Hugh

Thanks, Hugh

I'm interested in the use of the mural crown in Spanish decorations. I think of it in a naval connection in the UK. Any info available? Thanks, Hugh

Jurg(en) Hans Lisberg ?

Thought you might like to see the Washington Post writeup. I agree with Chris, Jeff and the Gunner - wretched excess. Hugh New medal for campaign against ISIS features armored hand stabbing a scorpion Resize Text Print Article Comments 4 Book mark article Read later list Saved to Reading List By Thomas Gibbons-Neff March 30 (Courtesy of the Pentagon) A new medal for service members fighting the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria was announced by the Pentagon on Wednesday. The Inherent Resolve Campaign Medal, authorized in an executive order by President Obama, joins a growing list of decorations created for the wars and operations that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. [Music videos and mortars: What the frontline near the ISIS stronghold of Mosul looks like] To qualify for the award, a service member “must have been present in Iraq, Syria, or the contiguous waters or airspace of either country, on or after June 15, 2014, for a period of 30 consecutive or 60 non-consecutive days,” according to a Pentagon statement. “Service members who were killed or were medically evacuated due to wounds or injuries immediately qualify for the award, as do members who engaged in combat.” Before the announcement of the Inherent Resolve Campaign Medal, troops fighting in Iraq and Syria earned the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, which is not to be confused with the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal. Troops deployed in support of Operation Inherent Resolve, but not stationed in Iraq or Syria, will earn the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal. The front side of the new medal features an image of a sword piercing a scorpion — probably a stand-in for the Islamic State. The display of such martial imagery is somewhat ironic, as the Pentagon has often gone out of its way to play down U.S. involvement in combat operations, insisting that U.S. forces are relegated to training and advising local allies and attacking targets from the air. The reverse side of the medal has an eagle perched atop a banner that says, “For service.” The hand clutching the sword appears to be wearing armor, and the sword itself is a variant of one commonly used in earlier U.S. military insignias. Known as the Sword of Liberation, the blade is prominently displayed in the emblem of U.S. Army Europe — although in the Inherent Resolve Campaign Medal, the sword is more of a dagger and the hilt is slightly altered. Compare this to the last medal awarded for operations in Iraq: the Iraqi Campaign Medal. Authorized in 2004, the medal features an outline of Iraq on one side and two curved Iraqi scimitars on the other along with the words “For Service in Iraq.” [This is the patch you’ll get for fighting the Islamic State] It is unclear why the hand is wearing what appears to be medieval armor. Imagery of that sort could be construed to imply religious zealotry — insignia and call signs that invoke armor-clad crusaders have embroiled the U.S. military in controversy before. Last year, two Army units were criticized for using crusader names, shields and imagery in their unit logos. The Islamic State and other terrorist groups, however, have never shied away from calling their enemies in the West crusaders. The Islamic State said terrorist attacks in Paris in November were in response to a French “crusader campaign” in Iraq and Syria,” while Osama Bin Laden’s initial declaration of war against the United States also used the term.

I'm thinking of the wrong Republic. My Republic sank just after the US Civil War (1866, I think) with a load of gold coins and other valuables. I should have paid attention to the date on the coins. Sorry, Hugh

Odyessy Marine (http://www.odysseymarine.com/ (here in Tampa) is the company which found RMS Republic. I'm sure they'd be happy to answer questions. Best, Hugh

I agree, it was fairly common for naval officers in the '60's / '70's to wear the top three, which frequently resulted in no campaign medals showing, especially with WW II veterans. Hugh

Ed;s site is South Asia Gongs - sagongs. As I mentioned, he's also active on the OMSA site. Hugh

Unfortunately, Ed has left this forum. You can reach him on the OMSA site. H

Mat Salleh has since become Malay slang for "white man"

Concur - Tamgha-i-Khidmat 1st class, worn with a red and white neck ribbon.

Seems as though grandsons would have a different last name. Maybe a nephew / great nephew. I was in Viet Nam in '69-70. Best, Hugh

I served with a Ken Cowart (Navy) in Viet Nam. Wonder if it was his son. He never mentioned it. Hugh

I've taken the liberty of posting this image from San Giorgio's forthcoming auction (I hope they won't mind) to illustrate. Here's a master sergeant with 4-1/2 years of overseas service in WW II and Korea and a Presidential unit citation. His top medal appears to be the Good Conduct medal. Now he may have been sorting socks 100 miles behind the lines, but he didn't get a Bronze Star for it.

Just to keep this dialogue stirred up, here's a piece by Tom Ricks / Ryan Blum from Foreign Policy. If I read it correctly, it states that every member of one unit achieved an individual award at some level after completing a deployment. Every member! That's what the campaign medal is for, not a Bronze Star. The system is, indeed, badly broken. When I served with some highly decorated officers in the '60's, some of them only wore the top row of ribbons on the premise that everything else was trivial. https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/01/21/the-other-stolen-valor/ E MAGAZINE VOICE The other stolen valor BY THOMAS E. RICKS JANUARY 21, 2016 By Ryan Blum Best Defense Council of the Former Enlisted Decorations, badges, and medals are the distinct manner in which military societies recognize a service member’s accomplishments. While there are specific differences between the categories, I will refer to them all as “awards” for the sake of simplicity, unless otherwise stated. A service member (SM) displays his or her awards on the military dress uniform, exhibiting achievements in a precisely arranged order, acting as a worn résumé. These awards depending on service branch, showcase a SM’s military occupational specialty, unit, marksmanship skills, military schools attended, geographical location history, years of service, months in combat, or whether or not the SM has been wounded. Other awards are based on accomplishments, such as receiving an Army Achievement Medal for attaining the highest physical fitness score in the platoon, or — like the National Defense Service Medal commends — simply enlisting in the first place. However, many Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines tell you that the awards that warrant the most deference are those bestowed for heroism and courage in combat, what the Army characterizes as “valor awards.” Combat, in service to the country, is the essence of the Armed Services, and combat awards are preeminent. Unfortunately, to many veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, the system of issuing these awards is broken, and all too often based on cronyism and rank. A quick look regarding awards on most military forum websites, and you’ll find the disgust of one medal in particular: the Bronze Star. The once glimmering award, originally created to raise the morale of ground troops fighting in the Second World War, is now considered by the rank-and-file as lackluster. In a memorandum to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, General George C. Marshall wrote about his support of the award: “The fact that the ground troops, Infantry in particular, lead miserable lives of extreme discomfort and are the ones who must close in personal combat with the enemy, makes the maintenance of their morale of great importance… the Infantry Riflemen who are now suffering the heaviest losses, air or ground, in the Army, and enduring the greatest hardships.” The combat arms branches, especially the junior enlisted, lament that the Bronze Star (BSM) has now become a shameless resume-building award for senior NCOs and staff officers, many of whom never experienced combat while in theater. The Army alone awarded over 170,000 Bronze Star Medals in Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom, only 4,500 of which had the accompanying “V” device, which denotes exceptional valor. Colloquially named, “blanket awards,” many unit commanders awarded their troops’ end-of-tour awards based solely on military grade. “At the end of our 12-month Afghan tour, E-4s and below received an Army Achievement Medal — a peacetime award,” wrote former Army Specialist Brandon Smith to me on Facebook. “E-5s and E-6s all received Army Commendation Medals, and E-7s and above received blanket Bronze Stars. It didn’t matter what they actually did during the tour, whether they patrolled everyday, or sat in an air-conditioned office.” Obviously, it’s important to recognize the efforts of support and staff personnel, and while the requirements for the bronze star were later broadened to include “meritorious service while in a combat zone,” there is an award specifically for that: The Meritorious Service Medal (MSM). However, the MSM was awarded less than a quarter of the rate of the BSM. Recently, according to documents obtained by USA Today, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter approved sweeping recommendations from a two-year study that was initiated by his predecessor to review the way in which the Department of Defense awards medals for combat. Included amongst the 37 recommendations is tightening the criteria for awarding the Bronze Star, and attempting to limit the number of awardees who “face few risks of actual combat.” In addition, the recommendation calls for a uniform definition for meritorious service that would limit combat awards to those exposed to hostile action. Also included in the recommendations was a review of the over 1,100 Service Crosses and Silver Stars awarded since Sept. 11, 2001 for potential upgrade to the Medal of Honor, the military’s highest award for valor. Furthermore, the review recommends that goals and guidelines be established to ensure that the process for Medal of Honor and other awards are completed in a timely way. Currently, several awards were approved years after the recipient left the service, including several after they passed away.

I've never seen a government-issued miniature before. Certainly didn't get any with mine! Does anyone know when they stopped issuing them (if that's the case)? H

The Maine dead are buried in the civilian cemetery, at the foot of Windsor Lane just past the Writers Compound.

Nice piece. The badge is shown and discussed briefly in Kevin Ingraham's book, Honors, Medals and Awards of the Korean War 1950-1953, along with several other awards to Colombian forces. (pp. 40-43) Sorry, can't help with value, although the field of interested collectors would probably be fairly limited. Best, Hugh

Amen! Too many meaningless awards. A sea service award for the Navy? What the hell did they think they were joining, the Girl Scouts? Doing your duty well should entitle you to a hearty handshake and eventually, the next promotion. I've got five rows of ribbons and the only one I'm proud of is the Combat Action Ribbon (but in fairness, that was only doing my duty). Three or four rows of ribbons, maybe less, for a 20 year veteran in time of war sounds about right to me. (That should start a "vigorous exchange of ideas".)

Good catch, Jerry. It is indeed in Col. Cole's book (p. 128). I must have flipped right past it. Apologies to all. H

The following is an excerpt from today's Washington Post article about medal policy in the US Armed Forces. It seems as though they are trying to put too much fine-grain definition. It's not clear to me how you would distinguish between award of a "C" device and the traditional "V" device. The idea of introducing still more new medals seems bizarre. Most US servicemen already look like a Christmas tree. Hugh "One of the more unexpected wrinkles following the awards review, however, is the proposed creation of a “C” device to denote meritorious service in combat. Defense officials said Tuesday it will go to service members who earn awards below the Bronze Star. Service members who earn an award with a “C” device will display it on their ribbons while in uniform. Carter also is expected to tweak the policy for service members receiving an award with a “V” device, in light of there being a discrepancy in the services. For example, in the Army the “V” specifically connotes that the award was approved for a service member’s specific valorous action. In the Navy and Marine Corps, awards with a “V” have gone to troops who performed heroically on a single day, or meritoriously in combat over an extended period of time. Defense officials said it would be possible to earn some ribbons with both a “C” and “V” device — with the “C” denoting meritorious service in combat and the “V” denoting a specific act or acts of valor."

Point well taken, Peter. But I wonder if there is a red bull anywhere in an Irish regiment's history. On the other hand, Cole's book refers to three formations using back bulls, none of which remotely resembles the picture shown.

Now this is really off the wall and very obscure, but...Kipling's Kim referred to a red bull as related to a regiment from Tyrone. I wonder if there might be some connection with an Irish formation? All right, you may start giggling now. H

I hope you also had a chance to visit the cemetery where the dead are buried and see the memorial there. H

Sorry, couldn't find it on a fast pass through Howard Cole's book Formation Badges of World War II. Hugh