Most of what I write (even the more serious stuff) usually has something “tongue-in-cheek” to try to elicit a smile. This essay does not follow that rule.

I was born not long after WWII ended and the Korean War was in full swing. I reached military draft age just after the 1968 Tet Offensive in Viet Nam.

During my formative years, I was taught to believe a hero was the guy who threw himself on a grenade to save his fellow soldiers. He was the guy who pushed the dead machine gunner away from the weapon and took his place, providing the cover fire that would hopefully allow his wounded comrades time to escape. Basically, a hero was someone who knew full well that he was going to die in order to save others and did it anyway.

Nowadays, the term “hero” is applied to people and animals for myriad reasons. It seems to have become a watered down catch-all word for instances that deserve recognition. I was prepared to write an extensive article on this subject but during my research came across another man’s already completed efforts. Chris Martin wrote, “A Veteran’s Perspective: What Makes a Hero?” This chap is far more qualified than I to share thoughts on this sensitive subject. He offers insights I hadn’t considered. HIs humble and honorable essay is well worth the short time it takes to read.

Let me end this by saying that there should be some word or phrase that sets apart those who expect to die while saving others from those who’ve done something that 40 years ago would have been considered common courtesy.

I think almost all of us, at one time or another, have had the occasion to give notable help or to save a life or two. This does not make us heroes. If we did not step up when we were in a unique position to be helpful, it would be difficult to justify our own existence.

There should be a term for the victims of violence (military or civilian) other than “heroes”. Some term of comfort for their families.