Is the awarding of the Meritorious Service Medal being watered down due to lack of standardization across the services?

I agree wholeheartedly with you. Semper Fi. I was a SSgt 87-96

All of the awards are being watered down. If you get an award for simply doing your job, then it is a participation award. It takes away from the worth of the awards for those who actually do something outstanding.

I agree. I can’t comment on the Marines, Navy or Air Force but the Army has just destroyed the awards process. Soldiers receive the MSM for changing duty stations. Down range is worse. I know for a fact that Purple Hearts have been given out that we’re not earned. Soldier falls out of chair when VBIED goes off outside compound and gets a PH. Yes that happened. It’s just a slap in the face to others who wear that award. I could go on for hours but the bottom line is you are correct the Army has water down awards to the point where they really don’t mean anything.

I can’t comment on today’s military but I did receive my first of two Soldier’s Medal before making E-3. Rank and TIS are irrelevant to ability and accomplishments.
We’ve all witnessed some getting awards who weren’t deserving but you shouldn’t assume those of lower rank automatically don’t.

How about an ARMY E-6, who shoplifted at the PX, and nothing happens and six months later received MSM for PCS award. Seriously SMH!!!

While the Marines may have a policy of only awarding an MSM to those with 12 years of service or more, the Army and Air Force don’t. They base the award on actual meritorious service, not simply time in service. Additionally, how do you know that the E-5 didn’t have 12 years time in service. The Air Force has typically been the hardest of the branches to make grade in. That guy may have 12 years or more in service.

The entire award system has been watered down and abused since Desert Shield/Desert Storm.

Are you the ribbon monitor,,,do you know what those men did to earn the MSM? Just cause you are in the Marines does not give you authority to question another man’s service. I earned mine as an
E-3 when I was assigned to Fort Chaffee during the Cuban refugee crises.

Yes, I think many awards are watered down in meaning by being tied to rank or TIS. One that has concerned me for a while though is the Medal of Honor. I have so much respect for any MOH recipient. But the Medal of Honor should be for someone who knowingly and willingly, of their own free will, risk or forfeit their life to help others or the mission. Occasionally, we see a MOH being awarded for thinly veiled political purposes. Often, the submissions don't come through the normal process; the President says to his lackeys "Go find me someone to give a Medal of Honor to". (They work great for drawing attention away from stealing, cheating, lying, betraying your country, etc.) Recently, a soldier inadvertently left behind was all by himself against a large enemy force. He fought bravely for many hours and, thus, single-handedly took on a large enemy force, to eventually die from his injuries. This man was a true hero in my book and I have nothing but respect for him. I'm sorry, though, but he was not, in my mind, eligible for the Medal of Honor. He was fighting for his life. He didn't willingly get left behind. I may get a lot of flame, but I hope you can see the distinction I'm trying to make. Definitely a hero, but only a very special category of heroes qualify for the Medal of Honor.

Depends what they did to earn it. Medals have nothing to do with “how many breaths you’ve taken”.