Ed_Haynes

And.

And.

And.

Some closeups.

Another.

This might (or might not) help.

http://www.jrc.or.jp/english/activity/m_v.html

My understanding is that any naming would have been private and may be impossible to link to a time period (1918 or 2008?). The numbering is the only official identification tool (when it is there, and many times it isn't).

Jeff???

Well done!

I have more, should anyone wish to see them. I shall accept silence as an answer.

I got them named already from other GMIC forum member

Ahhhhh.

Stupid question: If you don't know what the ribbons represent, how do you know whose it is?

As I observed elsewhere: Oy!!!

Nice group (and nice mounting too).

??? Isn't the ACSM only for Ulster? Have the regs./application changed?

By the notification, it is broader than that. In effect, however, it is for Northern Ireland, where one could spend their entire career and have only one medal with a single clasp to show for it. The instituting regulations go out of their way to make it sound like it isn't a double award. Methinks the lady doth protest too mich.

Were'nt the Bosnia UN / NATO medals awarded because the recipients qualified by service in the 2 organisations - not concurrently, which would have been "duplication", but consecutively?

America allows only a generic ribbon for UN medals? I'd never have believed it. It does'nt seem to apply within UN Missions, Americans being awarded the the UN medal with the relevant Mission ribbon & wearing that ribbon on uniforms.

The British "duplication" policy is rather sloppily applied. Even the Acculumated Service Campaign Medal seems to challenge this "policy".

Apparently the US policy now is for one UN medal only and then numbers for later tours in any deployment, any force. Since US troops don't serve in peacekeeping missions unless US commanders are in charge, there can't be many. The earlier policy have been to use UNTSO/UNOGIL for everything. (The UN Korea medal was, predictably, the exception.)

A very VERY complex swamp you wade into. Personally, thanks for your post. But the crocs abound.

Prepare to have to jump about. A lot.

And.

But most of the exhiibition area was intact, though perverted and sad. Fear it will soom perish.

But the interior of the pavilion had been mutilated into a lawn and garden show. Everything sold, I was told.

A shame. The outside of the space pavilion was mostly intact when I was there in 2006.

Nice!

Maybe but I ran across a nice article by R. C. Witte, "The Forbidden DSOs to Americans", The Journal of the Orders and Merdals Research Society 37, 3 (Autumn 1998): 229-33. Despite his title, the focus is on British awards to US Navy personnel in WWI, but especially deals with the tremendous official resistance to any orders on an ideological (and constitutional) basis.

While often ignored, Britain still maintains a "one service, one medal" ideology, where multiple medals for the same service are not permitted (ignoring, of course, the World Wars). This is the policy behind the witholding of permission to wear for the Kuwaiti and Saudi medals for Gulf War II. As the UK has its own medal for Afghanistan, the NATO medal is seen as a duplication.

As far as the US is concerned, clasps seem to be seen as frivilous European frippery (ignore, please, the WWI Victory Medal, the "Wake Island" clasp, etc.). As the various UN medals are collapsed to a single generic ribbon for the US, NATO clasps are disallowed.

Who ever said "policy" had to make logical sense?

Good eyes, Barry. Yes.

And one last, before the next picture (which will come later).

Yet another.