# Medals, again; the big one, this time



## Edward Campbell (21 Aug 2005)

Yet another guy with way too much time on his hands.

http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=ab099cb5-7894-4111-afa0-6cf1597df53c 


> Veteran wants 'truly Canadian' military medal
> Forces' top honour should be the Vimy Cross, not the British-themed Victoria Cross, ex-general says
> 
> Chris Lackner
> ...



A couple of points:

"¢	First, I know Pierre Senecal, have for about 35 years or more.   I do not know him all that well but well enough to stop for a brief chat when we meet somewhere or other.   He is something of an _Anglophobe_, perhaps part of a 'republican' _clique_ which was quite strong in the R22eR a few decades back - around 1970, when I first got to know Senecal.   I think most of that group were driven more by a distaste for _les mausdits anglais_ than for a unique Canadian nation.   I thought Senecal and many other R22eR officers of that generation were, primarily, Québecers; and

"¢	As the article notes, we have already been there and back - in the 1970s when the Cross of Valour, Star of Courage and Medal for Bravery were introduced.   The VC was reintroduced when a distinct set of military bravery awards were inaugurated in the '90s.


----------



## Mineguy (21 Aug 2005)

I was under the impression from reading the victoria cross part of the honours and awards page that the vc already has been resdesigned as cdn. "Pro patria" now replaces the current "for valour" in the british one.


----------



## KevinB (21 Aug 2005)

Pro Valoure IIRC

 That Gen is an idiot WE HAD that stupid "Cross of Valour" Trudeausism garbage, we all wanted the VC back, we got it back - no need to change medals like a sport team changes jersey colours and layout every few years....


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Aug 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Pro Valoure IIRC
> 
> That Gen is an idiot WE HAD that stupid "Cross of Valour" Trudeausism garbage, we all wanted the VC back, we got it back - no need to change medals like a sport team changes jersey colours and layout every few years....



What he said, but with a kick of dirt in the air and a goober on the ground.


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Aug 2005)

LurkingKuna said:
			
		

> I was under the impression from reading the victoria cross part of the honours and awards page that the vc already has been resdesigned as cdn. "Pro patria" now replaces the current "for valour" in the british one.



Just wishful thinking, Kevin B is right; the Canadian VC says Pro Valore (see: http://www.gg.ca/honours/mv_e.asp ) (At my age correct Latin matters.)

Pro Patria, of course, is used to distinguish Canada's First and Finest from the lesser lights in the army.   ;D


----------



## jmacleod (21 Aug 2005)

I read this incredible statement by Senecal this morning. The traditional Commonwealth Medals
for courage, bravery, steadfastness etc. were eliminated by the crowd around PM Lester Pearson
and their replacements have never acquired their luster and never will. The Distinguished Service
Cross awarded to RCNVR officers, friends oif my late father, meant something significant. The
Commonwealth decorations were eliminated in my opinion to placate Quebec, a major error in
judgement which was evident in the Royal 22nd Regiment Museum, Quebec City, when a Heritage
Canada guide described Major Paul Triquet's VC as "a foreign medal" to a group of visiting US
university students. Canada Post to their great credit designed and issued a set of postage stamps
commemorating the Victoria Cross, and illustrated both the traditional Commonwealth VC and the
Canadian design - similar of course, but slightly different in concept. Canada would be a better place
if our traditional links with the Commonwealth were focused and upgraded, and the traditions of
our links with the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth re-introduced into the Canadian mainstream.
MacLeod


----------



## KevinB (21 Aug 2005)

I was tired I should have rethought the U.  Thx Ed.

 Macleod seeing how somethings get treated in Quebec these days any Canadian medal might be considered foreign...


----------



## Chimo (21 Aug 2005)

"Canada should abandon the Victoria Cross and create its own elite military award, according to one retired general.

The medal is needed now that the last living recipient of the Victoria Cross -- Ernest "Smokey" Smith -- has passed away, says Pierre Senecal, a retired brigadier-general from Ottawa. 

And he knows just what the top Canadian decoration of valour should be called: The Vimy Cross, in honour of the 1917 Battle of Vimy Ridge in which nearly 4,000 Canadians lost their lives."


http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=ab099cb5-7894-4111-afa0-6cf1597df53c

Frankly, I see nothing wrong with our present systems of Orders, Medals and Decorations. But, hey, I'm just one guy....what do you think?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (21 Aug 2005)

I agree....medals like the Victoria Cross and Medal of Honour hold their own levels of mystique and a level of awe and respect that the Vimy Cross or whatever its called does not. Leave things as is.


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Aug 2005)

jmacleod said:
			
		

> I read this incredible statement by Senecal this morning. The traditional Commonwealth Medals
> for courage, bravery, steadfastness etc. were eliminated by the crowd around PM Lester Pearson ...
> 
> MacLeod



Nonsense.

That puffed up, pretentious, petty little provincial poltroon Pierre Trudeau committed that act of nationalist vandalism.

He used our British connections and traditions to play Québec politics.

He was a man of poor character with too much money and the trappings of a good education which too much money too often buys. But he was an intellectual featherweight â â€œ swimming only in the backwaters of the shallow Québecois stream.  He had nothing but charisma; sadly most Canadians mistook and still mistake that for ability and brains.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Aug 2005)

Kudos Edward


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Aug 2005)

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> Nonsense.
> 
> That puffed up, pretentious, petty little provincial poltroon Pierre Trudeau committed that act of nationalist vandalism.
> 
> ...



Hear Hear Edward.

Well said.  

Chris.


----------



## jmacleod (21 Aug 2005)

No Edward. It was Pearson, detested by real Liberals like my father, who, along with the Canadian
Legion, never forgave Pearson for elminating what I have heard World War II veteran soldiers
call the "Jack" - the Union Jack ensign, part of our Canadian Heritage - Pearson was considered
a fool by both the British and U.S. government's of the period. He insisted on being called "Mike"
because he did'nt like the name Lester, which was very important when dealing with him. In
any event, it is past history - we are talking about a change in our traditional highest award for
valor in the Canadian Forces. No government, no matter who the PM is, will change that, and
when you think about the committment to place the Canadian military in harms way, it could
be awarded for valor, again. MacLeod


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Aug 2005)

The medals fiasco took place in the early '70s, during Trudeau's much lamented mandate.  Pearson was long gone.

Trudeau was a political vandal; the worst prime minister in Canadian history and a sub-standard human being to boot.


----------



## EW (21 Aug 2005)

jmacleod said:
			
		

> "Pearson was considered a fool by both the British and U.S. government's of the period."
> 
> "No government, no matter who the PM is, will change that ...."



Correct me if I'm wrong, but the government already changed the VC in Canada when it left it out of the new 'all Canadian' honours systems in the 70's and then brought it back in the 90's as the 'Canadian VC.'  As for Pearson being considered a fool by the UK and US govt's.  I would expect that any Canadian PM who dares to exercise Canadian sovereignty that is at odds with the UK and US to be belittled by the UK and US leadership.   Since when do we judge Canadian PM's by what the UK and US think.

Nothing against the Union Jack, I'm proud that my great-grandfather and grandfather's served under it in WWI and II, but it was time for change.  As for the Canadian VC, why bother to change it now.  Although if it ever does change, I don't necessarily think naming it after Vimy Ridge is a bad idea.  The Crimean War happened before Canada even existed as a country (pre-1867).


----------



## Old Sweat (21 Aug 2005)

EW

Believe me, it was not only Brits and Americans who thought Pearson was a lightweight; a lot of Canadians shared that opinion. He was accident prone, he could not keep control of his cabinet and his government was plagued by scandals. 

As for the Crimean War reference, I consider that may be immaterial, although you are certainly entitled to express your feelings. My reason for disagreeing is that some Canadians had been awarded the VC before Confederation.

Edward Campbell put it best when he stated Pierre Senecal had too much time on his hands. After that statement, EC really got on a roll and I would gladly join him, except that we are probably flogging a dead horse.


----------



## KevinB (21 Aug 2005)

Why Vimy?

Sorry EW - the VC may have come out of the Serbastopol cannons - but is named for Queen Vic, not a set piece in time.

 Im not the worlds most vocal monarchist - but I cant see ANY rationale to change.


On dim wit PM's - I dont care if they think (other nations) our PM is an asshole, but I detest them thinking/knowing that our PM's are dullwitted or incompetant


----------



## Infanteer (21 Aug 2005)

Ah Vimy, the battle that no history books seem to talk about except ours....


----------



## jmacleod (21 Aug 2005)

The traditional position in the Canadian military of the highest award for valor of the Victoria Cross
will not change - and a debate prompted by BGen Senecal's remarks is not really appropriate,that in
particular, despite many years of neglect, it appears that national defence and security is becoming
a major part of the Federal governments new policies in support of the Canadian Forces. It is
expected that this will be focused in Regina at the Government's policy conference, where some
of the plans outlined by the MND and CDS will be honed, and certain priorities confirmed. Do not know
what these are specifically, but the fact that several senior CF officers are making significant statements
means that the CDS in particular has the tacit approval of the PM - which is frankly, a surprise, because
this gpvernment is not considered user friendly to the military - we shall see how it plays out. MacLeod


----------



## redleafjumper (22 Aug 2005)

It is appalling that anyone would suggest replacing the VC with anything else when the last Canadian holder of a VC (Smokey Smith) is
recently deceased.  The whole system of honours and awards, medals and decorations is to reward based on heritage and tradition.  
The VC is a major part of Canadian history and one day some enemy somewhere somehow will put a Canadian into a position
where he or she is forced to earn one again.  A Vimy Cross?   : No thanks.  The VC, even a Canadianized version made from the same Cannon of the Crimea as the original VCs, is much better and entirely appropriate as the first Canadian recipient of a VC was Lt. Alexander Dunn who won  his VC in the Charge of the Light Brigade in the Crimean War.  This thread is well-named as the VC truly is "the big one."


----------



## Spr.Earl (22 Aug 2005)

I'm sick and tired of our history being not taught in school,our Military being neglected now we have some shit pump trying to change our Highest Honour,hey we let the Gov. change the Valour to Valoure or what ever.
I came to this Country as a kid of 12 and loved the traditions like Dominion Day,Oh whats that you say?Yup Pierre Le Fluff changed it along with many like all one Uniform,Oh who was that.Oh yeh Paul Hillier.

This is no longer the Canada I knew and loved.
I feell sorry for you youngn's.
Step up and speak out and object!!


----------



## Bill Smy (22 Aug 2005)

I was once told that when the Government set out to establish a Canadian honours system, in the formal documentation listing which British honours were to be replaced, the Victoria Cross was inadvertently left off the submission to the Queen. Howerver, during all the PR of the day, this was overlooked.  

Most Canadians meekly accepted the changes as irreversable, but a small group of die-hards kept up the fight. Then in the early 1990s the oversight was discovered. At that point the Government was too embarrassed to go back to the Queen and have the VC retroactively formally stricken from the Canadian honours list. Solution? By God, the motto was not bilingual --so instead of awarding the historic medal, we'll Canadianize it with a Latin version of "For Valour"!

As I said, this was told to me second-hand, so I can't authenticate the story, other than to note there must be some truth in it, or why would the VC be reinstated some 30 years?

It's going to be interesting in seeing who, in our political correct world, is awarded the first "Canadian VC". After this Governor General appointment, need I say more?

In theory, I suppose, a Canadian could still receive the British VC. He/she could be serving in a British formation, and the recommendation would go up the British chain-of-command, but of course the approval of the Canadian Government would be required (after Lord Black, don't hold your breath).

Canadians serving with the British are routinely awarded British decorations, and the awards are published in the Canada Gazette.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Aug 2005)

Bill Smy said:
			
		

> By God, the motto was not bilingual --so instead of awarding the historic medal, we'll Canadianize it with a Latin version of "For Valour"!



We have so many people in this country that speak English as a second language (or not at all) that it made a great deal of sense to have the motto changed. You disagree?



> It's going to be interesting in seeing who, in our political correct world, is awarded the first "Canadian VC". After this Governor General appointment, need I say more?



Not clear what you're saying - are you suggesting that racial minorities are receiving favoured treatment - and that field commanders would base award decorations on the colour of someone's skin (or gender)?  



> In theory, I suppose, a Canadian could still receive the British VC. He/she could be serving in a British formation, and the recommendation would go up the British chain-of-command, but of course the approval of the Canadian Government would be required (after Lord Black, don't hold your breath).



Apples and oranges.  The Canadian prohibition on accepting knighthood go back to the 1920s or thereabouts.  There is no similar restriction on foreign awards.  Interesting to note that the Canadian members of the First Special Service Force just received their Combat Infantryman's Badges last weekend.  In 1944-45 when they were earning them, the US government had decreed that only US nationals were eligible.

I see nothing wrong with making national awards exclusive - and certainly a "Canadianized" VC is part of that trend.  I'm glad we kept it, and glad we made the wording representative of both official languages.

I think we erred in changing the ribbons for the "new" medals - the Star of Courage, Medal of Bravery, etc.  Might have been nice to tie them to the "old" decorations by keeping the ribbons - however, the new medals are not restricted to certain ranks the way the old ones were (MM and DCM only for NCMs, MC particularly odd in that it could go to warrant officers as well as officers, but no one ranked sergeant or below, DSO only for officers, etc.)  

So really, the "old" medals were not replaced just because they were "British" but because they discriminated according to rank.  Brings us more into line with US medals, which are also non-discriminatory.  Seems to fit better to our Army anyway, which was always better at avoiding class distinctions.


----------



## Bill Smy (22 Aug 2005)

We have so many people in this country that speak English as a second language (or not at all) that it made a great deal of sense to have the motto changed. You disagree?

How many speak Latin?

I see nothing wrong with making national awards exclusive - and certainly a "Canadianized" VC is part of that trend.   I'm glad we kept it, and glad we made the wording representative of both official languages.

I am not against a Canadian honours system, but why call it the Victoria Cross? If we have to keep the British designation for our highest award, why not keep DSO, MC, DCM, etc?

I think we erred in changing the ribbons for the "new" medals - the Star of Courage, Medal of Bravery, etc.   Might have been nice to tie them to the "old" decorations by keeping the ribbons - however, the new medals are not restricted to certain ranks the way the old ones were (MM and DCM only for NCMs, MC particularly odd in that it could go to warrant officers as well as officers, but no one ranked sergeant or below, DSO only for officers, etc.)   

So really, the "old" medals were not replaced just because they were "British" but because they discriminated according to rank.

The reason some British medals were restricted to rank was not so much class distinction but the level of responsibility associated with the act of heroism.

The same argument applies to our current Orders. A CMM award recognizes not only merit, but the level of responsibility associated with the merit, which is different than that of an OMM or MMM.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Aug 2005)

Bill Smy said:
			
		

> We have so many people in this country that speak English as a second language (or not at all) that it made a great deal of sense to have the motto changed. You disagree?
> 
> How many speak Latin?



Outside the Dungeons and Dragons club, probably no one.   Exactly why it is a suitable choice.   Look at US currency, for example - I don't know what E Pluribus Unum means. 



> I see nothing wrong with making national awards exclusive - and certainly a "Canadianized" VC is part of that trend.   I'm glad we kept it, and glad we made the wording representative of both official languages.
> 
> I am not against a Canadian honours system, but why call it the Victoria Cross? If we have to keep the British designation for our highest award, why not keep DSO, MC, DCM, etc?



They are discriminatory and don't correlate directly with the new honours system.



> I think we erred in changing the ribbons for the "new" medals - the Star of Courage, Medal of Bravery, etc.   Might have been nice to tie them to the "old" decorations by keeping the ribbons - however, the new medals are not restricted to certain ranks the way the old ones were (MM and DCM only for NCMs, MC particularly odd in that it could go to warrant officers as well as officers, but no one ranked sergeant or below, DSO only for officers, etc.)
> 
> So really, the "old" medals were not replaced just because they were "British" but because they discriminated according to rank.
> 
> ...



Right, so under the old system you got a DSO only to battalion commanders and the occasional company commander and then the BEM to warrant officers and nothing for meritorious Other Ranks.   Now we have the Order of Military Merit.   The new system neatly captures the two streams of recognition - merit, and bravery.   Merit should be tied to rank and responsibility; physical courage not so much.  Smokey Smith was a private and Cec Merritt was a Lieutenant Colonel, both performed comparable acts of bravery.  John Foote only held honourary rank, as a captain, and was recognized with the VC not for killing people (though he did lay down cover fire with a Bren Gun) but for volunteering to spend the rest of the war in captivity.  All worthy VCs.

My only concern with the bravery awards is that IIRC they're (or at least the MB, not sure about the CV or SC) not awarded solely for combat or "military" bravery; if we ever do get involved in another war we might want to distinguish somehow between combat awards (charging a machinegun) with non-combat awards (pulling an injured person from a burning building).

Other than that, I'd say the system of honours has been streamlined for the better.  I also didn't like that the old awards couldn't be awarded posthumously; had Smokey been killed and the VC turned down, all he qualified for was a Mention in Despatches - MM and DCM weren't given posthumously.


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Aug 2005)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Outside the Dungeons and Dragons club, probably no one.   Exactly why it is a suitable choice.   Look at US currency, for example - I don't know what E Pluribus Unum means.



From many: one.


----------



## Danjanou (22 Aug 2005)

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> From many: one.



Funny Edward, never pictured you as a D&D type. 8) Maybe LOTR, you do look a bit like Gandolf.

Seriously I'm with the majority here, some things just should just not be changed and this is one of them. I'm also a bit disappointed by the timing of this "debate" with Sgt Smith VC barely in his grave (and yeah I know he was cremated and his ashes scattered at sea, but you get my drift). I'd expect better from a fellow soldier General Senecal, sir.

Also bang on with your take on PET mon Colonel.


----------



## baboon6 (22 Aug 2005)

Australia has also introduced its own awards system but also retained the VC. The British medals have changed too. There are still separate medals for each service/environment eg. Military Cross, Distinguished Flying Cross, but now everyone is eligible for them, the old MM/DFM/DSM have been eliminated. The exception is the DSO, still only for officers, but now only for performance in command, not a "near-miss" for a VC as it sometimes was. A new medal, the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross, has been introduced to replace the DCM/CGM and in some circumstances the DSO.


----------



## Kirkhill (22 Aug 2005)

Used to be that lack of Latin was no laughing matter.      Oh how the world has failed me - and my Latin teacher.    I have a sudden urge to decline. 

Cheers.

By the way, generally speaking, I was under the impression that Medals went to ORs, Crosses went to Officers with the signal exception of the Victoria Cross and that Stars were things worn by foreigners and Aristocrats in tights.

I don't know that I disagree with the Canadianizing of the Honours system, Brit-Canadian that I am, I just wish that they could have come up with more compelling, less bureaucratic titles.   Something that tied in to a historic sense - not something that had a Brave New World Year Zero miasma surrounding it.   The Order of Canada actually appeals to me.   The Order of Military Merit does not.   Call me peculiar.

By the way I also think that those invested in the Order of Canada might be awarded an Honourific to attach to their name so that they are recognized for their service in common parlance - Something like, oh I don't know - Sir/Sieur, Dame/Dame?

Sir Farley Mowatt?   Dame Karen Cain?   etc....


----------



## KevinB (22 Aug 2005)

I'm a 'little' disappointed the Order or Canada and other orders (for playing a good game of hockey, writing a good book) are higher on the scale than the MB etc.

 I for one think the troop that entered a minefield to retrive a injured civilian put a little bit more on the line than 'The Great One'.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Aug 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> I'm a 'little' disappointed the Order or Canada and other orders (for playing a good game of hockey, writing a good book) are higher on the scale than the MB etc.
> 
> I for one think the troop that entered a minefield to retrive a injured civilian put a little bit more on the line than 'The Great One'.



How many people's lives did The Great One benefit, though?  Granted the level of personal sacrifice doesn't even compare, but I suppose the cold-blooded analysis would yield that the injured civilian was one person, while Gretzky, Eagelson (before being stripped), et al affected millions of people.

Not sure what you mean by lower down the scale though. I know who you respect more, and I know whom I respect more (not the guy who runs a union for spoiled millionaire hockey players).  Only real difference is the order in which you wear the ribbons.  The guys who went out into the minefield didnt' even get a payraise. *shrugs*


----------



## Haggis (22 Aug 2005)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> My only concern with the bravery awards is that IIRC they're (or at least the MB, not sure about the CV or SC) not awarded solely for combat or "military" bravery; if we ever do get involved in another war we might want to distinguish somehow between combat awards (charging a machinegun) with non-combat awards (pulling an injured person from a burning building).



Don't forget the other Canadian military valour awards, the Star and Medal of Military Valour:
 (from www.gg.ca/honours/mv_e.asp)

*Star of Military Valour* (SMV)
awarded for distinguished and valiant service in the presence of the enemy 

*Medal of Military Valour* (MMV)
awarded for an act of valour or devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy

Both are junior to the VC.  The SMV is senior to the SC and the MMV is senior to the MB.  Both, as noted, are earned "in the presence of the enemy".  The other valour decoration is the Cross of Valour"awarded for acts of the most conspicuous courage in circumstances of extreme peril". It is junior to only the VC in that it isn't neccesarry to earn the CV "in the presence of the enemy".

Hope this helps.


----------



## KevinB (22 Aug 2005)

I thought those had been withdrawn withthe re-intro fo the VC and the SC - MB


----------



## Haggis (23 Aug 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> I thought those had been withdrawn withthe re-intro fo the VC and the SC - MB



They're still there.  The difference being that the SMV and MMV can *only* be won for acts of valour in the presence of the enemy.  You can still win the CV, SC or MB in an operational theatre for acts that occur "out of contact".  Since inception no SMV or MMV have been awarded publicly.

19 CV have been awarded, the last one in 1998.  398 SC and 2177 MB have been awarded to date.


----------



## combat_medic (23 Aug 2005)

Michael: Si hoc legere scis, nimium eruditionis habes


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Aug 2005)

Haggis said:
			
		

> They're still there.   The difference being that the SMV and MMV can *only* be won for acts of valour in the presence of the enemy.   You can still win the CV, SC or MB in an operational theatre for acts that occur "out of contact".   *Since inception no SMV or MMV have been awarded publicly.*



Pardon?


----------



## combat_medic (23 Aug 2005)

Whiskey: The Directorate of History and Heritage site states that neither the SMV or MMV have ever been awarded.

http://www.dnd.ca/hr/dhh/honours_awards/engraph/med1_e.asp?cat=3

It is possible, however, that members of the JTF or others have received the award for conspicuous bravery, but regarding events that are not public knowledge, or remain classified. Unlikely, but possible.


----------



## jranrose (23 Aug 2005)

Here are my thoughts.
I like the idea and the title it has a nice ring. Unfortunately it is 30 years too late. There is no need to replace the Victoria Cross (VC). The VC is a world-renowned medal. Everyone knows what it is and what it stands for. If this were to be taken seriously, I would focus more on the Cross of Valour (CV). The title "Cross of Valour" is a little inaccurate. The CV is a bravery decoration NOT a valour decoration. Valour decorations includes Victoria Cross (VC), Star of Military Valour (SMV) and Medal of Military Valour (MMV). The Bravery decorations include Cross of Valour (CV), Star of Courage (SC) and Medal of Bravery (MB). But why stop there? Currently there are 6 awards for Valour and Bravery. I believe it should be more streamlined with changing the wording and get rid of the SMV and MMV. To look more like this.

Victoria Cross
awarded for the most conspicuous bravery, a daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty, in the presence of the enemy 

Cross of Valour/ Vimy Cross
awarded for acts of the most conspicuous Gallantry in circumstances of extreme peril and or distinguished and valiant service

Star of Courage
awarded for acts of conspicuous courage in circumstances of great peril

Medal of Bravery
awarded for acts of bravery in hazardous circumstances or devotion to duty

I understand there are different levels of heroism (pulling someone out of a burning building as opposed to Armed conflict). But all awards should be for all Canadians regardless if they are civvies or military (Except VC), because civilians can be involved in armed conflict on behalf of Canadian interests. This creates progressive stages to include Bravery (MB), Courage (SC), Gallantry (CV) and Valour (VC). This makes the lines a little clearer for awarding decorations.

Also looking at the Meritorious Service Cross (MSC) and Medal (MSM). Both awards are almost the same. The MSC being a rare high standard and the MSM being very high standard. I think there should be an added "Leadership" clause to the MSC. There is a small gap missing for "Leadership". Similar to the British Distinguished Service Order (DSO) or by adding a separate award for the shortcoming.

These are my personal opinions. Your thoughts are welcome.


----------



## Haggis (23 Aug 2005)

combat_medic said:
			
		

> It is possible, however, that members of the JTF or others have received the award for conspicuous bravery, but regarding events that are not public knowledge, or remain classified. Unlikely, but possible.



Why I said what I said the way I said it.  Hey, you never know....


----------



## Armymedic (24 Aug 2005)

This debate would end once a SMV or a MMV are awarded. IMHO, what we currently have is good, it just hasn't be used.

but that seems unlikely unless something bad happens...



> *Eligibility*
> For all three Military Valour Decoration, recipients must be a member of the Canadian Forces or a member of an allied armed force that is serving with or in conjunction with the Canadian Forces, on or after January 1, 1993. Military Valour Decorations can be awarded posthumously.
> 
> A person must be recommended by the Military Valour Decoration Advisory Committee. This committee is made up of one person appointed by the Governor General, and five CF members appointed by the Chief of Defence Staff. Field commanders can also grant Military Valour Decorations, but they must first have the Governor General's approval.



http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/cmdp/mainmenu/group02/smv


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (24 Aug 2005)

Couldn't resist:

I agree with Armymedic.  Nothing about the current system is broken, so why fix it?  The "Vimy Cross" idea smacks of historical revisionism at best and an anti-British attitude at worst.

There is a shiny new pamphlet issued by DHH (I have it in front of me now) that explains why the "military valour" medals have yet to be issued (page 11).  I'll quote the section in full:



> The three Military Valour Decorations (MVDs) (Victoria Cross, Star of Military Valour and
> Medal of Military Valour) were created on 1 January 1993 to recognize acts of valour, selfsacrifice
> or devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy. They can be awarded in situations
> short of war if the troops are in "combat" with an organized, armed "enemy" that is recognized
> ...



Makes sense to me....  As for "replacing" the VC with a politically-motivated, pseudo-historical "Canadian" decoration, no thanks...


----------



## reccecrewman (2 Sep 2005)

My own personal thought is the VC is steeped with tradition and our country has a long and distinguished list of winners of this most hallowed and prestigious award.  To create a new top valour award now.................... Well, how many people would have the respect for it that they carry for the VC?  Look how well received the Cross of Valour was.......... Leave our order of decorations as is.


----------



## jmacleod (2 Sep 2005)

Canada Post issued a Victoria Cross commerative stamp, which is an excellent representation of
the famous medal - the same series, illustrates a "Canadian Version of the Victoria Cross" a design
very similar to the traditional Victoria Cross, but slighty modified. None have been cast, according
to Canada Post, and of course, goes without saying, none have been issued. Each sheet contains
twenty stamps, featuring both designs. The centre section lists all Canadian VC's from the Crimeia
War, the Indian Mutiny, the Andaman Islands Expedition, the South African War, the First and
Second World War - details available from Canada Post - urged them to issue the stamps once 
per year, near November 11th. It would not be in our National interest to eliminate the VC.
MacLeod


----------



## Jungle (2 Sep 2005)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> There is a shiny new pamphlet issued by DHH (I have it in front of me now) that explains why the "military valour" medals have yet to be issued (page 11).   I'll quote the section in full:


I agree with the quote included in Teddy Ruxpin's post; however, in my opinion, in the last 12 years our Soldiers have performed acts which are more deserving than the handful of awards actually distributed. I am not advocating a free-for-all distribution of awards, but I think we may be a bit too conservative.


----------

