Originally Posted by
rickair7777
The recognition needs to match the contribution AND the hardship and risk endured.
Strategic nuclear folks (AF and Navy) make a huge contribution but it's not particularly grueling or risky. They get minimal recognition (a badge in both cases IIRC). Any combat medals they get are situation-dependent and are probably earned on IA grounds tours in the CENTCOM AOR.
I think strat nuke is good place to start when trying to decide how to recognize RPA drivers. Just because they happen to be the flavor-of-the-month doesn't mean we should get carried away.
Strat nuke folks never killed an enemy combatant (WWII excluded, but I don't think that's what you meant), never saved a life, never turned the tide of a TIC, never killed a terrorist. Again, the medal isn't supposed to be for simply showing up. It's supposed to be for something above and beyond. If deterrence is your only criteria, then let's give everyone in the military a medal and be done with it. No one is getting carried away, except for the irrational opposition to this. There's always someone who has done something harder and more dangerous than the next guy. An Army grunt could laugh at some of the DFCs handed out to aircrew - how much danger were they REALLY exposed to compared to the Jarhead on the ground in Fallujah? How does this medal truly affect anyone not in the RPA community?