-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Medal of Honor criteria and award inflation
- Thread starter FLYTPAY
- Start date
To be fair, the Bronze Star may be awarded for bravery, acts of merit, or meritorious service, but I understand the frustration.
I'm still amazed at the military's reluctance to award the Bronze Star with the "V" device for those who were awarded the medal for bravery and valor in combat.
I know a retiree who was awarded a Bronze Star for his actions while in the Army during the Korean War. I'm sure he would shake his head at these stats.
Dunham knew the grenade was a grenade, the Marines at the gate did not know the truck was a bomb. I am looking at this purely from the devil's advocate standpoint. I know however that we all can agree that these guys died performing their duties to their fullest and we, their comrade in arms recognize their sacrifice as being of the highest degree of selflessness.
Good point, that might be the difference they were thinking of when awarding the medals.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
They may not have "known" it was a bomb, but I think they had a good damn idea it was one.
I am not a fan of this "new" "Must die to be awarded MOH" mentality. You can't tell me in 7 years of conflict between OEF, OIF and other ops that NOBODY has done something worthy of the MOH and lived.
I am not a fan of this "new" "Must die to be awarded MOH" mentality. You can't tell me in 7 years of conflict between OEF, OIF and other ops that NOBODY has done something worthy of the MOH and lived.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Chontosh
He comes to mind, although I think we've already discussed this one ad nauseum.
By no means what so ever do I mean to belittle the valor shown and sacrifice made by Yale and Haerter in EARNING their Navy Cross. They are clearly some of the best men our nation can offer.
With that said, I can't help but think that given the same situation and the same mission, most Marines would have stood their ground. Manning a dangerous post was their job that morning. They did the very best they could to stop the truck and they are being righteously honored.
But IMHO it was not much different than you guys launching into bad weather knowing there is a chance you won't get back. Or landing in a hot LZ, or staying at your post below deck when torps are in the water. Everyone who has done those things deserves all the honor we have to give. The difference may be that most of the time you live. Sometimes you don't.
There are times when I don't know what to think about the guys who jump on grenades to save their buddies. People who wrap their bodies around frags know they will almost certainly die doing it. I think that may be why many times they win the MOH. The first thing I always think is "God damn it, I wish you would have (or had time to?) picked it up and thrown it. We can't afford to loose people like you"
With that said, I can't help but think that given the same situation and the same mission, most Marines would have stood their ground. Manning a dangerous post was their job that morning. They did the very best they could to stop the truck and they are being righteously honored.
But IMHO it was not much different than you guys launching into bad weather knowing there is a chance you won't get back. Or landing in a hot LZ, or staying at your post below deck when torps are in the water. Everyone who has done those things deserves all the honor we have to give. The difference may be that most of the time you live. Sometimes you don't.
There are times when I don't know what to think about the guys who jump on grenades to save their buddies. People who wrap their bodies around frags know they will almost certainly die doing it. I think that may be why many times they win the MOH. The first thing I always think is "God damn it, I wish you would have (or had time to?) picked it up and thrown it. We can't afford to loose people like you"
The awarding of the Bronze Star has gone in cycles. It's an honor to be sure, but it doesn't require Sgt Rock heroics. The Bronze Star actually started out as the ground equivalent of the Air Medal. It was given out en masse to soldiers in the European Theater. After WWII, anyone with a CIB was retroactively awarded one. As we went into Korea and Vietnam, it evolved into being used more to recognize personal valor (some senior officers notwithstanding). While I do believe that administrative excellence, in a combat zone or not, is better recognized by NAMS, NCs, MSMs, etc, and of course the Army and AF always go overboard, I wouldn't get worked up about the awarding of the Bronze Star.
Looking at it from a different perspective, I suspect that a more deliberate action (such as what medics often do) requires more bravery than an instinctive action which (obviously only guessing here) such as diving on a grenade.
Submission rate?
I don't even know how you'd compute it. Obviously the submission rate spikes when there are wars going on.
You could find some more correlation with the size of the war and the number of submissions, e.g. World War II--lots. Grenada--not so many.
As has been discussed in other threads, there are probably disproportionately few MOH submissions during the last few wars, based on the number of personnel in theater. It might be level if you compare the number nominated versus friendly KIAs (which you might use as a measure of the intensity of the combat). Whether the change is due to the changing nature of war or due to a tighter selection criteria (apparently posthumous only now), I don't know.
I don't think the number of friendly KIAs is necessarily a good measure of comparison between the combat intensity of current and past conflicts. Advancements in combat casualty care and improvements in the CASEVAC/MEDEVAC process have dramatically reduced the rate of KIAs. Combine that with the evolving nature of warfare, and I don't know what the right answer is for comparison and parity with past conflicts. It's kind of like the famous Potter Stewart statement on pornography; I have a hard time defining heroism, but I know it when I see it.
I am going to say no to that one. Both train to the extent that how they deal with a situation is "instinctual." Bravery is bravery. I don't think that, for instance:
1) taking cover, orienting on the enemy, considering whether so set up a base of fire and assault through or go firm, and then executing
is more or less deliberate than...
2) running up to a casualty, cutting away a trouser leg, and deciding to use quick clot or a battle dressing or an occlusive dressing and executing
In fact, (I'm not going to, but) you could argue that medics and corpsman rate lower awards, because the mental toll of taking life, as opposed to saving it, is higher on a person.
I would agree that 1 and 2 are similar; I would not call either of them "instinctual."
"Bravery is bravery"
Well, the people who set up and approve the awards don't agree with that.
I'm just curious as to what your experience with either of these -- life saving versus life taking -- is?