Astonishing that it's the most successful war film of all time. I've never heard of it.

It's not that astonishing when you ignore inflation: all the most successful films "of all time" are also recent films, unremarkably. If you adjust for inflation then many films, such as The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawence of Arabia, Saving Private Ryan, M.A.S.H. etc... all beat it. I think the most successful film of all time, with a war theme (adjusted for inflation) was, in fact, Forest Gump. If you discount Star Wars.

I think Gone with the Wind had that title for a long time if it doesnt still have it.

It would be interesting if they compared number of ticket sales. I'm assuming the "most successful" is based on gross earnings?

DD214 (Kyle)
Silver Star x 2
Bronze Stars X 5 with "V" device
Bronze Star x 1 with "V" device
Navy/USMC Commendation x 2 with "V" device
Meritorious Unit Commendation Medal (POTUS awarded the unit itself)

So what exactly was the lie?

Also. Holy Crap that's some hardcore NCO Eval.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I think Gone with the Wind had that title for a long time if it doesnt still have it.

Oh yeah! Nice catch... I think that is arguably the most successful film ever, and I forgot it is also set to a civil war backdrop (and very much about the impact of war). Now I'm not not certain what constitutes a "war film", but that one would be hard to beat.

 Jihadin wrote:

Navy/USMC Commendation x 2 with "V" device
Meritorious Unit Commendation Medal (POTUS awarded the unit itself)

It looks like his DD214 lists one Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal (without V), one with V, and one Navy and Marine Corps Commendation medal (with V). The Navy Comm with V being the higher of the three.

And a Meritorious Unit Commendation comes from the Secretary of the Navy, although there is a Presidential Unit Citation listed on one of his evals that isn't listed on his DD214.

So... based on that DD214, everything's kosher?

Or is it the fact that the DD214 could be a mistake?

The statement he made with "Two Silver Stars and five Bronze Stars with Valor" is correct. He just has more decorations for Valor below the Bronze.

Hordini made a correction for me. The Unit Citation he can still wear even after he left the unit since he was a member of the unit when it received the reward. Its rewarded to the Unit from the SecNav.
I was thinking Presidential Unit Award.

It is Kosher. Not Audie Murphy level but close. Like edge of field with Audie

 whembly wrote:
So... based on that DD214, everything's kosher?

Or is it the fact that the DD214 could be a mistake?

The medals he claims are on his DD214. There are actually more medals on his DD214 than what he claims in his book. It is possible that there could be a mistake on his DD214, but it's equally possible that his official personnel file, which the DOD would review, could be incomplete, as some awards could be missing from the file if he didn't ensure it was updated before he left the service. It's also possible that he could have legit awards that are not in his record currently due to being sealed if they were awarded for actions in classified operations.

Basically, it is possible that he could have lied and embellished his record. It's equally possible that all his awards are legit. The FOIA request response letter specifically said that part of the request was denied due to national security reasons, so there is further information that is not being released, so the journalist who wrote the article absolutely does not have all the information and none of the information that they do have can prove either that he definitely lied or that he definitely didn't.

One question about the DD214, and I only have my dad's to compare it to, but are awards usually listed in order of precedence?

No. It does not have to be in precedence. It just have to be on there.

Edit

Also its the last official document you receive from the US Military. If one needs to make additions/corrections to a DD214 one has to submit the require documents to HRC (Army not sure what it is for Navy) to make the corrections on the DD214.

Someone from the organization that claimed he lied didn't understand what they were looking at.
I can see where they saw one Silver Star typed and not understand the"(2)" after it. I also can see where he earned one of those Silver Stars by his Eval alone.

 Jihadin wrote:
No. It does not have to be in precedence. It just have to be on there.

Thanks. My dad's has them listed in order, and since that was the only one I have ever actually seen I didn't know if that was the norm or not.

Different time different era different HR.
My block for awards has all my decorations and badges thrown on there in no particular order.
Though the awards and such is important the one that counts towards anything is the bottom portion of that DD214. Blocks 23 to 30. D if you do not have that portion on your father copy of his DD214 then you can request it from


https://www.archives.gov/veterans/military-service-records/

 whembly wrote:
So... based on that DD214, everything's kosher?

Or is it the fact that the DD214 could be a mistake?

The issue according to The Intercept is that his DD214 does not match what was actually awarded - not that he claimed more than what was on his DD214.

Yep I can see where their going with it. Those are the actual announcements and Certificate of awards. Someone or a whole bunch of them in that agency do not understand what they have. I have 638's in my E-Records including those type of Certificates and 638's without Certificates.

The Announcement is read out loud while one is being presented with the Certificate.

You also can see where they have been denied (requesting agency in the FOIA) any other award documents by German. So there are sealed awards involve

 Jihadin wrote:
You also can see where they have been denied (requesting agency in the FOIA) any other award documents by German. So there are sealed awards involve

This is not, at all, what the Navy is saying. They explicitly are saying his records do not match what is on his DD214.

What was denied in the FOIA was spelled out, SSN's and stuff like that.