Gallantry Awards
 

Watching the BBC news right now, it strikes me that there are many soldiers in Afghanistan that are performing astonishing acts of bravery, and rightly being decoratedfor them.

My question is however, without wishing to denigrate the gallantry of earlier generations;

Is the System (ie the Government or the military authorities) being parsimonious with the awards of gallantry medals, in particular the VC?

Or is the reporting of such acts soon after they occur resorting to hyperbole that doesn't match the realities of what actually happened?

I'm inclined to suspect the former.

Please explain WTF, in plainer language, you are getting at ----

I mean that there are MC and CGM rightly being awarded, but to read the stories in the news (and indeed on the MODs website), there are astonishing acts being performed, with claims that match or even supersede (sp?) actions fought in Korea, WWII etc.

Or am I just being a bit thick?

As I understand it, he is saying is the Gov't being stingy, frugal with awards like the VC.


Hasn't that always been the case ? (with the VC ?).

What I'm writing is that there has been only one publicly gazetted award for Iraq and Afghanistan. There were many awards in earlier conflicts. Is it parsimony, or due to the smaller numbers of soldiers that are actually engaging the enemy in these modern conflicts?

I remember someone saying that in order to seem suitably highest award-worthy that any act had to supercede those that had gone before.

I was awarded the QJM for being at work. You have to be brave to work where I do.:)

Piggies

The VC was instituted in the Crimean War in 1856 and during the subsequent 150 years (which included the Boer War, WW1 & WW2 as well as Korea and numerous other minor skirmishes) some 1355 VC's were awarded. That is an average of 9 per year.

Piggies,
There have been two VCs awarded over the recent Afghan/Iraq campaigns, you are doing one of them a disservice.
Statistically, that is a 100% increase on your statement but it does not detract from the overall statement of an apparent lack of this level of recognition. As an aside, I would be interested to see the statistics of the amount of troops in theatre vs awards from previous campaigns.

Sloppy - as a partial answer to your question, during World War Two at least 10,000,000 UK, Commonwealth and Empire soldiers, sailors and airmen served at some stage over the (almost ) six years of the war. A total of 182 VCs were awarded for the years 1939-45. That makes an average of 30 per year, or very approximately 1 per 330,000 men mobilised per year. Taking into account the far smaller numbers of troops currently in Afghanistan, I dont think that there is any question of the VC being awarded more sparingly than previously.

Incidentally, in the period 1946-69 only 9 awards were made, a period which included the Korean War and conflicts in Palestine, Cyprus, Malaya, Suez, Aden, Kenya and Borneo.

Actually, you want to read this months Britain at War magazine covering some of the VC's never awarded during the 2nd world war.......

Some of them were eye openers... one covered was a pilot whose aircraft was hit and a large white hot lump of metal jammed by his rudder pedals, one of the crew tried to dislodge it, but was unable to, eventually it set fire to the aircraft and the pilots legs and boots, one of the crew heard the pilot call for them to abandon the aircraft and looking back upon hearing the order saw the pilot was totally engulfed from head to foot in fire still holding the aircraft steady so his crew could abandon it..
It was denied if i remember correctly because someone deemed he was doing his job!!!!!!!!!!!! Me, I would have given him a VC, that is well above and beyond.

Another was deferred until his captive crew would be released at the end of the war, but wasn't followed up on...... will copy parts of the article if you want to read it.......

Australia is relooking at some that were put fwd for VC's to re-assess their cases, one thinks the UK should do similar.

See

http://www.defence-honours-tribunal....0Reference.pdf

TTN,
Thank you, from that it appears the ratio is about right from a pure statistical view. Of course, statistics are completely impersonal which is probably what led to the initial post.

I once took on several Carrickfergus Commandoes and felt sure that I had a VC (or similar). Alas, it appears that the deed had to be witnessed by an officer.

Unfortunately reviewing past deeds might prove to be a bit uncomfortable. I've just finished reading TE Lawrence's 'Victory in the Desert'. He did some insanely brave things, but some of his other actions - eg ordering no prisoners to be taken - would amount to a war crime. Revisionist history is a pastime of dull socialist academics.

I see where you are coming from and there are objections to it happening in Aus, but where in the case of the one defered until post war, perhaps that should be put to bed so to speak either one way or the other..

It would appear that 'Nutloose' is doing his famous jumping on the bandwagon act again.
Surely if we start looking at the substance of higher end awards the floodgates could be opened for ALL awards thereby bringing the 'quota' system into sharp focus.

Somebody is not thinking this through.

Ladies & Gentlemen, thank you.
 

Sloppy / TTN,

Thanks for your replies. My mistake, I meant to write one each in IZ/AFG.

TTN's statistics show that I was wrong, so 'Mea Culpa' etc. However, I still suspect that the MOD pushes out Press releases after actions that are not subsequently borne out by Op Award announcements. Why would they do that?:rolleyes:

I'm inclined to think the statistics suggests that there is some objectivity to the process, which is probably a good thing.

As far as reviewing old citations, not sure about that. I've served on some fine former Bomber Command Squadrons (two of which both sank some boat in Norway) and fully support the memorial to be built in Green Park, but whilst I agree that the failure to award a campaign medal to Bomber Command aircrew was utterly wrong (and that many of those 'shot at dawn' in WWI were victims of gross injustice), I think there has to be a line drawn somewhere on mistakes made in the past. Otherwise, where would it stop? Should we seek compo from Italy for invading us in 43?

Nutloose

The Australia situation was pushed along because of well known recent conflicts battles still in living memory (Long Tan) - where it was well known that various politics got in the way of the proper medals being awarded to both the soldiers / officers of D Coy and the Iroquois pilots who did the re supply

This and others (one well known one being Simpson and his donkey at Gallipoli) have spurred the whole thing along.

Not sure where it will end but at least D Coy / Iroquois pilots have now got some of the right medals.

.

If you read my follow on post, you would see I was not refering to the ones that were refused on someones say so, simply the one that had been put on hold till a later date where all parties agreed that more information was needed and would be available, then forgotten after hostilities ended........ hence

Not jumping on any bandwagon.

Pah. the Rhonda Valley Commandos would have them for lunch....;)

Why not the Victoria Cross for this Soldier?
 

30 to 1 odds....fought till out of ammunition...out of grenades....resorted to using a club on one attacker....and not awarded a Victoria Cross!

Can anyone explain why this particular Soldier did not earn a VC?

In my view he certainly deserves the award!


Queen decorates Nepali for Afghanistan heroics - Yahoo! News