Quote Originally Posted by Xenophon View Post

Sometimes doing nothing is the right thing, and going for blood is the wrong thing. We should reward doing the right thing, whether that is charging an enemy machine gun nest or refusing to let the enemy bait you into harming innocents.
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.