Changes to service medals announced

[Eye In The Sky]

Except it's not so clean as you present it.  I'm Air DEU, but spent 7 month in Kandahar with D Bty 2 RCHA driving Bison, and doing 'army", "combat arms" things alongside gunners. Right beside us were Comms Research, Vehicle Techs, Med Techs, etc. We all got the same gold star for attendance.

Air DEU but purple trade so maybe not the best example.  What Brihard said is very true for Air Ops types;  AERE Os, AVS/AVN/ACS/AWS folks all stay back at HOMEPLATE.  They don't go off on the mission like you would did with the guns, and if you were deployed to IMPACT you wouldn't have flown with the fighter, LRP or AAR folks on their missions.

Like D&B said, we should award medals by theatre.

We do already.  Examples:

General Campaign Star - SOUTH-WEST ASIA (GCS-SWA)

in the theatre of operations consisting of the political boundaries of Afghanistan, the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, the Suez Canal, and those parts of the Indian Ocean and the Arabian Sea that are west of sixty-eight degrees East longitude and north of five degrees South latitude, as well as the airspace above those areas

General Campaign Star - EXPEDITION (GCS-EXP)

- within the political boundaries and airspace of Iraq; and/or
- within the political boundaries of Syria, its airspace and territorial waters

Operational Service Medal – Sierra Leone (OSM-SL)

The OSM with SIERRA LEONE ribbon is awarded for 30 cumulative days of service in Sierra Leone...Primarily intended for CAF members who served with the British-led International Military Advisory and Training Team (IMATT) following the Lome Peace Agreement (Op SCULPTURE).

Pretending your service is more important, more dangerous, etc. is just ego fluffing most times.

Some trades in the CAF ARE more dangerous than others;  some deployments are more dangerous than others.  It has nothing to do with ego fluffing;  a cook doesn't face the same dangers as a SAR Tech or a Clearance Diver daily here in Canada.  Some deployed areas are more dangerous than others, and that's got nothing to do with MOSID specifically.

Nothing to do with ego, lots to do with 'reality and facts'.

I do find it amusing when an Army DEU guy looks down on my "KAF" time because I wear a blue suit though...

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Just give everyone the same bloody medal and be done with it.  "You helped fight ISIS? Here is a campaign medal"

WW2 and Korean Veterans don't sit around whinging about who did what and their entitlement to wear a specific campaign medal.  It's ridiculous and petty.

I'll  make it simple for yah:

West Asia Campaign Star.  Covers all ops within  the Levant and Surrounding regions. Everyone who served their gets one and we can take this thread and do the proper thing and bury it.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Just give everyone the same bloody medal and be done with it.  "You helped fight ISIS? Here is a campaign medal"

See, now I remember exactly that happening with Afghanistan and the opposite arguments happening during that one;  people who deployed and never left KAF getting the GCS and those who lived outside the wire being pissed about it...the people who went outside the wire even called them KAFfers, remember?

For the record, I'm not advocating one way or the other for personal reasons; this change in time requirements, etc benefits me in no way at all.  But, I know some folks who put their meat on the line, 28 or 29 times in some cases, and will now be able to put the same Star up as their sqn mates.  And I think that is 'right'; they went into the same area to do the same job, assuming the same risks.  28 times, 30 times...what's the difference, really? 

 

[daftandbarmy]

You mean the lessons learned guy who spent just enough time in KAF to qualify, then developed a compassionate reason to go home?

:rofl:

It's only sad/ funny because it's true.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

See, now I remember exactly that happening with Afghanistan and the opposite arguments happening during that one;  people who deployed and never left KAF getting the GCS and those who lived outside the wire being pissed about it...the people who went outside the wire even called them KAFfers, remember?

For the record, I'm not advocating one way or the other for personal reasons; this change in time requirements, etc benefits me in no way at all.  But, I know some folks who put their meat on the line, 28 or 29 times in some cases, and will now be able to put the same Star up as their sqn mates.  And I think that is 'right'; they went into the same area to do the same job, assuming the same risks.  28 times, 30 times...what's the difference, really?

I'm in violent agreement with you. The semantics of this are just plain stupid and annoying.  Imagine if one of your pals got shot down on their first flight and was put in to a cage and burned to a crisp.... would we be arguing about whether they should receive their campaign star or not?

This is the stupidity we find ourselves in today. 

 

[Halifax Tar]

See, now I remember exactly that happening with Afghanistan and the opposite arguments happening during that one;  people who deployed and never left KAF getting the GCS and those who lived outside the wire being pissed about it...the people who went outside the wire even called them KAFfers, remember?

For the record, I'm not advocating one way or the other for personal reasons; this change in time requirements, etc benefits me in no way at all.  But, I know some folks who put their meat on the line, 28 or 29 times in some cases, and will now be able to put the same Star up as their sqn mates.  And I think that is 'right'; they went into the same area to do the same job, assuming the same risks.  28 times, 30 times...what's the difference, really?

I dont think KAF is greatest example.  It was actually shelled hundreds if not thousands of times and it did produce casualties.  While not the Talibs brightest move they also tried to breach the walls numerous time. 

This as well:

So here we see the difference between the Air Force and the Infantry: I'd much rather be closer to the 'Red Force Enemy', at the tip of the spear, than the 'Blue Force Enemy', that lurks in the rear areas of any operational deployment.

We should therefore probably issue the more coveted medals to those serving closer to the 'rock painting/ gate guarding/ VIP visit management platoon' lines

I uesd to hear the troops bitch all the time about the KAFers while at the PDC.  Funny though none of those bitching actually wanted anything to do with being employed there when I would chat with them.  KAF sucked.  Most would claw and fight tooth and nail to sent to a FOB or DC.

 

[brihard]

Except it's not so clean as you present it.  I'm Air DEU, but spent 7 month in Kandahar with D Bty 2 RCHA driving Bison, and doing 'army", "combat arms" things alongside gunners. Right beside us were Comms Research, Vehicle Techs, Med Techs, etc. We all got the same gold star for attendance.

Like D&B said, we should award medals by theatre. Pretending your service is more important, more dangerous, etc. is just ego fluffing most times.

I do find it amusing when an Army DEU guy looks down on my "KAF" time because I wear a blue suit though...

Sorry, I should have made it clear that I was not talking DEU broadly, but rather the difference between, a ship at sea, versus a deployed RCAF unit/det where aircraft are based in one (usually safer) country, with the aircrew alone being exposed to much greater risk. I was making a comparison about how each element goes into the fight; that’s all. I apologize if my lack of clarity caused any offense.

As a newly-minted MCpl on tour, one of my first tasks was to take a section or guys, and clean the transit coffins and set up a viewing at KAF for three of our members who had been killed by an IED. One of the berets I laid out was blue. I assure you I’m the last guy who will scorn genuinely scorn someone for being in a different element.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I dont think KAF is greatest example.  It was actually shelled hundreds if not thousands of times and it did produce casualties.  While not the Talibs brightest move they also tried to breach the walls numerous time. 

Then, it's a great example to demonstrate why Kuwait locations are GSM-assessed ones, and inside Iraq is assessed as a GCS area then. 

 

[Furniture]

Some trades in the CAF ARE more dangerous than others;  some deployments are more dangerous than others.  It has nothing to do with ego fluffing;  a cook doesn't face the same dangers as a SAR Tech or a Clearance Diver daily here in Canada.  Some deployed areas are more dangerous than others, and that's got nothing to do with MOSID specifically.

Nothing to do with ego, lots to do with 'reality and facts'.

Semantics, but some jobs are more dangerous, not trades.

Flying over Syria, dangerous. Sitting at a desk in Ottawa, not so much.

Driving a Bison to Spin Boldak, dangerous. Writing an inspection report in Ottawa, not so much.

Same trades, different jobs.

Is it fair to say that a SAR Tech will have more dangerous jobs more often than a cook? Yes. That's why they make more money.

I firmly believe that campaign medals should be awarded for the theatre, and the hardship/risk allowances should be where the differences exist. We should drop the GSM, and issue GCS for anyone deployed to SW Asia/Expedition. Give the GSM to the people outside theatre who support the mission, people in Germany, Trenton, Halifax etc.

In fairness 13 years ago I would have disagreed with my current position, then again I was 24, and much like Jon Snow.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Semantics, but some jobs are more dangerous, not trades.

Same trades, different jobs.

Fair point...

Give the GSM to the people outside theatre who support the mission, people in Germany, Trenton, Halifax etc.

The GSM is given to people outside the theatre who support the mission;  the folks in Kuwait being among them.  Iraq/Syria is the theatre. Kuwait is not.  Remember folks who received the GSM-SWA for that 'place that did not exist' close to Afghanistan?  Not in theatre...GSM awarded.  So those folks in the place that starts with M should have gotten the GCS/the whole area should be deemed "in theatre"?  Why?  As mentioned, the criteria for a GCS is "...deploy into a defined theatre of operations to take part in operations in the presence of an armed enemy".  That (armed enemy) doesn't exist in Kuwait;  that does exist in Iraq.  The 'presence of an armed enemy' is crucial difference. 

Re: yellow text...that is really watering down the value of a medal. 

PS - There are people who are deployed to the UK ISO IMPACT who receive the SSM-Exp...so...there's that too.  I don't see anyone arguing they should be getting the GSC or GSM... op:

 

[Furniture]

Fair point...

The GSM is given to people outside the theatre who support the mission;  the folks in Kuwait being among them.  Iraq/Syria is the theatre. Kuwait is not.  Remember folks who received the GSM-SWA for that 'place that did not exist' close to Afghanistan?  Not in theatre...GSM awarded.  So those folks in the place that starts with M should have gotten the GCS/the whole area should be deemed "in theatre"?  Why?  As mentioned, the criteria for a GCS is "...deploy into a defined theatre of operations to take part in operations in the presence of an armed enemy".  That (armed enemy) doesn't exist in Kuwait;  that does exist in Iraq.  The 'presence of an armed enemy' is crucial difference. 

Re: yellow text...that is really watering down the value of a medal. 

PS - There are people who are deployed to the UK ISO IMPACT who receive the SSM-Exp...so...there's that too.  I don't see anyone arguing they should be getting the GSC or GSM... op:

I understand how we award medals, I just don't agree that it is wise, or representative of anything. My biggest issue comes from how we delineate "theatre". In WWII being in Europe was enough to get you the star, they didn't differentiate between who was "in the presence of an armed enemy"  and who wasn't. I think the GSC/GSM, and "theatre" definitions were created with the best of intentions, but have turned into a game of who's service was more "important".

Let's be honest, nobody would be fighting to get what they consider a "lesser" medal. So any argument about who deserves a gold star for attendance vs. a medallion for attendance comes down to wanting to be more special. I think what we often forget is that the campaign medals are attendance medals. Show up, don't get sent home for not following the rules, and you get a shiny bit of flair for your DEUs.

Danger isn't the criteria for medals, service is.   

I have been in more danger during my service with the CAF far more often outside a "deployment",  than at any time during my time in Kandahar. We didn't get medals for fighting a fire 300 miles off the coast of Hawaii, without power, and in poor weather. Similarly there was no medal when I was measuring the amount of liquid precipitation(standing ankle deep in water, in a fenced compound) in the middle of a severe thunderstorm with continuous lightning when posted to Cold Lake. Lastly there was no medal for doing pressure comparisons in the AWOS compound in Alert while the station was in a Polar Bear lockdown. Each of those situations was far more likely to be fatal for me individually than showing up in a "theatre".

 

[daftandbarmy]

Danger isn't the criteria for medals, service is.   

Exactly.

Except for decorations for the various levels of valour, I agree.

 

[eliminator]

Did the existing GCS/GSM-SWA not cover the territory of the Op IMPACT AOR? Why award the "EXP" versions of medals when there already were medals in the system? Perhaps they felt the need to separate the recognition from the Afghanistan efforts? Originally the GCS-EXP was awarded to those Canadians that served in Iraq with the Americans...

 

[Sub_Guy]

Did the existing GCS/GSM-SWA not cover the territory of the Op IMPACT AOR? Why award the "EXP" versions of medals when there already were medals in the system? Perhaps they felt the need to separate the recognition from the Afghanistan efforts? Originally the GCS-EXP was awarded to those Canadians that served in Iraq with the Americans...

I still feel they are misusing the GCS/GSM-EXP by issuing it for Op Impact.

"This ribbon was created to provide a flexible form of recognition for those missions conducted in the presence of an armed enemy which size or scope does not justify the creation of a separate ribbon"

What defines "size or scope"?

Op Impact has been going on since 2014.  Yes I know it is not as "big" as the Afghanistan missions were...

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I understand how we award medals, I just don't agree that it is wise, or representative of anything. My biggest issue comes from how we delineate "theatre". In WWII being in Europe was enough to get you the star, they didn't differentiate between who was "in the presence of an armed enemy"  and who wasn't. I think the GSC/GSM, and "theatre" definitions were created with the best of intentions, but have turned into a game of who's service was more "important".

Let's be honest, nobody would be fighting to get what they consider a "lesser" medal. So any argument about who deserves a gold star for attendance vs. a medallion for attendance comes down to wanting to be more special. I think what we often forget is that the campaign medals are attendance medals. Show up, don't get sent home for not following the rules, and you get a shiny bit of flair for your DEUs.

Danger isn't the criteria for medals, service is.   

I have been in more danger during my service with the CAF far more often outside a "deployment",  than at any time during my time in Kandahar. We didn't get medals for fighting a fire 300 miles off the coast of Hawaii, without power, and in poor weather. Similarly there was no medal when I was measuring the amount of liquid precipitation(standing ankle deep in water, in a fenced compound) in the middle of a severe thunderstorm with continuous lightning when posted to Cold Lake. Lastly there was no medal for doing pressure comparisons in the AWOS compound in Alert while the station was in a Polar Bear lockdown. Each of those situations was far more likely to be fatal for me individually than showing up in a "theatre".

Come on,  that whole PROTECTEUR fire thing was just a big, uncomfortable camping trip at sea....

 

[brihard]

I still feel they are misusing the GCS/GSM-EXP by issuing it for Op Impact.

"This ribbon was created to provide a flexible form of recognition for those missions conducted in the presence of an armed enemy which size or scope does not justify the creation of a separate ribbon"

What defines "size or scope"?

Op Impact has been going on since 2014.  Yes I know it is not as "big" as the Afghanistan missions were...

Might be that the mission outgrew the medal. I probably would not be alone in suggesting a new ribbon be commissioned to recognize that particular theatre.

 

[eliminator]

Might be that the mission outgrew the medal. I probably would not be alone in suggesting a new ribbon be commissioned to recognize that particular theatre.

Or perhaps even easier, just rename the GCS/GSM-SWA to "Afghanistan" and the GCS/GSM-EXP to "Iraq and Syria"?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Or perhaps even easier, just rename the GCS/GSM-SWA to "Afghanistan" and the GCS/GSM-EXP to "Iraq and Syria"?

Typical imperialist...

....shoehorning rich, diverse, vibrant and complex Asian cultures into the Euro-centric geographical fabrications unfairly forced upon these peace loving peoples by greedy, exploitative, self-interested, colonial 19th century 'gunboat elitists'

 

[brihard]

Typical imperialist...

....shoehorning rich, diverse, vibrant and complex Asian cultures into the Euro-centric geographical fabrications unfairly forced upon these peace loving peoples by greedy, exploitative, self-interested, colonial 19th century 'gunboat elitists'

Well we need something more readily memorable than General Campaign Star-Sykes Picot"

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Danger isn't the criteria for medals,

Agreed.

And, it's important to point out the words "danger" "dangerous" "important" and "importance" aren't found in the description/narrative for any of the GCSs or GSMs.  :nod:

(It is, however, found in the narrative for the OSM; "...served under dangerous circumstances outside...")

Some medals are awarded for a theatre/time criteria...like the SSM-Exp.  Op PROJECTION...LRP aircrew, groundcrew, and mission support crew; all eligible for the same gong.