Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Campaign medal

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Campaign medal

    The Pentagon has apparently decided to award the same campaign medal to veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan. They offer the rationale that both are components in the war on terroism, and so should be awarded the same medal. Detractors submit that this decision is that, because these two conflicts are so different, as well having no historical basis, different medals should awarded.

    In the past, medals have been awarded based upon geographical location (e.g. Southwest Asia Defense Medal for Gulf War I), and dissenters declare that this should continue to be the case.

    It would be good if members who are veterans of Afghanistan or Iraq would offer their opinions on this, and the opinions of other members are welcome as well.
    0
    Yes
    0%
    0
    No
    0%
    0
    Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
    (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

  • #2
    Two different operations = two different campaigns. While they are both in CENTCOM AOR, IMO they should be shown to be different.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by RetPara
      Two different operations = two different campaigns. While they are both in CENTCOM AOR, IMO they should be shown to be different.
      hear! hear!
      Barcsi János ispán vezérőrnagy
      Time Magazine's Person of the Year for 2003 & 2006


      "Never pet a burning dog."

      RECOMMENDED WEBSITES:
      http://www.mormon.org
      http://www.sca.org
      http://www.scv.org/
      http://www.scouting.org/

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by RetPara
        Two different operations = two different campaigns. While they are both in CENTCOM AOR, IMO they should be shown to be different.
        Yeah. I'm sure some people served in both, so shouldn't they get medals for both? WWI and WWII were both against Germany, but they were different wars, so different medals.

        V67
        Alpine Kommandos

        Central Oregon KSK Airsoft Team

        Comment


        • #5
          Its not about the medals, once you start getting pissed off about it you have totally missed the point of why your there and hell I don't need anymore anyways. I just got promoted to Sergeant now can you imagine a Corporal with 7 ribbons/medals (Before I went ti Iraq)? The Corps doesn't hand out ribbons/medals like the other services do. So what happens when someone sees a Cpl. with that many they are thinking S**tbag.

          Semper Fi

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Marines
            Its not about the medals, once you start getting pissed off about it you have totally missed the point of why your there and hell I don't need anymore anyways. I just got promoted to Sergeant now can you imagine a Corporal with 7 ribbons/medals (Before I went ti Iraq)? The Corps doesn't hand out ribbons/medals like the other services do. So what happens when someone sees a Cpl. with that many they are thinking S**tbag.

            Semper Fi
            On the surface , I agree. If anyone went into combat thinking about any medals they may get, that's not right. However, the medal is a recognition by the DoD, the President and Congress and (hopefully) by extension the American people, for service rendered. One could then argue for a medal for any service (e.g. Haiti), but again that tends to miss the point. Failing to recognize in some manner those who gave honorable combat service would be inexcusable. BTW in 11 years of service, I received the following: Basic Training Ribbon, AF Outstanding Unit Award (twice) and SW Asia Defense Medal.
            Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
            (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

            Comment


            • #7
              Well, there was a Japanese Occupation and German/Allied Occupation, why not an Iraqi Occupation... or would that be to un-PC?

              I think they're two completely seperate major operations and should be treated as such.

              Don't they have a peacekeeping campaign award already? Maybe just add a 'N' to it when you're also 'nation building'.
              If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

              Comment


              • #8
                By extension, every serviceman and woman who served in WW II should get a single campaign ribbon, not one for each theatre they served in.

                Geographically, Itan and Afghanistan are close enough to get a theatre ribbon, but not a campaign ribbon. Two different beasties, two different agendas.

                Agreed, you should not go into battle thinking about ribbons. But, once you are out of the service, it would be nice to look on all that salad and be able to identify each place/campaign you served to your kids, family, and friends.
                Retreat hell, we just got here. Every Marine, a rifleman.

                Never let the facts get in the way of the truth.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Having already done the Afghan rotation and soon to get my turn in Iraq I believe there should be two seperate medals.

                  While both are operations in the war on terrorism they are both very different on the ground.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I agree with Iron Mike USMC. One trying to snach bin Laden, the other is (or was, until we got him) trying to get Saddam Hussein. Like he said, "Two different beasties, two different agendas."

                    V67
                    Alpine Kommandos

                    Central Oregon KSK Airsoft Team

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I believe they should be separate medals. However, its been nearly three years since 9-11 and the troops still don't have their medals. Why has it taken so long? In WWII they the medals designed and began awarding them within 6 months. Same for Korea, Vietnam, and DS. Why the long wait? Many folks have served two tours and, while they may have personal decorations, they have only the NDSM to show for service (as well as the Army and AF having their basic ribbons). Something just seems wrong about this. With all the technology, you think it would take less time to get this stuff done.
                      "Anything worth fighting for is worth fighting dirty for"
                      "The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step, and a lot of bitching"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by GeorgiaDixie
                        I believe they should be separate medals. However, its been nearly three years since 9-11 and the troops still don't have their medals. Why has it taken so long? In WWII they the medals designed and began awarding them within 6 months. Same for Korea, Vietnam, and DS. Why the long wait? Many folks have served two tours and, while they may have personal decorations, they have only the NDSM to show for service (as well as the Army and AF having their basic ribbons). Something just seems wrong about this. With all the technology, you think it would take less time to get this stuff done.
                        Its the same as any other bureaucratic group, the decision on medals, awards, ribbons is made at senior staff level, and this implies that it will be literally talked to death.

                        I don't recall how long it took to award the SW Asia (Desert Shield/Storm) Campaign Medal, but I believe that it was more than a year.
                        Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                        (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X