Medal of Honor for US Army Ranger

Discussion in 'US' started by DavidBOC, Jun 1, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Just saw this today:

    I find it notable that despite losing a hand he is able to remain on active duty.

    Well done Sergeant!

    More details are here: Article: Wounded Soldier to receive Medal of Honor for action in Afghanistan
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Pararegtom

    Pararegtom LE Book Reviewer

    • Like Like x 1
  3. Outstanding! well done that man... they don't give them out lightly either!
  4. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    unlike all the other medals they give out, indeed well done that man
  5. Good Skills, well deserved honour
  6. Rangers Lead the Way indeed. Respect.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    Indeed! Rangers Lead The Way! — Sua Sponte
  8. Shit beret, mind.
  9. Americans and Berets just don't get on, do they!
  10. "Petry threw a thermobaric grenade"

    Woah, THAT sounds fun...

    Nails actions on, BTW.
  11. Very well done indeed.
  12. Without distracting too much from the subject of this thread that rightly acknowledges the valor of this soldier, while I agree with and respect many of your posts, this one (IMHO, unseemly on this thread) dig is clearly both overbroad and unfair and indeed beneath your otherwise high standards.

    Let me preface my disagreement in readily agreeing with you that there is the phenomenon in some parts of the US military and in some situations of "award creep," and in candidly noting the clearly differing overall philosophy between the US and the UK in general for rewarding noteworthy combat and other performance of duty with medals.

    I hope we can both agree that much of this latter difference has nothing to do with the relative heroism or other superior performance of the individuals involved, whether American or British, but rather is rooted in cultural and historical reasons as is often evident when one compares the specific actions of a British soldier "only" mentioned in dispatches with virtually identical ones of an American soldier who receives a shiny thing to wear.

    To generalize in the way you did does an unfair disservice to (and in many cases dishonors) the valor (and often the ultimate sacrifice) of that American soldier, Marine, airman or sailor who rightly deserves the particular medal awarded (not merely "given" as dismissively suggested). Also, contrary to your implication that all US medals are "fungible," if you will take the time to read the actual citations that accompany especially the Silver Star and the respective service Cross representing the nation's second highest award for combat valor and compare them to those accompanying the DSO, CGC, DSC, MC and DFC you may feel the least bit sheepish about the sweeping breadth of your post.
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Yeah, bore off.
  14. Jumping, as long as the US Armed forces, that I respect, will approve of having recruits fresh out of basic training with a full row of ribbons/medals, the reputation of the said armed forces for dishing out medals by the crate load will remain.

    Considering how many servicemen we now see in the FRA armed forces sporting Bronze Star, ARCOM or AAM on top of GWOTEM, CIBs and US "combat patches" etc, etc, I can't see this reputation being dispelled anytime soon even though I understand the need of diplomatic awards to keep allies "in the fight".

    And BTW, well done that man !
  15. MY dear fellow, I acknowledged the difference in philosophy between nations on such things but surely on a military forum like this one would expect a bit more discernment between gallantry medals and all others. It is really a matter of degree in any event, as it really goes to the number of such things as even in the UK, medals are awarded for periods of service and the like having nothing to do with valor in combat.
    • Like Like x 1