Yeah, I don't get it.
Is this just an attempt to add more fruit salad to one's uniform or is there more to it?
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.
The proposal is now circulating in the Kabul headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force, a command spokesman confirmed Tuesday.
“The idea is consistent with our approach,” explained Air Force Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis. “Our young men and women display remarkable courage every day, including situations where they refrain from using lethal force, even at risk to themselves, in order to prevent possible harm to civilians. In some situations our forces face in Afghanistan, that restraint is an act of discipline and courage not much different than those seen in combat actions.”Full article here LINK“We absolutely support the right of our forces to defend themselves,” Sholtis said. “Valuing restraint in a potentially dangerous situation is not the same thing as denying troops the right to employ lethal force when they determine that it is necessary.”
I personally think this is a horrible idea....are we a military force or the peace corps? Why not blur the lines even more than they already are?
ODB
Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:
Why did you not clear your corner?
Because we are on a base and it is secure.
Yeah, I don't get it.
Supporting "time-limited, scope limited military actions" for 20 years.
We already have that. It's called the Bronze Star Medal.U.S. troops in Afghanistan could soon be awarded a medal for not doing something...
the air you hear hissing is a result of the body blow I just took
I resemble that comment, of course I never expected or asked for a medal for doing my job as best I could either...
As for courageous restraint... I'm confused... reasoned restraint is good... measured restraint is legal... physical courage is paramount... courageous restraint, huh?
Hacksaw
Say hello to my 2 x 4
When I was in Iraq, my IA battalion was transferred from Diyala to Al Anbar (this was after we were transferred from Al Anbar to Diyala but before we were transferred from Al Anbar to Diyala). En route, we were ambushed at night by a group of insurgents who had stationed themselves in an apartment complex with numerous lights that shined in the direction of the road, washing out our NVGs. I had one Lance Corporal (gunning) who had the presence of mind to forego his .50 cal and use his M4 to engage targets so as to pose less of a risk to any civilians in the apartments and another Lance Corporal who refused to return fire at all for the same reason. Meanwhile, a lieutenant who was gunning in another vehicle lit the apartment complex up with his M240.
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.
Wonder if a lot of the awards will be posthumous?
"Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper
A medal for being timid? Our troops are going to be killed and wounded when they don't defend themselves.
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.
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
Restraint comes down to discipline and professionalism. Wearing the uniform and respective unit embellishments should be enough recognition of those qualities.
However, the article doesn't make it clear - could this just be a loosening of, say combat action badges or whatever they are known as? I don't know what is involved in their reward but it mightn't even be an actual separate medal but rather an action 'tab', as such, acknowledging you were in "combat" or "danger" even if you didn't fire back?
Last edited by Chris jM; 05-15-2010 at 03:02 AM. Reason: added in second quote
'...the gods of war are capricious, and boldness often brings better results than reason would predict.'
Donald Kagan
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Added to all of the above, most medals are in recognition of going above and beyond the call of duty. I fail to see how restraint is above and beyond……..that’s not to say it’s beneath and below, its just part of the job.
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
I will provide some ground truth on this as I was there when this was presented to the task force commanders in Regional Command South.
This does not mean that soldiers are expected to simply "take one for the team." A better example is one I personally know of where a SEAL patrol with their ANA partners entered a village and a small engagement ensued with 2-3 insurgent fighters. Two were put down quickly, and one turned and ran. The SEAL nearest to the man was within every aspect of the ROE and the tactical directive at that point in time to simply kill the runner. Instead he took off after him, ran him down and tackled him, taking him prisoner. It is this type of assumption of greater personal risk in the name of avoiding potentially avoidable casualties that is at the essence of "courageous restraint."
To be honest, this resonates better with the British military than it does with the Americans. The Americans see more utility in simply ensuring that you have your most experienced decision maker at the most likely critical time and place; and to ensure that you have worked through situational pre-combat drills to wargame in advance likely dangers and how to best address them within the tactical directives and guidelines for the escalation of force.
I guess the key is that the Commanders are recognizing that there is valor in protecting the mission, just as there is in protecting one’s self and fellow soldiers.
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
BW,
Why does the action you describe require some unique award instead of what we already have?
Supporting "time-limited, scope limited military actions" for 20 years.
I'm not disagreeing in any way with what your wrote. But, if Commanders are "just now recognizing" valor in actions like this, then something is wrong. That would be another of many examples to demonstrate how clueless we were nine years ago and how slowly we've figured things out.
Regardless of the valor aspect, the notion of handing out awards for this stuff amplifies one of many poor messages that have been sent to Soldiers over the past nine years. Namely: "Do your job and get rewarded as though you've done more." Enough with the awards. I know guys who never left a FOB and have 3 BSMs. Even the Purple Hearts are out of hand.
For what it's worth, if you replace "SEAL" with "20-year old Infantryman" then it would describe at least three similar instances that I am aware of - including one that I witnessed - five years ago in Iraq. In the one that I witnessed, we brought the shooter (a 15-year-old who was paid 10,000 dinars to shoot at us) to his home and told his father what happened. His father went back into his home, re-emerged with a wooden rod, and then commenced one of the most vicious ass-whoopings that I'd witnessed in a long time. We restrained him because we thought he was going to kill the kid.
I hope that we're not "just now recognizing" the value of actions like this. And if the creation of this new award is an indicator of that, then once again I am concerned that senior leaders are just coming around to understanding what many younger Soldiers figured out years ago. And, even worse, they're addressing it in the wrong way. If the only way that leaders can influence Soldiers is to promise them awards for doing their jobs, then they're not really leaders.
Like I said, it resonated with the Brits, but not so much with the Americans. I think it might be getting over played and twisted a bit by those who have heard the words, but lack the context.
The primary point the commander was conveying was that under the new tactical directives we are asking the soldiers to assume much more personal risk in order to preserve and advance the larger strategic goals of the operations; and that leaders needed to do a more effective job of recognizing those who did so.
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
A quote from the first news story I saw on the topic:
And a more recent one from General McChrystal:NATO commanders are not planning to create a new medal or military decoration for "courageous restraint," but instead are looking at ways of using existing awards to recognize soldiers who go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties, Hall said.
And one from Rush LimbaughQ General... Is it true that you are contemplating -- awarding some sort of special honor for soldiers who make a special effort to avoid civilian casualties?
GEN. MCCHRYSTAL: ...The issue of courage -- we have a number of ways to recognize courage in uniform. And I think courage in uniform can come under enemy fire in the most traditional ways, or it can come under actions that may not be as expected or as traditional -- involve killing the enemy; it may involve protecting civilians.
There's a great photograph from the Marja operation. I think it's a U.S. Marine shielding an Afghan man and an Afghan child with his own body. He wasn't shooting anyone; he didn't kill any Taliban; but I would argue that he showed as much courage as any that I've seen on the battlefield.
So when we talk about courage, I think -- I don't think we need a different medal to differentiate different kinds of courage.
That last one included here as only as explanation why this is suddenly getting attention a week after the first stories appeared.I'm up to speed on it now. So we're going to have courageous military medal for showing restraint... I can just see the ceremony. Obama at the White House presenting the Distinguished Yellow Cross.
I've heard that same point made by others over there, even before Rush chimed in...
True.
So... Company Commander A in village A engages local leaders, establishes rapport, gets through a tour pretty much unscratched. In fact, never fires a shot. Over in village B Company Commander B experiences constant kinetic activity, high casualty rates...
End of tour. You're the Btn Commander. Who went "above and beyond?" How do you recognize them for it?
Is this really a quandary? Again, five years ago, a platoon in my battalion caught heat... not for restraint, but for over-aggressiveness. I'm not kidding when I say this: they were put on "time-out" (the CO's exact words). They were stood down for three days to review their SOPs, do maintenance, and pull PB security. The PL never lived it down. It was a black mark. Once again, five years ago.
Who went "above and beyond"? Whomever got the best results, given the situation that they were handed. Kind of similar to what, in the financial world, they call "alpha".
Why, Greyhawk, I'm surprised you listen to him. Never heard the guy speak, m'self.
But then I tend to ignore all the taking heads as they rarely contribute much.Perhaps you're correct but I'm more inclined to blame sloppy main stream media reporting and editing added to civilian lack of knowledge. As Bob's World said, out of context...That last one included here as only as explanation why this is suddenly getting attention a week after the first stories appeared.Not nearly enough info. Did the rapport actually accomplish anything or did it just exist? How kinetic was it, who initiated most of the contacts and how well did he do in the fights he had?So... Company Commander A in village A engages local leaders, establishes rapport, gets through a tour pretty much unscratched. In fact, never fires a shot. Over in village B Company Commander B experiences constant kinetic activity, high casualty rates...
End of tour. You're the Btn Commander. Who went "above and beyond?" How do you recognize them for it?
The real questions that Bn Cdr must answer have little to do with those two variables which are really sort of meaningless, rather they have to do with how well each did his job in totality for the deployment given the situations (plural) with which he had to deal. Their Cdr has all sorts of methods of rewarding -- or punishing, if warranted -- performance ranging from OERs (unimportant to some, vital to others) to hero badges (same discrimination criteria apply) to a slap on the back (always appreciated unless the Cdr is an @$*hole). Hopefully he knows his people, knows where their buttons are, knows what's important and does not have too much "help" from above...
And, most importantly; is fair.
Or we could use the simple or Ranger solution -- Bronze Stars for both and a "V" for the more kinetic locale.
Added: Apologies to Schmedlap, somehow I missed his intervening post. I coulda just said "What he said."
Last edited by Ken White; 05-16-2010 at 02:36 AM. Reason: Addendum
That sounds so simple in a classroom. It is logical and rational. It makes sense. I would caution that there are so many other scenarios. I will give you mine as a company commander. This is one of the times that it's good that I use my real name. Others can verify or just say he's full of crap .
As a commander, I had a wealth of contacts and friends within the villages. I engaged in and out everyday with the various elders. As it were, I was in a highly kinetic area, and I became one of the most violent commanders in Diyala Province. The Iraqis called my IA CDR and I the Lions of Diyala. The Americans called us the War Machine. In that area, we had the fewest casualties.
There are so many different scenarios in war.
Bookmarks