• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"courageous restraint" medal?

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
This proposed medal should be killed | Peter Worthington | Columnists | Comment | Toronto Sun


his may puzzle and shock old soldiers of past wars, and even some of our soldiers today, but NATO and the U.S. are considering establishing a “courageous restraint” medal for soldiers who risk their lives by not shooting civilians in Afghanistan.

The idea was probably born from bad publicity that is inevitable when mistakes are made, and civilians are killed in error by NATO troops.

But awarding a valour medal for not shooting in a dangerous situation is risk-taking of another sort and would likely result in more casualties among our soldiers.



and:


http://www.thetakeaway.org/2010/jun/25/do-we-need-medal-courageous-restraint/

In April, British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter, who commands NATO forces in southern Afghanistan, proposed creating an award for "courageous restraint." As avoiding the loss of civilian life is a cornerstone of the coalition's counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan, does rewarding restraint makes sense? Is restraint a courageous act of discipline under fire or does it put our troops in danger?



You know, they are going to have to award these posthumously since most of those showing this supposed "restraint" will be dead.


This medal is a bad idea and political correctness idiocy run amok.


what say you?
 
Last edited:
Here's the problem I have with the article:

The aim of a “courageous restraint” medal is obviously to save civilian lives and deter criticism when such casualties occur.

How can a medal possibly do that? I though Medals are designed as recognition for the times that restraint would occur. I highly doubt some guys going to risk his life just to receive a medal. I don't think the idea of winning a Medal of Valor is entering the minds of the soldiers who earn it when they act with valor in life threatening situations either.

The idea that this would cost Soldiers their lives seems pretty absurd and unfounded to me. The article even contradicts that idea by noting "Trained soldiers do not shoot indiscriminately, and usually opt for caution."

Why not recognize that?
 
You know, they are going to have to award these posthumously since most of those showing this supposed "restraint" will be dead.


This medal is a bad idea and political correctness idiocy run amok.


what say you?

Might as well make Nerf guns standard issue, to avoid unneeded casualties. :doh
 
This proposed medal should be killed | Peter Worthington | Columnists | Comment | Toronto Sun






and:


The Takeaway: In Counterinsurgency, Does Restraint Deserve Its Own Reward? - The Takeaway








































You know, they are going to have to award these posthumously since most of those showing this supposed "restraint" will be dead.


This medal is a bad idea and political correctness idiocy run amok.


what say you?


personally, i don't see why a soldier should receive a medal for refraining from killing civilians.
 
“The idea is consistent with our approach,” explained Air Force Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis.

Consideration of such an award, first reported by an Associated Press reporter in Afghanistan, doesn’t mean that, if approved, troops would be pressured to prevent such casualties at risk to themselves, Sholtis said.
Hold fire, earn a medal - MarineCorpsTimes.com
to be honest, i do not have much of an opinion. any soldier that risked his life JUST to get this medal... well... i just don't think it likely.

i would suggest that it is Air Forces that the medal is intended for. Less risk, greater benefit.

but, gee... what a surprise... the rightwing blogosphere is trying to have this on.... Obama!

Obama awards himself Medal of Courageous Restraint for handling of BP oil spill

predictable.

geo.
 
Why are you making this about Obama?


This is about the idiocy of the equivalent to the lady bing of a medal for troops.
 
i didn't make it about Obama. I just reported that others did. Considering how much YOU are prepared to condemn him for, I thought you would appreciate it.

geo.
 
i didn't make it about Obama. I just reported that others did. Considering how much YOU are prepared to condemn him for, I thought you would appreciate it.

geo.




I didn't think Obama had anything to do with this. Chasing windmills again are we don Quixote? :ssst:
 
i hear Ebay has a new section where you can trade for a sense of humor....

geo,
 
nah... i got one a while back... one of those holiday specials from K-Mart.
 
It does seem a bit weird to get a medal for something you're supposed to be doing anyway.
 
This proposed medal should be killed | Peter Worthington | Columnists | Comment | Toronto Sun




The Takeaway: In Counterinsurgency, Does Restraint Deserve Its Own Reward? - The Takeaway





You know, they are going to have to award these posthumously since most of those showing this supposed "restraint" will be dead.


This medal is a bad idea and political correctness idiocy run amok.


what say you?
This is a problem when you have soldiers placed in peacekeeping roles or have unclear mission directives.

One-soldiers dont 'kill civilians.' We arent trained to 'kill civilians'. And Im sure there are a few bad seed types but for the most part and from my personal experience Ive never known ANYONE who 'killed civlians'. Unfortunately we have an enemy who fights from behind and around civilians and has no regard for human life. They booby trap mentally retarded children and then detonate them trying to kill soldiers. They kill their own people indiscriminately. The enemy our soldiers face thing it is a brave and noble task to strap on a vest and kill themselves ina market taking with them 30-40 innocent men women and children that have no involvement in the conflict. Praise Allah. THAT is the enemy our soldiers face and yes...unfortunately sometimes civilians die in that environment.

I cant imagine the soldier that would stop and say...well...I WAS going to shoot...but if I dont shoot, maybe i can win a medal. Soldiers in a combat zone need to be able to assess and act. Not assess...reassess...think about it some ore...and...oh...how did I get shot...
 
I seem to be in the minority here but it seems like a great idea to me. Every war has its rules of engagement and there seems to be more and more focus on reducing civilian casualties. This is a reality that we must accept. The Vietnam War taught us that winning militarily is nothing unless you win politically. That is even more true now in Iraq and Afghanistan than it was back then. Keeping civilian casualties down is necessary for us to win. I think it's safe to assume that many soldiers have already risked their lives, maybe even given their lives because they practiced restraint while fighting in a city or town. That kind of sacrifice and bravery needs to be rewarded.
 
I seem to be in the minority here but it seems like a great idea to me. Every war has its rules of engagement and there seems to be more and more focus on reducing civilian casualties. This is a reality that we must accept. The Vietnam War taught us that winning militarily is nothing unless you win politically. That is even more true now in Iraq and Afghanistan than it was back then. Keeping civilian casualties down is necessary for us to win. I think it's safe to assume that many soldiers have already risked their lives, maybe even given their lives because they practiced restraint while fighting in a city or town. That kind of sacrifice and bravery needs to be rewarded.

They do it because MOST of our soldiers are men and women of good character. But the stories of heroism seldom get told. I know of a firefight where a soldier held fire even though he was getting shot at by a terrorist scumbag holding an old woman by the throat and using her for a shield. I know of a marine that took rounds in his back while he used his body as a sheild to protect a pregnant Iraqi woman caught in a crossfire. There was a brief news story of a soldier that died attempting to rescue a wounded Iraqi man who fell off a bridge...both men died. But the stories of heroism...well...its just so much more fun if they media and certain politicians can paint our soldiers as nazis and storm troopers. They already are recognized with medals for heroismon duty. This is some namby pamby political medal. I have a much better idea. The backers of this kind of bull**** mentality ought to join themselves.

I personally do not WANT my brothers and sisters dying in combat because they practiced restraint.
 
They do it because MOST of our soldiers are men and women of good character. But the stories of heroism seldom get told. I know of a firefight where a soldier held fire even though he was getting shot at by a terrorist scumbag holding an old woman by the throat and using her for a shield. I know of a marine that took rounds in his back while he used his body as a sheild to protect a pregnant Iraqi woman caught in a crossfire. There was a brief news story of a soldier that died attempting to rescue a wounded Iraqi man who fell off a bridge...both men died. But the stories of heroism...well...its just so much more fun if they media and certain politicians can paint our soldiers as nazis and storm troopers. They already are recognized with medals for heroismon duty. This is some namby pamby political medal. I have a much better idea. The backers of this kind of bull**** mentality ought to join themselves.

I personally do not WANT my brothers and sisters dying in combat because they practiced restraint.

Is it just me, or is about 75% of everything VanceMack posts an unverifiable personal anecdote?

I personally agree with the sentiment behind this, but don't think there should be a medal for it. Killing civilians only gives propaganda to the insurgents to use. If we kill a civilian in the crossfire of killing an insurgent, then we may have killed one enemy but in the process radicalized the entire family of the civilian into becoming supporters of the other side. Hearts and Minds is trite and overused, but it is an important tool for winning in these situations.
 
Is it just me, or is about 75% of everything VanceMack posts an unverifiable personal anecdote?

I personally agree with the sentiment behind this, but don't think there should be a medal for it. Killing civilians only gives propaganda to the insurgents to use. If we kill a civilian in the crossfire of killing an insurgent, then we may have killed one enemy but in the process radicalized the entire family of the civilian into becoming supporters of the other side. Hearts and Minds is trite and overused, but it is an important tool for winning in these situations.

Someone should tell CNN and MSNBC that.
 
Is it just me, or is about 75% of everything VanceMack posts an unverifiable personal anecdote?


They sound not so far fetched to me. :shrug:


I've witnessed things similar.



I personally agree with the sentiment behind this, but don't think there should be a medal for it. Killing civilians only gives propaganda to the insurgents to use. If we kill a civilian in the crossfire of killing an insurgent, then we may have killed one enemy but in the process radicalized the entire family of the civilian into becoming supporters of the other side. Hearts and Minds is trite and overused, but it is an important tool for winning in these situations.



There is always a sentiment. I didn't need a medal to NOT shoot into a school.... /facepalm
 
Is it just me, or is about 75% of everything VanceMack posts an unverifiable personal anecdote?

I personally agree with the sentiment behind this, but don't think there should be a medal for it. Killing civilians only gives propaganda to the insurgents to use. If we kill a civilian in the crossfire of killing an insurgent, then we may have killed one enemy but in the process radicalized the entire family of the civilian into becoming supporters of the other side. Hearts and Minds is trite and overused, but it is an important tool for winning in these situations.

Is it just me or does 95% of the **** you post come from left wing talking points?

No, cupcake...its not just you. Yes...I absolutely post anecdotal crap and heres why. This is an internet blog. You can believe it, not believe it...thats absolutely up to you. I COULD instead look through tons of articles and find JUST the **** that supports the point I am trying to make and pretend THATS actually factual...OR...I can post my opinion...and from my experience...you can read it...ignore it...offer your opinion...or whatever the **** you want to do. Now..the day we all get PAID for this we can all hold some very unbiased research studies and have all the answers. Of course...this place would then become more than just a diversion which it is now.

I will repeat the important part...EVERYONE HERE posts **** that they find that supports their position. And if you think that makes it factual you are on that Cali medicinal marijuana. And those that post a LOT of **** that supports their position? You have entirely TOO MUCH time on your hands.
 
I suppose I could be completely mistaken, but aren't soldiers trained to do everything in their power to avoid shooting civilians? Aren't they expected to avoid shooting civilians?

Getting a medal for doing exactly what you're supposed to be doing seems pretty absurd.
 
Back
Top Bottom