CF Service Medals

[George Wallace]

..........................some positions there were fairly soft even if they were speed-bump material (i.e. Battalion hockey team anyone?).  Did not even consider that Brussels-based types were also getting the medal, although not every position there was a caviar/opera position.  You are quite right that many people who got it was part of an abuse of the system, but it also covered a lot of other types of operations where short-term tours added up and no specific medal applied...   

You don't have two clues of what kind of crap is dribbling out of your oral orifice.  It might as well have come out of your anal orifice for all it is worth.

 

[eurowing]

It is also worth noting that a clerk (for example) posted to Lahr or more precisely the Kaserne to a position that was not a NATO position was not eligible for the SSM with NATO Bar.  When I left Geilenkirchen in 2001 it was the same for the folks at CFSUE Neiderheid.  They were just a few kilometers away from Geilenkirchen, but were not eligible for the SSM with NATO Bar either.

For what it is worth, for 8 and a half years out of country, I hold a SSM with NATO Bar.  I serviced aircraft going to war from there, yet folks in Florida at an HQ got NATO medals I was not eligible for.  I didn't feel I deserved said medals, but I had cause to wonder about the Florida folks and how they felt about their gong.  I think like most of us, I didn't have shiny medals in mind when I signed up.

 

[Greymatters]

You don't have two clues of what kind of crap is dribbling out of your oral orifice.  It might as well have come out of your anal orifice for all it is worth.

No, you're right, that wasnt very well put.  It was supposed to be a humorous dig, but it reads nasty.  Sorry about that.

 

[Greymatters]

I don't think you give the CF leadership credit for how much they listen to soldiers opinions (the difference between your bitching and moaning as opposed to ideas and concerns of merit).  In the private and public sector you will find very few companies whose leadership spends a consdierable amount of their time getting the opinions of the rank and file remaining aware of what is happening throughout their organizations. 

Getting rid of Army Work Dress, Summer DEU, future implementation of the Combat Action Badge and Sacrifice Medal, etc are all based on comments given to CF leadership by soldiers. 

Im definately having an off day - two bad posts, in the same day, on the same thread! 

I've contemplated this one on and off this afternoon, and I have to retract my opposition.  My comments on this are being biased by initial inherent cynicism, but I can think of numerous instances where airmen and soldiers made suggestions that were followed up on and proved to be valuable. 

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

"It is with such baubles that men are led."

  -  Attributed to Napoleon

 

[armyvern]

Just to clarify, specially for Vern  :-*

Nuddin' to clarify for me my dear ...

I know you are, and so am I. 

:-*

 

[PhilB]

I know exactly how you feel. And, I'd have been no lesser pissed off had my bar read "NATO-OTAN" --- those boys were willing to fight and die for their country ... it just so happened that there was no war during their time that the government decided that they were going to participate in. We could be having this very ******* discussion 10 years from now.

Sept 11 happened during our times ... and it just so happened that our government DECIDED that we would participate in that little war. That does NOT mean that those troops are any braver, better, or deserving than any other soldier -- even one who they assume was simply in it for the "Beer & Bratwurst". It just means that their government made a choice to let them participate --- THAT is what being a soldier is all about.

Vern, I think that this is an extremely good post. I do not like to hear the denigration of others service that some guys who have come back from Afghanistan do. Every tour is different, none is "better" than the other. That being said I think the above quoted post is a prime argument for the CAB. It is not saying someone is better or worse but rather that they have been in combat, something that a lot of members of the CF cant say, not through any fault of their own but rather because of where the CF has tasked them. The fact that they did not choose where they go still does not change the fact that they have not been in combat as others have. IMHO an event as drastic as combat deserves its own recognition. Just my two cents.


[Edit to change name of topic.]

 

[Dirty Patricia]

The fact that they did not choose where they go still does not change the fact that they have not been in combat as others have. IMHO an event as drastic as combat deserves its own recognition. 

I think that is the feeling of most of us that support the CAB.  It is not to gloat or snub our noses at other soldiers.  It is purely to recognize those that have participated in combat.  Unfortunately we have all faced professional jealousy at many levels since returning.  I think that runs deeply among those that don't support the award.



[Edit to change name of topic.]

 

[armyvern]

I think that is the feeling of most of us that support the CAB.  It is not to gloat or snub our noses at other soldiers.  It is purely to recognize those that have participated in combat.  Unfortunately we have all faced professional jealousy at many levels since returning.  I think that runs deeply among those that don't support the award.

That's interesting in and of itself.

Some of those who have expressed opinions of non-support, haven't done so out of "professional jealousy". Given that one of the CFs finer traits has always rather been "quiet professionalism" ... that seems to be disappearing these days.

Some have wondered if it's going to be applicable retroactively, and to what date. There are problems with it's implementation that they are going to have to sort out and deal with. That's why a lot of people have problems with it and it's seemingly being made "for" this mission.

We've had pers shooting and being shot at, and fighting back before Afghanistan. It's happened in the Balkans ... and it's happened under the blue beret. Were they wars? No, but ... a lot of people did some pretty fine mixing 'er up under fire with opposition who'd wish to see them dead at that specific point in time. Does one have to be shooting back bullets -- or will throwing grenades back suffice (because that's occured too)??

Does it have to be during a "War" to make it combat?? Because, if so ... Canada isn't officially at war right now either. It's going to be awarded for an "incident" of combat as I understand it ... not for "pro-longed periods of combat" ... I'm just wondering if say ... our boys from Medak will be getting it -- and if not -- why not??

What about some folks at a certain airfield in Africa circa 1993 who found themselves fighting on a two-way range? There are others of course ... All of this needs to be sorted out and settled before we implement anything.

I have nothing against the CAB. As long as it's applicable to all who've done it, vice only a select operation. Some of the above events that I've mentioned certainly didn't start out as Combat, but boys & girls ended up in it anyway ... even if only for one incident on their operation (UN or other). If one incident is the qualifier ... it seems to me that they'd have earned it as well.

We can't simply write off their contributions, nor their date with combat.

Just a few thoughts from me.




[Edit to change name of topic]

 

[Gunner]

I think that is the feeling of most of us that support the CAB.  It is not to gloat or snub our noses at other soldiers.  It is purely to recognize those that have participated in combat.  Unfortunately we have all faced professional jealousy at many levels since returning.  I think that runs deeply among those that don't support the award.

Depending on the final criteria it will probably be "more inclusive" vice "less inclusive" (not my words) and you will have no of knowing whether a soldier participated in Vimy Ridge or was asleep in the back of a LAV while the platoon/company/battalion participated in offensive operations.  At the end of the day, you will superficially judge them based on what you see (cap badge, colour of uniform and ribbon/medals).  It's not until you actually speak with someone that you actually know what he did or did not do.  A bronze, silver or gold piece of plastic is not going to change that.

Edited to add - I believe that when the CAB is introduced the criteria will be so water down it will have the same meaning as the warrior badges from the 90s and everyone will be pissed off with it.  My 2 cents.


[Edit to change name of topic.]

 

[George Wallace]

I think that is the feeling of most of us that support the CAB.  It is not to gloat or snub our noses at other soldiers.

Does it?  A person who fights in a war as a Cbt Arms soldier or some other 'Specialist'; goes through all the stress and anticipation; doesn't know when or where the bullets are going to start to fly;  but in the end, never fires a shot in anger; is unworthy in the eyes of some.  That's what it sounds like.  It does sound like they are gloating and snubbing their nose at other soldiers beacuse they never fired a round in anger.


Presentation is the problem here, more than anything eles.  How this idea is presented by some, is a slap in the face to others, intended or not.  It is the reverse attitide of the new guys opinions of the war stories of the older experienced guys. 

 

[Dirty Patricia]

.... goes through all the stress and anticipation; doesn't know when or where the bullets are going to start to fly;  but in the end, never fires a shot in anger; is unworthy in the eyes of some.  That's what it sounds like.  It does sound like they are gloating and snubbing their nose at other soldiers beacuse they never fired a round in anger.
 

If one thinks there is a lot of stress in anticipating a contact, wait until you are in one.  The stress level spikes a bit to say the least.  After the TIC, the level of anticipation is much higher as you know what's waiting for you in the next one.  Again, not gloating or snubbing noses, just recognizing ones service.  The experience of combat is different and deserves to be recognized.

 

[George Wallace]

...........and deserves ........

Presentation, presentation, presentation. 

The more people state that they "deserve" something, the more they land up butting heads with others who may even believe in the same thing, but are tired of the whining about what they "deserve" and in a way denigrating all who came before them.  This gives some the impression they are nothing more than petty, spoiled, and self-centered.  How many calling for these awards are not in essence nominating themselves for an award?  Doesn't that in itself sound petty?

 

[Dirty Patricia]

Presentation, presentation, presentation. 

The more people state that they "deserve" something, the more they land up butting heads with others who may even believe in the same thing, but are tired of the whining about what they "deserve" and in a way denigrating all who came before them.  This gives some the impression they are nothing more than petty, spoiled, and self-centered.  How many calling for these awards are not in essence nominating themselves for an award?  Doesn't that in itself sound petty?

I won't say I deserve anything, but I will tell you every one of my soldiers deserves it.  I've experienced a lot more pettiness, not only on this topic, but many relating to combat experience in Afghanistan and it has always revolved around the professional jealousy that we can't seem to shake in our army. 

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Presentation, presentation, presentation. 

The more people state that they "deserve" something, the more they land up butting heads with others who may even believe in the same thing, but are tired of the whining about what they "deserve" and in a way denigrating all who came before them.   This gives some the impression they are nothing more than petty, spoiled, and self-centered.   How many calling for these awards are not in essence nominating themselves for an award?  Doesn't that in itself sound petty?

George,

I do not see a link between combat veterans thinking that they deserve a badge denoting such service and their implied denigration of those who haven't.  I don't see it as whining either and it is hard for me to see it as petty.  Recognizing those with a certain type of unique service may make those without that service feel jealous, but that shouldn't be the reason why we do not issue the badge (was that a triple negative?).  Isn't every medal the recognition of a type of service that others may not have? 

Cheers

T2B

 

[Dirty Patricia]

Tango, this India call sign backs you up 100%.  Well put.

 

[George Wallace]

........and it has always revolved around the professional jealousy that we can't seem to shake in our army. 

I suppose that is more or less what it does boils down to, when all the layers are stripped away.  It isn't only in one direction, but in both.  The more someone harps on it, the worse and more distorted it gets.

 

[Dirty Patricia]

I suppose that is more or less what it does boils down to, when all the layers are stripped away.  It isn't only in one direction, but in both.  The more someone harps on it, the worse and more distorted it gets.

I can agree with you on that.  Well said.

 

[George Wallace]

........a link between combat veterans thinking that they deserve a badge denoting such service and their implied denigration of those who haven't. 

It is the few who harp on the matter stating that "they deserve" that is the bone of contention, not that there is not a reason for an award.  You probably remember stories of a few Snr NCOs in the unit, over a few beers, nominating each other for an award while on Tour.  Someone who has to "nominate themselves for an award" is not right in my books.  To carry on in such a matter and use their experiences to justify it, denigrates those others before them, as well as those others with them and following them.  It makes a farce of the Awards System.

As I say, it is the way that some are presenting the arguments that is souring their position with others.

 

[the 48th regulator]

That's interesting in and of itself.

Some of those who have expressed opinions of non-support, haven't done so out of "professional jealousy". Given that one of the CFs finer traits has always rather been "quiet professionalism" ... that seems to be disappearing these days.

Some have wondered if it's going to be applicable retroactively, and to what date. There are problems with it's implementation that they are going to have to sort out and deal with. That's why a lot of people have problems with it and it's seemingly being made "for" this mission.

We've had pers shooting and being shot at, and fighting back before Afghanistan. It's happened in the Balkans ... and it's happened under the blue beret. Were they wars? No, but ... a lot of people did some pretty fine mixing 'er up under fire with opposition who'd wish to see them dead at that specific point in time. Does one have to be shooting back bullets -- or will throwing grenades back suffice (because that's occured too)??

Does it have to be during a "War" to make it combat?? Because, if so ... Canada isn't officially at war right now either. It's going to be awarded for an "incident" of combat as I understand it ... not for "pro-longed periods of combat" ... I'm just wondering if say ... our boys from Medak will be getting it -- and if not -- why not??

What about some folks at a certain airfield in Africa circa 1993 who found themselves fighting on a two-way range? There are others of course ... All of this needs to be sorted out and settled before we implement anything.

I have nothing against the CAB. As long as it's applicable to all who've done it, vice only a select operation. Some of the above events that I've mentioned certainly didn't start out as Combat, but boys & girls ended up in it anyway ... even if only for one incident on their operation (UN or other). If one incident is the qualifier ... it seems to me that they'd have earned it as well.

We can't simply write off their contributions, nor their date with combat.

Just a few thoughts from me.




[Edit to change name of topic]

Excellent post Vern,

I am very interested in finding out the Criteria of the CAB and the Sacrifice Medal.

Will it be Retroactive as well?

dileas

tess