Hey, I think that is a good point. Are most medals not already for good conduct, bravery etc.?
So in the context of “courageous restraint”, why should the ‘restraint’ bit be emphasized as a reason for a specific medal. If the restraint is in itself courageous than existing medals should be able to cover it; a bit like a medic saving lives under fire without firing a shot. If it is not courageous than it could well be going towards being criminal, or at least against ROE (identifying legitimate targets and all that).
It’s almost a bit like getting rewarded for not running over that pedestrian with the pram as opposed to being dealt with for doing the opposite.
I think I can see what they are trying to do here with regards to creating an environment where restraint counters a gung-ho attitude but I am not sure that this sort of incentive is the right way to achieve it.
Bookmarks