Military Medal Review
I don’t know what this means, but apparently, according to Stars & Stripes, the Pentagon is proud to announce that they’re going to “review” all military medals. I don’t why, and I don’t get the point of it. Seems to me that there are more important things that Pentagon can be doing besides looking at bling. I guess the flag officers have all of the medals they can give each other, so they want to cut off everyone else, or something;
Officials said the review, ordered by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, would likely kick off within a month or so and be complete by late 2014 or early 2015.
Beyond determining how new warfare technologies would fit into the medal picture, the parameters of the review are still being worked out, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby said.
“As the wars are ending … rather than looking piecemeal at any specific one, he wants to do a comprehensive review of them all,” Pentagon press secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said.
The focus of the article is on awarding drone warriors a suitable medal, but it seems to me there are lots of medals not connected with actually being in combat to handle that. The last time the Army did this, in the early 80s, we got the Army Service Ribbon – a completely useless award that was adopted because there were too many people without any awards running around after the National Defense Medal awards ended in August 1974. When my son graduated from his 6 weeks of Air Force basic training, he already had three ribbons. I was on my second enlistment before I had three awards on my uniform. So the Army adopted the ASR, the Overseas Service Ribbon and the NCO Professional Development Ribbon to keep up with the Air Force, I suppose.
I guess this “review” is to keep some flag officers employed and a backdoor route to adopt the Distinguish Warfare Medal again – you know, that drone warrior thing, where you get a medal for combat without leaving the States.
Category: Military issues
I hope they begin to award the “Joint Giduck Srvice Medal of Valor” for surviving the hardest 58 days in the military…you know, the first 58 days.
You can earn an poison oak leaf “cluster fvck” as well as a hand lettered certificate signed by Danger Mouse’s sidekick for each one week tour of hazardous duty at a commercial one week military style adventure camp in Russia.
Any other fake life experience accepted as well as long as you were safely at home at the time.
Somewhat reminds me of the royal family situation in Saudi Arabia – too many of them, too closely related, all with fancy titles, with nothing to do and too much time on their hands to do it.
Yep! I guess that about describes The Perfumed Princes of the Pentagon.
If they can somehow end the practice of getting an award (or not getting one) because of rank, that’s be cool.
I was in the Navy from 84-90. ETS’d with a Good Conduct Medal, Sea Service Ribbon with some stars, and an Expert Pistol Medal. I also had my dolphins and my boomer pin with a bunch of stars in it. Now I see the mids doing summer tours in the Pemtagon with a National Defense Service Medal, a Merritorious Unit Commendation, and some variety of marksmanship ribbon, all before comissioning and without any prior service.
@2 Nice!
I love those thanks for showing up awards. My favorite is my KDSM, I got that for spending my 18th year on earth drinking soju and banging Ukrainian prostitutes.
They did the same thing in the 90s when Clinton created the Armed Forces Service Medal. It was the “you’re in a combat zone, but don’t get combat awards, so here’s a medal for you” medal.
I came back from Bosnia and had more awards than my commander that didn’t deploy.
NCOs have had many discussions about this over the years. The award system needs work, but the SecDef doesn’t know how to prioritize apparently. Minimum wage for federal contractors will start at 10.10 an hour. Even as a senior NCO for my “24 hours a day on duty” I don’t make that much. The same president who refused to give us a raise equivalent to cost of living, is telling us “Fuck you military” yet again.
Looks like Hagel is going down the same path as Panetta. Next thing you know, he’ll be flying across the country at taxpayer expense every weekend and authorizing Soldiers to participate in uniform in political events (as long as they are from the democratic agenda).
“Distinguished Warfare” Medal redux would be my guess as well, Jonn.
The fact that at least 4 suitable peacetime awards already exist to recognize such combat support efforts performed without personally being at risk (AFAM, AFCM, MSM, and LOM, depending on just how important the individual’s contribution actually was to the overall operation) is besides the point. The USAF is still smarting over being body-slammed for the 1999 Kosovo BSM Fiasco. This looks like yet another attempt to find a way for personnel “remotely supporting combat” to get awards equivalent to those who were actually there risking life and limb.
There’s actually a quite simple way to fix the situation: restrict designation of combat zones to places where there are actual hostilities, and preclude combat awards from being awarded in other locations without an individual exception to policy approved by the service secretary concerned. This would allow the award of valor decorations for terrorist incidents, but would prevent folks in Kuwait, Qatar, and other such “faux combat zones” that are nothing more than remote/hardship assignments and have essentially zero risk of seeing hostile action from qualifying. But DoD doesn’t seem to grasp that simple fact, or perhaps simply doesn’t want to “go there”.
Some things just aren’t the same via “long distance”; combat is one such thing. If you aren’t at least at risk of getting shot at, IMO you’re simply not deserving of a combat decoration.
Maybe one day the USAF and DoD will comprehend that.
Eric: not exactly the same, amigo – but similar.
The AFSM is awarded for participating in a “significant” operation (as determined by the theater commander and approved by DoD) where “no foreign armed opposition or imminent threat of hostile action was encountered”. The previous attempts referenced above were efforts to award (or in the case of the thankfully-aborted “Distinguished Warfare” Medal, create and then award) true combat decorations for those who were never at risk and who never actually entered the combat zone, period.
Perhaps the AFSM is more appropriate today for those in places such as Kyrgyzstan, Kuwait, Qatar, etc . . . , who support operations but aren’t at any actual risk of seeing hostile action than the GWOTEM. But as of mid-year it becomes a moot point anyway.
@5: I feel that way about my two MFO ribbons. 3 weeks of sitting at a remote site and then 3 weeks of sight seeing in Israel, going to the pyramids, climbing Mt. Sinai, and of course killing my liver for six months.
The bottom line to me is that there are plenty enough awards to honor those doing whatever job they do in the military. Combat, non-combat, drone pilots and cooks. So the only thing on the Pentagon’s mind about this would have to be reducing some of them as being obsolete. My point is, as someone else said so well, don’t they have better things to be thinking about and spending money for studies on than horse shit like this? It’s another, don’t watch my left hand while my right hand is behind my back. Smoke and mirrors. The effect of “looking” good and busy for the liberals who hate the military and military medals while the pay and retirement system goes to hell in a hand cart. I say leave the awards the way they are. If you don’t want so many out there…don’t hand them out. Instead, turn your attention, General Officers in the Pentagon, to the care and welfare of your troops. Now and those who have retired. It is all good for them since they have fairly good, livable pensions. How bout making sure your troops are as relatively well off.
I think we should go the Russian route and do away with the Oak Leaf Clusters. You got five achievement medals, go ahead and wear five ribbons! That should make people feel much better about the awards system.
The wars are ending ??? Sorry, I have seen this movie before with a liberal in charge of the security of our nation…
I’m thinking Billy Boy Clinton when he ignored the chance to get Bin Laden because there was nothing to charge him with so he lived on to bring us that great air show known as 9-11…
The war ain’t over, they are still at war with us we are just choosing to play with our Barbies while they continue to train for war…
This war ain’t over and won’t be until somebody gets in there and kicks the crap out of the Muslim terrorists…
I hate to rain on the parade, but like I said, I have seen this movie before.
Could the be reducing the amount of awards through retiring? Or is such a thing an anathema now?
I honestly feel they should take a long hard look at the bronze star and its candy like issuance to e-7 and above. I recall several stories of guys getting into a tic and receiving a bronze star, one I’m sure most of us are familiar with being Tim Kennedy. Not too long ago I watched a brigade staff (again e-7 and up) receive bronze stars for merely being in country and literally never leaving the brigade toc. No tics, no contact. There was the occasional IDF but no one had even been injured on the entire post for the duration of the deployment. The fourth highest award and people receive it for just showing up in country.
Fuck it…just do like the Navy and Marines do and not give anyone not politically connected jack shit.
@15- Yep, or just downgrade everything to a NAM, regardless of what you did.
This is bullshit. I did nine years and had a rack of seven. One of those was a State Emergency Service ribbon. Sure, an asshole in the S-1 shop hated me and denied pretty much everything I was put in for, but I didn’t care. The military is about service, not damned participation trophies!
@15: At the end of our Iraq tour I put two of Squad Leaders in for the BSM. They kept getting kicked back because they weren’t E-7 or above and was told so. Finaly they let them go through and they just got downgraded to ARCOMs.
Marine corps should cut all medals but campaign and simplify it down to 3 total ribbons.
POG ribbon
Infantry ribbon
Hadji killing machine ribbon
Rah
Back prior to Vietnam and being a young YN2 (E5), I went to the Great Lakes exchange to get a family portrait made. The photographer reached in his bag of tricks and produced a triple row of ribbons for me. I put them on my uniform as I only had the National Defense at the time. I let him take a couple of shots and then made him take the proper ones. Conscience is a nasty thing to have when your 22. Proffed ths won.
I think one of the main things the military needs to do is simply make sure everyone comprehends the award system. The vast majority of awards are simply for sticking around, getting on the plane or boat and sitting you ass where you are told without getting into trouble.
The problem with the individual awards is that it depends on who is watching and writes it up.
Most important thing is to judge a service member by how they are performing not by what they have on their rack.
I have always looked at the award system as a means for recognizing service above and beyond what is expected of the job/performance of the individual. However, there’s a ton of people who don’t think that. I once took a medical unit with an overall rifle qual score of 23.5% to 93% in under six months…These are medics, lab tech, dentists, physicians and nurses (Nurses are the WORST shooters in the army, bar none). My S3 NCO that helped me get this feat pulled off earned (in my opinion) recognition of some sort; But my commander didn’t agree. I ended up giving him certificate of recognition or something, but I know how hard he worked and how impressive it is to get people that suck that bad with their weapons to get that high of a unit qual score. It was too bad I couldn’t get him wha tI thought he earned.
Somehow I doubt the Pentagon dicking with the awards system will help at all.
@14 – Ryan, there are two types of BSM. One is the more commonly thought of which is with “Valor” wearing a V Device. That’s for kicking ass in combat, being a killing machine, etc. Without the “V” it is the equivalent of the MSM, just in a combat zone. That’s what the reg is on it. I don’t disagree that they do the “auto” thing for certain ranks. I put one of my E-4s in for a BSM because he was doing an E-7 job and doing it exceptionally well.
@17 – what is ironic is that every 42A I see looks like a Colombian Dictator because they “know” every reg and what they “deserve” to wear. But when someone else’s award request comes up, they tear it apart with how jacked up it is. There are plenty that will help everyone, but quite a few that just get theirs and that’s that.
@22 – I agree with you. I had an E4 go work with an LTC on an exercise for 3 weeks. He talked for 10 minutes about how fantastic a job she did, how excellent her work and knowledge was and would work with her again anytime. I said “would you put her in for an award then Sir?” “Aww, well no, well, she doesn’t deserve an award, so nah, I won’t.” In Other Words: I would have to put some effort into recognizing her achievement, so FU. Then you have other commanders who will push to recognize achievement.
Eric: precisely. The criteria for the two awards when presented for service/achievement vice valor are almost word-for-word identical less the BSM’s requirement for connection with operations against an armed enemy.
Until 2004, Army regulations specifically prohibited award of the MSM in a combat zone. One of the earlier versions of the Navy award reg (circa early 2000s, if I recall correctly) even specifically included language to the effect that the BSM when awarded for service or achievement was the combat-zone equivalent of a MSM.
Given this fact, the skewing of BSMs awarded for service or achievement shouldn’t be any surprise. Not very many E5s and below get MSMs – just like very few who aren’t GOs/FOs receive DSMs. The level of responsibility/position held by the individual in question is usually considered when granting any award for service or achievement. All else being equal, higher responsibility typically equates to a higher level award when someone does a highly commendable job.
Not saying that’s necessarily right, but it’s both defensible and “just the way it is” today.
@23 Eric- Thanks for the clarification on that one, my mistake.
I guess its just unit dependent on the disparity of awards received and the awards deserved.
I think they should review David Petraeus’ BSM w/V right away. I’m still wondering what heroic accomplishment he did. I’ve heard many people say it played out like this:
Convoy was stopped, he steps out of him humvee takes a look downrange with optics… then a mortar comes within 300 feet of him, he is escorted back to his humvee and leaves.
gets put in for BSM.
The proliferation of military medals follows the guidance of communism. Their own writings indicate that it helps to bolster morale and make the masses happy. Look at how as morale drops the metals increase. After 22 years, I would exchange anything I received for spending money. More so since the government is slashing my benefits everyday.