Military Medal for Courageous restraint !

[SteamWake]

I kid you not...

Originally Posted by Washington Journal

A proposal to grant medals for "courageous restraint" to troops in Afghanistan who avoid deadly force at a risk to themselves has generated concern among U.S. soldiers and experts who worry it could embolden enemy fighters and confuse friendly forces.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wo...-93007014.html

[AVGWarhawk]

Very soon they will asked to fight back with harsh language and a scowling face.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Very soon they will asked to fight back with harsh language and a scowling face.

AKA a fourm?

[August]

Fuggedaboudit. Some Brit General made that suggestion which I fully expect to be soundly ignored.

Originally Posted by August

Fuggedaboudit. Some Brit General made that suggestion which I fully expect to be soundly ignored.

Roll on those happy days of collateral damage!

[Weiss Pinguin]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Very soon they will asked to fight back with harsh language and a scowling face.

Good grief no, that might offend or intimidate the enemy.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Roll on those happy days of collateral damage!

Yup like those good old days of carpet bombing.

Honestly

[Skybird]

Is this an inflationary distribution of Peace Nobel prices? However, the description of when this medal should be awarded gives me the impression they are talking about - discipline in combat.

Discipline for a soldier in my book is - a duty and a necessary precondition.

A duty, the fulfilling of necessary preconditions, must not be rewarded. It is a duty, a necessity, you see.

Violation of duties can be see according sanctions. Failing to fulfill necessary preconditions can cause later failure and according costs.

[TLAM Strike]

Don't we already have that?

Its called the Deterrent Patrol Pin.
You get it for not firing your weapons while enduring hardships and possible death in the process for the defense of your country.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Very soon they will asked to fight back with harsh language and a scowling face.

You jest, but you don't know what kind of damage a Marine can do with harsh language and a scowling face. Or a smiling face. Or whatever face they last obtained from a person they used harsh language and a KA-BAR on. We would ******* people up with a face, but a skull or a spine would be more convenient.

Now I'm the one who is joking, but not as much as you might think. Both the Marines and Army alike have a lot of dedicated men within their ranks. Men who will fight with whatever is at hand to destroy the enemy, or die trying. The mentality is hard to describe to people who have never seen combat, or served on the front lines, but it is why men throw themselves on grenades, and fight against impossible odds. There is a degree of insanity in this mentality, but it is needed to produce a fighting force that will perform effectively even if it doesn't necessarily believe in the conflict at hand. That is the nature of a good and effective professional state army. As Clausewitz put it; "If soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the army". Clausewitz was right, and his wisdom remains valid despite nearly two centuries of economic, political, and societal development.

Unfortunately, there is another, far less palatable, side-effect to this system. What we have now is a die-hard professional fighting force that is just looking for an excuse to kill people, and they will kill and die for the sake of lies that their state has told them, and their ranks are often drawn from the dregs of society. It would be funny if it weren't such a pervasive theme throughout history, and people hadn't died en masse because of it.

I actually agree with the concept of this medal for professional restraint. Well, I don't totally agree, I think that the armed services should be held to higher standards, and that if they actually managed to adhere to such standards there would be no need for such a medal, but I think it is a step in the right direction.

What would be much better is a training program that created thinking soldiers who were properly educated and combat-effective. Y'know, one that was actually accountable for its actions. That is partly why I remain adamant that PMCs are better than state armies. Haven't we already learned this lesson many times? Are we really so stupid that we can't see the pattern of state wars? As in, the one where a lot of bad stuff happens for no apparent reason?

Which brings me to the current war, upon which I shall discourse from a Marine's perspective, even though it is kind of OT, and I have said this before.

The war in Iraq has become very unpopular. Apparently, it is expensive, internationally despised, and ineffective. I arrived at this conclusion without taking into account the quarter-million Kurds and untold numbers of Shiite Muslims who were killed, and whom I personally fought for. I guess nobody gives a s*** about them. After, all, they're just sand-******s, right? Never again, my ass.

The situation would be pretty God damn funny if it weren't so serious. There is a legion of fine troops who await your orders and will march to their deaths if you will it, America. On the other hand, there is a legion of fine troops who you stab in the back every time you pussy out on the war in Iraq and give their enemies cause to continue insurgent activity. God bless the horse-s*** political agendas that made it all possible.

There's nothing I love more than seeing innocent people killed by good soldiers who in turn get killed by insurgents encouraged to kill soldiers by a populace that has no *******-ing idea what a soldier or a war is or should be. I honestly laugh at the concept, because there is nothing else I can do.

And yet, we still fight and die at your command. I have seen good men, soldiers and Marines and even Iraqis, die screaming for no other reason than that America couldn't make up her *******ing mind. We need a mission. Let us win the war or don't send us in the first place. This is not a trivial matter. Either you give a **** about Iraq or you don't, but stop sending good men to die and suffer for something you're not sure about. This is like Viet-F**ing Nam all over again. Thank God I didn't have to deal with that cluster-*******. I really don't know how those guys did it.

I seem to have gone off on quite a tangent, here. My apologies. I do that from time to time when I get really riled, but I would like to stress the point there are a lot of good men who fight on behalf of the US, and there is nothing worse we can do to them than to suddenly change our minds about how they should be fighting or for what reason. You must realize that the fighting element of the military is primarily comprised of men who have been convinced that it is in their best interests to perform a morally deploreable task in an insanely dangerous environment. The military is a broadsword, not a scalpel. It is not an instrument that can be bent to your will. It's a big *******ing sword that is designed to destroy things because it is made of people who are designed to destroy things.

Am I the only one who sees how stupid this is? You build a fighting force out of people who are stupid enough to want to be shot at, for whatever reason, and then you expect them to excercise professional restraint? Those who do should get a medal.

[CaptainHaplo]

Remember you typed this next election Undersea - and then write my name in on your ballot.

Restraint is honorable. However, in combat - its suicide. As one NCO many decades ago said - "It ain't a low intensity conflict if they are shooting at me." and its really too damned bad that in today's politics, its the ones who have never served that are so quick to deploy troops to a hot zone.

War is little different than a single man with a firearm, or in the old Japanese way - a sword. If you pull it out, you better be ready to use it to its utmost. I think the old samurai saying was something like "never sheath your sword while and enemy stands" or some such.

Would an all out war create a storm of civilian casualties. Sure it would. But tying the hands of those who are fighitng does just as bad - the casualties are just your own....

[August]

The whole idea is unnecessary because not one of our medals for valor lists killing the enemy as a requirement and therefore could be awarded for "courageous restraint"

Here are the requirements of the top three. Any of them would qualify. I just can't see why a special "courageous restraint" medal would also needed.

The Congressional Medal of Honor is bestowed on members of the United States armed forces who distinguish themselves "conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States." Because of the nature of its criteria, the medal is often awarded posthumously.

The Distinguished Service Cross (Navy Cross/Air Force Cross) is awarded to a person who, while serving in any capacity with the armed forces, distinguishes himself or herself by extraordinary heroism not justifying the award of a Medal of Honor; while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States; while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing Armed Force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.

The Silver Star may be awarded to any person who while serving in any capacity with the armed forces, distinguishes himself or herself by extraordinary heroism in action against an enemy of the United States, while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.

[TarJak]

Why not the Congressional Medal of Following the Checklist?

Where did those bogies go? Dunno had my nose in the checklist and didn't see them.

[ETR3(SS)]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Don't we already have that?

Its called the Deterrent Patrol Pin.
You get it for not firing your weapons while enduring hardships and possible death in the process for the defense of your country.

I've got mine!

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

There's nothing I love more than seeing innocent people killed by good soldiers who in turn get killed by insurgents encouraged to kill soldiers by a populace that has no *******-ing idea what a soldier or a war is or should be. I honestly laugh at the concept, because there is nothing else I can do.

I think you blame the "population" or whatever (presumably meaning non-military US citizens) a little too much. The chain of command doesn't include the population and that's that. It's very simple.

I'd actually just look at the chain of command and the various entities that actutally are part of it and maybe find some fault with those for a change. And yes, that also includes the boots on the ground. Soldiers are not some dieties that cannot err in any way. The soldiers I know are very much fallible and often they are unable to find employment in the normal society. Why should these individuals be worshipped, especially when they give so little reason to be appreciated.