Tim Walz: Stolen Valor and the Dishonesty of Claiming Combat Service August 10, 2024
Posted by Chris Mark in Uncategorized.
Tags: CAR, combat action, iraq, Stolen Valor, Tom Walz, Trump, War
trackback
EDIT(I have so little respect for this dummy I had his name as TOM). it is TIM…like…little Timmy the coward….
Recently, the Harris campaign attempted to assuage concerns over Tom Walz’ lying about his service by saying he simply “misspoke”. For those who are not veterans I feel it is appropriate to give some context to his lies. First, “Turn Tail Tom” claims, through the Harris campaign that: “Governor Walz would never insult or undermine any American’s service to this country —” Yet, through his lies he has done exactly this.
Before I go on let me be clear. EVERY veteran who has served our great nation is to be applauded regardless of the job. That $100 million jet does not fly without a technician fixing the computer system. As a former Scout Sniper, if there was not an armorer to keep my rifle in match condition, my job was degraded. While we all like to make jokes, there is a truism in the quote: “Bullets don’t fly without supply”.
Within the veteran community there are three basic groups. Those who have been in direct combat (Combat veterans), those who have served in Combat zones but NOT seen direct combat, and those who are in support roles who have not deployed (in the rear with the gear). For every ‘front line’ or ‘combat’ troop there are about 10 support personnel in the US Military. Only about 10% of the Army, Marines etc. actually are doing the fighting. This is NOT to denigrate those who provide the support rather to show how important those jobs are to the war effort.
Every veteran knows that to be a combat veteran is considered the pinnacle of respect. It is so pronounced in the USMC that the MarineTimes actually wrote an article in 2015 about the infighting called No CAR,No Respect detailing how, within the Marine Corps, those who had earned the Combat Action Ribbon were perceived to look down upon those who had not seen direct combat. In short, Tom Walz did NOT misspeak about having been a war veteran. He intentionally lied about having been in ‘war’. The question is why? We know why. He wanted the respect and cache that comes from putting oneself in harm’s way.
Being a combat veteran is so revered within the military services that each service has specialized medals, ribbons or badges that enable one to immediately identify whether a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine is a combat veteran. In the USMC and US Navy we are issued a Combat Action Ribbon (CAR). In the Army they are issued either a Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) or the Combat Action Badge (CAB) and so on for each service.
Tom is a progressive liberal who hates guns. That is fine. By stating his ‘credentials’ (avid hunter (sure he is), war veteran), he is demonstrating his authority on the subject. This is a logical fallacy called appeal to authority. Tom Walz, in a public statement advocating for stricter gun control measures, asserted,
“We can make sure that those weapons of war, that I carried in war, is the only place where those weapons are at.”
This statement was intended to bolster his argument for restricting civilian access to certain firearms by drawing on his purported personal experience in a combat setting. By claiming firsthand knowledge of the destructive power of military-grade weapons, Walz aimed to position himself as an authoritative voice on the issue, suggesting that his experience granted him a unique and legitimate perspective on the dangers of such firearms in civilian hands.
However, it was later revealed that Walz had never served in a combat role, casting serious doubt on the authenticity of his claims. This revelation not only called into question Walz’s integrity but also highlighted the problematic nature of using appeals to authority based on false or exaggerated credentials in policy debates.
I have investigated numerous stolen valor claims and have reported a number of people on the claims. The vast majority of stolen valor claims are for people who simply want to impress a person of the opposite sex. In some cases it becomes more sinister such as in Tom Walz case where he is using the claims of combat earned by few to attempt to demonstrate authority on a subject in which he has no authority.
Shame on the Harris campaign for attempting to divert attention away from Tom Walz’ fraudulent claims of valor. In their defense, the Harris campaign stated: “In making the case for why weapons of war should never be on our streets or in our classrooms, the Governor misspoke. He did handle weapons of war …Well, I supposes that makes him a combat veteran. I like fast cars. I have a fast car. I drive a Maserati. Based upon that, I suppose I can tell people I raced in the Monaco Grand Prix and am a race car driver? No, of course not. My ‘handling’ a fast car (BTW…it is NOT a race car any more than the AR 15 Tom is trying to ban is a weapon of war) does not make me a ‘race car driver’ any more than Tom is a war veteran.
He has stolen valor and should apologize personally for his shameful actions.