Comments for The issue of retroactive Combat Action Badges, con't.

The issue of retroactive Combat Action Badges, con't.

2008-06-03T13:49:23Z

Heh. This one won't die in email, so let's run it by again...

My boon-companion Mike is not a supporter of the idea of retroactive Combat Action Badges...

John - will you support my effort to be awarded FA 57? It may help me professionally, and, well........ it's not my fault it wasn't quite in place while I was in the Army. And, oh, I'd also like my retirement pay adjusted to reflect the base pay of the most recent retiring majors; and adjusted every, what, three years to make sure I remain astride of what's due me. GMAFB!! ML

Actually, I would support his designation, because I look at what has happened to my father over his career, mine being dullsville in comparison, so I really don't have a dog in this fight.

So, even though the question was tongue-in-cheek, I actually would support Mike in getting an FA57 designation. Why? Because as retirees, we're both technically on retainer pay, subject to recall. Why shouldn't Mike's records be an accurate reflection of his skillset? Especially since it was a skillset he acquired while still serving, and was only honed, not established, by his post-retirement labors.

I'm all for the retired pay adjustment, too, but that's just me being greedy... and I want full COLA, too. And I want my retired pay based on my total compensation, too, rather than just base pay. Except for aviators. Flight pay should be excluded from the calculation because they were getting paid extra to do stuff they'd have *paid* to do, and they got to get more sleep than I did, anyway. So, stick it to the aviators, just on GP.

But more seriously, how is making the CAB retroactive any different from...

Awarding a medal for heroism 30 years after the fact? Medal of Honor or ARCOM w/V?

Making people like my father eligible for the POW medal, again, 30+ years after the fact?

Authorizing the SF tab for people like my father, 30+ years after he qualified in service for a badge that didn't exist at the time?

How are those different from making the CAB retroactive? How, for example, is a Purple Heart to a truck company soldier shot in a firefight along the MSR leading to Fallujah different from a Purple Heart awarded to a truck company soldier wounded driving along Highway 1 in Vietnam, different from a Purple Heart awarded to a soldier of the Red Ball Express wounded by shellfire moving supplies up an MSR to Patton's 3rd Army in 1944?

Tell me how the road to Fallujah is somehow more worthy than the other two, and you'll catch my attention. Unless you want to argue the CAB should be done away with altogether, and keep only the CMB and CIB.

This doesn't address the issue of careerist pogues, REMFs and Fobbits stretching the reg to such a fine gossamer nearly invisible film that it wouldn't stop a drunken dust mite on a diet fighting a head wind. If we're going to say "no" based on that objection then we're admitting we can't police ourselves, and we should just go back to the days prior to the Civil War. When there were no awards other than battlefield brevets for gallantry and the occasional special medal authorized by the Congress.

So sayeth the Armorer.

Your mileage may vary. Feel free to lay it out in the comments. But be gentle, I have such a delicate ego... with feelings that bruise at the merest hint of disapprobation.

No, really. It's true.

Comment from Mark on 2008-06-05

2008-06-05T16:00:40Z

MSG Keith: That is total BS. The CAB criteria has to be fixed. When I received mine, I believe it had just been autorized. The form had 3 different blocks for 3 engagements. Each one had to be filled out with a different time you had been in contact and returned fire. Luckily I had a few to choose from, but alot of my soldiers only had one and thus were unable to receive the CAB. Have they changed that and you only need one? They should if they haven't! I have always felt that if you earned the award then you should get it no matter when or what war. Unless you received a different award for the same action.

Comment from msg keith on 2008-06-03

2008-06-04T01:15:22Z

Since you brought up the CAB, I have a story. One of my guys volunteered for Iraq in 2006. On one of his trips outside the wire, he had the privilege of escorting an Army Times reporter to on of the FOBs. About 0330 one morning, the FOB started taking incoming fire. SSG W got his gear and headed toward the direction of the incoming. When he got to the guard tower, he assited a .50 cal gunner. When the .50 cal jammed, SSG W. took his M16 and went to a firing position and returned fire in the direction of where the insurgent fire was. An M240 crew showed up and took over his firing position. He went back to the tower, and humped ammo for the now firing .50 cal. An M1 tank was brought up and fired at the insurent location. Incoming fire stopped. Recon found two dead insurgents. A SITREP went up to the OPS center. The Army Times reporter followed SSG W. around. When SSG W. returned back to his HQ, his commander told him to submit the paperwork for a CAB. SSG W. wrote up a narrative, as did his commander, who happened to be in the ops center when the firefight occurred. He got a statement from the Army Times reporter, the intell report and submitted it. The active duty pukes returned it and said he needed two witness statements. When SSG W. located the guy in the tower, he said since SSG W. wasn't in his unit, he wasn't going to give a witness statement. So SSG. W came home without a CAB. When I found out about it, I got copies of everything and submitted it through our chain of command. They also said it needed two witness statements. No where in the reg does it say two witness statements. I asked a contact at the awards branch and she said that as long as there was documentation, two statements weren't required. Our command still wouldn't submitt the paperwork. The CSM even quit responding to my emails. I'm no longer the first sgt there, and no one else is willing to push back. So a Soldier who deserves the CAB, will go without. Sorry. just had to rant...

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-06-03

2008-06-03T19:09:27Z

Damn, JMH, I knew you were old, but gollee, yer really old, if you're remembering the reinstatement of the Purple Heart...

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2008-06-03

2008-06-03T19:00:07Z

If I remember correctly, the Purple Heart, when reinstated in 1932, was retroactive. Cheers

Comment from Grumpy on 2008-06-03

2008-06-03T17:57:14Z

John, in one very GRUMPY OLD VET'S view, I agree, he should receive the award. If the individual met all of the criteria, he should receive the award, even retroactively. Let's just take a look at your Father. Some, not you, might say, "Hey Grumpy, that was 30+ years ago!" There are a group of reasons that would make this move advantageous for every one. A short but important thought to this whole concept. There are some in the Military, who have not, can not and will not understand the importance of such issues. They really don't understand the Military. But equally so, there are people who have not, are not and will be in the Military, but they really understand. The issue is not Military experience, but understanding. John, men like your Father remind me of a neighbor of mine. He was a POW/Viet Nam. Words just don't do him justice. I was one of a few vets, he would allow to get close to him. Yes, they tortured him and he is screwed up for life. I listened to him talk, no questions, just listened - listened. Then one day, he came over, I made a mug of coffee. We sat down and talked, he opened up and talked about the past. I started to ask questions, "Have you told anyone else?" "Do you have any type of documentation?" His answer was "no". We sent all of the paperwork for and received his Military Records. They were not accurate. We were able to find the accurate documentation. He was later able to apply and receive the benefits he has EARNED! This is the reasons retroactive awards should be awarded. They deal with all of the bad things that come with combat, then why shouldn't they get some of the good things from their service, too. Grumpy

Comment from ry on 2008-06-03

2008-06-03T17:52:22Z

Feel free to lay it out in the comments. But be gentle, I have such a delicate ego... with feelings that bruise at the merest hint of disapprobation. No, really. It's true. If I wasn't certain it'd cost me my life(suicide by Big Boot) I'd stick my tongue out and waggle my hands from my ears over this bit, you big softie. No dog in this fight, but, I figure Service people ought to get paid to reflect what their responsibilities would be in the private sector(maybe -10% or something?). If a union dock manager can make 50k(+benefits) without benefit of college degree why can't anyone else who has similar or greater responsibilities?

Comment from kat-missouri on 2008-06-03

2008-06-03T14:26:24Z

Maybe you should move to Canada and apply to the Human Rights commission for any defamation or unintended or otherwise offenses of your senses? Hey...you might not even have to move to Canada since, apparently, you can just shop around until you find a provincial commission willing to hear your case? Why should only draft dodgers get the benefit of our Northern neighbor's laws?