Medal for Courageous Restraint

[n david]

U.S. troops in Afghanistan could soon be awarded a medal for not doing something, a precedent-setting award that would be given for “courageous restraint” for holding fire to save civilian lives.

And up next ... US troops will be trained by the French Army

I was listening to a show on the way home from work yesterday and the host had a friend who was a former Navy Seal call in. When they told this ex-Navy Seal about the new medal he wouldn't believe it. It was hilarious to hear the exchange. He couldn't believe it was a real medal.

Source

[pelathais]

Given the fact that the nature of warfare has changed again, it's important that we adapt to those changes.

In the 1800's there was a big push toward a more "humane" form of warfare where civilians were protected by both sides and all combatants were clearly identifiable by uniform and/or insignia - such as an armband or something similar if uniforms were scarce. This was the era that the Geneva Conventions on Warfare took place and organizations like the Red Cross came into being.

Communism changed that. Tactics of war in the Communist manuals by such writers as Mikhail Bakunin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh, advocated guerrilla warfare and the use of civilians as human shields. Mingling with and disguising oneself as a civilian became the way of the "revolutionary warrior."

To combat these tactics requires a great deal of restraint. American soldiers have been trained to avoid civilian casualties whenever possible. The media fall out from such losses is usually a huge boon to the enemy. They want civilian casualties and the uproar it causes here in the states - that's what led the US to pull out of Vietnam.

Our soldiers are already using considerable and very honorable restraint. I think this new award just seeks to recognize the valor that is already out there in the field.

[Sam]

Well, my first impulse is to say, "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" but that might be too harsh.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Given the fact that the nature of warfare has changed again, it's important that we adapt to those changes.

In the 1800's there was a big push toward a more "humane" form of warfare where civilians were protected by both sides and all combatants were clearly identifiable by uniform and/or insignia - such as an armband or something similar if uniforms were scarce. This was the era that the Geneva Conventions on Warfare took place and organizations like the Red Cross came into being.

Communism changed that. Tactics of war in the Communist manuals by such writers as Mikhail Bakunin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh, advocated guerrilla warfare and the use of civilians as human shields. Mingling with and disguising oneself as a civilian became the way of the "revolutionary warrior."

To combat these tactics requires a great deal of restraint. American soldiers have been trained to avoid civilian casualties whenever possible. The media fall out from such losses is usually a huge boon to the enemy. They want civilian casualties and the uproar it causes here in the states - that's what led the US to pull out of Vietnam.

Our soldiers are already using considerable and very honorable restraint. I think this new award just seeks to recognize the valor that is already out there in the field.

Yeah...I don't have a problem with this particular award. American soldiers are known for being compassionate and humane in most cases (except for your occasional idiot). It's a reflection of American values and patriotism, and deserves to be awarded in extraordinary circumstances. It is most definitely courage and valor to hold fire to preserve innocent life, especially when that restraint translates into immediate personal risk.