The press could do more to publicize some of our heroes, and Captain Chontosh and others may well be a legitimate candidate for a MOH, but I don't see a lack of these awards as necessarily a bad thing. What gets missed is that individual acts of heroism aren't planned for; which is to say that by the time a soldier, sailor, or airman is in a position to earn his or her moh, the odds are good that someone at a higher command level screwed up. Our military is much better run than it was during Vietnam and it may be that we aren't putting soldiers in so many impossible situations as back then.

Also, while I have tremendous respect for our servicemen who sack up every day in Iraq, I think that a lot of the danger they face is random. There is zero opportunity to earn a MOH when you're fighting against an IED. There is little opportunity to react.

Another point is that while it can be argued that MOH's have been handed out stingily, the same is not true of lesser awards; I've been reading about bronze stars handed out somewhat shamelessly.

And maybe someone here has a better handle on this, but how do the ratio of awards handed out in Iraq compare with the ratio of WWII?

regards,

f

Greyhawk:

Just wanted to inform you readers on another story about the Paul Ray Smith Middle School. http://www.defenselink.mil/News/NewsArticle.aspx?id=637

It's interesting. I was just sitting down with a former Navy co-worker and we were talking about medals and the MOH and whatnot. He noted that I have five ribbons already, after having been in the USAR for about 3.5 years. He said that his whole time in the USN in the 1980's he only got ONE RIBBON. My father noted the same thing, in that he was USAFR from 1966 to 1972 and he had just the single ribbon as well. It's like nowadays they give out TONS of lower and middle importance ribbons, but are loathe to hand out the top stuff; specifically the MOH.

We've arguably seen ferocious fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The likes of which we've probably not seen since Vietnam. Is it that nobody is putting anybody in for the MOH, or is it that the brass are refusing to grant the award, thus downgrading the MOH to DSC or some such?

It's disturbing to me, as a civilian reluctantly looking on from the outside, that valor and selflessness are not be recognized sufficiently. From the anti-Bush and utopian media I expect no different, but why not from the Administration and military??? This seems part of a pattern, that I think is very ill-advised, of trying to satisfy the anti-Bushies and the utopians in some half-assed way. Any such concessions will NEVER satisfy them (they are borderline insane) and will only harm the cause of national unity and demoralize our men and women on the front lines.

D. Ox

Hello,

This is a great blog. I'm going to be sure to link yours to mine. Would you mind doing the same for me?

Thank you very much.

My site:
www.americanlegends.blogspot.com

Take care,
Mark

Actually the number of medals awarded has been quite high. By 2004 the Army aone had awarded 111 Silver Stars andover 13,000 Bronze Stars. Many if not most of those Bronze Stars were given for "service" not for valor, in other words for just generally doing a good job. The Marines on the other hand had only awarded 200 Bronze Stars at that point. But plenty of Heroes are out there: SFC Paul Smith, Sgt Leigh Ann Hester, Marine Lt. Jeffre Lee, and hundreds of others.

Also while the President ulimately chooses who gets "The Medal", it is soldiers' unit leaders who recommend them for awards.

Ultimately, the Times excuse is self serving as Rumsfeld pointed out, they are an intellectually and morally confused entity, who wold rather report a few cases of sensationalized misconduct then any of the thousands of cases of valor by US forces.

Hi Mr. and Mrs. Greyhawk. I have some bad news to report, off topic of course. There has been an attack on one of our own in Washington. I found this story over at Little Green Footballs. The name of the article is National Guardsman Brutally Attacked. Let us get them so he can have some justice. Also, let us put a stop to this before it becomes 'fashionable'.

Sorry I couldn't bring good news this time. I will look for some...

Latest Navy Cross going to Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew G. Axelson

http://northshorejournal.org/index.php/2006/08/petty-officer-2nd-class-matthew-g-axelson

If I recall correctly, there is only one medal out there that does not require recomendation. That is the PH. It's often abused, but only the recipient knows the real truth. I'm totally baffled why folks would whine about not enough MOH's being handed out. Don't they have a clue what what that honor really represents?

I'm mad as hell. Has nothing to do with the article above but I read a post on this site about the "cool school" on milblog. It touched me and I posted the story on my hometown newspaper because they have a comment seciton at the bottom of their articles. Well today, I was reading the paper and the first story I saw was a piece "bragging" that middle school kids can avoid recruitment efforts. I reposted the story about the brave Sergeant First Class Paul R. Smith. Please honor his memory by posting your comments here
www.sj-r.com/sections/news/stories/94776.asp

Thanks folks.

Folks,
Is it just me that sees this type of thing as just another attempt to find some kind of fault as well as a symptom of the writers lack of knowledge about the way decorations are awarded. I'm a civilian but even I know that George Bush doesn't just randomly dool out medals to troops.
Furthermore, as a previous commentor said how doe you get a MOH against an IED or a VBIED? I agree there have been plenty of circumstances where the MOH may have been appropriatly especially during the assault on Fallujah but sometimes the situation or the circumstances if you will aren't condusive.
Anyway, it's a not a "number of medals" game; they're not a scorecard.

Paul
(Folks stop by our site http://www.techography.com I really could use the feedback)

My son was in SFC Smith's company during the war. Remember, there is a long vetting process to award the medal and, although there were many more during Vietnam, I wonder how many years it took for the total to be reached. Also, having been AD during that time, I would suggest to that there was a bit of award inflation during those years.

The fact that some of the commenters brought up IEDs as the reason more medals for valor are not being awarded demonstrates the problem. The American public has no idea what is going on in Iraq. Your Marines. soldiers and sailors have been engaging in fierce, tranditional combat, in some instances hand to hand combat, taking the fight to the enemy, and acquiting themselves with valor and distinction. If you think they are just sitting around, waiting for the next IED to blow up, you need to do some further reading to find out what is really going on. Just don't look to the MSM for that.

One problem may be the Hillary Generals who have not yet been washed out of the system, who denigrate the concept of personal heroism. Soon they will no longer be in a position to affect the process.

"Hillary Generals". Oh, Please! Now its the democrats fault that Bush is not giving out medals!. Come on!

I suspect the media doesn't play up the "heroes" for two reasons:

1. When you're losing a war, demand for hero stories isn't very strong.

2. The Bush administration lied about two other "heroes," Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman. Twice burned, thrice shy.

WW ... over in this comment thread at Blackfive, Tom W. says it best.

If you follow the course of events in Iraq from 2003, the insurgency hasn't been able to stop a single step in the Coalition plan. Our troops have faced the worst that Islamic so-called warriors have to offer, and they haven't blinked.

Maybe slowed down a litle ... but not stopped. We are winning, despite your "service" as Liar-in-Chief to tell us otherwise.

The only way we lose, is if we leave before the job is done ... just like in any war we have fought, be it WWII or Vietnam. And, if we stay, it will get done, as long as we have leaders, like our current President, who will act decisively at crunch time ...

... and people like Greyhawk, Blackfive, SMASH, and Subsunk (along with ordinary commenters like myself) who will ALWAYS be here to refute the Big Lies of Liars-in-Chief like you, WW.

None of us are going away.

Deal with it.

It is the fault of men who got their stars by sucking up to a military hating White House, guys like Wesson Oil Clark and Collin Powell.
Proclaim someone a hero and the iconoclasts go to work. I still don'tunderstand why Tilman suddenly ceased to be a hero when it turns out his death was by friendly fire. Fucking Feather Merchants!

Funny thing about that Wesson Oil Clark. He won. Apparently you people just HATE victory, don't you? Rich, where do you buy your mushrooms?

By the way, even your fire-breathing neo-con masters are now having their doubts about your Liar in Chief's war. And did you see that the Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee just refuted your Liar in Chief's lie about Saddam and al-Qaeda? Looks you dumbsh!ts will be last to know.

Dub-Dub -- still strainin' at gnats, as usual, instead of acknowledging the good and the bad, as it really exists.

There are still troops in Kosovo ... so by your apparent standards, NATO hasn't won that war yet, either ...

... and BTW, Wesley Clark didn't take the war to a decisive conclusion against its intended target. Milosovec was finally removed from power by his own people in 2001, two years after the American air war ended. We nabbed Saddam faster than that ... and he was in hiding, unlike Milosovec!

Oh, and here's another "connection" for ya ... and yes, it's that simple.

Methinks the Senate report you're crowing about will be reduced to a status just above one of your posts here before too long. We already knew the ties between Saddam and AQ were only casual at best ... the question was whether they would stay that way -- and given AQ's willingness to make common cause with the Baathist dead-enders once we went in there, that was a real good question!

In the meantime ... Iraq takes control of its miliary ... and ABC is airing a docudrama that calls many more whose INACTION led to 911 to account.

In that light, your crowing about this report is reiminiscent of the bluster of the Magnificent Oz ... "pay no attention to the (progress) behind the curtain."

Well said, Rich. Well said.

WWI and WWII were won by men with steeled resolve. Our military men and women and military leaders have that same resolve to lead us to victory as well. And the resolve of the milbloggers and those of us fighting the propaganda war on the homefront will support them 100%.

When exactly did Pat Tillman cease to be a hero, I don't believe I got that memo. Every man and woman that serves the country is a hero. Do you really need somebody to tell you who is or is not a hero? Or is having an original thought a completely foreign concept for you?

Pinger isn't cooperating with me on trackbacks. My post for the 2,996 project is here: http://homefrontsix.blogspot.com/2006/09/father-mychal-judge-00001.html

Good to see you back and posting! Missed ya!

Every man and woman that serves the country is a hero.

Funny, the Romans debased their currency, too.

Hey think this one will turn out to be "hero" too? Better stay tuned, wingnuts!

http://tinyurl.com/pbbby