Is there really a need for a Cold War medal?

Sgt Spencer Sikder I think the Cold War Veterans deserve it. Keeping the peace is just as important than the bureaucracy of warfare. Our Armed Forces earned it.
Millions of Cold War veterans, who served in the military from September 1945 to Dec. 26, 1991 — the day the Soviet Union dissolved — during pockets of peacetime tension that came during the expansion of communism and the fall of the Berlin Wall.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/11/cold-war-vets-seek-recognition/18839955/

I agree the number is inflated. At one point the estimate included all who might be eligible by reason of service form 1945 until 1992. Let us be honest a great many of them have now died over the past 25 years. Many of those who are eligible will simply buy the medal rather then go through the process of obtaining them form DoD. In my opinion, Congress should follow a path similar to the KDSM creation process and require DoD to comply.

My knee-jerk reaction was to dismiss the idea, but... then I read that the Pentagon objected on the basis of cost ($400M to create and award the medal). Really? Is that sufficient reason to withhold recognition? So, I was inspired to think about it some more and concluded that yes, it is a reasonable idea. The United States has never faced a greater threat than nuclear annihilation at the hands of the Soviets and victory was only won by the fact that we had a leader willing to admit that we were at war and act like it, and he was backed up by those willing to serve. Many deny President Reagan his just recognition saying that the Gorbachev was a helluva nice guy and surrendered because it was the right thing to do. BS! Well, if it really was a war (and I believe it was), there should be a campaign ribbon. Probably it should be supplemented with officially designated campaigns: Korea, Vietnam, Berlin Blockade, Cuban Missile Crisis, to name a few. And $400M represents what? An Air Force decal on one F35?