In a previous thread where posters began the inevitalble inter-service pissing contest an interesting side bar surfaced. It seems that different services use different criteria for awarding acts of valor. I am aware there are DOD guidelines, but it appears that the various services do, in fact, treat similar acts of valor differently. I'd like to see a credible study on this.

And then there are the service awards. It seems that there are different criteria here as well. The generic "combat action" award seems to be different when one compares the Army, Marine and Air Force for example, especially over time. I know vets, my brother-in-law for one, with non-combat MOS's, who were in support roles and never outside the wire during their 13 month Viet Nam deployment and yet were awarded the Army CIB. And I know of Air Force flight crews, flying from Thailand, who were awarded the Air Force combat award for flying refueling missions over territory well outside of SAM and air to air threats.

I'm sure the naval service has similar examples. Here's one. I was a USMC criminal investigator at El Toro and Camp Pendleton between 1969 and 1971. We had a case that touched some personnel who were stationed at a base in Viet Nam. When the case was finished I got some silly little citation for contributions to Marine combat operations in Viet Nam. Go figure.

Politics? Service bais? Careerism by the awarding authority? Of course. It'd be great to see an independent study on this subject, separate from any DOD influence.

A Australian was just honoured with the Victoria Cross, VC,...........

THE brown dust from the departing choppers that carried the SAS squadron south from their base at Tarin Kowt had barely cleared when all hell broke loose.

It was October 2010, at the height of the Afghanistan fighting season, and a large Taliban force had established numerous firing positions around heavy machineguns.

More than 24 elite Perth-based Diggers from the Special Air Service Regiment were under withering fire.

Realising his mates were in grave danger, and with no regard for his own welfare, the SAS Corporal charged headlong into the Taliban machinegun fire.

The sight of the 202cm Australian warrior coming at them must have shocked the bearded Afghans.

Within minutes three enemy guns had been silenced and numerous Taliban fighters lay dead.

West Australian Ben, or "RS" to his mates, had taken out three machinegun positions single handedly.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
Related CoverageEditorial: Ben fights for us all Second hero in battle with Taliban
The Australian, 6 hours ago
Take a bow Big Ben, we salute you
Courier Mail, 1 day ago
Battlefield mateship worthy of VC
The Australian, 2 days ago
SAS Corporal receives Victorial Cross
The Australian, 2 days ago
Inspired bravery in face of death
The Daily Telegraph, 2 days agoEnd of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
His comrades said it was the most extreme example of conspicuous gallantry since Albert Jacka VC jumped into a trench full of Turks at Gallipoli in 1915, killing seven with his rifle and bayonet.

"He just tore into the enemy," one of his mates said.

"He is the epitome of the Spartan soldier. It was only a matter of time before he would demonstrate his true ability."

Now the soldier - already awarded a Medal of Gallantry - will become the latest to be awarded the nation's highest military honour, the Victoria Cross For Australia.

"This guy is a warrior," one of his ex-colleagues said ahead of Sunday's investiture ceremony.

The battle that led to the honour came during an offensive in the Shah Wali Kot area.

Signals intelligence had intercepted enemy "chatter" about a large group of Taliban fighters moving to attack a combined force of commandos from the Sydney based 2nd Commando Regiment and the Afghan National Army.

The SAS had been mounting helicopter-borne assaults throughout the offensive, targeting Taliban commanders and bomb makers.

As soon as word came through, the troops from the squadron based at Camp Russell near Tarin Kowt immediately mounted several US Blackhawk choppers for the 15-minute flight into battle.

After landing the SAS took the fight to the enemy, but it was clear they would falter unless the machineguns were neutralised. Step forward "RS", the biggest man in the regiment by a fair margin.

"RS" joined the SASR in 2002 from the army's 3rd Battalion. He is a specialist sniper and "assaulter" and a devoted husband and father of two young daughters.

He was awarded a Medal for Gallantry in December 2006 for his courage under fire in Afghanistan's Chora Valley in the same battle in which Sergeant Matthew Locke, who was killed in action during 2007, won his MG. During that fight, according to comrades, "RS" tore a Taliban fighter off his back like an insect, stood on his throat and shot him dead.

By the time the battle was over about 60 Taliban lay dead from small arms fire, hand-to-hand combat and close air support.

Ben's Victoria Cross will make him the most decorated Australian soldier in decades.

His good mate Rob Maylor, whose book SAS Sniper was released last year, describes him as an outstanding soldier: "He has excelled as an operator in the Regiment, and is also an SAS sniper, but his main calling is as an assaulter and he is exceptional."



76 comments on this story

Increase Text Size Decrease Text Size Print Email Share
Add to Digg Add to del.icio.us Add to Facebook Add to Kwoff Add to Myspace Add to Newsvine What are these?

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/nationa...077678#ixzz1C4kVdw7a

TWL

The criteria for valor awards is covered by regulation, not "guidlines". That criteria is fairly consistent between the services. There are specific definitions for valor, heroism and gallentry. However there are differences in the criteria because of the different nature of the services. Most who write award ecomendations fail to read the criteria required let alone the definitions. For example; the level of "valor" that a private demonstrates may get him an award where the same level for a SFC or a captain would not get them an award because the privates actions were "above and bwyond" for him but expected of the SFC and captain.

It is unfortunate that many desrving of awards don't get them because those who recommend them fail to read the criteria and definitions. I've seen it many times, too many actually. Also if your BIL was awarded the CIB without an infantry MOS a records review these days would catch it and the award would be revoked. Not saying there hasn't been instances of that but it's much harderto do these days with computerized records. There also is different criteria for the CIB, CAB and "action ribbons". Participation or close proximity is the criteria for those, not "valor".

There is a lot of missunderstanding of the criteria for a Purple Heart for instance, especially as to what constitutes "wounds". Should a naval pilot who gets the ass end of his plane blown off by a SAM and ejects safely but then breaks his leg on landing get a PH?....think about before answering....

The Bronze Star is also greatly misunderstood. It is basically a Meritorius Service Medal awarded in a combat zone. It also is an award for "valor" if it is awarded with a "V" for valor. One is for doing a damn good job over and above, and the other is for heroism. Same medal, two different meanings.

Not wanting to get into a discussion with anyone about someone their drill sgt heard in a bar about some guy's uncle "in the NAM" who got a yadd yadda for nothing..... There's lot's of those stories. I'm just trying to shed some light on the subject as I've sat on awards boards, written recommendations (even for the MOH - it was awarded BTW), helped rewrite recommendations and observed heroism, gallantry and valor 1st hand.

Larry Gibson

Thank you Larry. I appreciate your informative post.

My PH always made me feel embarrased.
Always felt that some one who died deserved more than a PH.
Their needs to be a distiction between drawing blood in combat and going home in a box.

I think my dad saw so many dead that he was never impressed with any medal.

quote:

Originally posted by brad may:
My PH always made me feel embarrased.
Always felt that some one who died deserved more than a PH.
Their needs to be a distiction between drawing blood in combat and going home in a box.

It is pretty much SOP that those killed in action now also recieve the Bronze Star.

You shouldn't be embarrased by your PH. Getting killed in action is not the criteria. If you were wounded or injured in action you deserve the award and the recognition that goes with it.

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:You shouldn't be embarrased by your PH. Getting killed in action is not the criteria. If you were wounded or injured in action you deserve the award and the recognition that goes with it.

Larry Gibson

I couldn't agree more.

quote:

Originally posted by brad may:
My PH always made me feel embarrased.
Always felt that some one who died deserved more than a PH.
Their needs to be a distiction between drawing blood in combat and going home in a box.

My first soldier who was wounded in Iraq was embarrased. It was really no more than a scratch. I told him don't weigh so heavily on why you got the PH but, the job you did to get it. Not everyone is going back into a ambush site to make sure you got everyone out. It was just part of danger when you made the decision to go back into the kill-zone. I'm still very proud of his accomplishment.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
TWL

The criteria for valor awards is covered by regulation, not "guidlines". That criteria is fairly consistent between the services.

I don't know about that. Maybe someone else can weigh in and tell me if I'm wrong. In the Navy, You can get a Combat Action Ribbon without ever exchanging fire with a human enemy.

The logic being, if your boat gets holed by an anti-shipping mine and you fight to save it, you've been in combat. The explosion and subsequent fire can kill you just as dead as a bullet.

quote:

Not wanting to get into a discussion with anyone about someone their drill sgt heard in a bar about some guy's uncle "in the NAM" who got a yadd yadda for nothing..... There's lot's of those stories. I'm just trying to shed some light on the subject as I've sat on awards boards, written recommendations (even for the MOH - it was awarded BTW), helped rewrite recommendations and observed heroism, gallantry and valor 1st hand.

Larry Gibson

It is a fact that some people get medals who never earned them. I think the classic example is Lyndon Johnson's Silver Star. I'm still waiting for someone to explain how a guy taking a joy ride can get decorated for some vague heroic deed, and meanwhile none of the flight crew does.

How does the "observer" save the day without any help from the pilot, gunners, etc.?

What's most relevant to the situation is this. I was an officer. I couldn't give a r*#'s a#@ how many medals I got. I cared a great deal how many medals my guys got. I couldn't give them a raise. I couldn't give them a bonus. All I could do was submit recommendations for awards on their behalf.

But the only thing worse than not recognizing your men is cheapening the process. If somebody deserved a medal, I'd put him in for it. If somebody deserved to get s&$!canned, I'd put him in for that, too. I'd never make one of the good guys take up the slack for a no load.

I've no doubt there are some abuses in the awarding of undeserved awards and decorations. A lot has to do with the integrety of the recommender and the approving authority. One thing I've noticed over the years is whnever anyone is given an award there will always be someone who disagrees.

I'm also well aware opf the command policies that attempt to limit certain awards to certain ranks. However, if a recommendation is made, and made correctly, it can be addressed at a higher level than those who make the unauthorized "rules" and policies.

I was directly involved in the process that got Congress to change the law that allowed the awarding of many MOHs to deserving recipients who's paper work had been lost, misplaced or denied for various unauthorized reasons. I am somewhat proud of my involvment everytime I hear/see a MOH awarded for past actions in WWII, Korea or Vietnam.

Larry Gibson

I think it was interesting that during WWII the US Army awarded the CIB yet the USMC had no equivalent for doing the same job.
How was this handled in campaigns where US Army and USMC infantry served together?

The Marine/Navy/Coast Guard are authorized the Combat Action Ribbon. It is retroactive to 7 December, 1941. It, unlike the CIB is awarded to all ranks below Naval Captain regardless of MOS who must have rendered satisfactory performance under enemy fire while actively participating in a ground or surface engagement.

Larry Gibson

As a matter of interest, the Aussies have had a second VC go their way and the Brits, one, that I know of. The British guy is Johnston Beharry. Go play with Google and You-tube.

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
The Marine/Navy/Coast Guard are authorized the Combat Action Ribbon. It is retroactive to 7 December, 1941. It, unlike the CIB is awarded to all ranks below Naval Captain regardless of MOS who must have rendered satisfactory performance under enemy fire while actively participating in a ground or surface engagement.

Larry Gibson

I know this was cooked up and made retroactive but during the war it must have seemed inappropriate to the Marines, especially to some of those that came out of the war with 3 or 4 battle stars.

The CIB belongs to the Infantry Grunts. They're the ones at the sharp end with just a rifle where it is really personal doing the really dirty work, and they deserve a special award for doing that duty. No other form of service compares. I don't think a Combat Action Ribbon, however well deserved, is the same and I wish the Marines would honor their grunts with something like a CIB. God knows they've earned one if anyone has.

Jerry Liles

Jerry Liles

I spent 3 years recently training Marines and all of the were proud of their Combat Action Ribbons. I even heard a few complain because they didn't get one.

Marines are strange animals, they think every marine is a rifleman and all Marines can shoot better than anyone else. However, from what I've seen over the years..........

Larry Gibson

quote:

Originally posted by Larry Gibson:
I spent 3 years recently training Marines and all of the were proud of their Combat Action Ribbons. I even heard a few complain because they didn't get one.

Marines are strange animals, they think every marine is a rifleman and all Marines can shoot better than anyone else. However, from what I've seen over the years..........

Larry Gibson

Larry, it comes from the emphasis on marksmanship in the Marine Corps from the very begining. Keep in mind that the Marines still qualify out to 500 meters. They tend to shoot pretty well, relatively speaking.

And, all Marines, be they officer or enlisted, cook, accountants, tankers or any MOS, must qualify every year with the rifle. The only exception to annual qualification is being in a combat zone. But you will be scheduled for an annual qualification shortly after your return from a combat zone. Ask me how I know.

And yes, most Marines can shoot better than the average of any other group of similar size I know of; it is rare to find a Marine without at least a basic rifle qualification badge.

Semper Fi

LionHunter

You won't find any Army soldiers without a "basic rifle qualification badge" either. Marksmanship training and qualification is required of all Army personnel, regardless of future MOS.

I just completed 3 years of training marines and spent some time in NC and CA observing them on the range and also training them with foreign weapons. We also trained Army soldiers an same. I also was heavily involved in marksmanship training and qualification in my many years in the Army. As a Weapons NCO in SF for many years I also had the opportunity to train with Marines and many foreign nationals.

I wouldn't bet a nickol on any difference between most Army infantry units and marine infantry units marksmanship abilities. I wouldn't bet a nickol on the support troops marksmanship abilities either. The Marines are legends in their own minds when in reality they aren't any better at marksmanship, they only think they are. I've seen some really good marine shooters and some really good Army shooters. I've also seen some pretty bad shooters of each. On the whole though there's not a lot of difference.

BTW; just what are the Army's requirements for annual weapons "qualification" for all soldiers? If you can't really answer then how do you know the Marines are "better"?

Larry Gibson

Larry, correct me if I am wrong, but that last I checked the Army qualifies at a maximum distance of 300 yards, correct?

Legends in our own minds? Really?

Everybody in the Army qualifies in Basic Training out to 300 yards. Cooks, Mail Clerks, the General's driver, everybody.
Those in the Combat MOS's (Military Occupational Specialty) train much more extensively, and at longer yardages.

The Army has ten(?) times the number of troops the Corps does, the logistics would be nightmarish and the budget undoable.

Rich, I'm not talking about specialized training, now, just basic qualification. Nothing more, nothing less.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Larry, correct me if I am wrong, but that last I checked the Army qualifies at a maximum distance of 300 yards, correct?

Legends in our own minds? Really?

The basic rifle qualification course is 300 meters for the Army. As Rich says others qualify annually to much longer ranges depending on what their MOS is. I had my troops shooting to 800 meters on the transition range (R92 at Fort Lewis) with their M16A2s, quite successfully I might add. The sights do adjust to that range you know(?). Most infantry and combat MOS types do a lot more shooting than just annual qualification, a lot more.

"Legends in their own minds"? Why certainly, just ask any Marine.....he'll tell you all about it

Larry Gibson

To quote POTUS Ronald Reagan "Some people spend a lifetime wondering if they've made a difference; Marines don't have that problem."

When I was in I Corps early in that fiasco, I recall that Marines had to repeatedly bail out the "snake eaters" A-Team outposts so often that the CG of I Corps finally ordered all of SF out of the Corps area. Took a few years before they returned. But John Wayne did make a movie about them, once upon a time.

BTW, this contest is completely off-topic and should cease.

Interservice rivalry is ONE of if not THE the greatest tradition of the Armed Forces...

I remember coming from Chu Lai up to Danang in early 1971 when the Ranger Company split and half of us went north.

We took over the 1st Marine Recon's AO. Nice spot almost at the crest of a hill across the bay from where they were building this four hundred foot Buddha.

Rich

Lionhunter

Off topic? Yah it kinda drifted off but that happes on most threads. Not a pissing contest at all....we're enjoying it and no animosisty is involved. If we were bellied up to a bar we'd all be taken turns buyin' rounds and laughing about it.

You want to get this thread back on track then kindly add something pertinant to the topic(?). Perhaps you can read the regs and tell us of the differences between the services in awarding the same decoration?

Larry Gibson

quote:

Not a pissing contest at all....we're enjoying it and no animosisty is involved. If we were bellied up to a bar we'd all be taken turns buyin' rounds and laughing about it.

Larry Gibson

Amen to that! First round's on me!

First round's on Whitworth? Bartender, send a bottle of Glenfiddich over to our table with that big breasted redheaded waitress.

"To those of us who have fought for it, the word Freedom has a taste the rest of the world cannot know..."

Rich

I'm there........

Larry Gibson

Hate to take this back off topic but talking about getting your rifle qualfilcation in basic.
Back then they drafted groups of men from the same area.
Our company was made up half from Brooklyn and half from DC.
I dought if any of us had even seen a rifle much less shot one before boot camp. Those DI's had hell getting us through rifle marksman badge.
Now that was a medal that wasn't earned.

It was noted that the same action can get a variation of medal awarded based on a persons rank. In the Air Force, for example, A senior NCO might get a Meritorious Service Medal where a Junior NCO gets a lesser Air Force Commendation Medal or even lower, an Air Force Achievement Medal. This is not iron clad but pretty much the rule. Big exception. Females. They seem to get awarded higher medals than their male counterparts. When I was in, it was rare to see a male Junior NCO with a Meritorious Service Medal, but fairly common amongst the females. That is one example, there were others.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
It was noted that the same action can get a variation of medal awarded based on a persons rank. In the Air Force, for example, A senior NCO might get a Meritorious Service Medal where a Junior NCO gets a lesser Air Force Commendation Medal or even lower, an Air Force Achievement Medal.

True. I recall writing up three guys for Navy Coms. The Admiral approved the two for the Lieutenants.

He threw away the write-up for the JG. He said there was nothing a LTJG could do to earn a Navy Com.