Petamocto said:
Did you read the rest of this thread? Buds, I spent 90% of my tour in KAF. This isn't about me.
If anything, I am one of the one who doesn't want to be looked at and have people thinking "Hey, he has the "real" Afghan medal when people did more than I did.
I am all for the one-tour = one-medal motto, but that's not what it is now. The new regs make the SWASM appear as lesser (you get the GCS unless you don't qualify, then you get the SWASM).
Please cease and desist attempting to throw a different spin onto your comments with the "I don't want them thinking of me ..." bit.
The new regs don't make the SWASM seem like less nor have they (or the CF ever done so). As a matter of fact, the only person or message in this entire thread that has made the SWASM out to be less .. is YOU.
I dare say that the "target audience"
is indeed people exactly like you.
___________________________
Petamocto said:
Yes Vern, nice rant but it does not solve anything since I am not the target audience of what you are saying.
I don't make the call on what the CF as a whole believes is important or not or what is better than something else.
All my post stated is that I wanted those 1,000+ not to be viewed as lesser if due to the new changes it ends up getting viewed as lesser.
Did I say I would view it as lesser? Did I say you would? No, but if the culture as a whole ends up seeing it as less, then we have done those 1,000+ a disservice.
Basically you were ranting at ths CF, not at me. I accept your apology.
Well, if you're waiting for an apology from me I really do recommend that you not hold your breath. You seemed to have missed the gist of my post; that being:
If
the culture as a whole ends up seeing it as less, then we have done those 1,000+ a disservice
, then that "culture", ie 'those' people, (and yes, I do place you into this category as well for reasons which I will discuss after) needs to sort itself the fuck out. It's their attitudes that are wrong.
That's where the fixin' need be doin'.
Now, despite your protestions and post here to the contrary, your own attitude in this area shines brightly through in your previous post. I'll quote the whole thing for you this time just in case you missed anything else that you stated in that post:
Petamocto said:
That's what I'm saying is the problem. I agree with the above post that it lays out the guidelines in a "from now on..." perspective, but there are still 1,000+ people who are not the same.
If they don't give out both, then you have 1,000 people (I'm not one of them, so I'm defending them, not me) who did some ground pounding in search of the enemy in 2003 wearing a medal that could be interpreted as "not the real one". That's not fair to them, especially since most of them did more than I did for my GCS.
So to answer your question, I don't know if those pers will have to trade their medals but perhaps it would be the right thing to do. If they did, then that fall 05 tour would have to give back their SWASM and just have the GCS, but that's kind of a rip off too, which is why I thought the answer may that now that this mess exists, the only "fair" way to fix it would be to give (most) soldiers both, and the ones who did something but not enough for the GCS would be the only ones with just one.
If not, you are orphaning and under-awarding that first BG.
As for the Kabul-Kandahar tour, I know dozens of people who were there for four months and got both.
Now, to me (and to others apparently) your "but" in yellow above clearly indicates that you are speaking quite differently than you are now claiming in this latest post. You are not speaking of
All my post stated is that I wanted those 1,000+ not to be viewed as lesser if due to the new changes it ends up getting viewed as lesser.
but rather you are stating that if those 1000+ still only get to wear their SWASM (vice having 2 medals or the GCS) ... that we are somehow orphaning them. The CF has done
NO such thing. And the CF didn't create the attitude of which we speak ... rather a select few who view themselves as superior have created and perpetuate that attitude and myth. Those SWASM pers served under OEF mandate and they earned the medal applicable to the operational mandate under which they served. They worked damned hard to earn it too ... despite those of the "culture of which you speak" who seem to believe (erroneously) that the GCS is "The only medal that counts".
Now, those who earned both ... served under both mandates. Those BG who came later, earned the GCS as it is the applicable mandate under which they served. See the difference?
Yet, there are still pers earning their SWASMs over there right now as they are working under the other mandate even today.
Further, as for your last yellowed (my yellowing) spout of bullshit --- that "the only fair way to fix it would be to give (most) soldiers both and let those who didn`t do enough to earn the GCS wear just the SWASM." Let's not beat around the bush ... your (most) means: is the "outside the wire" folks and the "ones who didn't do enough to earn the GCS" is the "inside the wire folks".
Didn't do enough!!?? Give your head a shake.
By the way, not that your utterly idiotic comparison of the VC to tour medals is any way relevant to shitty attitudes regarding us 'less worthy' people like me (I bow to your greatness and your narcissism) means anything ... but your use of the word "ironicly" in the below once again highlights your own "cultural shitty attitude".
Petamocto said:
... That we have a list of medals and how they are prioritized speaks to this (which ironically to this discussion has the SWASM over the GCS). ...
Whether or not you (or Vern) cares about a medal's "value", there is a reason the Victoria Cross would be worn in front of all the others. At the end of the day is someone from that first BG going to know that they did more than someone who never left KAF in 2010 and have six PXs to choose from and not need a medal to tell them that? Of course.
Full disclosure: I participated in Apollo II & Athena 0. I value all members of the CF and ALL of their contributions to Canadian Forces operations in whatever capacity they might serve. Wherever, whenever, and however.
They are firstly volunteers and all are professionals. Some of them, including yourself, had the good fortune of having their SNs slotted into 'Y posns' or 'Z posns' under a GCS mission, others slotted into 'Z posns' on other ongoing operations. They certainly didn't put themselves into 'whichever' position they 'happened' to deploy in.
You should count yourself lucky that you happened to be posted to a Unit that deployed while you belonged to it; you very well could have been posted into a certain location full of schools where there are still instructors without either the GCS or the SWASM only because they can't get the fuck out of the training system to go on tour despite their best efforts to (due in part to all those refusing posns at those trg establishments where they find themselves stuck). I really hope that you don't honestly believe that their lack of either/or insinuates or somehow means you've got anything on them --- 'cause it don't mean diddly-squat. it means you were in the right place at the right time. No more, no less.
To pretty much anyone else on the planet, in using the term "Fine bureaucratic staff-officer form," I was obviously slagging "staff" -- ie, "bureaucracy" -- not you, or your commission.
