Heavy Medals

As an officer in the US Navy, here are some of my personal thoughts of why we have had an exponential growth in military awards since WWII:

1) More campaigns = more campaign medals. This comes up especially for Navy and USMC who can participate in Kosovo and OSW, or now, OIF & OEF in one cruise. The US was more isolationist in previous centuries.

2) All-Volunteer force creates a stronger careerist mentality, which leads to people expecting awards for remembering to breath, just so their career is not damaged if they don't get an award.

3) Inflation. If everyone starts getting medals, distinguishing who legitimately did an award-worthy event or tour of duty either risks raising the mean award level or it gets lost among everyone else's medals.

I still think that awards are appropriate on non-combat tours, but it should be for the top 10%, not the top 90% of performers. However, it becomes tough to take the recognition away once it is given.

Five years ago, it was my honor to be among the hundreds of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines called upon to provide support for the 60th anniversary of D Day, providing life support, facilitating transportation and protecting the force. On the day of the big ceremony, I was in my Army green uniform (???class As???) and I was extremely self-conscious of my rows and rows of individual awards, medals, service medals and service ribbons while most of the Normandy veterans (the ones who still fit their uniforms) had no (or damn few) awards or medals. At the time, I had ???earned??? 19 of them in my 16 years of service. Even though, I had experienced a great deal and not missed many actions, I felt insignificant in their presence.

Our current awards system is broken, but if you don't hand one out to every Soldier who leaves your unit, you will put your Soldiers at a disadvantage (for promotion, choice assignments, choice schools, etc.) . Your exceptional Soldier (or just plain old good Soldier) without a departure award will be valued less than a sub-standard Soldier whose command was too lazy to take corrective action and awarded the Soldier a departure award to boot.

The only good thing I can think of is that our ribbon racks are like resumes. Soldiers can look at each other's uniforms and know exactly where that Soldier has been and what they've accomplished in the military. But don't confuse all those pretty-colored ribbons as a measure of a Soldier's courage or honor.

You are correct, wstephenjackson. Most of those ribbons are service medals and service ribbons, denoting particiaption in specific campaigns. While GEN Craddock and ADM Mullen have some pretty high individual awards (both from DoD and each's respective service), most of their fruit salad is "places I've been" awards. GEN Eisenhower's highest award appears to be an Army Distinguished Service Medal. Fleet ADM Nimitz's highest appears to be the Navy Cross but, curiously enough, it's on the bottom of that stack, indicating it's the lowest award. There is only one award between the Navy Cross and the Medal of Honor. The one on top of his stack appears to be the Navy Distinguished Service Medal (3 away from the MOH). Perhaps Newsweek didn't get the order of precedence right or their colors are off.

One of the things I laugh at every time I hear it is the media calling almost anyone in the military ???highly decorated.??? While there are certainly those who qualify, many medals and ribbons are ???earned??? simply because the person was alive and breathing at a certain period of time or attached to a certain command. Many medals are thought to be only earnable for a certain rank and the chances of a lower ranked person getting that higher medal are slim. I don???t know how many times in my 22 years of Naval service did I hear a more senior person deny the junior person a medal simply because ???I didn???t get that when I was younger??? or ???that is the same medal I would get.??? In reality, medals and ribbons do nothing but boost the morale of the people wearing them. They are not really a measure of the person???s performance.

I am not a military man, and so my knowledge of the concept is limited, but I believe that most of what are shown in the photographs accompanying this article are not medals, which I believe are earned by extraordinary acts, but ribbons, which indicate participation in a specific campaign. Now assuming I am correct on the ribbons, a long serving officer participating in many campaigns will wear a lot of ribbons. I believe that those items termed as 'awards' are not the same as medals, either, and it appears many are rather like a Boy Scout 'Merit Badge'. I would like to see explanatory comments by a knowledgeable officer on the subject, as I am sure they could provide far more illumination. Respectfully submitted.

I like David Petraeus as a prime example. The man wears 25 medals and six badges. Most are awarded simply because he's a general. Nine are campaign medals that show where he's served. Ten can politely be described as "plays well with others"...including his highest award, the Defense Distinguished Service Award which is only given to generals that play well with other generals.

He has one combat award, the Bronze Star with a V. The circumstances under which he was awarded it are questionable as reporters on the scene do not remember him doing anything notable at a time when he needed a combat decoration to move up.....

The rest of his medals are foreign or unit decorations.

I like David Petraeus as a prime example. The man wears 25 medals and six badges. Most are awarded simply because he's a general. Nine are campaign medals that show where he's served. Ten can politely be described as "plays well with others"...including his highest award, the Defense Distinguished Service Award which is only given to generals that play well with other generals.

He has one combat award, the Bronze Star with a V. The circumstances under which he was awarded it are questionable as reporters on the scene do not remember him doing anything notable at a time when he needed a combat decoration to move up.....

The rest of his medals are foreign or unit decorations.

Have these guys ever served? What's the problem with giving our men and women some recognition for their service? If you know anything about our ribbons and medals (not everything is a medal we pin on our chest, some are just 'service ribbons', you can tell a lot about the service member you're talking to.

Obviously, you have not seen pictures of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. http://home.st.net.au/~dunn/sigint/spyron01.jpg

During my time on Active Duty (27 years) most military folks treated some of their ribbons rather humoriously.
In my case I was there badges, I done it badges, and last but not least I forgot to duck badge.

Ribbons and badges are a military resume. You could tell a lot from ribbons, and if a soldier wore unit patches on both sleeves.

Me personallly there are only 2 or 3 that means a lot to me, and I still were Minuatures of them on days like Memorial and Vetrans day.

Most of today's lieutenants have completed multiple combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is no parody and farce here as Evan Thomas and Aku Ammah-Tagoe imply; these are not children playing dress-up. The men and women of the US Military, regardless of rank, have put their lives on the line countless times and deserve the awards they have been given.

Naturally, what you fail to mention is that is often the officers of yesteryear personally CHOSE to not wear all ribbons awarded. Do you honestly believe that in the 30 years of service that both Ike and Nimitz had at the time these photos were taken, all they had earned was five medals? You also fail to note that the opportunities for deploying and earning awards has increased by orders of magnitude since WW2. You also are dishonest when doing your comparisons. Your point is shown to be invalid when comparing photos from today to photos of the likes of Lieutenant General "Chesty" Puller of the Marine Corps. The highly decorated Marine could barely fit all his ribbons onto his uniform, and his years of service were from 1918 to 1958. So, by cherry picking your information and your photos, you attempt to make a point that is, basically, pointless. This is not news.....