Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

“Each decoration prescribes standards which define the degree and magnitude of an act, achievement, or service considered worthy for awarding that particular decoration. Do not base award of a specific decoration upon a member’s grade, but on the member’s level of responsibility, achievements, accomplishments, and manner of performance.”
- AFI 36-2803

The award of military decorations in an incongruent manner has a negative impact on both morale and readiness. The current misapplication of aviation related awards and decorations by a deployed flying wing has three unintended consequences: 1) it dilutes the recognition of other higher options for recognizing aerial achievement and 2) it complicates the process of correctly applying other non-aviation awards and decorations, and 3) removes sufficient recognition of superior performers that lays the ground work for a “socialistic decline” in the future performance within the wing. Not all awards are applicable within the normal conduct of a deployed flying wing’s day-to-day operation.

The Distinguished Service Medal is generally not applicable beyond the WG/CC. The Distinguished Service Medal is intended for exceptionally meritorious service to the US in a duty of “great responsibility”, such that they “decide the successful operation of a MAJCOM, activity, installation, or major program” such that they “greatly benefit the interests of the US”.

The Silver Star is intended for “gallantry in action” (i.e. “heroism of high degree involving risk of life”), just short of warranting the Medal of Honor or Air Force Cross. It requires this “gallantry” while “engaged in an action against an enemy of the U.S.”

Multiple common policies incorrectly apply award guidance and are infused with subjective application of requisite rank and duties. The current squadron level policies of pushing Air Medal recommendation as soon as possible after completing twenty combat sorties is far out of line with Air Force instruction guidance on awards and decorations. Higher group level policies dictating that End of Tour Decoration recommendations cannot contain achievement/service construed as “primary duties” further diverges from the structure presented in AFI36-2803. The application of aviation related recognition is laid out by the Air Force Instruction as such:

The Distinguished Flying Cross is the highest honor available for recognizing aerial performance. It requires “heroism or extraordinary achievement” that is “entirely distinctive" during “operations that are not routine.” This award is not intended for “sustained operational activities and flights”, thus would be rare, requiring an exceptional example that should be clear in its worth.

The Airman’s Medal is applicable, but unique. This medal requires an act of “heroism involving voluntary risk of life under conditions other than those of conflict with an armed enemy of the US” in other than the “normal performance of duties”. Like the Distinguished Flying Cross, this award would be rare, requiring an exceptional example that should be clear in its worth.

The Air Medal, like the Distinguished Flying Cross, also requires “heroism or meritorious achievement” during aerial flight that is “entirely distinctive" during “operations that are not routine”. It is awarded for those achievements that are “above and beyond that expected of professional airmen” and must be “accomplished with distinction”. This medal is intended for those achievements that do not rise to the level representative of the Distinguished Flying Cross. The medal is expressly stated to not be awarded for “sustained operational activities and flights”.

The Aerial Achievement Medal is awarded to recognize “sustained meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight.” MAJCOMs, FOAs, and DRUs have leeway in determining the missions and positions that qualify, but the award is not to be used for “single event flights”.

The Aerial Achievement Medal does not require specific achievement, only “sustained meritorious achievement”. The blanket exclusion of aerial achievement from “End of Tour” award recommendations and citations is not appropriate. However, in accordance with AFI36-2803 paragraph 1.15.10, the “approval of multiple decorations for the same act, achievement, or period of service is considered dual recognition which is prohibited”. If they are included in the award of the Air Medal, it makes those achievements disqualified for use in an “End of Tour” award recommendation. Once the recommendation is in the “official chain”, defined by AFI 36-2803 as endorsed by the next person above the person making the recommendation, those achievements are considered.

This means that an “End of Tour” award recommendation for even an Air Force Achievement Medal cannot use these achievements. However, an “End of Tour” award recommendation for the Air Force Achievement Medal is certainly applicable for “outstanding achievement or meritorious service rendered specifically on behalf of the Air Force” or “acts of courage that do not meet the requirements for award of the Air Force Commendation Medal” that are outside of aircrew’s “primary duties”.

The Legion of Merit is intended for “exceptionally meritorious conduct in performance of outstanding services”. “Performance of duties normal to the grade, branch, specialty, assignment, or experience of an individual is not an adequate basis for this award”. There is no prohibition on the inclusion of aerial achievement outside of dual award. The Legion of Merit is a combat and non-combat award appropriate for the very best efforts within the deployed air wing, to include aerial achievement and otherwise. Under the current policies of mandated, and inappropriate, Air Medal submissions, normally only ground duties are available to justify this recognition. Although, even discounting aerial achievement, stellar performances outside aircrew "primary duties" could justify recommendation of the Legion of Merit.

The Bronze Star is intended for “meritorious achievement or service” that does not involve “participation in aerial flight” under conditions applied to the Silver Star. The Bronze Star is also used to recognize meritorious achievement or service during “armed conflict that are of a lesser degree than that required for the award of the Legion of Merit”. The Bronze Star is not a lower form of the Silver Star, rather relative to the Legion of Merit recognition. Holding the exclusion of achievements involving "participation in aerial flight", the Bronze Star award applies only to ground duties. Aircrew are not eliminated from consideration for this recognition based solely on other "primary duty". The Bronze Star is intended for stellar performance outside aircrew "primary duties" that do not measure up to justification of the Legion of Merit.

The Air Force Commendation Medal is intended to recognize any “meritorious achievement and service” by an Air Force member that is “distinctive”, but “not unique”. To this end, the Air Force Commendation Medal is expressly stated to recognize “sustained meritorious performance by crewmembers”. This is the lowest form of “End of Tour” award recommendation related to aerial achievement (meaning it can and should consider aerial achievement, with reference to the prohibition on dual award), as the Air Force Achievement Medal “will not be awarded for aerial achievement”. Recognitions of duties which are “distinctive”, but “not unique” can easily apply to the performance of “additional duties” such as flight commander, liaison officer, etc. Doing a "distinctive" job in a commonly held position is sufficient to justify this recognition. The act of downgrading a stellar performance to this award holds the most potential for "socialistic decline" in future performance. Show up on time everyday and if the boss likes you, AFCM...do an job above the "grade, branch, specialty, assignment, or experience" expected of you...AFCM (likely downgraded from a MSM, which is not even appropriate in a combat zone). The only hope is that an officer promotes into the next preconceived requisite rank before they catch on that their performance is not properly recognized.

None of these three decorations are predicated on position, rank, or previous accomplishments. Aircrew within a deployed air wing should be appropriately considered for Air Force Commendation Medals if they perform well outside of flight, the Bronze Star if they perform exceptionally (i.e. “above their peers”), and the Legion of Merit if they excel beyond their “pay grade” (i.e. “well above their peers”).

Rather than move closer to aligning with Air Force Instruction, recent trends are to recommend the Meritorious Service Medal and subsequently fight to have them not downgraded to Air Force Commendations Medals. The Meritorious Service Medal is not a combat award. It is intended for the recognition of “outstanding non-combat meritorious achievement or outstanding non-combat meritorious service” to the United States. “Normally, the acts or services rendered must be comparable to that required for the Legion of Merit, but in a duty of lesser though considerable responsibility” (i.e. in-garrison). The Meritorious Service Medal is not applicable within the deployed air wing. Rather than downgrade an MSM to a AFCM, we should be downgrading LOMs to Bronze Stars to AFCM to nothing at all…except the twenty Air Medals you received, which you’ll wear before your AFCM, since your efforts were not worthy of an MSM (which should have been submitted as an LOM, downgraded to a Bronze Star).

Bendy

Edited by Bender
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Senior Leaders Challenge Airmen to Reaffirm Commitment to Core Values"

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/473713/senior-leaders-challenge-airmen-to-reaffirm-commitment-to-core-values.aspx

We thats it folks. That should fix everything, time to shut this thread down. Leading by webpage, who knew?

It was the email that really moved me.

zb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Senior Leaders Challenge Airmen to Reaffirm Commitment to Core Values"

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/473713/senior-leaders-challenge-airmen-to-reaffirm-commitment-to-core-values.aspx

We thats it folks. That should fix everything, time to shut this thread down. Leading by webpage, who knew?

:vomit:

Bendy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I didn't understand that email. What was that supposed to accomplish?

The one about banging your wife or the one about finding new ways to self affirm in the mirror?

Recommendation: Bang your wife, brag about it to the ADO, then brag about it to your self in the mirror saying, "I did do that, I did it for her, and I did it well".

Then I think you're covered either way.

Bendy

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naw AF wide email on Core Values and our need to recommit to them and being a wingman means being an informant:

To All Airmen,

Following is a very important message from General Welsh, CMSAF Cody and me regarding Core Values in our Air Force. I ask each of you to read it, internalize the message and rededicate yourself to our Air Force and our Core Values.

Respectfully,

Deborah Lee James

-------

To the Airmen of the United States Air Force:

Being an Airman is more than a job. When we voluntarily raised our right hands and took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, we became members of the profession of arms. Underpinning that profession is the sacred trust given to us by the American people. To meet their expectations, we must build our lives and shape our service on the foundation of our core values: Integrity First, Service Before Self and Excellence In All We Do. Throughout our history as a service, Airmen with tremendous moral courage have taught us there is no replacement for virtue, character, dignity and respect. Today’s Airmen—active, Guard, Reserve and civilian—must continue this tradition.

When Airmen fail to live up to our core values, the reputation of all who serve is tarnished. We must have the strength of character to do and say the right things at the right times, always with diplomacy, tact and respect. Being a wingman does not mean protecting those who lack integrity or fail to uphold the core values; it means not tolerating them. You are accountable not only for your actions, but also for failing to take action if you see bad behavior.

Today we challenge each and every Airman to reaffirm their commitment to our core values by finding new ways to live these values each and every day. This reaffirmation will strengthen the trust between Airmen, and our commitment to one another. It also reassures the American public we are worthy of their trust.

Thank you for representing the Air Force so well and exhibiting pride and courage in our service. If you have questions about our core values, please seek out guidance and assistance from people who can help: commanders, first sergeants, chaplains and inspectors general are available to provide counsel and advice. Because of who we are, and what we do, Integrity, Service and Excellence carry special meaning for all of us. Always remember that it is an honor to be called “Airman.” We must earn that honor, every day.

Deborah Lee James

Secretary of the Air Force

Mark A. Welsh III

General, USAF

Chief of Staff

James A. Cody

Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force

Edited by AFsock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Naw AF wide email on Core Values and our need to recommit to them and being a wingman means being an informant:

To All Airmen,

Following is a very important message from General Welsh, CMSAF Cody and me regarding Core Values in our Air Force. I ask each of you to read it, internalize the message and rededicate yourself to our Air Force and our Core Values.

Respectfully,

Deborah Lee James

-------

To the Airmen of the United States Air Force:

Being an Airman is more than a job. When we voluntarily raised our right hands and took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, we became members of the profession of arms. Underpinning that profession is the sacred trust given to us by the American people. To meet their expectations, we must build our lives and shape our service on the foundation of our core values: Integrity First, Service Before Self and Excellence In All We Do. Throughout our history as a service, Airmen with tremendous moral courage have taught us there is no replacement for virtue, character, dignity and respect. Today’s Airmen—active, Guard, Reserve and civilian—must continue this tradition.

When Airmen fail to live up to our core values, the reputation of all who serve is tarnished. We must have the strength of character to do and say the right things at the right times, always with diplomacy, tact and respect. Being a wingman does not mean protecting those who lack integrity or fail to uphold the core values; it means not tolerating them. You are accountable not only for your actions, but also for failing to take action if you see bad behavior.

Today we challenge each and every Airman to reaffirm their commitment to our core values by finding new ways to live these values each and every day. This reaffirmation will strengthen the trust between Airmen, and our commitment to one another. It also reassures the American public we are worthy of their trust.

Thank you for representing the Air Force so well and exhibiting pride and courage in our service. If you have questions about our core values, please seek out guidance and assistance from people who can help: commanders, first sergeants, chaplains and inspectors general are available to provide counsel and advice. Because of who we are, and what we do, Integrity, Service and Excellence carry special meaning for all of us. Always remember that it is an honor to be called “Airman.” We must earn that honor, every day.

Deborah Lee James

Secretary of the Air Force

Mark A. Welsh III

General, USAF

Chief of Staff

James A. Cody

Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force

big blue, specifically AFPC is doing a great job at integrity first and excellence in all we do.....

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From John Q. Public...

I've been measuring my shots at General Mark Welsh carefully over the last week or so, because I've been working instead on trying to help diagnose the organizational and systemic issues associated with the drawdown. More to say on that in a day or two. But first, I am going to take a shot at General Welsh.

Please, for the love of God, STOP PREACHING INTEGRITY to airmen. Just stop. Don't remind them to have integrity. Don't do it. It has ZERO effect upon the rank and file. None. The vast majority don't need to hear it and get offended that you feel the need to remind them. The few who demonstrate they do need to hear it probably aren't going to respond meaningfully anyway, and should not have their shortcomings driving how you communicate with everyone.

The only impact this has is NEGATIVE. It's bad. It hurts you because the current perception -- a fair one -- is that the leadership and staff level of the Air Force is where the real integrity problem lives. Airmen complain of a say/do gap, an endless game of "I've got a secret" . . . and one-way commitments that leave them with no bargaining power. I've written elsewhere that personnel and evaluation policies are being allowed to persist when we know they're telling us lies and leading us to wrong decisions. If there is an integrity problem, it's not among the audience the attached article seems to be addressing. So why not target more discriminately?

Best commander I ever had (and now one of my professors says the same thing) used to say "show, don't tell." Great advice. Fire the next commander you catch lying or the next Chief you catch defying your intent. That'll go a long way toward reinforcing the value of integrity.

  • Upvote 20
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being an undereducated simple minded guy from the south I can never quite put into words all the things that frustrate me with the Air Force, but he seems to always get it right. Bravo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Meritorious Service Medal is not applicable within the deployed air wing.

Disagree...and so does Title 32 Section 578.18(a)(2). (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2008-title32-vol3/xml/CFR-2008-title32-vol3-sec578-18.xml)

After 9/11 MSM's can be given out for " for outstanding non-combat meritorious achievement or service in a non-combat or combat area."

Not every deployed "achievement" is a "combat achievement". Being deployed to Bagram does not, in and of itself, mean you were "in combat". Deployed...yes....in combat...maybe.

We have over awarded the Bronze Star to the point where it is meaningless. To put things in perspective, Bronze Stars were originally used as awards for D-Day (and later the entire Normandy invasion) participants who were not eligible for the CIB (engineers, medics etc). The intent of the Bronze Star as stated by Title 32 section 578.16(a) is to award achievement (heroic or meritorious) "in connection with military operations with an armed enemy" (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2008-title32-vol3/xml/CFR-2008-title32-vol3-sec578-16.xml)

Unfortunately, we have let every single person who deploys, no matter how far removed they are from actual combat, believe that they were participants in combat. Simply put, mere existence in a deployed location does not make you eligible for "combat achievement"

To further illustrate my point, the Air Force views the MSM and Bronze Star as equivalents for purposes of enlisted promotions (5 points each).

Edited by mudhen69
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a HUGE difference between a BSM and a BSM with a V device.

Yeah one is handed out to every First Sergeant who spends his deployment driving around the FOB in his own truck and doing no observed work....

He other is pretty much never approved or automatically downgraded....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well maybe it's not just the AF. Forget brightly colored gym shoes, let's start the war on sandwiches:

‘Chaps’, said: “Quite a few officers in the divisional mess seem to be under the impression that they can eat their food with their hands. The practice of serving rolls and sandwiches must stop”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10677230/Army-commander-bans-sandwiches-in-attack-on-barbaric-habits.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as expected, a quick response from ARRSE...

http://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/gen-cowans-edict-a-reply.211041/

Dear Sir,

3001TO39 LETTER OF THANKS - MAJOR-GENERAL JAMES MICHAEL COWAN CBE DSO

1. We, the junior officers of your mess, wish to thank you for your earlier 3-page memo. Given the challenges of operational drawdown, budgetary cuts and generational structural change, we are reassured that our leaders are not distracted by such trivia and are instead addressing the vital military issues of the day. Considering the effort and time you took from your busy schedule, we felt it only correct to show our appreciation of your thoughts. We note from an Army spokesman that your original missive was intended as a light-hearted dialogue, and not at all a serious attempt to impose proto-Victorian behaviors which make Senior Officers, who are never in the mess, feel more comfortable while alienating junior officers, who live here. So, given you lamented the lack of suitable conversation between senior and junior officers, we feel sure you will appreciate this free, funny and entertaining dialogue on suitable topics outside work such as our marriages, grammar and sandwiches.

2. You wrote that quite a few of us are under the impression that we can eat with our hands. Please let us assure you, we have confirmed it: we most definitely can eat with our hands. If you have not already been made aware, hands are most useful for a range of such manual tasks. We particularly like using them for eating for several reasons:

a. Common understanding has it that sandwiches were designed for manual manipulation.

b. Sandwiches take half the time to order and eat in the mess, so we have more time at our desks in your headquarters, in order to read more of your emails about eating sandwiches.

c. Sandwiches are enjoyable and reasonable value. When the improved quality and cost from PAYD actually improves quality and cost instead of producing overpriced belt-fed contractor fare at the table, we might come back. Until then, we are pretty sure the PAYD directives issued by the chain of command highlighted "choice" as an important aspect of the system. We have chosen to eat sandwiches. Actually, we chose the cake, but apparently that was a bit of a joke by Mary, the mess manager, and didn't actually exist!

d. We don't have to spend our lunchtime making faux-polite conversation at the table with Senior Officers while avoiding any honest and meaningful discussion that will torpedo our annual report.

e. It's really hard to eat a Brie, Bacon and Cranberry baguette melt with a knife and fork.

3. Please be assured that we are not negligently eating sandwiches with our hands with complete disregard to the consequences. We carefully follow a range of metrics to calculate the impending End of Civilization As We Know It. Admittedly in the last few days several of the "World War" metrics are a bit worrying, but we are confident they are not caused by us eating sandwiches.

4. We note your observation that few junior officers stand when you - apologies, the Commanding Officer - enter the room. This is of course entirely wrong, and we will correct it immediately. Please excuse Capt George RLC and Capt MacDonald RE, however: the prosthetics make it a bit problematic. While on the subject, please be assured that Capt Fraser RLC is not, in fact, 'giving you the finger' when saluting - it's just that he only has the one remaining.

5. You note that it is considered better manners if our Wives And Reputable Girlfriends (WARGS) write letters of thanks for mess events we attend, and that the secret to a successful marriage is to generally avoid them unless at home where it proves impossible [DRAFT: check, is this right?]. Clearly this is a sensitive topic, but you see, Sir: we actually quite like our wives. That is rather why we married them. Unfortunately, some of them are a bit demanding these days. They will tend to go on about their own career - which, incidentally, tends to contribute a bit more to the family coffers than ours - their concerns, and so on. Many of them see it as a bit of an imposition to agree to go to a work function of ours so they can be plied with copious amounts of drink while being banned from visiting the ladies' room, encouraged to watch paunchy middle-aged men get smashed and make inappropriate comments before staggering off to piss in a sink, and then be made to write to thank you for the pleasure. Often they would rather just let us get on with it. When they do agree to come to mess functions, it is often considered a night out with us. Given that between HERRICK rotations, weekend duties and exercises, and spending up to 2000hrs on a weekday in your headquarters reading emails about sandwiches, we don't get to see each other that much, so they quite like sitting with us. It makes them, the guest, more at ease and happier. We were always taught was the aim of mess functions. Please let us know if this has changed.

6. We read your tips on grammar and clear English. We completely agree. We are encouraged to see support for our concerns from our commander. Since you will clearly be pushing this issue up the chain of command to get a revised and much shorter edition of JSP 101 issued forthwith, can we assume an implied task that all 3 (UK) Division paperwork should immediately sack off such wanton use of capitals and acronyms?

7. Finally, we hope you don't feel assaulted and exhausted after reading this. We realise, compared to many of the basic military tasks conducted daily by your soldiers, that this kind of stuff is pretty tough going. Your fortitude, consideration for our welfare, and focus on the important issues continues to inspire us.


We remain,
Sir,
Your mostly obedient Chaps,
etc.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's beautiful

Indeed. Not a first for the Brits, though:

Gentlemen,

Whilst marching from Portugal to a position which commands the approach to Madrid and the French forces, my officers have been diligently complying with your requests which have been sent by H.M. ship from London to Lisbon and thence by dispatch to our headquarters.

We have enumerated our saddles, bridles, tents and tent poles, and all manner of sundry items for which His Majesty's Government holds me accountable. I have dispatched reports on the character, wit, and spleen of every officer. Each item and every farthing has been accounted for, with two regrettable exceptions for which I beg your indulgence.

Unfortunately the sum of one shilling and ninepence remains unaccounted for in one infantry battalion's petty cash and there has been a hideous confusion as the the number of jars of raspberry jam issued to one cavalry regiment during a sandstorm in western Spain. This reprehensible carelessness may be related to the pressure of circumstance, since we are war with France, a fact which may come as a bit of a surprise to you gentlemen in Whitehall.

This brings me to my present purpose, which is to request elucidation of my instructions from His Majesty's Government so that I may better understand why I am dragging an army over these barren plains. I construe that perforce it must be one of two alternative duties, as given below. I shall pursue either one with the best of my ability, but I cannot do both:

1. To train an army of uniformed British clerks in Spain for the benefit of the accountants and copy-boys in London or perchance.

2. To see to it that the forces of Napoleon are driven out of Spain.

Your most obedient servant,

Wellington

[no idea of authenticity, but the underlying point remains]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree...and so does Title 32 Section 578.18(a)(2). (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2008-title32-vol3/xml/CFR-2008-title32-vol3-sec578-18.xml)

After 9/11 MSM's can be given out for " for outstanding non-combat meritorious achievement or service in a non-combat or combat area."

Not every deployed "achievement" is a "combat achievement". Being deployed to Bagram does not, in and of itself, mean you were "in combat". Deployed...yes....in combat...maybe.

We have over awarded the Bronze Star to the point where it is meaningless. To put things in perspective, Bronze Stars were originally used as awards for D-Day (and later the entire Normandy invasion) participants who were not eligible for the

The section of Title 32 you are quoting pertains to the United States Army. While the Army may choose to award the MSM for meritorious achievement in a “combat area” that does not automatically apply to the United States Air Force. There is no such regulation governing the Air Force; if there is show it to me, otherwise agree to disagree on point #1.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=de55914787128b8ec27c324988488b3f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title32/32cfrv6_02.tpl#800

AFI 36-2803 does not have the 9/11 caveat, therefore the MSM is not applicable to the deployed USAF air wing:

http://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/publication/afi36-2803/afi36-2803_.pdf

Agree wholeheartedly on point #2, that not every deployed "achievement" is a "combat achievement". However, aircrews operating out of Bagram Airfield fly into combat every day, thus the ridiculous Air Medal debacle. I will concede that it is against an enemy already subject to our air superiority and ill-equipped to launch effective, consistent attack against our airborne assets. Be that as it may, they are in contact with the enemy’s small arms fire on every departure and approach, effective or plentiful or not.

On point #3, I like where you are coming from, I do, but this is not WWII and to continue trying to compare ourselves to that generation, while fruitful in some respects and dreadfully painful in others, I do not believe is appropriate in this situation (but we must still have respect for it). The Bronze Star may not mean what it meant in WWII, but it should mean what AFI 36-2803 fucking says it means, one of them being “meritorious achievement or service during armed conflict that are of a lesser degree than that required for the award of the LOM”. The LOM does not even require contact with the enemy, but it requires such an above and beyond performance of service that it is rarely ever appropriate, and is rightfully rarely awarded. The correct downgrade is to the Bronze Star, then the Air Force Commendation Medal. Again, you quote Army CFR to make your point, which unless you are in the Army is not applicable.

The Bronze Star should not be confused with the Silver Star, even during WWII. You may be able to find examples that make your point, but I didn’t get past just trying to find a citation for both (I’ll go with your Army example, as they are easier to find quickly). The Silver Star in WWII:

"For gallantry in action against the enemy in Germany on 17 November 1944. Although his platoon sergeant and squad leaders had become casualties during the early stages of the attack, First Lieutenant Abate (then Second Lieutenant) courageously continued to lead his men forward, fully aware that he was the only officer left with the assault elements. Moving freely through the veritable hail of fire, he gave his men renewed confidence. When they were halted by a well fortified machine gun position, he directed his men to cover him while he boldly charged and annihilated the emplacement. Finally, the objective was secured, but First Lieutenant Abate declined to seek cover until he had assured himself that his men were properly protected. His courage and gallant leadership reflect great credit upon himself and the military service."

Bronze Star in WWII:

“Mark J. Alexander, O-411615, Lieutenant Colonel, Infantry, United States Army. For meritorious service in connection with military activities against the enemy for the period 20 September 1944 to 2 January 1945. Lieutenant Colonel Alexander, Base Commander, France, established now camps in France for the 82d Airborne Division while it was in combat in Holland. He administered and organized the camps and accomplished the reception of troops in a highly efficient manner. Faced with numerous and complex problems and a meager staff from the United Kingdom Bases of the Division, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander executed the tremendous assignment with outstanding skill and initiative. When the 82d Airborne Division was unexpectedly committed in Belgium his invaluable assistance helped expedite that unprecedented displacement of a reinforced Division into combat in less than twenty four hours. After its departure, he operated the two Airborne camps for the successive tenancy of two Divisions, and an Army Headquarters. His intelligent and determined efforts in a period of critical troop movements were material factors in the successes of the 82d Airborne Division and other major organizations which stopped the German surprise offensive in Belgium. Entered military service from Kansas.”

Not the same thing…and they still aren’t.

Point #4 I agree with, but it is an oversimplification. “Mere existence in a deployed location does not make you eligible for "combat achievement"." One cannot have a “combat achievement” if they do not exist in a combat zone (define it how you wish)…that is part of the beauty of the United State Military (there may be exceptions).

Point #5 is the heart of the matter. The Bronze Star is the deployed MSM, so it makes sense they are weighted the same (I think we give out too many MSMs too by the way). The Air Force does not have an MSM in combat…it has the Bronze Star. My point here is that it is the Air Medal that is given out inappropriately that causes the muck…not the Bronze Star; If the Air Medals were not awarded, those achievements would be used in a Legion of Merit, eclipsing a Bronze Star, for service beyond that capable of by the “shoe clerk”. The Bronze Star has been given out too freely (I agree with you there), for things that are the “performance of duties normal to the grade, branch, specialty, assignment, or experience of an individual” which is not in line with its successor, the Legion of Merit. Process more travel vouchers than anyone has ever processed before and that is “distinctive”, but it is “not unique”…which is the definition of the Air Force Commendation Medal, certainly NOT the definition of the Bronze Star.

Bendy

Edited by Bender
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTF happened to this thread? Did we get through all the low hanging fruit about what's wrong with the AF so now we have to quote sections of US code to compare to AFIs? I mean good god, I know the medals stuff is broke, but who cares? Another air medal just means I have to update my service dress before the next time I wear it.

Although it is fun to laugh at the finance dude getting a bronze star.

Ain't nothing wrong with the AF that a real no shit shootin war won't fix quick fast and in a hurry.

Back to my whiskey.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTF happened to this thread? Did we get through all the low hanging fruit about what's wrong with the AF so now we have to quote sections of US code to compare to AFIs? I mean good god, I know the medals stuff is broke, but who cares? Another air medal just means I have to update my service dress before the next time I wear it.

Although it is fun to laugh at the finance dude getting a bronze star.

Ain't nothing wrong with the AF that a real no shit shootin war won't fix quick fast and in a hurry.

Back to my whiskey.

You know what you do when you aren't interested, aren't involved and/or aren't asked to participate in the conversation going on? You STFU...and drink your whiskey.

Bendy

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what you do when you aren't interested, aren't involved and/or aren't asked to participate in the conversation going on? You STFU...and drink your whiskey.

Bendy

I'll drink one for you. You're due home from the sandy place soon aren't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll drink one for you. You're due home from the sandy place soon aren't you?

Thank you and very. At least I better be before that kid pops out, otherwise I might as well stay.

Bendy

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...