Printable View
Just goes to show, how senior Officers who envariably have never dealt with an angry man let alone seen one, make decisions such as this. The reason the PARA's get more awards is because they take the risks to get the job done. How can a Sea Lord make a judgement call like that, that perhaps the PARA's were getting too many Victoria Crosses for being just too brave grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr:
A Falklands hero and the VC that never was - Telegraph
Thank god the committee was not around for this lot then Gil.
"The battle of Rorke's Drift in 1879, some 150 British soldiers held off around 4,000 warrior tribesmen whose land they had invaded. It was an event which saw 11 Victoria Crosses awarded, more than for any single battle before or since."
From books I have read about battles the Para's, Commando's the SAS are given the harder gigs to do as they are trained for such battles this does not diminish what the ordinary soldier does or faces what I am suggesting is these groups of highly trained & motivated people are given the real tough nuts to crack so their chances of getting killed are proportionally greater.
I agree, however, these "powerful" men, who sit on these committee's should not be distracted from awarding medals on their merits, and certainly if they are backed up by first hand accounts, they should be sealed in stone and awarded regardless, and not reduced because some "crap hat" thinks that anyone unit has more medals then the other, how ridiculous!!
Rourkes Drift and the Imjim River in Korea were prime examples where the amounts of VC's justified the award, by the outstanding bravery shown by the men at the time. Had they not done what they did, things would have certainly been different, and that applies to the Falklands War as well as many across all nations!!
In the early days the VC was about the only award to show courage, so there are examples in WW1 that are simple bravery and received a VC. Later awards almost always were harder to get the same award, Rorkes Drift showed 11, had there been an MM or MC at the time, every man surely would have received one...just for having survived...
Staff wogs have no idea. That simple...
There is a certain irony in awarding (or not awarding) a meritorious award on a perceived quota as opposed to merit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil Boyd
Senior officers don't want OR's having medals they don't have themselves. They absolutely would not want a Private wearing a VC.
It happens in the CF regularly. Rob Furlong left the Army before the CF decided if he could put up the Silver Star awarded by the U.S. And it took 8 years for the PPCLI to be allowed to wear the Presidential Unit Citation(Gloucestershire Regiment has that too as I recall) won at Kap Y'ong.
Mind you, senior CF officers have been known to CYA themselves and fail to take responsibility for what the troopies under them do too. That's what they did when the CF Airborne killed a kid in Somalia. The only guy punished was a Corporal as I recall. Senior officers and NCO's got away with not having control of their troopies. Somalia also gave Chrétien an excuse to disband the CF Airborne Regm't.
Oh and 'a Sea Lord' is a political appointee. The fact that there is such a thing as a committee "to adjudicate on overall standards and to monitor the number of awards by grades to each Service" is the scandal.
Well...two stood accused but one attempted to hang himself and has been playing vegetable since. Living free but quiet. The other went to prison for murder and has since released. Easy to google it... That was a lack of supervision...I know many involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunray
I would comment but out of respect and knowing I would get banned will refrain.
You can always message me...Quote:
Originally Posted by enfield303t