Awards are not based on the "mental toll" the situation incurs on someone, it is action(s) above and beyond the call of duty and level of hazard the actions place someone in during the act(s).
-
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
Awards are not based on the "mental toll" the situation incurs on someone, it is action(s) above and beyond the call of duty and level of hazard the actions place someone in during the act(s).
Maybe I'm fucked up, but it seems to me that the sometimes futile struggle to save the life of a teammate is far more troubling than worrying about whether some shithead got his 72 virgins. Like Hacker said, if you don't mind, could you share some of your experiences that brought you to this conclusion.
Next we'll all be trying to draw the difinative difference between taking a life with a rifle or with a GBU-31 and which is "harder."
Or which results in more mental anguish
But that would be relative to the individual. So sensitive people would get a disproportionate amount of awards.
Well, that wasn't really my point at all, although there is probably a valid discussion to be had there as well.
I find that people who have never actually been involved in killing another person are still able to make some interesting -- and usually inaccurate -- statements about it. So, I was just wondering.
My knowledge of taking life is only academic, but it includes this:
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psych...bs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230857458&sr=8-2
and this:
http://www.amazon.com/Combat-Psychology-Physiology-Deadly-Conflict/dp/0964920549/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b
which is some of the best work out there done on the subject. My knowledge of saving life is more practical, I was an EMT for 3 years, and worked on a person who died. Not a friend, not in combat, but real nonetheless.
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psych...bs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230857458&sr=8-2
and this:
http://www.amazon.com/Combat-Psychology-Physiology-Deadly-Conflict/dp/0964920549/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b
which is some of the best work out there done on the subject. My knowledge of saving life is more practical, I was an EMT for 3 years, and worked on a person who died. Not a friend, not in combat, but real nonetheless.
Yeah, thats my point. They are pretty similar. One is not more or less deliberate or instinctual than the other, until things get back to the battalion surgeon.
Shouldnt the award be compared to the person's job duties? For example, If you pull someone out of a burning building you'll be Mr Hometown Hero. Firemen do it every day for low pay. They probably have to look at someone going above and beyond what they were supposed to do.
The "instinctual" actions would be of the "jumping on a grenade" type, not the type you described.
Ok, I am picking up what you are putting down now. You were comparing the specific actions, not the general nature of the two MOS's.
Disagree. Instincts have been evolved for self-preservation purposes. Jumping on a grenade runs counter to that.
The instinctual response to a grenade would be to run for cover.
Jumping on one is as instinctual as diving in front of a bullet or running in front of a speeding car.
Our brethren who jumped on the grenades did so 100% counter to their first gut reaction. You know: the one that could have saved their lives.
That's why they're heroes.
It's not nearly as salacious as any of the Audie Murphy MoH stuff, but it was no less selfless and no easier a decision to make.
Let's not demean it by calling it an "instinctual response".
So my dog's instincts to chase cats are for self preservation? I think you are a little bit off on your interpretation of "self-preservation".
Actually, the instinct to chase cats is probably the remnants of the hunting instinct that its wolf ancestors had. Hunting=food=self preservation.
I don't think he meant ALL instincts are for self-preservation, just that it is an instinct to try to preserve one's life. It takes a lot of will, what we call courage, to overcome that instinct by either self-sacrifice or by exposing oneself to extreme risks.
The action of saving lives under duress of combat, and against the self preservation instinct, could and has been worthy of the MOH.
I had the opportunity to meet Dave "Mad Dog" Dolby last year. Vietnam War era MOH recipient. He was awarded the MOH for doing what he said simply "had to be done". He is a very humble and down to earth kind of dude. In his situation he just did what he thought needed to be done. Pretty cool story, 'specially hearing it from him.