Wounded soldiers should be awarded British Purple Hearts

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Skynet, Mar 8, 2008.

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. From The Sunday TimesMarch 9, 2008

    Wounded soldiers should be awarded British Purple Hearts Marie Woolf, Whitehall Editor
    SOLDIERS wounded in conflict zones such as Afghanistan and Iraq ought to be awarded a Purple Heart-style medal to recognise their sacrifice in battle, according to an official report.

    The plan, presented to armed forces chiefs last week, is one recommendation in a review commissioned by Gordon Brown to find ways of boosting respect and recognition for serving soldiers.
    More on the link
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3511911.ece
     
  2. The first time I ever worked with the Yanks, this came up. We replied with the old chestnut that British soldiers don't get medals for getting shot, just remedial training.
     
  3. Bugger off
     
  4. Don't think British soldiers want purple hearts, this is a Liabour spin exercise and bollocks to boot.
     
  5. Whatever happened to 'wound stripes'?
     
  6. I'm sure there are more pressing issues people in the MoD should be worrying their pretty little heads about.
     
  7. This subject has been muted many times on arrse and the general concensus of opinion seems to be that British soldiers do not want such an award.

    How about we ask some soldier that have been wounded?

    Personally (and i have never been wounded by enemy action) i think it is a positive idea as long as the criteria for earning it are plausible - playing football in the sandpit and twisting your knee for example should not be earning the award.
     
  8. Rather that the money was spent on rehabilitation for the wounded than a pissy medal.

    What about the mentally wounded?
     
  9. Seconded.

    "Look - we really CARE about our soldiers!" :roll:
     
  10. Sounds like a 'cost-neutral' plan to make it look as if something is being done.
     
  11. Spot on carrots dear chap. Every Yank engagement comes off with that question, "why no purple hearts?" :D
     
  12. I raised this point with an MP i met at a do last year.

    I doubt that any soldier that has been injured in Afghanistan or Iraq would want a piece of tin that they have to polish to remind them about getting injured.

    And people whose injuries were serious enough to be discharged would (at a guess) be insulted by the fact that government think they could make up for the loss of a limb with a piece of compressed cardboard.

    If anything then the only thing i thinhk people would want to get would be somthing along the lines of wounded stripes that were awarded back in the day.
     
  13. Well said Bossdog.
     
  14. Wounds gotten in battle are medal enough, those guys need no other trinket to remind them or others, they carry them and their honour without a pretty ribbon.
     
  15. Sack the medal and the "research" in to it.

    It is an irrelevance.

    On the flip side, the money now freed up from the medal and the research can go in to other things. Better facilities for helping the wounded, rehabilitation for wounded better compensation/pensions for wounded.

    For those walking/wheeling about with visible scars and those who harbour the invisible kind.

    You can't live on a bit of tin and a fancy ribbon.