• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Honours & Awards (merged)

At the risk of covering ground already covered by others, the following is a slightly modified extract from a study I did re honours and awards, in this case from the Boer War, for my possible future use.

Having said all that, there is one factor that ranked above all else in determining the number of honours and awards granted. Simply, to receive an award, one had to have been nominated.  This is as true today as it was in South Africa, or in any other war in which Canadians fought for that manner. For example, during the South African War 78 Victoria Crosses were awarded to British and Empire forces. Of these, five, including three to Canadians, were awarded to members of 19 Brigade commanded by Major General Horace Smith-Dorrien for just over a year including both Paardeberg and Leliefontein. His nickname was “Half Rations, Full Congratulations” because he worked his troops and himself very hard, but also liberally recommended his officers and men for awards. It is well known in military history circles that the numbers of decorations awarded to members of a unit more often than not reflected the number of the recommendations submitted, and not necessarily the unit’s success in battle.  There is another factor which is almost as important. To be successful, any recommendation submitted must be fully documented and well-written. It must also conform to the appropriate instructions and should be as complete as possible. The more documentation, especially eye-witness accounts, included with the submission, the better.
 
ArmyVern said:
Sorry, I forgot to mention technology. War is very different today than it was then. Even when we're up close now, we still manage to do lots from afar. It is my opinion, that these wars are incomparable --- that includes South Africa. These days, we'd simply send in the rotor heads to blow up a gun so it didn't fall into enemy hands ... you wouldn't see it being saved by someone requiring to snatch it off it's carriage and run with it to keep it from being taken.  ;)

Happy belated birthday to the RCDs too ...

Yes, you are right.  Tech makes a big difference to what can be accomplished nowadays.  Maybe I'm a softie, or maybe they were back then. But reading some of the citations from today, when I compare them to yesterdays VC citations they are just as incredible and brave acts of valour.  To my mind, I would have awarded several VC from what I have read.  Of course, I am not in a position to make a recommendation, comment etc and maybe that is a good thing.  But as I mentioned in other threads, have we not set the bar so high that a mere mortal could not/would not be recognized accordingly?  Look at Sgt Richardson from the LdSH(RC) for example.  More balls than I possess certainly, and not to belittle his act.  But come on, some of our current lads were no less brave and daring...
 
jollyjacktar said:
Yes, you are right.  Tech makes a big difference to what can be accomplished nowadays.  Maybe I'm a softie, or maybe they were back then. But reading some of the citations from today, when I compare them to yesterdays VC citations they are just as incredible and brave acts of valour.  To my mind, I would have awarded several VC from what I have read.  Of course, I am not in a position to make a recommendation, comment etc and maybe that is a good thing.  But as I mentioned in other threads, have we not set the bar so high that a mere mortal could not/would not be recognized accordingly?  Look at Sgt Richardson from the LdSH(RC) for example.  More balls than I possess certainly, and not to belittle his act.  But come on, some of our current lads were no less brave and daring...

In no way, at no time, have I belittled or suggested that acts of our troops in Afghanistan weren't incredible acts of bravery and valour.

I am only suggesting that 'opportunities' (& I hate calling it that) are much fewer and in between in our latest conflict and that our current technology does much to mitigate direct, face-to-face instances.

Yes, the bar is set extremely high. It's a VC.

I don't think it was set any lower back then; how many other Honours and Awards were distributed to Canadians for acts of valour and bravery in prior conflicts, of which a great many probably also read close to VCs? Hundreds? Whatever it is, I can almost guarantee that it is the VC that was and does remain the rare one even though, historically, Canadians won VCs at a higher per captia rate than any other nation.

Now, with stats to determine "ratios" from then - till now, you may be able to convince me otherwise, but if the stats showed that in previous conflicts we awarded "96 VCs (inclusive of Hall's and Reid's respectively - 1857 Indian Rebellion) and 3110 other awards for Military Bravery during same period" and that the stats for same from this conflict indicate that such an obvious (according to some here) discrepency and anomaly actually does exist with it's "lack" of presentation, then I may be willing to be convinced. Pulled my figures from the GGs page.
 
Is there any point in comparing Boer War-era citations with present day? Look at the last two Brit VCs - Beharry and Budd gave up all expectations of living to do what they did...and imagine the VCs that could have been issued in WWI if all the witnesses hadn't died along with the one who performed the gallant act...
 
Ralph said:
Is there any point in comparing Boer War-era citations with present day? Look at the last two Brit VCs - Beharry and Budd gave up all expectations of living to do what they did...and imagine the VCs that could have been issued in WWI if all the witnesses hadn't died along with the one who performed the gallant act...

Exactly. Apples vs an Orange.
 
A couple of points re Boer War honours and awards that are moot. First, there were many, many more awards of the Distinguished Service Order (DSO) for officers and the Distinguished Conduct Medal (DCM) for men along with the very few VCs. Second, the VC could not be awarded posthumously at the time, although King Edward VII changed that policy in the last stages of the war.

And regarding recommendations for awards, 2 RCRI was the only Canadian unit that served in South Africa that did not have a NCM receive a gazetted decoration. Even the 10th Canadian Field Hospital which was in theatre for a few months in 1902 had a soldier awarded the DCM. However, several officers in 2 RCRI were awarded the DSO, so recommendations for officers at least were being submitted. The Minister of Militia and Defence noticed this and Otter caught a load of crap for it. He did try to submit a recommendation for a VC for Private RR Thompson well after the event (and after Thompson had received his Queen's Scarf in the mail and then returned to South Africa in the South African Constabulary) but it got bogged down in the bureaucracy and was rejected. I believe that if a recommendation for Thompson had been submitted after Paardeberg, it very likely would have been successful.
 
ArmyVern said:
In no way, at no time, have I belittled or suggested that acts of our troops in Afghanistan weren't incredible acts of bravery and valour.
Forgive me, but I was not suggesting or thinking that you had.

ArmyVern said:
I am only suggesting that 'opportunities' (& I hate calling it that) are much fewer and in between in our latest conflict and that our current technology does much to mitigate direct, face-to-face instances.
That is a very good point, and it is not a bad thing either.  I like the idea of stand off for our guys and being able to put hurt down at a distance. 

ArmyVern said:
Yes, the bar is set extremely high. It's a VC.

I don't think it was set any lower back then; how many other Honours and Awards were distributed to Canadians for acts of valour and bravery in prior conflicts, of which a great many probably also read close to VCs? Hundreds? Whatever it is, I can almost guarantee that it is the VC that was and does remain the rare one even though, historically, Canadians won VCs at a higher per captia rate than any other nation.

Now, with stats to determine "ratios" from then - till now, you may be able to convince me otherwise, but if the stats showed that in previous conflicts we awarded "96 VCs (inclusive of Hall's and Reid's respectively - 1857 Indian Rebellion) and 3110 other awards for Military Bravery during same period" and that the stats for same from this conflict indicate that such an obvious (according to some here) discrepency and anomaly actually does exist with it's "lack" of presentation, then I may be willing to be convinced. Pulled my figures from the GGs page.

Agreed, the bar should be high.  From what I have read of citations for the high level decorations (VC, SMV, MMV and earlier awards DSC, MM, MC etc) they all were of course stand out acts of selfless heroism and at times self sacrifice.  As such, when consideration is given to the weight it must be like splitting hairs and I don't envy the selection board.

As many of the VC awards were posthumous, I would be happier to think that our people come home alive for a SMV or MMV in that they would not have been put into situations of VC award considerations in the first place.  Which goes back to your stand off situations of bringing hurt down at a distance.
 
ArmyVern said:
Whatever it is, I can almost guarantee that it is the VC that was and does remain the rare one even though, historically, Canadians won VCs at a higher per captia rate than any other nation.

Canadian V.C.'s were rare in World War Two. For example, of the 10,659 members of the RCAF killed in Bomber Command, only one was awarded the Victoria Cross. 

 
mariomike said:
Canadian V.C.'s were rare in World War Two. For example, of the 10,659 members of the RCAF killed in Bomber Command, only one was awarded the Victoria Cross.

Understood. I had edited my previous post after visiting the GG site. 96 VCs awarded along with 3110 "other" decorations for bravery in previous wars; about 3%, 3 per 100 bravery medals awarded was a VC in previous conflicts.

I'm not sure we've even awarded 100 from this conflict yet, so I'm not seeing anything to back up the comments that infer that we've now made the standard too high or are being stingey etc (even IF we had the same volume of "daily" opportunities --- which we certainly didn't have in this conflict).
 
They have similar issues in the US with delays and the 'bar being too high" with the MoH:

Medal of Honor takes moment to earn, years to receive

For Sal Giunta's actions more than three years ago, he will be awarded the Medal of Honor.In most cases when a soldier does something extraordinarily brave in battle, it happens in a matter of moments. But to reward that bravery often takes years.

Spc. Sal Giunta went above and beyond the call of duty on October 25, 2007, when he helped thwart an ambush and stopped two Taliban fighters from capturing a fellow solider. But it will be November 16, 2010, when now Staff Sgt. Giunta received the Medal of Honor from President Obama, a wait of more than three years


http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-16/us/medal.of.honor.giunta.process_1_medal-of-honor-recommendation-second-highest-medal-proper-recognition?_s=PM:US
 
Keep in mind that a good part of the delay in awarding decorations is a direct result of the scrutiny in the process.  If the court of public opinion (or the uninformed masses if you like) weren't so quick to denigrate, doubt and trash everything, perhaps the process wouldn't be so slow.  CFDAC sits once a month, so it's not like these files are sitting around gathering dust forever.  The process simply takes that long.
 
Very interesting story...mind you there is a very different story from the US army Medics that ran that very base....hmmm
 
If you weren't there...button it and either offer congrats or begone
 
tacmed2007 said:
Very interesting story...mind you there is a very different story from the US army Medics that ran that very base....hmmm

Is it a story you'd like to personally put your name behind? Or will it suffice to suggest politely that you bugger off?
 
tacmed2007 is just doing a drive-by trolling. Its his first post in a year and note the negative milpoints.
 
OK first thanks puck chaser for the FYI have better things to do then sit here and post, I came here looking for a can-forgen...whatever dude  I have been out doing my job. I had this post sent to me, so i said what i thought....

Second Jammer I was there in FOB Wilson with the TF 3-09 and B&C coy 1/12 Inf, B coy 101st Airborne Div, So yes Jammer I was there.

Third my name is on this as part of an investigation being carried out by the 1/12 Inf US Army as part of the action that day by several members. So who did what will come out...but that is beyond me.

As far as those that choose to blast off, well I can assume none of you where there and are going off third forth, reporters versions...so whatever the few that want to attack my " status as a troop" have at er, been in this rodeo for a long time....what makes a solid troop in this army, one that never takes what is not his, one that stands up for the troops, and one that will go out that front gate every time, regardless of how many bad hits they took.

I would also point out that this whole H&A system we have is BS, there are dudes right now that are getting gimmes and crap for outstanding work, others that got a H&A for sitting at a desk drinking green beans. There is one dude that should have got the VC for what he did....i think he is getting the MID.

dudes did some righteous work my last tour over there and they should get what they deserve, most wont for one reason or another....
 
Back
Top