Distinguished Warfare Medal

[Devil Doc]

I figured it a touchy subject to come out with this Medal when there is so much controversy about DRONE Attacks.

[lordmonar]

I figured it a touchy subject to come out with this Medal when there is so much controversy about DRONE Attacks.

Why?   There is not really any controversy from the military point of view. 

[LGM30GMCC]

The reality is when new types of warfare come these types of controversies tend to happen. It happened with cross bows (banned by the church for awhile), guns, machine guns, airplanes, poison gas, nuclear weapons and now UAVs.

Of those really only the conventions against the use of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons have stood the test of time. Sometimes chemical weapons are used but there is still pretty universal condemnation of their use. Nuclear weapons scare the living daylights out of people in many ways.

Targeted strikes with UAVs are unlikely to ever go away. They just aren't an exponential increase in terror. The questions are more about the constitutional legality of the strikes. The controversy would be the same if it was manned aircraft doing the strikes. (And it was for awhile)

[PaulR]

Why could they not just use the stateside awards and authorize a certain type of clasp or or device to attach when the award is for UAV related accomplishments?  I am against inventing new types of awards  when prexisting types can be utilized.  There are two types of personal decorations- those for merit and valor on the battle field and those that are for contributions while not in harms way.  A UAV operator is definitely in the latter catagory

I know some of the UAV operators who work out of the Houston area... while they do deserve recognition for the impact they make, they are not deserving of the same medals and awards as those who have to dodge bullets.  Also, I feel that the creation this medal is ridiculous, as well as not cost effective in our current economy. 

If they are going to create a medal, I had rather see the Cold War Service Medal created and awarded to our aging and neglected Cold War veterans.   

[PHall]

I figured it a touchy subject to come out with this Medal when there is so much controversy about DRONE Attacks.

There's lots of controversy about NAPALM attacks too. But you still get an Air Medal for delivering one if you save our guys lives.

[BGNightfall]

If they are going to create a medal, I had rather see the Cold War Service Medal created and awarded to our aging and neglected Cold War veterans.

Paul, while I'm not entirely sure, I do believe there have been several commemorative medals struck for cold war vets.  For a campaign or service medal, well... this year we'll see the guys who joined in 1993 hit their 20 year mark, so the opportunity to actually recognize our cold warriors is rapidly falling away.  While I'm not entirely familiar with the other services rules on retirement and high year tenure, I do know that at best we can expect roughly ten more years of service for enlisted who nominally served during the cold war, and another ten after that for the flag/general officers who happened to commission in the final days.  This is a fairly small number of people that we would be striking a campaign/service medal for.  Not to say that they aren't worthy, just that the perception at this stage would be that it would be another ribbon on the stack for folks that are already highly decorated.

[CAPAPRN]

No matter what you think of a cold war medal (and there have only been after market unofficials made- only official recognition is a certificate you can order) the issuance of a new award for UAV pilots is a very obviously political move. Gotta agree with PaulR on this one. I believe in 2007 the instructions for award of the DFC were changed to allow award for someone not physically located in the plane- I believe this was specifically done for drone operators. The Legion of Merit is also allowed as an end of tour award - combat or non combat. Considering the lack of recognition of enlisted warriors in our recent wars, this is really crazy. - BTW- name of thread is incorrect- this is not a service specific award.

[lordmonar]

What do you mean by "political"?

As for The DFC, Air Medal and Aerial Acheivement medals....those are all well and good for RPA operators....but does not address other forms of cyber operations....nor does it address the other "non aircrew" members of the RPA chain of attack.

The part that gets me all riled up....is that everyone is second quessing the experts at the Pentagon that made this medal and chose its location in the order of medals.  It was not like a couple of RPA pilots came up with the idea and just decided to put it above the Bronze Star.  There is a whole office in the Pentagon that debates these things, they talk to all the players involved, check the precidents in the histories and make their recommendations to the SecDef.

Bottom line....none of the existing medals really fits the bill.

When they tried to award an Air Medal to a RPA pilot for superior airmanship in saving a crippled RPA.....all the other pilots got all up in arms.

An RPA crew is made up Pilot (who may or may not be a rated pilot), a sensor operator and Mission Corridinator (an Intell guy).  When a operation is going on (door kicker overwatch, targeted strike or CAS support) there are several other people not in the trailer who are all part of the attack chain.   Many of them are not air crew.....and so do not qualifiy for an Air Medal or DFC.

So look at the available medals.

AFAC....okay that could apply.
MSM.....nope....not for combat.
BS.......Nope....must be in "hazard pay" area.
Air Medal....Okay could apply to some RPA guys....but not to others and not to cyper warriors
DFC.....Okay could apply to some RPA guys....but not to others and not to cyper warriors.
Legion of Merit (LOM).....is awarded to high ranking officers and SNCO's (cheifs)

So there is nothing that really applies.

Hence a new medal.

Now......the decision to put it above the Bronze Star is because it is going to be HARDER to get then the Bronze Star.
The Bronze Star is a service Medal....that is you have to do exceptional service supporting combat operations in a hazard fire pay zone.   You can get it for doing a great job as a finance specialist in the hospitol in the AOR.   The Distingushed Warfare Medal rquires direct hands on employment of weapoin systems........that means you have had to actually attacked the enemy whether it was through an RPA or you attacked their computer systems or communications systems using cyber or EW equipment.

it is ONLY awarded for single exempulary acts and not for sustained operational service.

So......by my thinking it is higher then the Bronze Star.

Yes.....it kind of sucks for the guy who got his Bronze Star with V for jumping on a gernade, or kicking some major butt in a figher fight.    But that has existed since the day they first started giving out Bronze stars to the REMF guys as well as the line guys.

And yes....we will get people saying "well I never saw a REMF get a Bronze Star".....but we all know that they are out there.

[flyboy53]

What do you mean by "political"?

As for The DFC, Air Medal and Aerial Acheivement medals....those are all well and good for RPA operators....but does not address other forms of cyber operations....nor does it address the other "non aircrew" members of the RPA chain of attack.

The part that gets me all riled up....is that everyone is second quessing the experts at the Pentagon that made this medal and chose its location in the order of medals.  It was not like a couple of RPA pilots came up with the idea and just decided to put it above the Bronze Star.  There is a whole office in the Pentagon that debates these things, they talk to all the players involved, check the precidents in the histories and make their recommendations to the SecDef.

Bottom line....none of the existing medals really fits the bill.

When they tried to award an Air Medal to a RPA pilot for superior airmanship in saving a crippled RPA.....all the other pilots got all up in arms.

An RPA crew is made up Pilot (who may or may not be a rated pilot), a sensor operator and Mission Corridinator (an Intell guy).  When a operation is going on (door kicker overwatch, targeted strike or CAS support) there are several other people not in the trailer who are all part of the attack chain.   Many of them are not air crew.....and so do not qualifiy for an Air Medal or DFC.

So look at the available medals.

AFAC....okay that could apply.
MSM.....nope....not for combat.
BS.......Nope....must be in "hazard pay" area.
Air Medal....Okay could apply to some RPA guys....but not to others and not to cyper warriors
DFC.....Okay could apply to some RPA guys....but not to others and not to cyper warriors.
Legion of Merit (LOM).....is awarded to high ranking officers and SNCO's (cheifs)

So there is nothing that really applies.

Hence a new medal.

Now......the decision to put it above the Bronze Star is because it is going to be HARDER to get then the Bronze Star.
The Bronze Star is a service Medal....that is you have to do exceptional service supporting combat operations in a hazard fire pay zone.   You can get it for doing a great job as a finance specialist in the hospitol in the AOR.   The Distingushed Warfare Medal rquires direct hands on employment of weapoin systems........that means you have had to actually attacked the enemy whether it was through an RPA or you attacked their computer systems or communications systems using cyber or EW equipment.

it is ONLY awarded for single exempulary acts and not for sustained operational service.

So......by my thinking it is higher then the Bronze Star.

Yes.....it kind of sucks for the guy who got his Bronze Star with V for jumping on a gernade, or kicking some major butt in a figher fight.    But that has existed since the day they first started giving out Bronze stars to the REMF guys as well as the line guys.

And yes....we will get people saying "well I never saw a REMF get a Bronze Star".....but we all know that they are out there.

OK, I respect your point. But you're not going to tell me it isn't political.

In any other circumstance, the criteria of an existing medal would have been adapted to this new type of warfare.

So, in the Korean War, there were lingists and other crypto people in Japan hammering out their duties, monitoring the war or passing on key communications. They qualified for the same campaign medals that were earned by the men and women fighting in the combat theater. In Vietnam, everyone got a NDSM and we came up with in-country or era veteran status. What does this new medal mean -- someone can get PTSD for operating a drone a distance away from the drone strike?

Now that's its created, you can't debate the justification for this award. It seems the American Legion (and probably other veterans groups) are now advocating for the medal to rank below those combat decorations. The personal joke would be that that recipient would then qualify for the appropriate campaign medal without ever being there and that's wrong.

I would advocate placing it behind or before the Combat Readiness Medal (which ranks above a good conduct medal). Perhaps the next thing to do, would be to eliminate the none-direct combat justification of the Bronze Star.

One more thing about Cold Warriors -- and I am one -- the certificate is nice, but it doesn't do that period of service any justice. It has taken about 30 years for a lot of the operations and losses to come to light -- a lot of the international tensions and moments when we were a breath away from nuclear war -- and the average member of the public has no idea what was going on because the Cold War also included things like Korea, Vietnam, and a bunch of other brush fires, for which there is very little recognition.

I remember coming back from 24 months overseas in Alaska and being told I wasn't even a veteran. All I got for Cold War service overseas was a ribbon. The certificate, though popular, is pretty poor recognition.

Years ago, a retired Army staff member created a Cold War Medal for private sale through a Virginia company called Foxfall Medals. It is this medal that the various veterans groups have been trying to get the DoD to recognize. More than once that medal has been included in the DoD budget, but gets cut essentially because the DoD would rather fund programs for drone operators. That needs to change.

[MIKE]

Alaska isn't overseas.

[PHall]

Alaska isn't overseas.

It is according to DoD. It's OCONUS (Outside the Continential United States), Hawaii is OCONUS too.

[MIKE]

Alaska isn't overseas.

It is according to DoD. It's OCONUS (Outside the Contiguous United States), Hawaii is OCONUS too.

FTFY.  I looked it up.  It's the contiguous wording that makes Alaska qualify as OCONUS.

[SarDragon]

Alaska isn't overseas.

Depends of who's defining overseas. Some places in Alaska are sure as hell isolated enough to count as sea duty in the Navy. Adak comes to mind immediately. Many Japan tours counted as sea duty. I know, I did two of them there.

Here are our rules:

Five types of duty designations or "types" are used to identify commands for establishment of sea/shore rotation.
(1) Shore Duty (Sea/Shore Type Duty Code "1"):  Duty performed in United States (U.S.) (including Hawaii and Anchorage, Alaska) land-based activities where members are not required to be absent from the corporate limits of their duty station in excess of 150 days per year, or long-term schooling of 18 or more months.
(2) Sea Duty (Sea/Shore Type Duty Code "2"):  Duty performed in commissioned vessels and deployable squadrons homeported in the U.S. (including Hawaii and Alaska); U.S. land-based activities and embarked staffs, which require members to operate away from their duty station in excess of 150 days per year.
(3) Overseas Remote Land-based Sea Duty (Sea/Shore Type Duty Code "3"):  Duty performed in a land-based activity, which does not require members to be absent more than 150 days per year, but is credited as sea duty for rotational purposes only due to the relative undesirability of the geographic area.
(4) Overseas Sea Duty (Sea/Shore Type Duty Code "4"):  Duty performed in commissioned vessels and deployable squadrons homeported overseas; overseas land-based activities and embarked staffs, which require members to operate away from their duty station in excess of 150 days per year.
(5) Overseas Shore Duty (Sea/Shore Type Duty Code "6"):  Duty performed in overseas land-based activities, which are credited as shore duty for rotational purposes.  Members are not required to be absent from corporate limits of their duty station in excess of 150 days per year.

[Flying Pig]

Ive never heard of AK or HI referred to as overseas.  Ive been to both in the military a couple of time.  Never rated anything for it, never came up in any documentation, DD-214, you certainly are not entitled to any overseas decorations for being in AK or HI.  Per the definition, yes its considered OCONUS based in geography but thats about it.  But who knows.....  I didnt even know I rated the Korean Defense Service Medal until a few years after I got out! 

[ol'fido]

I got the Army Overseas Service Ribbon for being stationed in Hawaii. And yes, it's on my DD214. AK and HI are considered an overseas assignment by the Army unless things have changed in the last 21 years which they may well have. Don't know about the other services.

[lordmonar]

OK, I respect your point. But you're not going to tell me it isn't political.

I still don't know what you mean by political.  Are you suggesting that the DoD is making this medal to win political support form some party or group?  Are you saying this is political in-fighitning between "line combat" "Manned Fliers" and RPA operators and Cyper Warriors.

In any other circumstance, the criteria of an existing medal would have been adapted to this new type of warfare.

So, in the Korean War, there were lingists and other crypto people in Japan hammering out their duties, monitoring the war or passing on key communications. They qualified for the same campaign medals that were earned by the men and women fighting in the combat theater. In Vietnam, everyone got a NDSM and we came up with in-country or era veteran status.

?? Let's not confuse campaing medals with Personal Decorations.....because you will loose.....Gen Clarke the commander of all Nato forces in the Kosovo war had to get an exception to policy for him and his staff....becasue they did not actually fight their war in the AOR for the campaign medal.  Those crews who deployed to and sortied out of Ramstein did not qualify for the campaign medal.  The crews from Whiteman did not qualify for the campign medal.........hench why the USAF created Air and Space Campaign Medal.....so they could recognise their people who fought the war from outside the AOR.

What does this new medal mean -- someone can get PTSD for operating a drone a distance away from the drone strike?

Actually.....yes you can in a way.  but that is an argument for another thread.

Now that's its created, you can't debate the justification for this award. It seems the American Legion (and probably other veterans groups) are now advocating for the medal to rank below those combat decorations. The personal joke would be that that recipient would then qualify for the appropriate campaign medal without ever being there and that's wrong.

Is the campaign medal for being there......or is it for supporting the war?   RPA operators are fighting the war every day, day in and day out.  Watching the backs of the door kickers.   What is wrong with recognising them for fighting the war that they are fighting?  And for the record.....they don't qualify for the campaign medal....but they should.

I would advocate placing it behind or before the Combat Readiness Medal (which ranks above a good conduct medal). Perhaps the next thing to do, would be to eliminate the none-direct combat justification of the Bronze Star.

So what you are really mad about......is that your "ideal" of what the Bronze Star is does not match the reality.   So....what really needs to be is a "Gold Star" medal or something that is for direct combat that would be above the new medal but less then the Silver Star.

One more thing about Cold Warriors -- and I am one -- the certificate is nice, but it doesn't do that period of service any justice. It has taken about 30 years for a lot of the operations and losses to come to light -- a lot of the international tensions and moments when we were a breath away from nuclear war -- and the average member of the public has no idea what was going on because the Cold War also included things like Korea, Vietnam, and a bunch of other brush fires, for which there is very little recognition.

I remember coming back from 24 months overseas in Alaska and being told I wasn't even a veteran. All I got for Cold War service overseas was a ribbon. The certificate, though popular, is pretty poor recognition.

Years ago, a retired Army staff member created a Cold War Medal for private sale through a Virginia company called Foxfall Medals. It is this medal that the various veterans groups have been trying to get the DoD to recognize. More than once that medal has been included in the DoD budget, but gets cut essentially because the DoD would rather fund programs for drone operators. That needs to change.

So....you are mad that "drone operators" are getting their medal but you are not getting yours. 

[flyboy53]

OK, I respect your point. But you're not going to tell me it isn't political.

I still don't know what you mean by political.  Are you suggesting that the DoD is making this medal to win political support form some party or group?  Are you saying this is political in-fighitning between "line combat" "Manned Fliers" and RPA operators and Cyper Warriors.

In any other circumstance, the criteria of an existing medal would have been adapted to this new type of warfare.

So, in the Korean War, there were lingists and other crypto people in Japan hammering out their duties, monitoring the war or passing on key communications. They qualified for the same campaign medals that were earned by the men and women fighting in the combat theater. In Vietnam, everyone got a NDSM and we came up with in-country or era veteran status.

?? Let's not confuse campaing medals with Personal Decorations.....because you will loose.....Gen Clarke the commander of all Nato forces in the Kosovo war had to get an exception to policy for him and his staff....becasue they did not actually fight their war in the AOR for the campaign medal.  Those crews who deployed to and sortied out of Ramstein did not qualify for the campaign medal.  The crews from Whiteman did not qualify for the campign medal.........hench why the USAF created Air and Space Campaign Medal.....so they could recognise their people who fought the war from outside the AOR.

What does this new medal mean -- someone can get PTSD for operating a drone a distance away from the drone strike?

Actually.....yes you can in a way.  but that is an argument for another thread.

Now that's its created, you can't debate the justification for this award. It seems the American Legion (and probably other veterans groups) are now advocating for the medal to rank below those combat decorations. The personal joke would be that that recipient would then qualify for the appropriate campaign medal without ever being there and that's wrong.

Is the campaign medal for being there......or is it for supporting the war?   RPA operators are fighting the war every day, day in and day out.  Watching the backs of the door kickers.   What is wrong with recognising them for fighting the war that they are fighting?  And for the record.....they don't qualify for the campaign medal....but they should.

I would advocate placing it behind or before the Combat Readiness Medal (which ranks above a good conduct medal). Perhaps the next thing to do, would be to eliminate the none-direct combat justification of the Bronze Star.

So what you are really mad about......is that your "ideal" of what the Bronze Star is does not match the reality.   So....what really needs to be is a "Gold Star" medal or something that is for direct combat that would be above the new medal but less then the Silver Star.

One more thing about Cold Warriors -- and I am one -- the certificate is nice, but it doesn't do that period of service any justice. It has taken about 30 years for a lot of the operations and losses to come to light -- a lot of the international tensions and moments when we were a breath away from nuclear war -- and the average member of the public has no idea what was going on because the Cold War also included things like Korea, Vietnam, and a bunch of other brush fires, for which there is very little recognition.

I remember coming back from 24 months overseas in Alaska and being told I wasn't even a veteran. All I got for Cold War service overseas was a ribbon. The certificate, though popular, is pretty poor recognition.

Years ago, a retired Army staff member created a Cold War Medal for private sale through a Virginia company called Foxfall Medals. It is this medal that the various veterans groups have been trying to get the DoD to recognize. More than once that medal has been included in the DoD budget, but gets cut essentially because the DoD would rather fund programs for drone operators. That needs to change.

So....you are mad that "drone operators" are getting their medal but you are not getting yours.

How about none of the above.

I said it was political because it relates to essentially one or two specific and very unique military groups that are products of a new type of warfare. (Which, by the way, I find absolutely amazing).

Second, I didn't confuse personal decorations with campaign medals. I was explaining how there was an obvious change in policy that once allowed this otherwise exception to policy -- and by the way, I know the individual who received these Korean campaign medals. He received the Occupation Medal for Japan at the same time.

Also, I said earlier that I could accept this new medal given the changing and very complex operations tempo that the American military now operates in. I don't agree that a medal such as this should be ranked higher than those decorations that reflect direct, boots on the ground, participation in combat.

Third, to fall victim to PTSD. You have to have experienced the trama first hand. You will never tell me that a drone operator or systems technician will get PTSD from watching a mission unfold on a monitor. Get real. If that's the case, than we've exposed a whole group of people to PTSD for playing all those combat video games.

Fourth. I am not angry that someone gets a decoration and I received nothing -- which is an unwarranted personal attack. I said the DoD can come up with a new medal/decoration when an entire era of American military (about 40 to 50 years worth of military men and women) only get a certificate, which is wrong. The number, which I won't try to estimate, is probably the reason why a certificate was adopted -- because of the cost. You are aware, I hope, that those who foght WWW II never saw the campaign medals that they earned because they were given ribbons. Most of the actual campaign medals were not minted until 1947. You are also aware, I hope, that the crews who were shot down or the individuals wounded for border skirmishes in places like post-war Korea or Germany never earned Purple Hearts for their wounds.

Remember, I said that I received the Air Force Overseas Service Ribbon for my tour. I'm proud of that ribbon. And given the fact that my DOR was Sept. 1, 1980, I was probably among some of the first to qualify for that ribbon. I also received a AFCM for that tour (so that you realize I am not confusing campaign medals and decorations) AND I happen to have another one for non-combat valor at a plane crash!!

Finally, my DD Form 214 credits me with 1 year, 11 months and 21 days of overseas service for the tour in Alaska, and I can probably find an LES that shows the overseas pay.

[lordmonar]

How about none of the above.

I said it was political because it relates to essentially one or two specific and very unique military groups that are products of a new type of warfare. (Which, by the way, I find absolutely amazing).

And the Air Medal, Aeiral Acheivment and Distinguished Fly Cross are not for a very unique military group that are product of a new type of warfare (back in the 1940's)? I do agree that it is political in the Air Force at lease where the man aircraft guys don't like the fact that RPA guys are doing more for the war then they are.   Yes the face of warefare is changing and this medal (along with the Air and Space Campaign Medal and the GWOT Service Medal) is an indication that the DoD is looking for ways to recognise their very valuable contribution to the war effort.

Second, I didn't confuse personal decorations with campaign medals. I was explaining how there was an obvious change in policy that once allowed this otherwise exception to policy -- and by the way, I know the individual who received these Korean campaign medals. He received the Occupation Medal for Japan at the same time.

Yes.....I understand your point.....but maybe it is easer to just make a new medal than it is to write a 100 different execptions to policy to recognise thier contributions.

Also, I said earlier that I could accept this new medal given the changing and very complex operations tempo that the American military now operates in. I don't agree that a medal such as this should be ranked higher than those decorations that reflect direct, boots on the ground, participation in combat.

It is ranked higher because it harder to earn.   The Bronze Star can be awarded for a single instance of execptional performance in combat....with a V is that performance also had valor or heroism.   It can also be awarded for exceptional service.  The new medal can ONLY be awarded for specific instances of exceptional employment of a weapons systems in support of war operations......i.e. saving the butts of boots on the ground guys in a fire fight, or taking out a difficult target.   Like I said we have the "ideal" of what the Bronze Star is about.....but in reality it is also awarded for a lot of other things beside kicking butt on the line in combat.

Third, to fall victim to PTSD. You have to have experienced the trama first hand. You will never tell me that a drone operator or systems technician will get PTSD from watching a mission unfold on a monitor. Get real. If that's the case, than we've exposed a whole group of people to PTSD for playing all those combat video games.

This is why the RPA guys are so upset with their other war fighter brothers.   They alway get greif that they are "just playing a video game" and the get to spend every night with their wife and familiy....how can that be stressful?   How about knowing that they are in fact killing people?  That at the end of the day they have to go out into the world and can't talk to their wives and freinds about the stress of their jobs.   How about the fact that they do it day in and day out for years.....with no break.....unlike most ground combat troops who spend maybe six months or a year on the line.  And when they do complain about the stress they feel......the get greif from everyone who automatically dismisses their stress from playing "video games"?   Just because they are not in danger from enemy action or mechincal failure does not mean that they are not suseptiable to the PTSD.

Fourth. I am not angry that someone gets a decoration and I received nothing -- which is an unwarranted personal attack. I said the DoD can come up with a new medal/decoration when an entire era of American military (about 40 to 50 years worth of military people only get a certificate, which is wrong. The number, which I won't try to estimate, is probably the reason why a certificate was adopted -- because of the cost. You are aware, I hope, that those who foght WWW II never saw the campaign medals that they earned because they were given ribbons. Most of the actual campaign medals were not minted until 1947.

I agree.....I don't know why the DoD did not want to make a Cold War Service Medal.....and yes the certificate was adopted as a compromise between doing nothing and issuing new medals.   And I am aware that most service members were never "given" their medals....including me.  I go all my personal decorations....but all my campaign medals I had to order from Vanguard or buy at the Uniform Sales.   But that is neither here nor their.  I accused you of being angry because you brought it up......as what the DoD did nor did not do in the past has no bearing on their decision to make an award to honor the contributions of what is going on now.

Remember, I said that I received the Air Force Overseas Service Ribbon for my tour. I'm proud of that ribbon. And given the fact that my DOR was Sept. 1, 1980, I was probably among some of the first to qualify for that ribbon. I also received a AFCM for that tour (so that you realize I am not confusing campaign medals and decorations) AND I happen to have another one for non-combat valor at a plane crash!!

Finally, my DD Form 214 credits me with 1 year, 11 months and 21 days of overseas service for the tour in Alaska, and I can probably find an LES that shows the overseas pay.

??

[flyboy53]

I suspect that we are both (and always will be) former Air Force senior NCOs and, as such, are brothers in arms who have considerable knowledge about things like awards and decorations. As such, we can have a healthy and respectful agree to disagree because we are both and will always be "airmen" and part of that very unique and special 'fraternity.'

Also, we both recognize that the battlefield or theater of war is changing and we need to keep pace with those changes.

I, like you, probably have certain medals and awards that mean more than others because if what it took to earn it. That's why I mentioned the AFCM for non-combat valor (which was awarded before a V device was authorized). So, I have a ribbon for overseas service. I am not snubbed by it. It represents my service in a very real, Cold War. There are certain other ribbons, awards or medals that mean a lot to certain people -- some very unique, like the Antartic Service Medal. Also, I was deployed three times during my career and there were no medals or ribbons to recognize that service.

Finally, my comment about the overseas service on my DD Form 214 was directed at an earlier post who didn't think Alaska was considered overseas.

I will say this though about the inequity of Cold War recognition. In the two years, that I served in Alaska, I was aware of very real hostile threats that were made on our Nation's security, largely by "enemy" probes or confrontations, that tested our readiness. More often than not, I was also aware of weapons controllers, already stressed out by remote tours in a hostile weather environment, who suffered nervous breakdowns or other mental issues from the stress. It is unfortunate that that service goes unrecognized.

[lordmonar]

I agree that you and I are on the same wavelenghts on a many things.....I just try to keep my arguments seperate.....the merits of a cold war medal are a seperate issue from this medal.

As are my views of the equity of medals as the exist today comparing them to pervious eras of the military (your Date of Retirement preceeds my Date of Enlistment by six years) and things change.

I am a civilian contractor for the RPA community following some time as a blue suit RPA maintainer.   I know what we do day in and day out....and its direct impact to the warfighter on the ground.  I am also a communications guy before getting into the RPA world and know how the cyber and space warfare whelm is changing and how it is going to affect future wars.

I know how these new guys on the block in warfare are fighting for legitmacy in today war fighter community.   In a lot of way it has parallels with Billy Mitchell's era when the aviation guys were trying to get recognition from the "traditional" war fighters of that time.

And that is all that I really want from anyone who enters this debate.

That they first truely understand the true requirments of the awards they hold in such high regard.
That they respect the contributions that cyber, Electronic Warfare and RPA are to the overall war effort.
That they at least respect that what these wariors are doing are infact important and that they have stress and sense of being a part of the fight. 

Time and time again have seen people disrespect the RPA, Space and Cyber communities as not being important or their jobs are "so easy" that they do not rate the same respect as others.......and I understand where that comes from.....as a comm guy I think that Infantry Grunts must have an easy life of it (at least in garrison) because I don't know their dialy routine and their gripes and complains seem trivial to me.....as they see my gripes and complains.  I try to see things from the other guys point of view.   And I also look at what Career Field X is doing and consider how that affects me.

If the RPA guys all want to get a medal for shooting hell fire missions.......how does that affect me?  It doesn't.   If I got a Bronze Star for saving the world with a swiss army knife while under intence artillary fire.........someone else getting a different medal for what I would consider easier circumstances.......takes nothing away from my Bronze Star.

They stil earned their Bronze Star for what they did and just like your AFCM....it is important to them.   This new medal does nothing to diminish that.