Bill to lower precedence of Distinguished Warfare Medal

| February 28, 2013

Members of Congress have begun to intercede on the Defense Department’s efforts to introduce a new medal designed to reward combatants who are removed from the battlefield by geography. DoD had originally planned t make the medal higher in precedence than the Bronze Star Medal which rewards performance on the battlefield, but warriors have complained that the Distinguished Warfare medal should be lower than those awarded for participation in combat. From Stars & Stripes;

A trio of veterans serving in Congress, Reps. Duncan Hunter, D-Calif., Tom Rooney, R- Fl., and Tim Murphy, R-Pa., introduced the bill on Wednesday, in response to what has been a public outcry against the creation of the medal, which was announced on Feb. 13.

“Combat valor awards have a deep and significant meaning to those who serve in America’s military,” said Hunter, a former Marine, in a statement. “These awards represent not just actions, but also the courage and sacrifice that derive from experiences while in harm’s way. And those engaged in direct combat put their lives on the line, accepting extraordinary personal risk.”

Personally, I think the announcement of the medal was timed to distract from the rest of the crap the Defense Department is engaged in right now, like raiding the Tricare surplus and kicking thousands of retirees off of Tricare Prime. DoD’s insistence that their plans go forward on the medal is out of character for them. But, I guess we’ll see what Congress can do about the inequity of this award.

Category: Big Army, Military issues

Comments (6)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Hondo says:

    For those who’ve forgotten: this (Congressional action) is how the BSM was (mostly) un-fornicated after the Kosovo BSM FUBAR of 1999. There, Congress acted to make it a requirement in Federal law (10 USC 1133) that a person must be in receipt of hostile fire/imminent danger pay to be eligible to receive a BSM. That was previously not a specified requirement.

    In this case – like the BSM case – the phrase “there oughta be a law . . . ” really does seem apropos.

  2. fm2176 says:

    Kinda off-subject, but I got bored a few nights ago and played around with the medal and ribbon rack builders on Medals on America. Made myself a nice honest rack, then pulled a Ballduster McSoulpatch and added a bunch of unearned stuff. Finally, I had to take one from the Air Force vet politician featured here a while back (forget her name, but I recall the reference to her “rack”) and add all the commemorative medals. That would make even Zhukov jealous. Heck, it almost looked liked a National Guardsman’s rack displaying all his or her state and federal ribbons…

    That same night I checked the Pentagon’s Institute of Heraldry website and was surprised that the DWM hadn’t already been listed.

  3. UpNorth says:

    Stars & Stripes ought to do a little fact checking, Duncan Hunter is not a democrat.

  4. David says:

    Damn, and here I thought there was an actual sighting of a Democrat veteran, one of the most elusive mythical creatures in the country.

  5. Common Sense says:

    @4 – there are actually quite a few in Congress…

    The House:

    The Senate:

    The lists are a couple of years out of date, but you get the general idea.

  6. obsidian says:

    The medal should be the same level as for service aboard Submarines and air medals.
    If they shoot a live enemy target the medal gets a Star or a little silver drone.
    These guys do work for the money and for the service provided for the Snuffy in the field.
    They deserve some kind of award.
    I’m thinking An Air medal would suffice.