Medals and Stars

[John Nayduk]

I know that this is a hotly debated topic but I would like to keep it in a historical context.
I'd like to debate the current SWASM and the GCS and compare these with their historical counter parts.
In World War 1, we had the 1914 Star and the 1914-15 Star (which the current General Campaign Star seems to be modeled after), followed by the 1914-1919 War Medal followed by the Victory Medal.
In World War 2 there was a bunch of campaign stars (8, I believe) followed by the Defence Medal, the Voluntary Service Medal and the 1939-1945 Medal.
So here in the war in Afghanistan, we wear the South-West Service Medal before the General Campaign Star (even though they are both awarded for service in Afghanistan, you get one or the other, usually). 
Now I know that there will be those that say that we don't give two medals for the same service BUT we have in every other war.  There is a 1939-45 Star and 1939-45 Medal for WW2.  One could even argue that the CVSM and KVSM are a give me for serving in the war that you got a war medal for.  Even the Peacekeeping Service Medal (like the other two voluntary service medals) could be seen as two medals for the same service if you got any UN or NATO medal for a tour. 
So, should the powers that be switch the order of precedence putting the GCS before the SWASM and award both for the war in Afghanistan?

 

[Michael OLeary]

I think this would require a more detailed analysis of why each of the medals you mention were awarded:

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu

 

[PuckChaser]

As far back as 1-07 people were being told that awarding both the SWASM and GCS for the Kandahar mission was in the works.... so we'll see how long for the GG's office of Honours and Awards gets it approved. Probably end up around the same time as the Combat Action Insignia.... which again is something we filled out forms for but is not yet approved.

Its a good idea, I think. Also would make sense to give something to those that have been overseas more than once.... but methinks that topic has been beaten to death.

Michael: I couldn't find a reference to the SWASM or GCS on that site, as I believe those medals are NATO designed?

 

[Michael OLeary]

Michael: I couldn't find a reference to the SWASM or GCS on that site, as I believe those medals are NATO designed?

Link from the ribbon images here - http://www.forces.gc.ca/dhh/honours_awards/chart/engraph/home_e.asp

 

[Dirty Patricia]

xxxxx xxxxxxx mentioned an interview he did with the CDS, in which the CDS states: “We're in the process of moving to change all that and to recognize that somebody who's served in Afghanistan, that it's distinctly Afghanistan, recognized with a medal and if you have served there multiple tours there is a multiple tour recognition in the form of a number."

What direction will this distinctly Afghanistan medal take?  Perhaps the SWASM as a service medal for the region and the GCS will be a campaign medal for Afghanistan regardless of whether it is OEF or ISAF service.

 

[GnrJetTech]

Awesome pic

 

[jranrose]

While we are on the topic of recognition.
I think it may be time to introduce a new bar to the GCS.
The “SPECIAL OPS” bar, similar to the Australian Service Medal.
http://www.defence.gov.au/medals/Content/+040%20Campaign%20Medals/+010%20Since%201975/+020%20ASM/

The Criteria could read:
SPECIAL OPS: Awarded to Canadian Forces members and members of allied forces working with the Canadian Forces who were involved in Special Operations. Those who served for one day or more in the theatre of operations are entitled to the bar. Due to the high-grade secrecy behind these operations, the Chief of the Defence Staff determines eligibility. Criteria includes:
1. Service on submarines during special operations,
2. Aircrew members during special operations,
3. Personnel undertaking covert intelligence gathering, or involved in covert signals operations,
4. Personnel undertaking Counterterrorism operations and
5. Personnel undertaking operations deemed too sensitive for national security for disclosure.

 

[George Wallace]

While we are on the topic of recognition.
I think it may be time to introduce a new bar to the GCS.
The “SPECIAL OPS” bar, similar to the Australian Service Medal.
http://www.defence.gov.au/medals/Content/+040%20Campaign%20Medals/+010%20Since%201975/+020%20ASM/

The Criteria could read:
SPECIAL OPS: Awarded to Canadian Forces members and members of allied forces working with the Canadian Forces who were involved in Special Operations. Those who served for one day or more in the theatre of operations are entitled to the bar. Due to the high-grade secrecy behind these operations, the Chief of the Defence Staff determines eligibility. Criteria includes:
1. Service on submarines during special operations,
2. Aircrew members during special operations,
3. Personnel undertaking covert intelligence gathering, or involved in covert signals operations,
4. Personnel undertaking Counterterrorism operations and
5. Personnel undertaking operations deemed too sensitive for national security for disclosure.

This medal would have to be awarded 50 years after the fact, as that would probably be the minimum time that the Security Classification on those types of OPs would hold before being declassified.  Otherwise, we'll have guys running around advertising that they were on a Classified Operation, and questions would be asked by people who would have no need to know.  Quite embarrassing, eh?  ;D

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

So, should the powers that be switch the order of precedence putting the GCS before the SWASM and award both for the war in Afghanistan?

That would make the medal-mounting folks happy.

 

[Greymatters]

This medal would have to be awarded 50 years after the fact, as that would probably be the minimum time that the Security Classification on those types of OPs would hold before being declassified.  Otherwise, we'll have guys running around advertising that they were on a Classified Operation, and questions would be asked by people who would have no need to know.  Quite embarrassing, eh?   ;D   

And limiting it to 'one day or more' would make it just as meaningless as some of the other medals out there have become... 

Edit - wrong quote in the box above, should have been this below....

The Criteria could read:
SPECIAL OPS: Awarded to Canadian Forces members and members of allied forces working with the Canadian Forces who were involved in Special Operations. Those who served for one day or more in the theatre of operations are entitled to the bar. Due to the high-grade secrecy behind these operations, the Chief of the Defence Staff determines eligibility. Criteria includes:
1.  Service on submarines during special operations,
2.  Aircrew members during special operations,
3.  Personnel undertaking covert intelligence gathering, or involved in covert signals operations,
4.  Personnel undertaking Counterterrorism operations and
5.  Personnel undertaking operations deemed too sensitive for national security for disclosure.

 

[Michael OLeary]

And limiting it to 'one day or more' would make it just as meaningless as some of the other medals out there have become... 

I never heard the Italy Star described, directly or indirectly, as meaningless before.

The Italy Star

The star was awarded for one day operational service in Sicily or Italy between 11 June 1943 and 08 May 1945.