Young veterans should also realize that they are not the only people in the world that suffer from PTSD. Their PTSD might have manifested itself relatively fast and is therefore more 'visible,' but that doesn't mean their spouse or other family members don't also experice PTSD that perhaps took a lot longer to manifest itself and so is less obvious. For example, their spouse might have had a bad relationship with their father when she/he was a child growing up and so now as a young spouse has problems (ie PTSD).

Anyway, the point is that veterans shouldn't think they are the only people with problems.

I saw that video that those guys posted from their Delta flight and thought, "So what? This is a minor administrative mix-up and can be fixed by a travel voucher or a phone call. Use a little fortitude and resourcefulness and get over it."

Even the guys on the video said that the normal procedure was to allow three bags and that DoD had a special exception that the gate agent clearly didn't know about.

It was especially bad because I found the video posted by another Army vet on Facebook with the title "And to the soldiers on this flight that recently returned from Afghanistan, Delta Airlines would like to extend a big fat fuck you."

Everything about the guys' attitude screamed smug entitlement. It was clearly meant to inflame other vets' anger against Delta by portraying some minor mix-up as a deliberate smear or discrimination against the military. Which it wasn't.

Did the guys have a right to be frustrated? Sure.
But were they right to claim discrimination? No way.

I'm a retired Marine Officer and I also think this incident smacks of a growing culture of entitlement. I guess the real question I have is why are troops who are obstensibly traveling on government orders paying for baggage in the first place? Is this another example of troops being expected to reimburse the government because their leadership is too cheap to pay for excess baggage?

Save that Ugly American act for when you're in France or somewhere ; )

We don't need to be springing that on our fellow citizens.

Stolen Valor. Check out Master Sergeant Soup Sandwich: http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=24149

I went through a bit of this myself when I got back from deployments in 03 and 05. There are a lot of factors that went into it, none of them good ones, but the bottom line is that I occasionally acted like an entitled ass. I think a great point in the original post is that fellow servicemembers/veterans are usually the only folks who will call out jackass vets. If you see someone embarrassing themselves, and the rest of us by extension, try to be a voice of maturity.

I'd say the "Youtube Justice" video was wrong on many levels.

1.) The travel orders allow for four bags. If Delta had charged them for excess baggage, these troops could have easily filed a travel voucher and gotten reimbursed within a few days.

2.) Their chain of command did them a disservice by allowing them to travel commercial air without a government travel card, or by at least ensuring they had a personal credit card with a sufficient limit to allow for travel blunders (cancelled flights, etc)

3.) One soldier did not pay $2800 for an extra bag. 30 soldiers paid a total of $2800 in excess baggage fees.

4.) I hope the chain of command formally counsels and reprimands the soldier who thought it was a good idea to check a bag containing a rifle, grenade launcher, and a pistol. Has an airline ever lost your luggage? Let's just hope Delta Airlines delivers lost luggage to the arms room!

Great points but I wonder sometimes if that sense of entitlement is not in a lot of American youth today? Maybe I am just becoming older and think of them "young whipper snappers" as something new but I see that in a lot of kids now.
On a side note, wish a few vets would make a video nailing those kids for
A.) Not knowing that they get anything they spend back from the DoD on baggage if it's on their orders
B.) Being huge whiners and going way overboard with the video.

That being said, it is distasteful when veterans abuse this such as in the case with the baggage fees.

Roger on the need for all people--young and old, military and civilian--to take a deep breath and feel a sense of humility before taking perceived injustices to the Internet.

That said, however, the argument that troops should've somehow "sucked it down, paid the fee themselves, and waited weeks or months to be reimbursed on their travel vouchers" seems itself to come from a position of (non-Economy Class?) privilege. Worse that than, however, it's full of taxpayer-unfriendly illogic.

As a frequent multi-bag and in-uniform traveler during my 2010 pre-deployment, I often encountered ticket agents from many airlines who rolled their eyes at my insistence that I be checked-in by a human, not a self-service kiosk. If I used the kiosk, I'd get charged for baggage. If I got checked in by a human--one who could acknowledge that I was traveling on military orders--I'd not be charged because of airline/DOD arrangements. More than once, an agent snottily pleaded with me to "just use the kiosk," because "the Army would reimburse me."

Given that Uncle Sam already pays full-freight for passenger tickets, and pre-arranges for soldiers to exceed luggage size and item restrictions, shouldn't our first question be: Why do airline employees apparently feel entitled to charge taxpayers twice for moving the same duffel bags?

Yes, I need not act like a jerk when I ask them that question--particularly when I'm wearing the American flag on my uniform, and representing my country. But I also think the YouTubers got more-significant and -immediate results than my personal one-soldier campaign against the kiosks.

“Sure, only a small portion of the American population has served in Iraq or Afghanistan…”

And with that small quote we move to the root of the entitlement attitude many young veterans feel. There are over 300 million Americans, how many volunteer to serve and defend the nation? I cringed a bit when I first read the Delta story too. I have suspected some young veterans I've known of faking injuries to get greater benefits (BTW, I am a young vet too). I also recognize that there is an increased entitlement mentality among many veterans today, and I don’t necessarily agree with it. However, I see this “entitlement attitude” more as being a result of the all volunteer force we created. We’ve created this special little warrior class within our society. When you belong to a 1 percent club, it’s probably only a little too natural that you’re going to feel special. Especially when that volunteer 1 percent club is responsible for defending an entire nation.

And let's not bring up the "youth of today" argument. If you want to see a strong sense of entitlement in action, just talk with any baby boomer.

Ever since I joined in 2008, I have heard over and over again how great we Soldiers are in comparison to those whom we serve. The AVF has created this "Us" vs." Them" mentality. This is convenient for "us" because it creates a a separate class of citizen which has instant respect from "them," and often get nice kick backs (free beers, discounts etc). It's convenient for "them" because "us" does the dirty work that "them" doesn't want to do...or want their children to do.

Unfortunately this is counter to what our founding fathers wanted, and it is to the detriment of our country. More and more military installations are moving away from the East and West coast and heading into rural America (mostly in the South). Most USARC centers are shutting down in the communities in which they serve, and are moving into USAR Super Centers. ROTCs have left (or are leaving) populated urban areas in favor of rural areas where, apparently, those who love America live. Even our terminology (Warrior-Citizen instead of Citizen-Soldier) is divisive. The above only exacerbates "US" vs. "Them."

Lastly, one reason I love being a Reservist is because I can be both "US" and "Them." I love having my feet in both worlds. I feel that it grounds me so that I can better appreciate our sacrifices while understanding that, contrary to what my Drill Sergeants told me, "Them" is not lazy, is not fat, and does not hate "US."

Unfortunately, I have to agree with the premise of this post: young vets are jerks, especially to people their own age. I did not join the military, but I went to school in DC and regularly got into "encounters" with Iraq and Afghanistan vets because they felt it was their right (because they joined and I didn't) to cut me in line for a movie or to order a beer ahead of me (there are many more examples, but I won't bore you). I have nothing but respect for our military, but after so many of these situations, you naturally begin to harbor ill will toward them personally. You have to actively remind yourself that the vast majority of veterans are wonderful people and that every group has assholes.

If you think Soldiers are building a sense of entitlement (and some definitely are), there are spouses that have developed a completely warped sense of what the Army (and the nation) "owe" them.

Look at the reaction to the on/off cuts to the spouse tuition assistance. A nice gesture, but is it really necessary? And should it be untouchable?

When the inevitable budget cuts come, what happens to all the free childcare, the hundreds of redundant community support and family assistance programs (that have abysmal utilization rates), etc.?

The GOP and Dems are like the divorced parents of a child (the military family) -- competing for its love by seeing who can give to most support. And the result is a spoiled child that struggles to be responsible for him/herself.

I'm an Iraq vet. My first line of defense against being an entitle jerk is to ask myself what I've done for anyone. (This comes up often enough when people thank me for my "service".) I firmly believe that my time in the military, and most especially my time in Iraq, did not accomplish anything for anyone but myself (the salary, the various post-retirement benefits, the admiration of ignorant strangers) and maybe the politicians who sent me over. And I believe that the same is true of just about anyone who's gone over. Yes, deploying is a hard thing to do, but does it benefit anyone? People like to prattle on about "defending freedom" but really, nothing that any individual does (and precious little of what the military as a whole does) can do anything to aid the cause of freedom. In my view, having a real job, raising a family, and putting oneself through school are all significantly more difficult and more useful to society than being in the military.
But I wouldn't quite know, since, because of my "service," I've become too lazy to try any of those things, as well as well-off enough to avoid them all indefinitely.
Military people are unlikely to realize any of this, because they've been trained to think that civilians are all selfish and lazy. Very few of them have any idea what civilian life is like, or how much harder than military life it is.

They were redeploying soldiers returning to their CONUS station with their gear - to include their weapons! Why the hell should they have to fork over $200 of their own money and then wait for reimbursement?

"In the case of the Baltimore-to-Atlanta flight the unit was flying in coach. Each soldier who had a fourth bag to check, which apparently was the bulk of the unit, was charged a $200 fee."

First, it is the fault of the government Travel Office (probably a contractor) and whoever made the reservations. Any routine (nowadays) baggage charges should have been accounted for on the travel orders/vouchers or government travel office issued ticket - period.

Yes Joe, you are a jerk. Do you think that every E-6 has room on their credit card for an unplanned $200 expense or that they can wait for their post Finance Office to reimburse them? Just where does that go on the claim form?

"The Defense Department reimburses some authorized travel expenses, but soldiers have complained that the procedure is time-consuming and reimbursement is slow. Authorizing officials may approve reimbursement for troops’ baggage fees. On the Defense Department’s Web site there is a document titled How to Claim Airline Checked Baggage Fee, dated February 2011."

The charge itself is excessive and the government should not have to pay that much money to ship a bag. One SSG said that his weapon was in a military case. Perhaps the case would not fit inside their allotted cabin space.

"Staff Sergeant O’Hair said his fourth bag was his weapons case, which held his M4 rifle, a 203 grenade launcher and a 9-millimeter handgun — arguably an unsuitable carry-on."

How do we know that on a *non-chartered* flight, the ticket agents and gate personnel in Baltimore believe that you can carry a weapon, in whatever condition, on the plane? [Personally, I wouldn't let my assigned weapon out of might sight.]

Finally, there are "combat veterans" and :veterans." They are not the same. Ex-military veterans normally do not carry an M4 with M203 mounted and a 9mm. On the other hand, if I see you or Tom on the street tomorrow, I'm gonna wish that I had the M4 in my hands.

Well spoken. It is a shame that all too often you must be considered part of a whiny melodramatic minority before you can be permitted to criticize it. Nonetheless I think you're right. Right before leaving Iraq the second time I remember getting a speech from the Bn Commander reminding us that nobody owed us anything, and not to walk around with chips on our shoulders.

I personally think Delta was in the right and it is a shame they were forced to change their position as a result of what amounts to cyberterrorism. The video spread like wildfire and people who didn't even understand the climate (from what I saw, mostly veterans of other eras who wished they had been treated better) were the most vocal.

At the end of the day Delta is a private company with the right to conduct their business as they see fit. If they choose to cut GIs a break that is their prerogative. The soldiers were treated as per stated company policy and any member of today's AVF should be smart enough to be able to read their policies. The company was not being insensitive when expecting the soldiers to file claims for their bags..Uncle Sam should pay for #4 when Delta has already paid for three.

Good work and Semper Fi, Joe..

And to the armchair commando: Bring it on-my personal one is just one of many tools I always have within an arm's reach.

Indeed, I must agree that they behaved by jerks; nothing is owed to them (or to most veterans anyways). However, circling around that achieves nothing.

In the military (as in many other tight-knit groups) the prime that is put on professionalism and elitism is necessary; nobody would like to belong to a group that has little positive attributes or that everyone can easily join. Feeling proud, special (which often come fro overcoming challenges) and part of something greater are key in a person's motivation, which is obviously needed in the case of military. But that does not mean that they are better or worth more than others.

It is quite common, understandable and -yes-wrong for these "tight-knit" or "special" groups to feel superior to others. A very thin line must be walked between elite/professional/special and better/more than others. That thin line precisely what must be defined and enforced.

Tom knows exactly who I am and he knows I am not coming down the street with an M4. Besides, it is illegal to own a modern full-auto weapon. "Bring it on" is more concerning, although reminiscent of our previous president.

Someone on Active Duty could be referred to as a combat veteran reflecting his or her experience. But a veteran is a legal class and is someone who is no longer on Active Duty, but has served in the military.The men on the aircraft were obviously traveling under government orders and traveling at government rates. Not one penny of their travel fare is their responsibility. Any excess baggage charge for authorized/required baggage should be charged to the government. None of this is the returning soldiers responsibility. I'm glad that they chose to publicize this matter.

Were I running a government travel office, I would find it inconvenient to place military personnel on Delta flights for a while. However, the source of this problem is the person who negotiated military rates with the airlines and/or the Delta gate personnel. Government travelers on government orders do not pay the same rates as other passengers. There is no reason for military personnel, obligated to carry their weapons in transit, to not have that provided for in the contracted tariff. Government personnel are not subject to "company policy." They travel under a negotiated contract. I find it fascinating that there is even one person sticking-up for a corporation over a returning soldier. Ironically, Delta used to bend over backward for the military and a significant percentage of their pilots were former Navy pilots - veterans.

I can understand that someone who labels him/herself "Disgruntled" might have an aberrant view, but I'm somewhat surprised at "Tom Kennedy" who posts frequently. Just because I'm anonymous (screen name picked at a time when most everybody was) doesn't mean that I'm likely to draw my Hi-Power. Now as to "Disgruntled," I'm not so sure.

One of the reasons I post anonymously is so I do not have to exchange private emails with fringe lunatics.

They were redeploying soldiers returning to their CONUS station with their gear - to include their weapons! Why the hell should they have to fork over $200 of their own money and then wait for reimbursement?

"In the case of the Baltimore-to-Atlanta flight the unit was flying in coach. Each soldier who had a fourth bag to check, which apparently was the bulk of the unit, was charged a $200 fee."

First, it is the fault of the government Travel Office (probably a contractor) and whoever made the reservations. Any routine (nowadays) baggage charges should have been accounted for on the travel orders/vouchers or government travel office issued ticket - period.

Yes Joe, you are a jerk. Do you think that every E-6 has room on their credit card for an unplanned $200 expense or that they can wait for their post Finance Office to reimburse them? Just where does that go on the claim form?

"The Defense Department reimburses some authorized travel expenses, but soldiers have complained that the procedure is time-consuming and reimbursement is slow. Authorizing officials may approve reimbursement for troops’ baggage fees. On the Defense Department’s Web site there is a document titled How to Claim Airline Checked Baggage Fee, dated February 2011."

The charge itself is excessive and the government should not have to pay that much money to ship a bag. One SSG said that his weapon was in a military case. Perhaps the case would not fit inside their allotted cabin space.

"Staff Sergeant O’Hair said his fourth bag was his weapons case, which held his M4 rifle, a 203 grenade launcher and a 9-millimeter handgun — arguably an unsuitable carry-on."

How do we know that on a *non-chartered* flight, the ticket agents and gate personnel in Baltimore believe that you can carry a weapon, in whatever condition, on the plane? [Personally, I wouldn't let my assigned weapon out of might sight.]

Finally, there are "combat veterans" and :veterans." They are not the same. Ex-military veterans normally do not carry an M4 with M203 mounted and a 9mm. On the other hand, if I see you or Tom on the street tomorrow, I'm gonna wish that I had the M4 in my hands.

I agree with JC333's comment. As a vet, I'm more concernced with the sheer number of fraudalent claims made by people lying about serving in the military. This is true stolen valor and is more prevelant and insulting than what this article addresses.

I found that The author using his experience at a bar as a bouncer fairly telling, but definitely in contrast to the situation with Delta. I would hope that most people in America would go to great lengths to make the return home from a
Combat deployment as painless an experience as possible for the guys. It doesn't appear that the individuals at Delta did that. Airlines rake everyone over the coals, and we all hate it when their imposition of policy is in mismatch and in great detriment to our personal situation. It happens to everyone. It would be different if this unit were traveling to say, NTC.

I work with a retired Sergeant Major, and he has pointed out to me on a few occasions that I display that self-entitlement as well. In the past few months I've tried to be a little less vocal, but regardless of my silence, I still feel the same way. I don't know if it's anger at myself for volunteering in a "time of war,"
while I watched friends and acquaintances go to law school and med school and acquire six figure salaries, or if it's just the illness that many vets experience that they didn't do enough or that "there's more work to do." I know now that I'm "out" I hate realizing that my friends are back over there. I also hate when people who have never put on a uniform feel free to comment on the conflicts or quote the one article they read. Whatever it is, it manifests itself in some or many, much more so with drink. My retired co-worker, coincidentally, does not drink anymore.

Also, I think for the most part, many of us vets know that alot of Americans of my generation have no desire to be part of something bigger than themselves in a selfless way. This leading to self-entitlement is highly ironic, yet to a degree understandable. I ddfinitely did not score any points with my civilian friends by putting my hands around the neck of a guy at a bar who was threatening violence against his girlfriend for talking to another guy, or just feeling like I could say whatever i wanted to anyone without fear of reprisal. The guy told my friends he was kidding, and I became the bad guy. I have since noticed a decrease in invitation to social functions for ruining their good time. I know I'll be more cognizant of this, though, since the last time I mouthed off, turns out it was two retired SF guys. Definitely a kick to the nuts.

as for the disconnect between civilians and vets/soldiers, check out the book "hot chicks with douchebags" and their take on the "unearned dogtags" phenomenon. they do also mention that douchebags are in the service, because let's face it, douchebags are everywhere. But they deserve special consideration before being labeled a "douche." sorry to those who consider this a bit crass.