thedrifter
08-20-06, 12:19 PM
08-20-2006
The Medal of Honor: Should There Have Been More?
By Paul Connors
DefenseWatch Senior Editor Matt Dodd, in his most recent article on the lack of Medals of Honor for Iraq and Afghanistan (see "Medal of Honor: What does it take?," DefenseWatch 8-13-06) has raised some very interesting points on why only ONE Medal of Honor has been awarded since the commencement of U.S. combat operations in Iraq more than 38 months ago. My fellow editor has done a commendable job of detailing the heroism of the Navy Cross recipients during that same time and his most recent posting got me to thinking about the title of his article and why he may have felt the need to ask the question.
To be sure, Mr. Dodd’s statistics are interesting in that they provide an informative view of the real differences between WW II, when the largest number of awards in recent history took place and what U.S. troops face today. Perhaps the single most glaring fact is the difference in the size of the U.S. armed forces from 1941 through 1945 vs. what the nation fields today in total military manpower. Remember that during WW II that all of the combatant nations fielded larger armies due to limitations in weapons technology and the labor intensive nature of land, sea and aerial warfare. Likewise, much of the advances in military science that have taken place since then have also been doctrinally related as well as those changes that have been mandated by revisions in national military and foreign policy.
Another historical fact that should NOT be overlooked is that WW II was a war thrust upon the United States by outside actions; namely the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. After then President Franklin D. Roosevelt asked that Congress declare a state of war between the United States and the Empire of Japan, Germany and Italy, Axis partners of Japan then declared war on us. That reality resulted in a massive call to arms, the conversion of the American economy to a war-time footing and the complete mobilization of all available manpower to fighting the known enemies. Unlike today, the vast majority of manpower for the U.S. armed forces were citizen-soldiers, conscripted by local draft boards for assignment to the various branches of the service.
The last time the United States resorted to conscription to fill the ranks, the nation was embroiled in the Vietnam War. After our departure from Indo-China, the government and the various services determined that the draft was itself part of the problem and planned for a complete conversion to an “all volunteer force.” That process commenced under then President Nixon, and the last draftees completed their obligated service in 1976. Since then, all of the services have been filled with volunteers. Even the reserve components and the national guard, no longer the refuge of those seeking to avoid active service, have had little trouble meeting their recruiting and retention goals.
That was the case until recently.
Since the end of the Vietnam War, the United States Army has awarded three Medals of Honor, and those three were posthumous. Two were awarded to members of the Army’s Special Forces in Somalia in 1993 and the third and most recent went to Sergeant First Class Paul R. Smith of the 11th Engineer Bn. (Combat) of the 3rd Infantry Division for his heroism during the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Mr. Dodd, in his August 13th article here points out that Medal of Honor processing time is lengthy and that is a true statement. But some of the lesser awards, to include the Army’s Distinguished Service Cross, the Navy Cross (awarded to members of the Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard) and the Air Force Cross also have stringent requirements for documentation of heroism and processing. Even the nation’s third highest award for gallantry, the Silver Star medal, awarded by all of the services can be a difficult award to justify. All too many times, the awards packages that are sent forward are either denied or downgraded and the logic for these decisions often leaves the on-scene commander and his staff wondering.
After reading each of Matt’s installments on the USMC recipients of the Navy Cross, I have often found myself wondering why not one of these gallant Marines has not been invited to the White House to have the baby blue ribbon with the five pointed star draped around his neck by his Commander-in-Chief. And it is not just Marines who are deserving of this honor. I can think of two posthumous recipients of the Air Force Cross who should also have been recommended for the nation’s highest award for heroism.
Mr. Dodd raises interesting questions and unfortunately, too many are still unanswered. As someone who has studied military history and who also served as an Air Force historian at both the wing and numbered Air Force levels, I can state with certainty that the Air Force jealously guards who will carry forward its legacy of heroism. Even outside viewers know that the supposed war-fighters in the Air Force are the pilots, although since 9/11, the only two Air Force Crosses awarded have gone to enlisted members who served as pararescuemen (PJ). The last preceding AFC was also awarded to a PJ, then Technical Sergeant Timothy Wilkinson for his actions during the “Black Hawk Down” incident in Mogadishu, Somalia in 1993.
Each and every AFC awarded since the end of the Vietnam War has gone to an enlisted member of the nation’s youngest service and as I read the citations that accompanied each award, I often wondered why these men did not receive the Medal of Honor. I then wondered if they had even been nominated. Knowing the Air Force as I do, I found myself thinking that they probably had not. I say this because I know that the Air Force, despite its short history as a separate service has always maintained an unofficial policy that no enlisted member will receive the Medal of Honor for any conflict BEFORE an officer does. That institutional discrimination is the reason why it took almost 40 years for Airman First Class William Pitsenbarger, a pararescueman originally awarded a posthumous AFC in Vietnam to have his award upgraded to the Medal of Honor his actions so justly merited.
But the unofficial policies that have artificially denied the awarding of the Medal of Honor aren’t recent either. During the initial airborne assault of France and subsequent combat actions by the 101st Airborne Division after D-Day, then Major General Maxwell D. Taylor, commanding general of the Screaming Eagles determined that there would only be one Medal of Honor awarded, despite whatever heroics by any number of officers and enlisted members might have warranted consideration. His decision is the reason why 1st Lieutenant Richard D. Winters, acting CO of Easy Company, 2nd Bn., 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment received a DSC for his assault on a battery of German 105mm guns that were firing directly onto Utah Beach from Brecourt Manor. Ironically, Captain Winters would later receive his DSC on the same day that Major General Taylor received his. With the acclaim and world-wide renown for the men of Easy Co., 2/506th PIR generated by the late Stephen Ambrose’s book (and the later HBO miniseries) BAND OF BROTHERS, there have been notable attempts to upgrade Major Winters’ DSC to the Medal of Honor. This upgrade, more than 60 years after the end of is not without precedent. In the late 1990s, President Clinton corrected several injustices when he presented Medals of Honor to former members of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team and the 100th Infantry Battalion for their heroism during WW II.
The upgrades were made to Japanese-American members of the U.S. Army, their original heroism unrecognized due to war-time prejudices against Nisei soldiers serving in Europe.
Mr. Dodd references comments made by others who believe the different type of war the U.S. now finds itself in presents fewer and fewer opportunities for the smaller number of combat troops to perform heroically. Rightly, he refutes those arguments as they are comments made without foundation in fact. All one need do is review the citations for the Navy Crosses awarded to the Marines Mr. Dodd has written about to know that uncommon valor continues to remain a common virtue within the American fighting man.
Yes, the nature of warfare has changed since the 1940s. But then, the Korean War was different from WW II and Vietnam was different than Korea. And despite the unpopularity of the latter, American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines received Medals of Honor for their heroism without the pitiful excuses uttered by those who defend the dearth of awards out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Instead of accepting these pathetic attempts at justifying only one Medal of Honor, let’s look at some other possible reasons why there haven’t been other awards.
Stinginess on the part of senior commanders. High ranking awards for valor steal their thunder and place in the sun, especially if the recipient is (God forbid) a low ranking enlisted man.
Political expediency: by not creating new heroes, the administration hopes to keep the war out of sight of mainstream America. Without a draft and widespread national sacrifice, there is no real need to emphasize the heroics of America’s fighting forces. The rest of the population, without any vested interest in the outcome, doesn’t need heroes.
We’re in this together: the smaller military is a professional force and they’re just doing their jobs. We’re all team players and don’t need to recognize individual valor.
Don’t laugh. I’ve heard each of the above rationales used as possible reasons why we’ve seen only one award of the Medal of Honor. They’re inane and ridiculous and fighting men who should have been recognized with their country’s highest award for combat valor have not.
During the course of my military service, I have been assigned the duty of writing up numerous awards packages. I have never had the privilege of writing up a Medal of Honor, but I did have an occasion to re-submit a Vietnam veteran, serving in the New York Air National Guard during the late 1990s for an Air Force Cross. I have also completed many packages for the numerous peace-time awards that the U.S. military is all too fond of awarding. Like other awards and decorations specialists, I got to be very good at and I knew what phrases and buzz-words to use to increase the chances of the particular award being approved without having to re-write, correct or re-submit.
The U.S. Marines written about by my fellow editor, Matt Dodd, are without a doubt, heroes in the same vein as the Marines who preceded them in WW II, Korea and Vietnam. By themselves and under different circumstances, any one of these men probably would have been recommended for and received the Medal of Honor.
What is especially sad is that the unpopularity of this war, like the one in Vietnam before it has served to deny the nation of the heroes it so badly needs. Instead of carping on the misdeeds of a few, the American military and the media back home need to trumpet the heroism of the real American heroes, the guys at the cutting edge of the spear, the men who Matt Dodd has written so eloquently about.
Regardless of what one thinks of the wisdom or the need for the American intervention in Iraq, the heroism of our soldiers and Marines is ongoing. These men and women did not start the war, nor did they make the national policies that led to their assignment to a combat zone. What they are doing, in conditions that oftentimes challenge our ability to understand, is performing heroically. The sad part is that the commanders and the policy-makers who sent them to Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place are now denying them the honor that their selfless, heroic acts so justly deserve.
I find myself hoping that somewhere, some commander, whether at be at the company, battalion, brigade or division level will just once, do the right thing and send forward a recommendation for the Medal of Honor without regard to politics, expediency or appearances. I know in my heart that there have been several instances where Marines and soldiers have performed with the same degree of heroism as that found in our past heroes to warrant the award of the Medal of Honor. It is long past time when this nation recognized its latest generation of heroes.
Copyright 2006, Paul Connors. Paul Connors is a Sr. Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at paulconnors@hotmail.com
Please send your comments to dwfeedback@yahoo.com
Ellie
The Medal of Honor: Should There Have Been More?
By Paul Connors
DefenseWatch Senior Editor Matt Dodd, in his most recent article on the lack of Medals of Honor for Iraq and Afghanistan (see "Medal of Honor: What does it take?," DefenseWatch 8-13-06) has raised some very interesting points on why only ONE Medal of Honor has been awarded since the commencement of U.S. combat operations in Iraq more than 38 months ago. My fellow editor has done a commendable job of detailing the heroism of the Navy Cross recipients during that same time and his most recent posting got me to thinking about the title of his article and why he may have felt the need to ask the question.
To be sure, Mr. Dodd’s statistics are interesting in that they provide an informative view of the real differences between WW II, when the largest number of awards in recent history took place and what U.S. troops face today. Perhaps the single most glaring fact is the difference in the size of the U.S. armed forces from 1941 through 1945 vs. what the nation fields today in total military manpower. Remember that during WW II that all of the combatant nations fielded larger armies due to limitations in weapons technology and the labor intensive nature of land, sea and aerial warfare. Likewise, much of the advances in military science that have taken place since then have also been doctrinally related as well as those changes that have been mandated by revisions in national military and foreign policy.
Another historical fact that should NOT be overlooked is that WW II was a war thrust upon the United States by outside actions; namely the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. After then President Franklin D. Roosevelt asked that Congress declare a state of war between the United States and the Empire of Japan, Germany and Italy, Axis partners of Japan then declared war on us. That reality resulted in a massive call to arms, the conversion of the American economy to a war-time footing and the complete mobilization of all available manpower to fighting the known enemies. Unlike today, the vast majority of manpower for the U.S. armed forces were citizen-soldiers, conscripted by local draft boards for assignment to the various branches of the service.
The last time the United States resorted to conscription to fill the ranks, the nation was embroiled in the Vietnam War. After our departure from Indo-China, the government and the various services determined that the draft was itself part of the problem and planned for a complete conversion to an “all volunteer force.” That process commenced under then President Nixon, and the last draftees completed their obligated service in 1976. Since then, all of the services have been filled with volunteers. Even the reserve components and the national guard, no longer the refuge of those seeking to avoid active service, have had little trouble meeting their recruiting and retention goals.
That was the case until recently.
Since the end of the Vietnam War, the United States Army has awarded three Medals of Honor, and those three were posthumous. Two were awarded to members of the Army’s Special Forces in Somalia in 1993 and the third and most recent went to Sergeant First Class Paul R. Smith of the 11th Engineer Bn. (Combat) of the 3rd Infantry Division for his heroism during the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Mr. Dodd, in his August 13th article here points out that Medal of Honor processing time is lengthy and that is a true statement. But some of the lesser awards, to include the Army’s Distinguished Service Cross, the Navy Cross (awarded to members of the Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard) and the Air Force Cross also have stringent requirements for documentation of heroism and processing. Even the nation’s third highest award for gallantry, the Silver Star medal, awarded by all of the services can be a difficult award to justify. All too many times, the awards packages that are sent forward are either denied or downgraded and the logic for these decisions often leaves the on-scene commander and his staff wondering.
After reading each of Matt’s installments on the USMC recipients of the Navy Cross, I have often found myself wondering why not one of these gallant Marines has not been invited to the White House to have the baby blue ribbon with the five pointed star draped around his neck by his Commander-in-Chief. And it is not just Marines who are deserving of this honor. I can think of two posthumous recipients of the Air Force Cross who should also have been recommended for the nation’s highest award for heroism.
Mr. Dodd raises interesting questions and unfortunately, too many are still unanswered. As someone who has studied military history and who also served as an Air Force historian at both the wing and numbered Air Force levels, I can state with certainty that the Air Force jealously guards who will carry forward its legacy of heroism. Even outside viewers know that the supposed war-fighters in the Air Force are the pilots, although since 9/11, the only two Air Force Crosses awarded have gone to enlisted members who served as pararescuemen (PJ). The last preceding AFC was also awarded to a PJ, then Technical Sergeant Timothy Wilkinson for his actions during the “Black Hawk Down” incident in Mogadishu, Somalia in 1993.
Each and every AFC awarded since the end of the Vietnam War has gone to an enlisted member of the nation’s youngest service and as I read the citations that accompanied each award, I often wondered why these men did not receive the Medal of Honor. I then wondered if they had even been nominated. Knowing the Air Force as I do, I found myself thinking that they probably had not. I say this because I know that the Air Force, despite its short history as a separate service has always maintained an unofficial policy that no enlisted member will receive the Medal of Honor for any conflict BEFORE an officer does. That institutional discrimination is the reason why it took almost 40 years for Airman First Class William Pitsenbarger, a pararescueman originally awarded a posthumous AFC in Vietnam to have his award upgraded to the Medal of Honor his actions so justly merited.
But the unofficial policies that have artificially denied the awarding of the Medal of Honor aren’t recent either. During the initial airborne assault of France and subsequent combat actions by the 101st Airborne Division after D-Day, then Major General Maxwell D. Taylor, commanding general of the Screaming Eagles determined that there would only be one Medal of Honor awarded, despite whatever heroics by any number of officers and enlisted members might have warranted consideration. His decision is the reason why 1st Lieutenant Richard D. Winters, acting CO of Easy Company, 2nd Bn., 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment received a DSC for his assault on a battery of German 105mm guns that were firing directly onto Utah Beach from Brecourt Manor. Ironically, Captain Winters would later receive his DSC on the same day that Major General Taylor received his. With the acclaim and world-wide renown for the men of Easy Co., 2/506th PIR generated by the late Stephen Ambrose’s book (and the later HBO miniseries) BAND OF BROTHERS, there have been notable attempts to upgrade Major Winters’ DSC to the Medal of Honor. This upgrade, more than 60 years after the end of is not without precedent. In the late 1990s, President Clinton corrected several injustices when he presented Medals of Honor to former members of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team and the 100th Infantry Battalion for their heroism during WW II.
The upgrades were made to Japanese-American members of the U.S. Army, their original heroism unrecognized due to war-time prejudices against Nisei soldiers serving in Europe.
Mr. Dodd references comments made by others who believe the different type of war the U.S. now finds itself in presents fewer and fewer opportunities for the smaller number of combat troops to perform heroically. Rightly, he refutes those arguments as they are comments made without foundation in fact. All one need do is review the citations for the Navy Crosses awarded to the Marines Mr. Dodd has written about to know that uncommon valor continues to remain a common virtue within the American fighting man.
Yes, the nature of warfare has changed since the 1940s. But then, the Korean War was different from WW II and Vietnam was different than Korea. And despite the unpopularity of the latter, American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines received Medals of Honor for their heroism without the pitiful excuses uttered by those who defend the dearth of awards out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Instead of accepting these pathetic attempts at justifying only one Medal of Honor, let’s look at some other possible reasons why there haven’t been other awards.
Stinginess on the part of senior commanders. High ranking awards for valor steal their thunder and place in the sun, especially if the recipient is (God forbid) a low ranking enlisted man.
Political expediency: by not creating new heroes, the administration hopes to keep the war out of sight of mainstream America. Without a draft and widespread national sacrifice, there is no real need to emphasize the heroics of America’s fighting forces. The rest of the population, without any vested interest in the outcome, doesn’t need heroes.
We’re in this together: the smaller military is a professional force and they’re just doing their jobs. We’re all team players and don’t need to recognize individual valor.
Don’t laugh. I’ve heard each of the above rationales used as possible reasons why we’ve seen only one award of the Medal of Honor. They’re inane and ridiculous and fighting men who should have been recognized with their country’s highest award for combat valor have not.
During the course of my military service, I have been assigned the duty of writing up numerous awards packages. I have never had the privilege of writing up a Medal of Honor, but I did have an occasion to re-submit a Vietnam veteran, serving in the New York Air National Guard during the late 1990s for an Air Force Cross. I have also completed many packages for the numerous peace-time awards that the U.S. military is all too fond of awarding. Like other awards and decorations specialists, I got to be very good at and I knew what phrases and buzz-words to use to increase the chances of the particular award being approved without having to re-write, correct or re-submit.
The U.S. Marines written about by my fellow editor, Matt Dodd, are without a doubt, heroes in the same vein as the Marines who preceded them in WW II, Korea and Vietnam. By themselves and under different circumstances, any one of these men probably would have been recommended for and received the Medal of Honor.
What is especially sad is that the unpopularity of this war, like the one in Vietnam before it has served to deny the nation of the heroes it so badly needs. Instead of carping on the misdeeds of a few, the American military and the media back home need to trumpet the heroism of the real American heroes, the guys at the cutting edge of the spear, the men who Matt Dodd has written so eloquently about.
Regardless of what one thinks of the wisdom or the need for the American intervention in Iraq, the heroism of our soldiers and Marines is ongoing. These men and women did not start the war, nor did they make the national policies that led to their assignment to a combat zone. What they are doing, in conditions that oftentimes challenge our ability to understand, is performing heroically. The sad part is that the commanders and the policy-makers who sent them to Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place are now denying them the honor that their selfless, heroic acts so justly deserve.
I find myself hoping that somewhere, some commander, whether at be at the company, battalion, brigade or division level will just once, do the right thing and send forward a recommendation for the Medal of Honor without regard to politics, expediency or appearances. I know in my heart that there have been several instances where Marines and soldiers have performed with the same degree of heroism as that found in our past heroes to warrant the award of the Medal of Honor. It is long past time when this nation recognized its latest generation of heroes.
Copyright 2006, Paul Connors. Paul Connors is a Sr. Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at paulconnors@hotmail.com
Please send your comments to dwfeedback@yahoo.com
Ellie