Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
Air gunner,
Would you say, in today's Air Force, that more people get Air Medals for individual achievement or for sortie count? It's not even close.
I am not a fan of Air Medals awarded for "mission sustainment." IMHO, they should only be awarded for Valor or a significant single sortie achievment in aerial flight. However until the regulation allowing it is changed it is what it is. To assume that all that have been awarded Air Medals have gotten them as "sortie counters" is not completely accurate. That is why we have the "V" device for valor, this generally separates those awarded the AM for Valor vs. those those awarded for "mission sustainment."
Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
Second, if 9 people get an award for sortie count and 1 gets it for individual heroics, what's the value of THE award. Not HIS award, but THE award. The answer is "X number of sorties".
The value remains the same, just the criteria for which it was rewarded changes. As I stated above, that is what the "V" device is for. Those of us in or who have worn the uniform usually know the difference between an award for valor vs. mission sustainment.
Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
We don't need to focus on the theoretical, we have real world. The majority of Air Medals are going for sortie count; either that or those boom operators with 8 Air Medals are pretty heroic. Bronze Stars are going to PAOs, admin clerks, equipment custodians, etc. You tell me what it's worth today.
No focus on the theoretical, the reality is that until regulations and criteria for award are changed these awards for achievement can and will still happen as permitted by the regulations. Only those who can differentiate a AM or BSM either with or without the "V" device will know the difference. BTW as for worth, to your average "sweatty" it's about 3 points and 7 points per award for WAPS purposes
not that it matters for the AD folks as everyone else is maxed out for points..even the "shoe clerks" now days.
Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
If 3 people in line all have Bronze Stars, 1 from Korea, 1 from Vietnam, and 1 from 2012, are you going to assume they all distinguished themselves equally in combat? Not me, I won't, and neither will you.
No, it would depend solely on whether or not they were awarded the BSM with Valor or not. This opinion does not say that they didn't deserve the award, someone put them in for it and it was approved. There is a difference between awards given for acts of valor vs. achievement. This is situation we have when existing regulations allow awards "traditionally" given for valor also be awarded for achievement and why I say the regulations regarding the award of medals like these need to change.
Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
It's because a medal's value is based on the circumstances on which it is PREDOMINANTLY awarded, not on what it's criteria should be.
So with the majority of BSM's in the Air Force given for achievement, what say you about those who have theirs awarded for valor. Does that put them in the same league as those awarded for achievement? No, the difference is the "V" device ...a lot of people see the BSM as a "deployed MSM" except for those awarded with the "V" device.
Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
It's funny how you see the very solutions to such issues as a sign of the problem. If admin clerks who don't go outside the wire had a separate medal from the guy diffusing the IED, you don't think the respective values would be more meaningful?
The problem is not with the medals, nor the individuals awarded them, it's the manner in which they have been awarded over the past few years. Just because someone qualifies for an award does not mean they deserve or have earned it. I've seen this happen first hand, where someone will put a person in for the highest award they "qualified" for regardless if whether they deserved it or not and irregardless if a "lesser" award would have been more appropriate.
They do it in the name of "taking care of people." This is where the dilution process begins. Another good example of this is anyone that has participated in a Joint Operation for a period of time qualifies for a Joint Achievement medal. Does that mean they all deserve one, NO. We created this monster by being overly zealous with the awards. Supervisors and leaders need to be held more accountable and ensure the intent of the awards process is being used to properly recognize deserving people and to not give people an award for playing.
Originally Posted by
LivingInMEM
Medals today are given out like candy compared to 20 years ago and that's not the problem because we'll stick to thinking about what they COULD be given out for, some new award for a behind the scenes contribution to the mission is? Interesting.
I could not agree with the first part of your statement more. However, this medal for cyber/drone operations in the manner which is proposed is completely unessecary, given there are existing avenues of adequate recognition available to them.