When I was a wee nobbut, I was bounced on the knee of retired Vice Admiral “Red” Ramage, a friend of my father’s and awardee of the Congressional Medal of Honor. He was a kindly old man, with a charming sense of humor – he told me in tones of mock disappointment at my life choices: Having received an appointment to the Naval Academy, and telling him that I aspired to be an aviator, he allowed as how we’d always need at least one or two airplanes in the Navy. He never spoke much about what he’d done to earn that bit of cloth, but there it was: A wee, blue rosette sprinkled with white stars pinned to his lapel. It led a very young man just embarking on a life in the service to wonder how he might stand when the time came to be tested.
We’ve had people in the fight over seven years now, many of whom have distinguished 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.”
Thus far in the war on terror, five US servicemen have been awarded the MOH. Each of them posthumously.
Like John, I have to wonder, “What’s up with that?”
Read the official citations from all the MOH recipients, especially the old ones, and there’s no doubt we’ve had people who deserve it in our current conflicts.
We’ve certainly built up a mythos around the award and it holds that nobody seems to be worthy of the award, alive anyway. The best part is the living recipients are as bewildered about this as the rest of us.
I suspect a large part of it is that a guy with an MOH could bring a lot of clout with him, especially after he got out of the service and into, say, politics.
You got it Humble. The last thing that the politicians want is a live hero. It might give someone enough credability to change people’s opinions about the war, a place that politicians reserve for themselves and select members of the mainstream media.
Small world, Lex. I commissioned USS RAMAGE (DDG 61) in ’95 and am a proud “Red Thunder” plankowner. I had the pleasure of meeting some of the Admiral’s family and friends at both the christening and commissioning and was even privy to a few sea stories from some of his PARCHE shipmates.
We’re starting to do it Nip style. The Imperial Japanese Navy only gave medals to dead people. I swear they thought it was better to die, with or without result, than to kick tremendous ass while remaining alive one’s self. There were exceptions for highly-placed, already-important people. Sorta like our Legion of Merit.
The MOH Museum is on the Yorktown (CV-10) here in Charleston and it is sobering to wander through the halls and read the citations. A business acquaintance that helps fund-raising for the museum is a living MOH recipient and he is also is dumb-founded at the Navy Cross citations that didn’t cut it for the MOH. As he says, you don’t want to denigrate their achievements, and there is the problem of the recipients never “living up to the medal”, but he clearly believes that you award for that performance without any looking ahead as to what that military member may or may not do or become. Our current policy is kind of like awarding the MVP to the guy that retires so he never has to play up to that level again.
I always wondered at Jimmy Dolittle’s MOH for leading the B-25 raid on Tokyo. Why not all the rest of pilots and crew? Also, Douglas MacArthur’s for, what exactly? I’m thinking didn’t he get two – one in WWI another in WWII? The WWII for leaving Corregidor? Maybe I’m wrong.
Great men, great leaders, perhaps deserving but compared to the things I read about that don’t make the cut today it seems we’ve raised the bar a little too far.
It is a greater shame that, having 5 MOH winners from the recent wars that they aren’t known to every school child in America. I admit that I can’t cite their names either as the information must be pulled and is not pushed in our society. If we do not celebrate and honor greatness we defacto honor and celebrate what then?
Cap’t…
Somewhat interesting that I just happened to open this up whilst sitting at my desk on the 3rd deck of Ramage Hall (the Submarine Learning Facility building at NAVSTA Norfolk). For once, my “surfing” was professionally related. It’s amazing to read about the VADM’s heroism, as well as that of other submariners.
V/r,
MMCM
OldT6Flyer – Lex, me, and our compatriots of the milblogs are the societal “push” on this topic.
Sadly, we also are the ones who had to “pull,” for years, to get the info to push.
Feh.
I can name the recipients. So can my son. And he’s never going to wear a uniform. He just absorbed the right lessons, however much I despaired of that at times.
Not unlike my father suffered bouts of despair.
John:
Thank you for the service you and all the mil bloggers perform. I’m addicted to Lex’s site and have visted yours, but need to spend more time there as well.
Please do, OldT6, but be aware, there are people hanging out there who may be even weirder than I am. I am more normal now after Bad Cat Robot’s bionic repairs. You should have seen me before the interactive fiction comment party, in which I was virtually eaten by the Moat Monster.
Castle Argghhh! The most neurally-divergent of all Milblogs! Long may it remain so!
I think part of this is an overreaction to the perception that medals were handed out like water in the Vietnam era.
It’s interesting that Patton was an advocate of having an officer on the staff whose entire job was prodding units into awarding decorations.
The conflict we are currently in seems to be proving an exception to most wars we’ve fought in terms of the nature of awards and decorations. In earlier conflicts a distinct pattern is clear: Initially, desperate/eager for heroes to pump up civilian morale in the early stages of the fight with heroes, individuals have been awarded medals out of proportion to their achievements. As the the conflict progresses, the “standard” criterion then comes into play. Finally, if the conflict goes on long enough, worries are voiced that the proliferation of medals “cheapens” them and most submissions began to be automatically down-graded. This happened in Vietnam where toward the end everyone was gaming the system by submitting for one award higher than truly deserved with the knowledge that it would automatically be down-graded to the “proper” one originally considered anyway; because if the valid level of award was initially submitted the outcome would likely be an automatic downgrade to a lower award than truly deserved.
This same psychology may be seen in the current conflict in the number of missions required for an air medal. In Vietnam it was 10–or, as we used to say after every msn, “well another day, another 1/10th of an air medal.” In the current conflict they have raised it to 15, I believe–reflecting the belief that the msns currently flown aren’t as rough as in Vietnam (and they aren’t) so as not to degrade the worth of a Viet-era award.
(I’m also convinced that this downgrade effect in the Vietnam era was do somewhat to the jealously of Sr. officers who saw 1/lts walking around with multiple silver stars when the o-6s had nothing but campaign medals, etc.)
What is really strange about the current conflict, and what makes it such an anomaly–at least in my eyes–is that there seemed to be an effort to suppress ALL awards for valor from the gitgo, while at the same time pumping up the number of awards for the non-combatants by the creation of multiple campaign ribbons and that silly damn “combat/war zone” badge handed out to troops who don’t qualify for the Combat Inf Badge, i.e., “Everyone gets prizes” PC run amok stuff. That is, puff up the non-combatants while PC-leveling down to them by limiting valor awards for combat types.
(The rush to “heroize” that female captured, then rescued, Army enlisted soldier–who, as it turns out, never fired her rifle–is a PC case-in-point.)
Finally, my take on the MOH bit is partly in agreement with previous comments here, but also, I have the gut feeling that there is an additional reason. The accepted historical fact is that the reason that LBJ refused to publicize the horrible atrocities committed by the VC/NVA–as happened in Hue during Tet–was because of fear the public would be whipped into a frenzy and demand an invasion of N. Vietnam (or at least super heavy-duty bombing) that would bring the Chinese into the conflict ( and memories of Korea were much on their minds) if such actions were taken–and alternatively make the US look impudent if they were not.
Such fears of an expanded regional war to say, Syria and Iran, I believe has led to the playing down of heroic exploits that might encourage a level of patriotic fervor in an American public that might demand more forceful and wider actions than an administration is willing to contemplate.
Esoteric BS? Perhaps, but as the old saying goes: “Often in error–never in doubt.” Besides, not many shrinking violets around here–I’m sure somebody is headed my way with a bucket of cold water even as I type.
PS: I forgot–as further ammunition for my PC derived argument, I submit the withdrawal of the black berets from the Rangers and trying to make every Spec 4 in the Army pretended to feel he is a Ranger–or at least has Ranger-like qualities. What a joke… (Of course the REAL PC reason that the Army went to berets for everyone is because of the women. Berets are easier for women to mount on their hair than the garrison-cap/”piss-cutter”) (Plus the very term “piss-cutter” pissed ‘em off to begin with)
It was NOT ENOUGH to simply give kaki berets to the rank and file, oh no, no,no. It was REQUIRED that the Rangers be taken down a notch from their elite status by humiliating them and appropriating THEIR colors and letting the Army at large bask in the borrowed glory/elitism the former Ranger colors represented, while FORCING and HUMILIATING the Rangers to wear standard-issue colors–Army kaki. When such actions are added together with others too numerous to mention, I feel there is strong evidence to suggest a steady, drip, drip, drip, erosive, conscious attempt to “level the playing field” in the services via a race to a non-elite bottom.
Virgil
Well said – Quit holding back and tell us how you really feel. Electrons are free. I can remember my father telling me about helos from Saigon arriving at his battalion firefights out in Tay Ninh so that some REMF could jump into the fight long enough to qual for his CIB. Got to the point where the old man told the helo jockeys not to land with that crap anymore or there would be friendly incoming at them – which makes it very un-friendly. Actions like that diminish the very institutions we all love and hold as examples.
But so far I’m giving you the AMADGY tip o the hat of the day! Bombay and tonics all around to Virgil.
virgil-
regarding your comments vis-a-vis “that silly damn “combat/war zone” badge handed out to troops who don’t qualify for the Combat Infantry Badge (CIB),” allow me to elaborate. First of all, the Combat Action Badge (CAB) is not awarded to non-combatants. Period. You still have to meet the same criteria as a grunt would to get a CIB. The only difference is that non-infantry units can now be recognized for engaging in combat ops as well. To me, the real inequity was that the CIB was handed out for over 50 years, as though only infantry units were worthy of combat recognition. Since the Army doesn’t have something like the Navy’s and Marine Corps’ Combat Action Ribbon – which is awarded without prejudice to one’s MOS – they has to create a separate badge, the CAB, to close the gap.
Days after the cease fire in Desert Storm, the division commander came to address us. Among other things, some of the unit truck drivers complained that they wouldn’t get a CIB when we would. The CG’s answer? “You could have joined the infantry, but you chose not to. Don’t complain now.”
Historically, the infantry has had far and away the highest rates of casualties and mortality in combat of all the branches and arms in the Army. That was why there was a CIB and not a Combat Food Service Specialists Badge.
Having said that, I have no problem with the CAB. In Iraq especially, we have seen non-infantry units perform infantry missions, to the point of being organized along pretty much the same lines, due to a shortage of infantry battalions available. If they are going to take the same risks and fight the same fight, they certainly deserve the same level of recognition. Casey Sheehan comes to mind. The man was a mechanic. He didn’t have to go to the fight that cost him his life. But the trumpet sounded, and he answered the summons.
I’m awaiting moderation. I didn’t lace it with profanity or links, but I might be dual qualified on these terms:
egregious inanity or pugnacious stupidity
NAW, XBRAD, they’re just pissed because of your attempt to impersonate me….
OldT6Flyer: Re Jimmy Doolittle and his MoH, I’ve often had the same thought regarding submariners. A submarine crew is a pretty tight “all for one and one for all” bunch, at least the good ones are. Of the seven WW2 submarine skippers who received the Medal of Honor, only two received it for truly personal acts of gallantry: Howard Gilmore and John Cromwell. The other five — Dick O’Kane, Red Ramage, George Street, Sam Dealey, and Gene Fluckey — received it for attacks they launched with their subs against the Japanese. All incredible men, all fully deserving of the honor. Let no man say otherwise. And yet … they didn’t do it alone the way Audie Murphy or Tony Stein or Dick Bong did.
Sometimes I think there should be some group version of the Medal of Honor, something like a superlative of the Presidential Unit Citation. Awarded to a small, closed unit such as a submarine crew or bomber crew, or perhaps even a tank crew, for “conspicuous gallantry as a team, at the risk of all their lives above and beyond the call of duty.”
MAJHARVY
Actually, I wasn’t aware the Navy & USMC had that award–I always thought it strange that the Marines lacked the equivalent–glad to see they don’t after all these years, just didn’t know where to look.
Actually, I understand the reasoning for the CAB and approve, but it was my understanding that it has been handed out rather more liberally than you indicate. If not, I’m glad to stand corrected.
G-Man/
Of all the Awards and Decs my WWII Vet Father earned–which were several, from purple heart (jeep hit a land mine, driver killed, said he would just as soon have passed–although two B-26 Maurader drivers in the beds on either side of him in hosp. taught him how to fly the B-26 to while away the time. Dad always said after that “ground school” he was convinced he could fly the B-26 in a pinch) to Silver Star–he was proudest of the CIB.
My compalint about the current “policy” on MOH awards is that it ignores the criteria in the Awards Manual, and it denegrates a level of herosism that I find far more compelling than the soldier, sailor, Marine or Airman who reacts instinctively and thrown him/her self onto the grenade to save their comrads. It is a universal truth that we fight for each other and I mean no disrespect to anyone who makes that choice in a split second and makes the ultimate sacrifice.
But what of the individual who knows that death is both a possible, and perhaps probable, consequence of their actions and still repeatedly exposes themselves to enemy fire to retrieve the wounded, or flies repeatedly into an impossibly hot LZ to resupply crucial ammo and remove the wounded? Are they not worthy?
It is said that Dwight Eisenhower was approached by several supporters who wanted to lobby the president for a MOH for Ike to equal the one MacArthur recieved. It is said that Eisenhower’s reply was that he didn’t particularly want a medal “that could be awarded for hiding in a tunnel.”
It is true that the criteria for the award have changed repeatedly through the years. Charles Lindberg was awarded the MOH for his flight. In the inter-war years I know of awards made to the pilot for superior airmanship in which his crew survived a crash landing.
And this is NOT the first time politicians have prostituted the awards process. Bill Clinton and his merry band of draft dodgers dicided that the awars process in WW II had been “racist” and ordered that what they claimed were ancient wrongs be righted. (Funny how they thought that only people of color get discriminated against in the awards process. Of course none of them were ever enlisted, so they wouldn’t recognize the institutional bias there!)
PS to G-man
Hadn’t thought of it for awhile, but one of my proudest possessions is a letter one of the B-26 pilots wrote to my Mother telling her what a great guy my Dad was and how his cheerful outlook bucked them up and helped speed their recovery. What a rare and kind thing for that guy to do! And what it said about Dad….
Marine6/
It’s funny, because while WWII troops often derided MacArthur as “Dug-out Doug” his WWI performance as a Regimental, later Division CO of the 42nd Rainbow (the Div Dad served in in WWII) was legendary for it’s courage. MacArthur used to go out UNARMED (which was pretty smart, come to think of it) on individual night recce missions as an O-5/O-6!
And what you said about those who have the “luxury” of contemplating the odds prior to committing to action!
MacArthur also had numerous incidents in WWII where he inspected the front lines on various islands in the Pacific walking in some cases so far forward he was told by the soldier on patrol not to venture further as he was approaching the point. This during periods of active firing by all sides. Lucky he was not a victim of a lucky sniper.
I did not mean to question his courage nor the validity of his WWI MOH as I believe that well deserved. I do beleive he was given one in WWII for less distinguished rationale.
It seems that politics and the winds of the times have all too much to do with what should be a more solemn process.
MacArthur was a BG in WWI – at permanent rank I believe. Not sure when he got his star but I’m sure he exited the war with it and never reverted to pre-war rank.
wolfwalker/
Sam Dealey is a classic example of how fleeting is fame. Bet not one in 10,000 knows that the Plaza in Dallas where JFK was shot is named for a WWII hero MOH awardee–even back in 1963!
OldT6Flyer/
MAC got his star when he assumed command of the 42nd on the battlefield.
Wolfwalker, I think something like your proposal is or was in effect for the VC. Troops got to nominate one guy as representative, with understanding that it applied to the whole unit.
I am not denegrating the demonstrated bravery of Douglas MacArthur in World War I. But, if you check I believe that you will find that he did NOT receive a MOH for WW I actions. He did receive the award after arriving in Austrailia, after “hiding in a cave.” Not my words, but those of the troops he commanded. I have read historical accounts that seem to indicate that the award was ordered by President Roosevelt (who was no great fan of MacArthur) because at that point “America needed heroes.”
My concern is that our need for heroes is no less today, and NOT making the award not only deprives the nation of our heroes of this generation, but is an affront to those whose deeds have EARNED the award.
Marine6:
Went back and checked it. You are correct. He did receive two DSCs in WWI as well a number of other medals including two Purple Hearts.
His DFC in Korea strikes me as the most absurd one. Wow does one get that for not actually, you know, flying?
Marine6/
MacArthur earned 7 Silver Stars and 3 Dist. Service Crosses–all awarded, I believe in WWI. Plus two Purple Hearts. And, of course all the rest DSM, etc., that came with a long career as a General Officer.