Heavy Medal
on 12/04/2006 at 09:46 AM
These are the same sob’s who usually bitch and moan that too many medals are being given out! Asshats! You just cannot win when they simply determinedly choose to be displeased.
Not only that(not prize to be won) these are medals awarded for going above and beyond - therefore not everyone is going to get them. Secondly, perhaps it is becoming apparent from John Kerry that people ‘awarded’ to themselves sometimes by finaggling the system. Which would be a reason there were more in the past.
Perhaps they have also ‘weeded’ out the ones, like post civil war ‘indian fighters’ who in 1890 enscounced on a hill over some 350 Lakota opened fire with Hotchkiss guns (probably causing the majority of deaths on both sides) and walked away with MoH. Lots of ‘above and beyond’ bravery there.
To get the MoH is very hard indeed - it requires more than someone nominating for the award. And war has changed since WWII which even then, it was masses of soldiers (i.e. ‘cannon’ fodder) sent to their deaths. This war is being fought differently and our armour is better which makes the whole senario change.
But leave it to the screeder of raping, terrorizing, cold blooded murdering US soldiers to wonder why not as many are awarded medals? Might not their own propaganda have turned down the temp on patriotism, hero worshipping and just plain recognition?!?
Another example of the typical liberal do as I say, not as I do crappola.The DoD website used to list medal winners in a section titled “Heroes.” This disappeared a couple of months ago with no explanation; when I send a email to their contact address asking why there was no response. It would be nice to flush out the PC bureaucrats and get them out of government.
Posted by Lee
12/04/2006 at 12:22 PM
Warmama gets it right, as usual. The nature of this war is different. If you think it through, in a really well run campaign should be no heroes above the norm. But let’s face it, all war plans go in the shredder to some extent when the firing starts. Best laid plans, etc.
I have read on other sites that the Army gives out little awards like candy. I have not read that standards have been lowered for the major ones. From my understanding, I would never denigrate the Bronze Star as being a “mid-level award”, even if two higher awards exist. You don’t get one for nicking yourself while shaving or doing some CYA for your boss at the Monday morning office meeting.
Time and Newsweek are leftist crap publications. Since they’re printed on glossly paper they aren’t even fit for lining cat boxes or wrapping fish in, two uses for which the NYT is superb.
Wardmama, I’m impressed with your comment about the Hotchkiss gun. That Gatling Gun type weapon was the granddaddy of the Vulcan style cannons still used today on fighter planes and attack helicopters.
War? What war? According to the MSM the only thing happening in Iraq is the daily struggle of heroic freedom fighters to throw off the chains of Imperialist Republican oppression and restore the duly elected tyrant, Saddam Hussein, to the throne of power so he may reign in peace and freedom forever!
How do you expect American soldiers to win medals for opposing that?
This article starts off complaining about a perceived lack of medals, goes to the inequity of medal awards, reminds us that the nature of war has changed, and then tells us of the heroic young Marine. The whole article lacks a coherent point.
And it is so nice that they finally mentioned a MOH recipient, but of course, only in a way that bashes the war, the services and the President.
Bastards. That they, and most people, use the word winner for the MOH makes me think maybe Rangel has a point and that compulsory service would be a good idea.
Check out the Flag Officers, They all have row upon row of medals, Interesting
Hey TIME mag-rag, STFU!
The process to get medals has become much more complex.
For instance, its not as easy to put yourself in for a purple heart for a scratch on your butt from a piece of shrapnel thrown by your own grenade.
