VC, Medal of Bravery, Star of Courage...Where are the nominations?

[3rd Horseman]

It's been an awfully long time since Canada has granted honours for "courage" or "valour" or "bravery" under fire and the system is quite unaccustomed to dealing with this. 

I trust long time means 10 years. Last awards for Valour in combat was Bosnia, and a few years before that Croatia. The system is slow for a reason but it works.

Too all - as I said earlier dont get wraped up about the number of gongs on the senior ranks many of them mean nothing other than attaining rank and showing up. The real medals stand out for all to see. Even the unseen medal that comes with just knowing that the guy spent time in combat....he may not have a gong for his above the standard action but someone who he soldiered with and that soldiers family know him as the hero that saved the life of thier friend, father, husband, buddy.  My friend who wears no such gong is well known to my family for saving my life. I once caught my wife she thought out of my ear shot, thanking him for bringing me home to her...she knew the story...now he knew he was a hero. Thats the true hero, not the one with the medal for showing up, the one who risked his life for his friend.

 

[GO!!!]

Teddy,

Nice job on proving my point reference the OMM/MMM.

Each of the statements as to the awarding of the decoration states this has been interpreted to mean as the preface to identifying a rank cohort.

So, the awards committee interpreted the awards as being rank specific, and handed them out by the dozen, presumably with the requisite investigations to preserve the integrity of the honor.

Fortunately, the CF would never misinterpret anything though - right?

Hardly a peer reviewed journal you say! Well, then even the slimmest shred of evidence should suffice to appease this great unwashed mob so predilicted to dredging the uncomfortable past.

You might be sick of hearing about it, but the bronze star issue is indicative to me of a larger problem within the CF - where we lionize appointments vice action, perhaps as a substitute for the former.

You are right, I don't know which awards are in the system for who did what - but I know when all of my friends got back - and I know they are still waiting.

 

[George Wallace]

You might be sick of hearing about it, but the bronze star issue is indicative to me of a larger problem within the CF - where we lionize appointments vice action, perhaps as a substitute for the former.

What does the awarding of Foreign Awards have to do with our Awards System?  It is not a fault of our Award System that a Foreign Award System presents its Awards as it does.  This discusion is about ours and it has been laid out by numerous posters already what some of the problems are and also how the system works at a rather slow meticulous pace.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Nice job on proving my point reference the OMM/MMM.

Each of the statements as to the awarding of the decoration states this has been interpreted to mean as the preface to identifying a rank cohort.

Well, if you can provide me with an example of someone in a lower rank group that occupies a "position of great responsibility" - CDS/Army Comd equivalent - I'll put him/her up for the CMM... until then I suggest we live with it.  If you want examples of where real recognition for bravery is happening, I suggest you look at the list of bravery awards for SAR Techs - most to Sgts and below, with very few officers.

even the slimmest shred of evidence should suffice to appease this great unwashed mob so predilicted to dredging the uncomfortable past.

Well, aside from the Canada Gazette article stating flat-out "From the American Government", I'm a touch confused as to what you'd deem acceptable.  The citations were all American, the nomination process was American and the awards were presented by the US Ambassador.  I'm unsure as to what more "evidence" you'd need, aside from the original Rakkasan nomination documents. (Disclaimer, for those who may be concerned:  I am not one of those who received a Bronze Star on APOLLO). You can probably dig those up with a FOIA request to the DOD in the US, if you're so interested in proving a conspiracy.

You might be sick of hearing about it, but the bronze star issue is indicative to me of a larger problem within the CF - where we lionize appointments vice action, perhaps as a substitute for the former.

You know, I won't disagree with you there.  I've seen some complete asses get medals and commendations for doing next to nothing.  However, your position and argument is seriously diminished by your concentration on the Bronze Star "issue".  There are plenty of other Canadian examples that you could cite with a bit of digging.

but I know when all of my friends got back - and I know they are still waiting.

And, in the overall scheme of things, they haven't been waiting long.  As others have indicated, there is a reason that valour awards receive such scrutiny; it's only been a few months (at the most) after all.  If, purely for example, a VC is in the works, the system has to be ready for the hurricane of publicity and second-guessing that would inevitably result and has to be 100% sure that the award is deserved.

Cheers,

TR

 

[warrickdll]

From a previous discussion:

... - only medals awarded by Canada are typically authorized to be worn.  Other foreign awards have to have permission for wear granted in each individual instance and have to be awarded by the foreign head of state (in other words, my US Army Wombat Shooting Medal can't be authorized).  Moreover, such foreign awards can't "compete" with a Canadian award.  Thus in this case, there's already a Canadian Gulf and Kuwait gong - the foreign awards recognize exactly the same service.

There is no reason for any foreign award to be worn by someone in the CF (pet peeve). Whatever reason the US Army has for awarding their medals to Canadians is their business, and the CF's response should be to organize an appropriate parade for the presentations - after which those awards are keepsakes for those who received them.

If a Canadian receiving the US Bronze Star received the Canadian MiD (the rough equivalent) then why would they ever expect to wear a second award for the same thing? And if they did not receive the MiD then their CoC should at least check to see if they were eligible based on the write up for the US Bronze Star.


A problem stated is the length of time required by the CF to process Canadian decorations; that should be improved, especially at the level of the MiD. Keep in mind that the MiD has the same problem as the US Bronze Star (and Silver Star) in that it is awarded for varying criteria.


Improving the Canadian system and forbidding the wearing of foreign medals/distinctions would be the best, and easiest, solution. It shouldn't matter to anyone in the CF who is or who isn't receiving a foreign award. However, and this is where rank comes into it, it is probably more than likely that you'll see a high ranking officer wanting to be the exception to the rule.

...You can't tell me that what, half of the full Cols in Canada do such an outstanding job that they deserve a medal for it, while it is extraordinarily rare to see any other rank with such medals as the Order of St. John's of Jerusalem, any of the Distinguished Service decorations or the OMM/MMM.
...

If you don't allow for the OMM as a separate award for deserving Senior Officers and CWOs then they will just end up receiving awards that you wouldn't want them to receive. This way you know what the award is for. As for the Order of St. John's... it seems unnecessary in the list of Canadian honours, regardless of rank.

 

[3rd Horseman]

If a Canadian receiving the US Bronze Star received the Canadian MiD (the rough equivalent)

I think not! The US Bronze star in both its forms "V" and basic is given out for lesser actions than a CDS commendation. I would suggest the bronze star is more equivalent to a CDS or Comd Commendation...IMHO. But I agree with the remaining part of all your text. I guess I'm just being picky and I'm a little bias.

 

[KevinB]

The Snipers got the V on the Bronze Star.
  They where supporting US Forces.
The Chain got the Bronze no V.


Whippyfrickendo its a "shiny" 

 

[medicineman]

I had a rant all written up but decided to just say this - it seems to me it's pretty apparent that ignorance is rampant and abounding when it comes to the Canadian Honours and Awards system.  It also seems that the more gongs and accoutrements that are added (both personnally and systemically), the more people seem to think they need (see last parenthesis).  Not to say that people aren't out there devaluing some of those awards - there are plenty I'm (damned) sure.  But before you go around slagging down people/stuff or how long something takes to get done, actually read the requirements for awarding them first - you might be alot surprised.

As a personal observation, when people start going on about a couple of medals I have, the first thing I do is look at their's.  Oddly enough, most don't have much more than a CD.  Take that as you will.

MM, (SBStJ) CD

P.S.  Perhaps the mods might like to split this off to another thread, as it seems to be evolving outside the parameters of bravery awards to awards in general?

MM

 

[Haggis]

I trust long time means 10 years. Last awards for Valour in combat was Bosnia, and a few years before that Croatia. The system is slow for a reason but it works.

According to the GG's Canadian Honours and Awards Search page,  11 Medals of Bravery (10 to Canadians, one to a Brit) were awarded for military service in the Balkans during the period 01 Jan 92 to today (14 years).   No Stars of Courage or Crosses of Valour were awarded for military service in the Balkans.  In fact only four Crosses of Valour have been awarded to CF members, involving two separate incidents.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Again, these are bravery awards, not awards for valour.  Valour awards are for actions in the face of an armed enemy, the word "enemy" being the deciding criteria; "peacekeeping" missions are specifically excluded.  Again, from the pam:

The three Military Valour Decorations (MVDs) (Victoria Cross, Star of Military Valour and
Medal of Military Valour) were created on 1 January 1993 to recognize acts of valour, selfsacrifice
or devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy. They can be awarded in situations
short of war if the troops are in “combat” with an organized, armed “enemy” that is recognized
as such by the Canadian people. It must be understood however that “combat” is not
merely the presence of fire. Rather, the fire has to be directed at our troops, with the intent
of our troops being the destruction of the opposing force as a valid entity. The word “enemy”
in this context means a hostile armed force, and includes armed terrorists, armed mutineers,
armed rebels, armed rioters and armed pirates.

It should be noted that conflicting parties in a peacekeeping context are not considered
enemies and although there may be altercations with the CF in a peacekeeping mission, the
use of force by the CF will generally be limited to self-defence. This is why MVDs are not
generally awarded during peacekeeping operations.

Which is why we haven't seen the "new" valour decorations awarded in the Balkans (or anywhere else - yet - for that matter) and why we haven't seen a VC since WW II (there were none awarded to Canadians in Korea).

 

[boondocksaint]

Clear 'nuff?

What is abundantly clear is that too many folks assume the level of combat being fought almost daily over there is not quite up to 'medal worthy'.  Which to steal a line is Bovine Scatology. Is it the numbers? Not enough deaths? Not a high enough casualty count? Or body count ? Not enough stories of charging the MG nest ? These things shouldnt be based on numbers alone, math should not decide medals. But it does indicate to some extent the level of combat.

Taliban did not die of the common cold,  robots, or aliens. Soldiers closed with and destroyed them. So how many Mg nests does Pte Bloggins need to take out for a shiny? Is that a common occurence? It was over there, but does that diminsh the act? When Americans we fought with call it worse then Iraq ( and most over there do ), does that perhaps reach the right level?

When a fighter pilot gets X number of kills he is an ace, a hero, he is revered at a national level. AS he should be.

When an Infanteer gets X number of kills he is.....what? And folks, there are Infantry aces out there. A plethora of them. But it's not kosher in our society to speak about that. Is this perhaps why folks dont understand the level of combat over there?

As PPCLIguy mentioned, things appear to be moving in the right direction. What happened in the past in regards to medals is in the past. As Teddy continually and correctly mentions there is a system in place for a reason. And it will be the systems fault if recognition fails to be timely or appropriate, not the level of fighting over there.

That much should be 'clear nuff'

 

[Journeyman]

What is abundantly clear is that too many folks assume the level of combat being fought almost daily over there is not quite up to 'medal worthy'.  

While that may not be completely true, recognition is slowing dawning. This quote came from a very senior officer who just returned from one of those Staff Annoyance Assistance Visits:

First, it's clearer to me than it was before this trip - we are at war. Any other tag would be misleading and disingenuous; the recent casualties serve to underscore this reality. This fact should colour all that we are doing in Canada to force generate soldiers and teams for service in this demanding theatre.

Word is getting out.

 

[Haggis]

Boondocksaint:

Suffice to say you have, again, missed my point.

Nothing I've posted was meant to belittle the acts or contributions of those who are "doing the job".  Let's leave it at that.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

As PPCLIguy mentioned, things appear to be moving in the right direction. What happened in the past in regards to medals is in the past. As Teddy continually and correctly mentions there is a system in place for a reason. And it will be the systems fault if recognition fails to be timely or appropriate, not the level of fighting over there.

+1 and I fully expect that any combat-related awards will be valour decorations...  FWIW.

 

[3rd Horseman]

Again, these are bravery awards, not awards for valour.  Valour awards are for actions in the face of an armed enemy, the word "enemy" being the deciding criteria; "peacekeeping" missions are specifically excluded.  Again, from the pam:

Which is why we haven't seen the "new" valour decorations awarded in the Balkans (or anywhere else - yet - for that matter) and why we haven't seen a VC since WW II (there were none awarded to Canadians in Korea).

From the pam quote from Teddy  Key word is highlighted.
It should be noted that conflicting parties in a peacekeeping context are not considered
enemies and although there may be altercations with the CF in a peacekeeping mission, the
use of force by the CF will generally be limited to self-defence. This is why MVDs are not
generally awarded during peacekeeping operations.

AS I pointed out key word is General. Not exclusive as you have said just in general. Yes splitting hairs but it does not exclude and infact details that it is possible just not generally done.

Haggis - As for the reality of the GG web page from your search, you are correct what you have read but not all you read in the public domain is true to life. I have been personally aware of the changing of the narrative to fit the peactime feel of the public domain. I nominated a soldier for the Medal of Military Valour for Valour in combat in 1995. He ended up not getting it but the reason it was denied was not that General rule of no peace keeping mission will get a Valour medal just the other details. It was argued long and in detail at many levels and the end result was that during certain actions in the Balkans Valour would be the accepted wording as it fell outside the general rule. I can tell you that this soldier did get to the highest level and was awarded a valour decoration which was then altered as it came back down the chain.
Another incident - On the issue of the GGs web page I can tell you that items on that page have been altered. In a letter issued with the medals from the PM, MND, and CDS to the chain of command and the soldier in question it read that the award will be given but will not be given any public media and will be issued in private in the Commanders office. The soldiers will not be given the honour of getting it at Government house the GG sends his regrets but with the thanks of a nation and hoping the soldier will understand . The message read at the start - The  reading of the citation will be sealed with the script not authorized to be release in any form to the publc or any other member of the CF. As directed the soldier was awarded his Valour decoration in an office with the CO and Commander and a cuban cigar and sherry to celebrate......then put it in your pocket and go away. The citation only to be read in private and then returned to the Commander.  You can find this citation in the GGs web site changed in its narrative.

The end result here is that their are no absolutes.
Edit typo

 

[KevinB]

:

Silent Professionalism meet Obnoxious Illiteracy

 

[Michael OLeary]

As he said:

...not all you read in the public domain is true to life...

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

On the issue of the GGs web page I can tell you that items on that page have been altered. In a letter issued with the medals from the PM, MND, and CDS to the chain of command and the soldier in question it read that the award will be given but will not be given any public media and will be issued in private in the Commanders office. The soldiers will not be given the honour of getting it at Government house the GG sends his regrets but with the thanks of a nation and hoping the soldier will understand . The message read at the start - The  reading of the citation will be sealed with the script not authorized to be release in any form to the publc or any other member of the CF. As directed the soldier was awarded his Valour decoration in an office with the CO and Commander and a cuban cigar and sherry to celebrate......then put it in your pocket and go away. The citation only to be read in private and then returned to the Commander.  You can find this citation in the GGs web site changed in its narative.

Are you saying that, for political reasons, valour decorations were awarded in secret??  Why?  For what action?  For which theatre?  :

 

[Gunner]

Deep battle operatives....

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Speeshal Farces, no doubt... very sneaky.