Fast, furious wars mean fewer medals

The Boston Globe ^ | 5/25/2003 | Bryan Bender

[Radix]

WASHINGTON -- Two US Air Force pilots were circling Baghdad in a B-1 bomber on April 7 when intelligence officers on the ground spotted Saddam Hussein in the Mansur neighborhood. It took 12 minutes for the pilots to punch the coordinates into their computer and unleash two satellite-guided bombs that destroyed a restaurant where Hussein was believed to be meeting with his top advisers.

[Radix]

This guy should get a medal for having the nerve to put this on the front page of the newspaper today. The implication by my read is that our Troops are not really heroes. Anybody can get in a plane and move over hostile terrritory while facing the prospect of anti-aircraft fire. That does not constitute valor.

[Larry Lucido]

Wars aren't about medals.

[Servant of the Nine]

We have many heroes in this war, but a DFC for the routine danger of orbiting a bomber over Baghdad seems a bit much. If they find the proof that the bombs killed Saddam will they upgrade them to Medals of Honor?It these two deserved one, so did every other combat pilot.

So9

[Moose4]

Out of curiosity, does anybody know what award(s) were given to the P-38 pilots that made a long-range flight to shoot down Admiral Isoruko Yamamoto in 1943?

}:-)4

[Servant of the Nine]

Out of curiosity, does anybody know what award(s) were given to the P-38 pilots that made a long-range flight to shoot down Admiral Isoruko Yamamoto in 1943?

I think it was the DFC, but that was for an extremely dangerous mission requiring extraordinary bravery and skill, not for just being the bomber on station when the call came in to release.

So9

[DTA]

>>>that destroyed a restaurant where Hussein was believed to be meeting with his top advisers. For their actions that night, the pilots have been recommended for one of the Air Force's most coveted awards, the Distinguished Flying Cross. <<<<

What, they will get Distinguished Flying Cross for MISSING the target by 300ft? They did not hit and destroy Al Saa Restaurant in Mansour district on April 7, they hit and destroyed house located 300ft. away and killed 16 civilians.

That is known fact.

Awarding Distinguished Flying Cross for a miss is affront to all those who earned DFC.

"The Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity with the Army of the United States, distinguished himself or herself by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. The performance of the act of heroism must be evidenced by voluntary action above and beyond the call of duty. The extraordinary achievement must have resulted in an accomplishment so exceptional and outstanding as to clearly set the individual apart from his or her comrades or from other persons in similar circumstances. Awards will be made only to recognize single acts of heroism or extraordinary achievement and will not be made in recognition of sustained operational activities against an armed enemy.

It seems that Clinton spirit is still alive and well.

[omega4412]

According to http://www.salute.co.uk/salutegames/yamamoto/Yamamoto.htm

"For the U.S. pilots involved, it was expected that Mitchell, Lanphier and Barber would be nominated for the Congressional Medal of Honor, but this was turned down by Admiral 'Bull' Halsey as a punishment for details of the mission being leaked to the press. Eventually, all three received the Navy Cross, and the remaining pilots on the flight received the Navy Air Medal."

Details of the attack had to be kept quiet so the Japanese wouldn't learn that we had broken their code.

There was a long dispute over who actually shot down the plane Yamamoto was in.

[Teacher317]

Liberals whine about war, then they whine that war doesn't last long enough. They are, simply put, child-like in their ideology, philosophy, and critical thinking skills.

[Grut]

I hate to tell you, but I got a DFC in Vietnam for drinking beer (it's complicated). For the most part, medals are meaningless, literally 'decorations'.

[Moose4]

Interesting. They were Army Air Force pilots who received Navy medals. That couldn't have happened very often!

Thanks for the info.

}:-)4

[Radix]

I suppose that I am feeling a bit chastened here after posting this article. My immediate reaction to the article was that the author seemed to be minimzing the efforts of our Troops. That is not unusual when it is on the front page of that piece of crap that they call the Boston Globe.

I personally have never seen a combat zone and I feel that all of the Troops deserve recognition. I happen to believe that the current crop of Troops is exceedingly well trained and dedicated. That is not meant to be a sleight toward any other Veterans of differnt eras. These Volunteers today are in my estimation, very special.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

The wars aginst Iraq are not really anything I would draw great lessons from. They were waged against an 85th rated power. This 85th rated power had no airforce to speak of. Leadership was nonexistent, the Iraqi troops ill trained and in most instances ill equipped. The wars tested some of our equipment under field conditions. That is about it. On the ominous side once again our logistics came up short. It was fortunate that we had reams of time to bring equipment up to the launching areas. This war applied old doctrine developed near the end of WWI and applied in WWII. The Blitz!

[Leisler]

I knew a kid whose father flew a DC-3 in the Pacific. Engine failure had him belly land on a uninhabited atoll. The island was so small that it was covered at high tide and they had to sit on top of the plane. The cargo was all beer. They spent 10 days there until rescued. He didn’t remember much except it being hot, bright and warm beer.

[68skylark]

The wars aginst Iraq are not really anything I would draw great lessons from. They were waged against an 85th rated power.

I respectfully disagree.

First, you don't look at all the advantages the Iraqis enjoyed over us -- like fighting on their own home turf while we had to go half-way around the world.

Second, you don't point out that the reason some opposition troops and leaders just melted away -- because they knew if they stood up to us in battle they'd die a quick and violent death.

[AngrySpud]

Servicemen and women are not heroes merely by virtue of their service, even in a combat zone. They are certainly honorable, disciplined, and brave, and most acquit themselves well when under fire. But they should not be called heroes unless they do something heroic.

Having served from '74 to '96, I've seen the downward spiral in awards justification. In peacetime or wartime, too many medals are given for "being there".

I'll even point the finger at myself: half of my personal decorations would never have been awarded to a soldier or sailor ten or twenty years earlier. Too many decorations are given away for what should be considered routine service.

[Radix]

Servicemen and women are not heroes merely by virtue of their service

I respectfully disagree with you.

The Troops are all heroes. The issue of medals is another thing entirely. I certainly do appreciate your service and I thank you for it.

Campaign awards are one thing, medals for valor and performance are another. Perhaps I am a bit biased and my thinking is clouded. Perhaps I have no objectivity at all. I think that is likely so.

The only thing that I do know is that my son was almost killed in combat recently, and he lives and that he will wear his new medal with honor. In my heart, I honestly do not believe that they are just giving away medals. I mean that.

I honestly believe that standards have changed during the last 10 years or so, and we are served by a group of Volunteers who are the most excellent of their generation.

Thank you again for your service.

[Larry Lucido]

feel that all of the Troops deserve recognition

I've never had to serve in combat, but if I did I'd want the engagement to be as short as possible and would be happy just getting home alive with the mission accomplished. The author might be right that a short campaign means fewer opportunities for recognition, but that's a tradeoff I would gladly make.

[Lib-Lickers 2]

Tommy Franks deserves a fifth star before he retires for Afghanistan and Iraq,, IMHO,,

[eeman]

The "dilemma" aout the lack of activites mertiting medals is a good thing because that means less serviceman having to sacrifice their lives.

I am reading "Miracle at Midway" currently and every page is full of heroic examples of serviceman sacrificing or willing to sacrifice their lives. For example: 1. PBY pilots who stayed out well beyond their expected fuel range so they could maintain visual contact with the enemy--and risk crashing into the Pacific on their return. 2. Pilots who engaged Zeroes with obsolete Brewsters and were slaughtered 3. Torpedo bombers who knowingly flew against Japanese aircraft carriers without fighter protection knowing they would be slaughtered.

Although heroic, many of these actions were ineffective due to inferior equipment/poor training we had against the Japanese.

I suppose one can argue that the pilots in Iraq did not have to show as much valor as their WW2 predecessor (I think they are all pretty darn brave). However that's because our technology has advanced so much compared to our enemies, we don't have to. I hope the trend continues and in 20 years, the debate will be whether someone gets recognition for flying a remote controlled aircraft over enemy territory