Medal of Honor criteria and award inflation

[Flash]

What about this: Can you even IMAGINE a guy getting 2 MOHs these days? Me neither.

I second all thoughts about more MOH, less Bronze/Silver Stars. A bronze star for being good at paperwork? Sad.

Because it can't happen anymore, a change in the law in 1918 allows only single awards, it also created the 'pyramid of honor' that we still use to this day:

http://www.cmohs.org/medal/history_links/double_award_winners.htm

http://www.cmohs.com/medal/medal_history.htm

 

[SemperGumbi]

Fair enough, but the point is still valid ad hoc.

 

[BarrettRC8]

I think that the military is actually being much stingier with at least the top 2 medals than it has in the past. To some extent, this is good, but in our rush to keep the integrity of these awards, we're making the MOH a "grenade jumping medal" vice a medal for warriors who've risked their lives exhibiting extreme valor. I think Lt Brian Chontosh's and SgtMaj Kasal's actions at least warranted MOH consideration. I don't think we've had an MOH winner since Vietnam who has actually survived his actions. A little more reasonableness on these two awards and a little more stinginess on Bronze Stars on down is warranted.

I spoke about this with a few buddies last weekend and I agree completely.

 

[phrogdriver]

Because it can't happen anymore, a change in the law in 1918 allows only single awards, it also created the 'pyramid of honor' that we still use to this day:

http://www.cmohs.org/medal/history_links/double_award_winners.htm

http://www.cmohs.com/medal/medal_history.htm

That law only prevented getting 2 for the same action. It would still be possible if you were enough of a stud to do something that courageous twice.

 

[FLYTPAY]

That law only prevented getting 2 for the same action. It would still be possible if you were enough of a stud to do something that courageous twice.

I don't want to ever be in a that position once, if I were in that position twice, well, if I survived, I would be buying lottery tickets.

 

[JIMC5499]

I think that it might have something to do with the MOH being the most political of all of the awards. Look at how many times it has been awarded decades after the event for which it was earned happened. Look at how many times in recent years these awards were made on the basis of the ethnic or racial group of the awardees. I mean no disrespect to the awardees, I am just pointing out the politics involved. I honestly believe that the reason that all of the MOH's, awarded recently, have been deceased is politics.

 

[wink]

I think that it might have something to do with the MOH being the most political of all of the awards.

Ya think? It is the Congressional Medal of Honor. Teddy Roosevelt's award was not received in a timely fashion just because he had become a political figure (probable presidential candidate) and he had too many opponents in Congress. They didn't want him to get any good press. That may have the most political.

 

[Flash]

That law only prevented getting 2 for the same action. It would still be possible if you were enough of a stud to do something that courageous twice.

Read closer, in the links it specifies that "stipulate that no person could receive more than ONE Medal of Honor". They talk about all of the previous 'double awardees', including the ones that got them for two seperate actions like Smedley Butler, when they refer to the prohibition.

I have tried to find the actual law but could not.

 

[JIMC5499]

They didn't want him to get any good press. That may have the most political.

You hit the nail on the head. What would happen if the MOH was awarded to a live recipient? All you have to do is to take a look at what happened with Jessica Lynch to get an idea of what I'm talking about. What if a MOH recipient spoke out in favor of or against the GWOT? Our politicians are not willing to take a chance like that, so they play it safe.

 

[phrogdriver]

Ya think? It is the Congressional Medal of Honor. .

Actually, it's not the "Congressional Medal of Honor," just the "Medal of Honor," which is awarded "in the name of the Congress of the United States."

 

[Flash]

I think that it might have something to do with the MOH being the most political of all of the awards. Look at how many times it has been awarded decades after the event for which it was earned happened. Look at how many times in recent years these awards were made on the basis of the ethnic or racial group of the awardees. I mean no disrespect to the awardees, I am just pointing out the politics involved. I honestly believe that the reason that all of the MOH's, awarded recently, have been deceased is politics.

I know what you are trying to say, but the recent awards to African and Asian-Americans were reviews of earlier awards that might have warranted a MOH. It was not awarded because of their ethnicity, it was awarded for their actions, fairly from what I know about them.

 

[JIMC5499]

I know what you are trying to say, but the recent awards to African and Asian-Americans were reviews of earlier awards that might have warranted a MOH. It was not awarded because of their ethnicity, it was awarded for their actions, fairly from what I know about them.

I agree 100%. I never implied that the awards were not justified. It goes to the point that I'm trying to make. The MOH is the most political of all military awards. Those recent awards were made because it benefitted the politicians to do so. It wasn't because someone was reviewing the nominations and found that a mistake was made. Just as when the original nominations were made, it was a political descision to NOT make the award then.

 

[ea6bflyr]

As a side note, I met this guy and this guy when I was at Penn State. Both great Americans and deserving of their MOHs. Very humble dudes.

-ea6bflyr

 

[wink]

Actually, it's not the "Congressional Medal of Honor," just the "Medal of Honor," which is awarded "in the name of the Congress of the United States."

Oops, got me there. But the point remains, it is authorized by congress. If congress (politicians) does not authorize, the nominee doesn't get it. Am I right there?

 

[Flash]

Oops, got me there. But the point remains, it is authorized by congress. If congress (politicians) does not authorize, the nominee doesn't get it. Am I right there?

I don't think they have a vote, literally or figuratively. I think it is DoD only.