Posted on Jan 6, 2016
Pentagon may upgrade hundreds of troops to possible Medals of Honor
1.78K
12
9
5
5
0
The sweeping review ordered by Defense Secretary Ash Carter would represent one of the most significant steps in decades to honor troops who have displayed extraordinary courage in combat. It stems from a study of military decorations and awards that was ordered in March 2014 by then-Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel "to ensure that after 13 years of combat the awards system appropriately recognizes the service, sacrifices and action of our service members."
Pentagon may upgrade hundreds of troops to possible Medals of Honor
Posted from usatoday.comPosted in these groups: 
Medal of Honor
Medal of Honor
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
3
3
0
I cannot wait until the defacement of our military will be a thing of the past. This really saddens me, because this diminshes the medals.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
LONG OVERDUE. That SFC who was running into a burning track vehicle to get those troops out should've gotten it based off his actions THEN. The Marine who had a ship named after him should get it too. There are more, but these two stand out immediately. But in our rush to make up for wrongs, lets not get too far into this and really start giving this to every Joe Schmo because we know the numbers of those with it from wars past are dying at an alarming rate. I'd rather see two men (a woman should've been had this somewhere from all the wars we've had), have this, and they can truly justify it compared to 200 who when you break it down really just deserved an ARCOM with V device.
(2)
(0)
SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury
What Marine that had a ship named after him didn't get a CMH? One of the newest Arleigh Burke Class DDGs is named after LCPL Json Dunham, who received the CMH for his actions. I've been aboard - it's an awesome tribute.
His citation reads as follows: "For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as a Rifle Squad Leader, 4th Platoon, Company K, Third Battalion, Seventh Marines (Reinforced), Regimental Combat Team 7, First Marine Division (Reinforced), on 14 April 2004. Corporal Dunham's squad was conducting a reconnaissance mission in the town of Karabilah, Iraq, when they heard rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire erupt approximately two kilometers to the west. Corporal Dunham led his Combined Anti-Armor Team towards the engagement to provide fire support to their Battalion Commander's convoy, which had been ambushed as it was traveling to Camp Husaybah. As Corporal Dunham and his Marines advanced, they quickly began to receive enemy fire. Corporal Dunham ordered his squad to dismount their vehicles and led one of his fire teams on foot several blocks south of the ambushed convoy. Discovering seven Iraqi vehicles in a column attempting to depart, Corporal Dunham and his team stopped the vehicles to search them for weapons. As they approached the vehicles, an insurgent leaped out and attacked Corporal Dunham. Corporal Dunham wrestled the insurgent to the ground and in the ensuing struggle saw the insurgent release a grenade. Corporal Dunham immediately alerted his fellow Marines to the threat. Aware of the imminent danger and without hesitation, Corporal Dunham covered the grenade with his helmet and body, bearing the brunt of the explosion and shielding his Marines from the blast. In an ultimate and selfless act of bravery in which he was mortally wounded, he saved the lives of at least two fellow Marines. By his undaunted courage, intrepid fighting spirit, and unwavering devotion to duty, Corporal Dunham gallantly gave his life for his country, thereby reflecting great credit upon himself and upholding the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service."
His citation reads as follows: "For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as a Rifle Squad Leader, 4th Platoon, Company K, Third Battalion, Seventh Marines (Reinforced), Regimental Combat Team 7, First Marine Division (Reinforced), on 14 April 2004. Corporal Dunham's squad was conducting a reconnaissance mission in the town of Karabilah, Iraq, when they heard rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire erupt approximately two kilometers to the west. Corporal Dunham led his Combined Anti-Armor Team towards the engagement to provide fire support to their Battalion Commander's convoy, which had been ambushed as it was traveling to Camp Husaybah. As Corporal Dunham and his Marines advanced, they quickly began to receive enemy fire. Corporal Dunham ordered his squad to dismount their vehicles and led one of his fire teams on foot several blocks south of the ambushed convoy. Discovering seven Iraqi vehicles in a column attempting to depart, Corporal Dunham and his team stopped the vehicles to search them for weapons. As they approached the vehicles, an insurgent leaped out and attacked Corporal Dunham. Corporal Dunham wrestled the insurgent to the ground and in the ensuing struggle saw the insurgent release a grenade. Corporal Dunham immediately alerted his fellow Marines to the threat. Aware of the imminent danger and without hesitation, Corporal Dunham covered the grenade with his helmet and body, bearing the brunt of the explosion and shielding his Marines from the blast. In an ultimate and selfless act of bravery in which he was mortally wounded, he saved the lives of at least two fellow Marines. By his undaunted courage, intrepid fighting spirit, and unwavering devotion to duty, Corporal Dunham gallantly gave his life for his country, thereby reflecting great credit upon himself and upholding the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service."
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL - While I certainly support awarding the MOH to those who are truly deserving, I do not support reducing the criteria. I believe that the current process works very well, and I fear that this effort, however well intended it may be, will result in that.
While I agree that the awards system, in general, favors higher ranks getting higher awards (and realize much of that can be attributed to “scope and responsibility of the rank/position), I believe that is primarily limited to administrative/meritorious awards, not awards for heroism, which I believe the stats will bear out.
I just have an uneasy feeling about the plan to “look back” at over 1,000 award recommendations to see if they should be upgraded, because I believe the system used to determine whether they should have been awarded the first time was valid. What are they looking for – equity/equality due to race, gender, sexual orientation, etc? Will “hero” status now have EEO goals? Do the services now have to ensure that a certain percentage of females, Blacks, Hispanics, gays, Muslims, transgenders, etc., etc. receive a certain award, like they already do for promotions, assignments, etc.?
Again, I am all for ensuring someone deserving gets the appropriate award, if they were inappropriately overlooked the first time, but, to be honest, I’d feel a whole lot better about this effort if it was being done by anyone other than the liberal/progressive, politically correct Obama Administration. I firmly believe they will apply social-engineering into the equation and find discrimination against females, gays, minorities, or whatever, whether there was any or not, and you will see the award of the MOH diminished in stature, similar to how the Nobel Prize was diminished when Obama got it for no justifiable reason.
While I agree that the awards system, in general, favors higher ranks getting higher awards (and realize much of that can be attributed to “scope and responsibility of the rank/position), I believe that is primarily limited to administrative/meritorious awards, not awards for heroism, which I believe the stats will bear out.
I just have an uneasy feeling about the plan to “look back” at over 1,000 award recommendations to see if they should be upgraded, because I believe the system used to determine whether they should have been awarded the first time was valid. What are they looking for – equity/equality due to race, gender, sexual orientation, etc? Will “hero” status now have EEO goals? Do the services now have to ensure that a certain percentage of females, Blacks, Hispanics, gays, Muslims, transgenders, etc., etc. receive a certain award, like they already do for promotions, assignments, etc.?
Again, I am all for ensuring someone deserving gets the appropriate award, if they were inappropriately overlooked the first time, but, to be honest, I’d feel a whole lot better about this effort if it was being done by anyone other than the liberal/progressive, politically correct Obama Administration. I firmly believe they will apply social-engineering into the equation and find discrimination against females, gays, minorities, or whatever, whether there was any or not, and you will see the award of the MOH diminished in stature, similar to how the Nobel Prize was diminished when Obama got it for no justifiable reason.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google