Battle Honours for Afghanistan

[Bruce Monkhouse]

...and I as one of those 'old guys' who did 'nothing' we did do one thing exactly like you are doing now................whatever the Govt. of Canada asked of us at a particular time.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

  Funny - 1PPCLI seems to have qualified for all those requirements. The soldiers in 1PPCLI deserve a Battle Honor for Panjawai.  The sad thing I'm seeing in this thread are the pencil pushers here trying to take away from the boys on the ground (Common occurrence in this Army I forgot).  Everyone has to step back and realize these last two tours are not your little vacations in Cyprus or your laughable march up the "whale" , this wasn't your little WOG posting in Camp Mirage, this was war fighting.  In ONE day of fighting in Panjawai my platoon and attachments took 4 killed and 10 wounded.  We were fighting an enemy estimated at numbers reaching 200. This Military needs to get off our high horse and realize our boys are killing and getting killed.

  I also see the same attitude about the Combat Infantry Badge.  I hear the complaining all over base, "Why should they get something that makes them stick out from all the rest of us".  Why? Because we did something this Army hasn't done since the days of Korea. We went out, actively engaged the enemy for 7 months and in laman-terms kicked their ass. 
 
  Saying Panjawai wasn't a battle is laughable and even sadder due to the fact you most likely sat on KAF for 7 months sipping your Tim Hortons.

/Rant Off   

I'm hoping that TheHead's hyperbole wasn't aimed at me, as he has no idea of what my personal service has entailed. He has, though, intruded upon what was an decent academic discussion with a pointless, arrogant rant.

Which brings me to my first point.  TheHead appears to claim that he's part of some elite, but I can virtually guarantee that he has no - as in zero - idea of what others' service in other operational theatres has entailed.  In fact, he has no - as in zero - idea (aside from that obtained from buddies in theatre) what the current rotation is going through, although he's better placed than most to guess.  All missions and all rotations are different, and, as Bruce points out, we all go where we're told. 

TheHead's post illustrates exactly what's wrong with things like combat action patches.  It promotes a false elitism that isn't warranted historically or institutionally and promotes the arrogance that The Head so vividly espouses.  "We're better than you wogs..."  He even uses the word, something that surely merits some sort of response, even if his post wasn't so offensive and condescending.

Yup, you've BTDT, buddy, and good on you.  You have your tour medal(s), and I sincerely hope your battalion merits a battle honour for an outstanding action under unbelievably adverse circumstances.  It isn't for me to decide.  But spare us your attitude and your assumptions, they denigrate your efforts on the battlefield and fly in the face of the concept of quiet professionalism.

Edit:  typo and to repair TheHead's moniker.

 

[geo]

+1 Teddy.

And for those Combat engineers who served alongside the Infantry and who don't carry battle honours (because we'd have too many to carry) I salute thehead's rant and my sappers .

 

[vonGarvin]

+1 Teddy.

And for those Combat engineers who served alongside the Infantry and who don't carry battle honours (because we'd have too many to carry) I salute thehead's rant and my sappers .

CHIMO!....or is that "UBIQUE", as I understand to stand for all the battles in which the engineers have participated: "Everywhere"

*nb: yes, gunners also have "UBIQUE", but of course, that means "all over the place" in their case

(j/k)

Hauptmann

 

[RHFC_piper]

  Funny - 1PPCLI seems to have qualified for all those requirements. The soldiers in 1PPCLI deserve a Battle Honor for Panjawai.  The sad thing I'm seeing in this thread are the pencil pushers here trying to take away from the boys on the ground (Common occurrence in this Army I forgot).  Everyone has to step back and realize these last two tours are not your little vacations in Cyprus or your laughable march up the "whale" , this wasn't your little WOG posting in Camp Mirage, this was war fighting.  In ONE day of fighting in Panjawai my platoon and attachments took 4 killed and 10 wounded.  We were fighting an enemy estimated at numbers reaching 200. This Military needs to get off our high horse and realize our boys are killing and getting killed.

  I also see the same attitude about the Combat Infantry Badge.  I hear the complaining all over base, "Why should they get something that makes them stick out from all the rest of us".  Why? Because we did something this Army hasn't done since the days of Korea. We went out, actively engaged the enemy for 7 months and in laman-terms kicked their ***. 
 
  Saying Panjawai wasn't a battle is laughable and even sadder due to the fact you most likely sat on KAF for 7 months sipping your Tim Hortons.

/Rant Off     

I don't want to pick a fight here but isn't 1 criteria for getting a battle honour for a battle taking and holding the ground?  'cause that being the case; 1 RCR took Panjwayi during Op Medusa, which I believe was the first successfull push into that region.  And although there was a company of PPCLI (A Coy), I'm pretty sure there's some kind of criteria for the amount (Percentage) of a unit which has to be present in the battle to earn an honour... otherwise every reserve unit in LFCA would get one, and I don't think thats right.

Again, I stress the fact that I'm not trying to pick a fight, I'm just trying to clairify what I'm sure will be a historical event.  The event being the 'Battle of Panjwayi', which, in my understanding, occured on 2 - 5 September, 2006 during Op Medusa, when 1 RCR (Charles Coy) let attacks into Pashmul, and the remainder of TF3-06 battle group (including RCDs and RCHA) took and held the positions around the 'white school' and the 'Mosque'... positions which are still being held to this day.

correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I'm going to step in here through the temporary lock to highlight a point.

RHFC_piper raises an intersting point regarding the percentage of a unit involved in an operation to be eligible for a Battle Honour. From the reference noted above:

Normally, the rule that will be applied is that headquarters and at least fifty percent of the sub-units of a unit must have been present.

However, the following should also be noted:

There may be exceptional cases where individual squadrons or companies took an important part in certain operations, and in such cases any claims submitted will be treated on their merits.

Notably, it is not exceptional in the current method of Task Force structures for individual subunits to be deployed with Battle Groups built on HQs from other regiments.  These company/squadrons (under command) do not normally deploy and fight by their Corps doctrines at the sub-unit level, nor are they operating independently, so these paragraphs don't quite apply:

Two particular extensions of this rule will be allowed for as follows:

(a)    where units such as armoured regiments, armoured car regiments, reconnaissance regiments or machine-gun battalions fought on a squadron or company basis, with squadrons or companies being attached to brigades or battalions for operations, honours may be awarded where fifty percent of the squadrons or companies were engaged without their regimental or battalion headquarters~. Where a unit had sub-units committed simultaneously to different operations only one award covering anyone period of time will be made;

(b)    where a regiment was represented in a theatre only by a squadron or a company operating independently, such as the independent machine gun company in an armoured division, honours may be awarded on the basis of fifty percent of the troops or platoons being present in battle. Where such troops or platoons were committed simultaneously to different operations, only one award will be made to cover anyone period of time.

This is one of the points that would require further analysis and, possibly, the updating of the terms and conditions for award of Battle Honours.  It is, for reasons described above, and this requirement to redefine conditions for Battle Honours that any expectations that Battle Honours should be awarded in the near term would be premature.

 

[Shec]

This may be a silly question that shows how out of touch and anachronistic I am but I'm wondering if those Militia units which have deployed contingents to Afghanistan will be awarded battle honours for their contibution to the campaign?  Thanks all !

 

[Michael OLeary]

We have discussed battle honours before in general.

As for your specific question, the numbers involved from any particular Reserve unit will make it very unlikely for battle honours to be awarded unless there is a significant rewrite of the regulations.

Some related material can be found here

 

[hugh19]

My guess would be only if the milita unit sent a complete unit. Like a platoon. Then yes. But not if they are attached into another unit.

 

[Michael OLeary]

My guess would be only if the milita unit sent a complete unit. Like a platoon. Then yes. But not if they are attached into another unit.

Start here for a baseline for level of participation required:

33.1 BATTLE HONOURS—THE SECOND WORLD WAR
http://regimentalrogue.com/battlehonours/secondworldwar-btlhnrs.htm

Percentage of Unit present in an Operation

13.     Normally, the rule that will be applied is that headquarters and at least fifty percent of the sub-units of a unit must have been present.

14.     Two particular extensions of this rule will be allowed for as follows:

(a)     where units such as armoured regiments, armoured car regiments, reconnaissance regiments or machine-gun battalions fought on a squadron or company basis, with squadrons or companies being attached to brigades or battalions for operations, honours may be awarded where fifty percent of the squadrons or companies were engaged without their regimental or battalion headquarters~. Where a unit had sub-units committed simultaneously to different operations only one award covering anyone period of time will be made;

(b)     where a regiment was represented in a theatre only by a squadron or a company operating independently, such as the independent machine gun company in an armoured division, honours may be awarded on the basis of fifty percent of the troops or platoons being present in battle. Where such troops or platoons were committed simultaneously to different operations, only one award will be made to cover anyone period of time.

15.     There may be exceptional cases where individual squadrons or companies took an important part in certain operations, and in such cases any claims submitted will be treated on their merits.

 

[dapaterson]

Keep in mind we're already streching in giving units any decorations.  Officially, we have not been deploying units.  We task a unit to prepare (with augmentation from various other places).  Then, for the deployment, those personnel are attach-posted from their unit to the Task Force, which is the deployed entity.

Or, in layman's terms, when the soldiers of 2 RCR deployed from LFAA, the legal entity of the 2nd Bn, The Royal Canadian Regiment, was still in Gagetown - though the majority of its personnel had been attach-posted out to Task Force Afghanistan.  To deploy 2 RCR  would have required a ministerial order, cancelling the previous order, and placing 2 RCR under CEFCOM; on their return, another MOO would be required to move them back from CEFCOM to LFAA (or 2 CMBG, depending on the mood of the day, but I digress).

 

[Infanteer]

Can't they just attach post "2RCR" as a whole to CEFCOM to skip the whole indiv attach post admin hickup?

 

[dapaterson]

But we're not send 2 RCR whole.  We're leaving a company+ behind is rear party, just back etc, and attaching a company from the PPCLI, some Dragoons, some gunners, some sappers... the 2 RCR contingent is probably less than half of the folks deployed.

Mind you, I don't know all the thought process that went into our current way of doing business.

 

[dapaterson]

Many things are GOBIs. Or, in other cases, someone not knowing the impacts of their decisions makes what they see as a time saving decision - not knowing that it will result in much more work for others (or even themselves) down the line.  Or someone makes an offhand comment that's interpreted as an order, vice as a start point for analysis.

 

[Infanteer]

I'm surprised some of you aren't lobbying for a "Hastings 1066" battle honour.

How about you just work on the "Afghanistan" one for us.

 

[Lowlander]

I'm sure "Afganinstan", "Afganinstan 2002-11" or "Afganinstan 2002-14" which ever they go with will be awarded pretty soon or pretty soon after 2014 to the RCR, PPCLI, R22R, RCD, LdSH, 12RBC. 

 

[aesop081]

to the RCR, PPCLI, R22R, RCD, LdSH, 12RBC.

Add a few more units to that list.........

 

[Michael OLeary]

I'm sure "Afganinstan", "Afganinstan 2002-11" or "Afganinstan 2002-14" which ever they go with will be awarded pretty soon or pretty soon after 2014 to the RCR, PPCLI, R22R, RCD, LdSH, 12RBC.

That will first require the Directorate History and Heritage to review and possibly revise the conditions for award of battle honours, which is still principally predicated on the employment in battle of complete (i.e., single cap badge and CFOO orbat) units rather than units assembled from multiple regiments with "plug and play" sub-units. It may take longer than people think to complete the necessary administration and review processes.

See A-AD-200-000/AG-000, The Honours, Flags and Heritage Structure of the Canadian Forces for the current guidelines. Historical guidelines for comparison can be found here.

This is tangent best dealt with in its own threads:

Battle Honours for Afghanistan
Battle Honours for Afganistan

 

[Lowlander]

I was only refering to army units.  I'm sure many Air Force Sqn's will also be awarded with it.

 

[aesop081]

will be awarded pretty soon 

It took almost 10 years for the Kosovo battle honour to be awarded to 425 and 441 Squadrons.