Interesting story tonight on our local news. Angel Rosario, a Vietnam vet who won the Purple Heart for taking four bullets in his arm, is going to smash his medal with a sledgehammer Thuirsday then mail it to the White House.(Sorry, I’ll have the story link hopefully on this thread tommorow morning, if there is interest.)
His beef is that injured military personnel at the Pentagon attack will be awarded Purple Hearts. He thinks this takes the meaning away from his medal. He contends the PH was intended for those injured in COMBAT. He does agree that the Pentagon injured should be honored in another way.
Personally, I think it’s a bit of an overreaction. No one can take how he earned that Purple Heart away from him. I’d be curious as to your thoughts, especially military personel.
Has the value of the Purple Heart been cheapened? But weren’t the Pentagon victims injured in an act of war?
One does not “win” the Purple Heart. One gets shot in one’s ass by an enemy and, in return, one is awarded a Purple Heart.
Cite: http://www.purpleheart.org/Awd_of_PH.htm
Rosario is apparently a Grade-A schmuck. You sure he didn’t take those four bullets in the cerebellum?
"… Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed, or who has died or may hereafter die after being wounded
(1) In any action against an enemy of the United States.
(2) In any action with an opposing armed force of a foreign country in which the Armed Forces of the United States are or have been engaged.
(3) While serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.
(4) As a result of an act of any such enemy of opposing armed forces.
(S) As the result of an act of any hostile foreign force.
I thought that this clause was even more on the money :
(6) After 28 March 1973, as a result of an international terrorist attack against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the United States, recognized as such an attack by the Secretary of the Army, or jointly by the Secretaries of the separate armed Services concerned if persons from more than one service are wounded in the attack.
Angel Rosario is not the entity which decides who has qualified for any award, to include the Purple Heart.
If he had managed to pull his head out of his rectum sometime in the last few decades, he would’ve noticed that hte criteria for qualification for that medal, as well as for others, had changed sometime after the Vietnam Conflict. He would also notice that there is also a new award specifically for civilian government workers who were killed or injured in the attack on the Pentagon. IIRC, that award is the “Defense of Freedom” award.
I wonder if Rosario also declines his Veteran’s benefits now that he’s being such a wanker about those who are currently on Active Duty.
Well, tried to find the article again, but no luck. Doesn’t look like much of a debate here anyway.
I think it’s kind of a sad story. The guy is obviously a war hero who seems quite misguided, and a little meanspirited. Seems such a waste to destroy such a precious symbol.
[rant] Well, considering the guys who turned over one of our more sophisticated spyplanes to the Chinese got a selection of medals, (Each received an Air Medal for heroism, the Aircraft Commander got the Distinguished Flying Cross, one of the higher honors you can receive, and the A/C Commander (again)and the Senior Enlisted man received Meritorious Service Medals. (ABC News) I wonder how that went over with those B-17 and -24 drivers in WWII who brought home their shot up aircraft without receiving an award) those guys at the Pentagon deserve the Medal of Honor. [/rant]
Sorry about that, in the peacetime military troops are getting medals for properly completing paperwork or showing up on time. Medals are to be awarded for outstanding achievment or sacrifice, not for just doing your job.
Those guys at the Pentagon deserve their Purple Hearts. They were injured or killed in the line of duty. They earned them and it is small honor to those who lost their loved ones.
The Purple Heart is our oldest military decoration. Visit the Military Order of the Purple Heart for more info on the history of the award.
I saw a news item that Congress was hastily preparing special medals which were to be awarded to all victims of both the WTC and Pentagon incidents. It was some sort of “National Order of Freedom” sort of thing. I saw the design, IIRC it says “with the thanks of a grateful nation” on the back… I haven’t seen anything further on any special medals.
I hate to sound like the asshole, no wait a second, I don’t mind sounding like an asshole. I can understand having a medal awarded to those who voluntarily put themselves in harms way and were harmed. But a medal just for dying in a terrorist attack seems rather pointless.
[ul]The Defense of Freedom medal will be the civilian equivalent of the military’s Purple Heart. The first recipients to be honored will be those Defense Department civilians injured or killed recently as a result of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon.
At the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, the medal may be awarded to non-Defense employees, such as contractors, based on their involvement in Department of Defense activities.
The medal itself consists of a golden circle framing a bald eagle holding a shield which exemplifies the principles of freedom and the defense of those freedoms upon which our nation is founded. The reverse of the medal is inscribed with “On Behalf of a Grateful Nation” with a space for the recipient’s name to be inscribed. The laurel wreath represents honor and high achievement. The ribbon is the red, white and blue. The red stripes commemorate valor and sacrifice. The wide blue stripe represents strength. The white stripes symbolize liberty as represented in our national flag. The number of red stripes represents the four terrorist attacks using hijacked airplanes and the single blue stripe represents the terrorist attack on the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.[/ul]
Apparently the idea is that one can be assumed to incur a certain risk greater than the general population if one is working in a military target.
I think the Pentagon is more realistic than that. How about “those civilians serving the military at the time of their death or injury are more logical recipients of an award from the military than those who were not.”
As soon as you raise your right hand and say the magic words, you’ve volunteered yourself into harms way. That’s part of the reason G. Washington had the Medal created in the first place. By the standard you’ve just posited, most of the dead at Pearl Harbor shouldn’t have recieved a Purple Heart, either. After all, they were just doing their jobs, and weren’t at war, and most died without being able to fight back…
It’s really simple: Either you meet the criteria, or you don’t. Period. The dead at the Pentagon meet the criteria.
this may qualify this debate for the bbq pit, but
In addition to P/h for those injured or killed (which they deserve, I believe), the military working in the Pentagon who were NOT injured will receive an additional $150 for hazardous duty pay for that day.
those in the same units working 2 blocks away or on leave or otherwise out of the office will not receive the pay. Nor will the Civil Service. Even some of the military are shaking their heads on this one.
(the flip side being, they’re so underpaid that $150 is something to be grateful for!)
Regardless of the current standards, do you think someone who was killed/injured at the Pentagon deserves to receive the Purple Heart? Should the standards be changed so that only someone who is in combat receives it?
I say that they do deserve it, since they are part of the military and were injured/killed while an active member during a hostile attack.
Tranquilis, I think that MGibson is saying that the people that did not “raise [their] right hand and say the magic words”–the civilians who were wounded/killed in hte attacks–ought not get a medal. They would be the recipients of the newly proposed medal. I tend to agree, in that I don’t think that some guy who was in the wrong convinence store at the wrong time and got shot is less of a hero–or his death less tragic–than that of any given guy who happened to be in the Pentagon.
I agree. The heros were the fire fighters and other workers who rushed back into the WTC to try and save more people (and others who made similar sacrifices). I’m sure there must of been many like them at the Pentagon as well.
I don’t think saying this is a slam on those who DIDN’T or COULDN’T help. I don’t know how I would have reacted if I had been there and survived the initial blasts – just the shock of it might have been overwhelming. But I don’t think I would deserve a medal unless I had somehow collected my thoughts and worked to save other people while there was still danger.
But given the medal criteria posted here, I suppose this point is moot.
If you enlisted in the military then by default you volunteered to put yourself in harms way. I have no problems with military personel getting a purple heart since this seems to meet the criteria as I understand it. What I think would be silling is giving medals to those killed at the WTC. Not counting firefighters and other rescue workers who volunteered to put themselves in harms way.
Remember the the Purple Heart is in no way linked to heroism. It’s a public acknoledgement that the holder’s blood was shed by an enemy of the United States, and that the United States is grateful that this person was willing to shed that blood. Nothing more. For heroism, there are loads of other decorations, for a wide range of heroics.
MGibson, perhaps I could use a little “Whooosh” control. I missed your point earlier, and appreciate your clarification.
