Is a new award for service in Iraq necessary?

Sgt Justin DavisCrowe — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:35:12 -0400

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Mar 30 at 2016 4:39 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:39:31 -0400

Yes...awarding our servicemembers in important.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Mar 30 at 2016 4:46 PM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:46:35 -0400

Awarding a campaign medal (not an award) is important "to honor troops who have served or are serving in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria." I agree, those sacrificing deserve the honor and distinction.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/pentagon-unveils-new-medal-soldiers-who-fought-isi/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

Pentagon unveils new medal for troops who fought ISIS

The Pentagon unveiled Wednesday a new medal to honor troops who have served or are serving in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

Response by Sgt Erle Mutz made Mar 30 at 2016 4:56 PM

Sgt Erle Mutz — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:56:29 -0400

Good question - I think only those who have served there (no matter when) could lend any credence to the need or volition of a "new" medal!

Response by Sgt Justin DavisCrowe made Mar 30 at 2016 4:59 PM

Sgt Justin DavisCrowe — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:59:23 -0400

I must appologize for my question I misread the article that brought me to post this question. Being that it is for service in Syria as well then yes there should be a new Campaign Medal, and reactivating the Iraq Campaign Medal would be totally out of the question.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 30 at 2016 5:02 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 17:02:38 -0400

It's a new campaign medal.

The reason it is "necessary" is because the previous Iraq campaign is "officially" ended. This means that for Marines we would default to the Marine Corps Expeditionary Medal (or the Armed Forced Expeditionary Medal) which is granted when no other Campaign Medal is authorized. So basically we would still get one...

Remember, the awards show distinct aspects of your career. Some of it is accomplishments (Valor or Personal Awards). Some of it is Longevity. Some of it is Locale. None of it's really necessary, but it does tell a story.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 30 at 2016 5:13 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 17:13:38 -0400

I do not see any harm in it. This ribbon is for service in Syria and Iraq against ISIS, not just for Iraq. Yes, they probably could have just placed the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal in this place... but it will recognize Soldiers for participating in the campaign. Whether it is the GWOTEM or this new medal, I think it will be a good thing. Not everyone cares about medals or awards, but some people do get their motivation from little things that show off where they have been and what they have experienced.

Response by LtCol Jim Fuhs made Mar 30 at 2016 6:29 PM

LtCol Jim Fuhs — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 18:29:47 -0400

Absolutely not.

Response by LTC John Mohor made Mar 30 at 2016 9:21 PM

LTC John Mohor — Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:21:02 -0400

As long as they've made a new campaign medal does that now mean any service members that engages in direct combat can now earn a second award of the CAB, CIB, CMB, CAR and CAM depending on which service?

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 31 at 2016 12:03 AM

COL Charles Williams — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:03:01 -0400

As CSM Michael J. Uhlig stated below, if the ACM is no longer the right answer, this certainly makes sense.

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Mar 31 at 2016 6:44 AM

CSM Darieus ZaGara — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:44:48 -0400

The "Medal" is not for Iraq alone, it covers every area of operation in which our service members are actively facing ISIS. The titles for prior recognition do not fit todays fight. If our service members are in harms way for extended periods we (the military) must have a way to track/and recognize where you serve. This is done in the form of a Medal not an Award, there is a distinct difference.

I think those that serve deserve recognition.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 7:56 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 07:56:25 -0400

I don't think it should be unless they are actual combat theatres. They also have one for OND which another con combat theatre.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 12:01 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 12:01:36 -0400

There are some politics involved here. Frankly, I am surprised a bit that it wasn't put in a separate category under the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.
The President wants to distance himself and his actions from anything the Bush administration did. That is why the language has been what it has. Reactivating the ICM was going to be a complete non-starter. Even using the GWOTEM for OIR had symbolism not lost on some.
So we get something new.
I don't disagree with the outcome, but the thought process on things like this is often very political.

Response by Cpl Matthew Wall made Mar 31 at 2016 7:58 PM

Cpl Matthew Wall — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:58:38 -0400

Why not? They served there. Should we remove the GWOT, ICM, and ACM?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 8:54 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:54:37 -0400

Yes. This is a totally different campaign from OIF. Also, there very well may be a lot of young Soldiers that did not have a part in OIF but deployed on this mission and this medal would be instrumental for them. What I do foresee, though, is there will definitely be Soldiers begging to go on this mission so they can add some more bling to their rack. Little humor for ya there.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made May 9 at 2018 9:16 PM

SGM Bill Frazer — Wed, 09 May 2018 21:16:20 -0400

It is a New campaign right, then a NEW campaign medal can be authorized.