rw
12 March 2001, 10:00
JSOC Marine and Gunny Hicks,
You'll appreciate my disgust over this one.
After over eleven years service to our Marine Corps, both enlisted and as an officer, I have witnessed the perceived, perpetual decline in the validity and worth of our awards system. It all started in late 1991 after Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm with the mass awarding of the Combat Action Ribbon to entire units regardless of whether or not they met the parameters as set forth in Secretary of the Navy’s Awards Order. Awhile back, the Secretary of the Navy, with the advice of the Commandant of the Marine Corps revised the order to include awarding of the Combat Action Ribbon (CAR) for Peacekeeping Operations. According to MARADMIN 463/00 issued 20 September 2000, Members not eligible to receive the CAR for the criteria originally set forth are now eligible to receive the award in peacekeeping when all of the following criteria are met.
1. The service member was subject to hostile, direct fire.
2. Based upon the mission and tactical situation, not returning fire was the best course of action for the service member to adopt.
3. The service member was in compliance with the rules of engagement and his orders by not returning fire.
Amplifying guidance on submitting individuals for the CAR was provided in MARADMIN 547/00 outlining the steps that Marines or former Marines need to follow in order to be considered for the CAR entitlement. Marines must include the following synopsis to summarize their actions justifying a CAR:
1. Outline the operation the individual was participating in and the location of said operation.
2. Describe the event where they were fired at with direct fire weapons (pistol, rifle, machine guns)
3. Describe how the eligibility criteria previously outlined above were met.
It further goes on to explicitly detail the fact that deployment to a combat area in and of itself does not constitute a CAR entitlement and that the CAR continues to be a personal award, and it is awarded only for actions that strictly conform to the guidelines outlined in the reference.
Most recently, however, MARADMIN 066/01 authorized 2,030 Marines of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit participating in Operations JOINT GUARDIAN and ALLIED FORCE to wear the Combat Action Ribbon. While I was not there personally, I find it hard to believe that each of these Marines were individually subject to hostile, direct fire. In fact, while talking to a supply officer who was there, the only thing he offered was that there was occasional, indiscriminate sniper fire but couldn’t actually verify whether or not any rounds impacted their hill or compound. My definition of “subject to hostile direct fire,” as flawed as it may be, would be actually hearing the crack of the round past you or personally seeing the impacting of rounds.
S/F
rw
You'll appreciate my disgust over this one.
After over eleven years service to our Marine Corps, both enlisted and as an officer, I have witnessed the perceived, perpetual decline in the validity and worth of our awards system. It all started in late 1991 after Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm with the mass awarding of the Combat Action Ribbon to entire units regardless of whether or not they met the parameters as set forth in Secretary of the Navy’s Awards Order. Awhile back, the Secretary of the Navy, with the advice of the Commandant of the Marine Corps revised the order to include awarding of the Combat Action Ribbon (CAR) for Peacekeeping Operations. According to MARADMIN 463/00 issued 20 September 2000, Members not eligible to receive the CAR for the criteria originally set forth are now eligible to receive the award in peacekeeping when all of the following criteria are met.
1. The service member was subject to hostile, direct fire.
2. Based upon the mission and tactical situation, not returning fire was the best course of action for the service member to adopt.
3. The service member was in compliance with the rules of engagement and his orders by not returning fire.
Amplifying guidance on submitting individuals for the CAR was provided in MARADMIN 547/00 outlining the steps that Marines or former Marines need to follow in order to be considered for the CAR entitlement. Marines must include the following synopsis to summarize their actions justifying a CAR:
1. Outline the operation the individual was participating in and the location of said operation.
2. Describe the event where they were fired at with direct fire weapons (pistol, rifle, machine guns)
3. Describe how the eligibility criteria previously outlined above were met.
It further goes on to explicitly detail the fact that deployment to a combat area in and of itself does not constitute a CAR entitlement and that the CAR continues to be a personal award, and it is awarded only for actions that strictly conform to the guidelines outlined in the reference.
Most recently, however, MARADMIN 066/01 authorized 2,030 Marines of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit participating in Operations JOINT GUARDIAN and ALLIED FORCE to wear the Combat Action Ribbon. While I was not there personally, I find it hard to believe that each of these Marines were individually subject to hostile, direct fire. In fact, while talking to a supply officer who was there, the only thing he offered was that there was occasional, indiscriminate sniper fire but couldn’t actually verify whether or not any rounds impacted their hill or compound. My definition of “subject to hostile direct fire,” as flawed as it may be, would be actually hearing the crack of the round past you or personally seeing the impacting of rounds.
S/F
rw