Monday, February 28, 2005

Combat Awards...and boots...

Jpck20 suggested that I read a milblog that he likes --Armor Geddon. I found this in the comments on the site the other day and thought I'd throw it out there for discussion.
It's been said on numerous occasions that awards were given liberally during and after Vietnam --as opposed to Korea and WWII where they were harder to come by --or to earn. Is the War on Terror producing a higher than usual amount of awards...? Does this happen when it is perceived that the troops don't have the full support of the public....? Just some things I was thinking about after I read this comment:


"Ok, I REALLY hope I don't get in trouble for this, so I will try to tone down my disgust. I think the Close Combat Badge is [lame]. I think it is a token badge for all the non-infantry, combat arms soldiers who want a CIB. The worst part is that support units like transpo guys are ineligible because they do not close with the enemy. But THEY get into so much shit because they are on the road so much and are a juicy target. Now I'm not an infantry lover. Tankers are the shit. Not only can my soldiers tank their asses off, but we do motorized and light infantry stuff in the city streets and palm groves all the time. AND we call for fire. Tankers do it all. But I am a firm believer in tradition. Which is why I wince when I see non-Airborne qualified soldiers wear Jump boots just because they shine nicely for the boards. Or when somebody wears tanker boots because they are cool(which they are). Leave the CIB for the infantry. And step out of my tanker boots." (source)

No comments: