Comments on: Long Tan Medal http://strange-land.com/2006/08/long-tan-medal/ The Vietnam war, songwriting Tue, 13 Jul 2010 22:25:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Billyk http://strange-land.com/2006/08/long-tan-medal/comment-page-1/#comment-51 Billyk Sat, 21 Apr 2007 00:00:20 +0000 http://strange-land.com/?p=30#comment-51 Thanks for your comment. It was a bit head scratching but pleasing (because they could clink) to get two medals for Vietnam. Then after 15 years another one for long service - fair enough, and then another one for long service for the same period that police, firemen etc got. When I left the Army I had four medals, not quite a row, but reasonable. Then the mailouts arrived - one for being in PNG before independence, not that anyone was fighting anyone. Then two more for just being in the Army. I'm not complaining, mind you, I'm starting to look decidedly gallant for Anzac Day although I haven't done anything since 1986, but the medals still keep coming. Give my regards to your family. Cheers Bill Thanks for your comment. It was a bit head scratching but pleasing (because they could clink) to get two medals for Vietnam. Then after 15 years another one for long service – fair enough, and then another one for long service for the same period that police, firemen etc got.

When I left the Army I had four medals, not quite a row, but reasonable.
Then the mailouts arrived – one for being in PNG before independence, not that anyone was fighting anyone. Then two more for just being in the Army.

I’m not complaining, mind you, I’m starting to look decidedly gallant for Anzac Day although I haven’t done anything since 1986, but the medals
still keep coming.

Give my regards to your family.

Cheers
Bill

]]> By: Justin Smiley http://strange-land.com/2006/08/long-tan-medal/comment-page-1/#comment-50 Justin Smiley Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:53:57 +0000 http://strange-land.com/?p=30#comment-50 Just a note to the above. I'm a Brit from a military family. While I have never served in the forces both my father and uncle were involved in the 'Bush Wars' of the 1950s and 1960s (funny how that name has another resonance these days). All they got was a General Service Medal (GSM) with clasps for each individual campaign. In particular my uncle, a Royal Marine, fought in Borneo, Radfan, Aden (twice) and Northern Ireland (making several tours of duty in the 1970s when it certainly wasn't pretty). All he has is a GSM with four clasps-but all veterans know what those clasps mean. Another point about gallantry medals. You cannot change the award retrospectively- my Granddad fought in Burma and was recommended for 3 MCs, he got one. He was also MID 5 times. As he used to say 'some guys got nothing and were killed.' However it slightly galls me when you read of people in Iraq being awarded MCs simply for tending to a wounded comrade while under fire (who wouldn't?). As my drinking buddy Tom from 42 commando RM who saw action in the Falkands on Mount Harriet says: 'we were doing that sort of thing all night and clearing trenches and bunkers!' And he was wounded-he just got a campaign medal. And lastly, unfortunately former PM John Major decided to downgrade the DSO to a non-gallantry status- an extraordinary thing to do when it has been in service as a gallantry award since 1886. The OBE used to be awarded for such things as 'leadership'. In its place we have the meaningless piece of tin called the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross. Why? I think its important that gallantry is recognised, but not cheapened. As my chum Tom says "we all know who did what, and that's that." Just a note to the above.
I’m a Brit from a military family. While I have never served in the forces both my father and uncle were involved in the ‘Bush Wars’ of the 1950s and 1960s (funny how that name has another resonance these days).
All they got was a General Service Medal (GSM) with clasps for each individual campaign. In particular my uncle, a Royal Marine, fought in Borneo, Radfan, Aden (twice) and Northern Ireland (making several tours of duty in the 1970s when it certainly wasn’t pretty). All he has is a GSM with four clasps-but all veterans know what those clasps mean.

Another point about gallantry medals. You cannot change the award retrospectively- my Granddad fought in Burma and was recommended for 3 MCs, he got one. He was also MID 5 times. As he used to say ’some guys got nothing and were killed.’

However it slightly galls me when you read of people in Iraq being awarded MCs simply for tending to a wounded comrade while under fire (who wouldn’t?). As my drinking buddy Tom from 42 commando RM who saw action in the Falkands on Mount Harriet says: ‘we were doing that sort of thing all night and clearing trenches and bunkers!’ And he was wounded-he just got a campaign medal.

And lastly, unfortunately former PM John Major decided to downgrade the DSO to a non-gallantry status- an extraordinary thing to do when it has been in service as a gallantry award since 1886. The OBE used to be awarded for such things as ‘leadership’. In its place we have the meaningless piece of tin called the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross. Why?

I think its important that gallantry is recognised, but not cheapened. As my chum Tom says “we all know who did what, and that’s that.”

]]> By: Guran http://strange-land.com/2006/08/long-tan-medal/comment-page-1/#comment-49 Guran Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:32:49 +0000 http://strange-land.com/?p=30#comment-49 The points made by Greg and John probably underlie the advice on honours policy provided to the government - i.e., it is not possible to treat Long Tan in isolation, and it is not the role of a government 40 years after the fact to second-guess medal recommendations by commanders in the field, even if they were hamstrung by the quota operating at the time. I'm told that most decisions for the creation of new medals in recent years have been political ones, made against advice from the honours policy bureaucrats. Imagine, if forty years from now, the PM felt free to authorise the award of gallantry decorations to units deployed in Afghanistan now, for which recommendations were never made at the time? How much faith would the military have in their awards system? None. The quota in SVN was shitty, but if you break the rule for Long Tan, how do you justify not breaking the rule for any other campaign? You can't. You'd end up awarding retrospective VCs for Australians in the Crimea. (Yes, I know that's nonsensical, but that's the point.) Oh, and Michael, Australia does (now) have unit-based gallantry awards, but awarding them for actions that occurred before they existed faces the same retrospectivity issue as above - where do you stop? Members of D Company 6RAR have received the US Presidential Unit citation, the Vietnam Medal, the South Vietnam Star, the AASM1945-75 'Vietnam', at least nine of them have imperial gallantry awards of some kind, and many of them have been granted approval to accept and wear South Vietnamese individual gallantry awards (the ones the dolls and cigar boxes were presented in lieu of). Additionally, those nashos amongst them have the Anniversary of National Service 1951-72 Medal, and they're all entitled to the Australian Defence Medal. Conceivably some of them can now legitimately wear eight medals from a single tour in Vietnam. I'm not saying they don't deserve it. What I'm saying is, we're talking about the government thinking long and hard about additional recognition (which is where this thread started). Additional recognition. I think it's worth being sure it's warranted, and not just minting a couple of hundred extra trinkets which are by themselves worthless, but in the wider context, are extremely damaging to the integrity of the honours system. The points made by Greg and John probably underlie the advice on honours policy provided to the government – i.e., it is not possible to treat Long Tan in isolation, and it is not the role of a government 40 years after the fact to second-guess medal recommendations by commanders in the field, even if they were hamstrung by the quota operating at the time. I’m told that most decisions for the creation of new medals in recent years have been political ones, made against advice from the honours policy bureaucrats. Imagine, if forty years from now, the PM felt free to authorise the award of gallantry decorations to units deployed in Afghanistan now, for which recommendations were never made at the time? How much faith would the military have in their awards system? None. The quota in SVN was shitty, but if you break the rule for Long Tan, how do you justify not breaking the rule for any other campaign? You can’t. You’d end up awarding retrospective VCs for Australians in the Crimea. (Yes, I know that’s nonsensical, but that’s the point.)

Oh, and Michael, Australia does (now) have unit-based gallantry awards, but awarding them for actions that occurred before they existed faces the same retrospectivity issue as above – where do you stop?

Members of D Company 6RAR have received the US Presidential Unit citation, the Vietnam Medal, the South Vietnam Star, the AASM1945-75 ‘Vietnam’, at least nine of them have imperial gallantry awards of some kind, and many of them have been granted approval to accept and wear South Vietnamese individual gallantry awards (the ones the dolls and cigar boxes were presented in lieu of). Additionally, those nashos amongst them have the Anniversary of National Service 1951-72 Medal, and they’re all entitled to the Australian Defence Medal. Conceivably some of them can now legitimately wear eight medals from a single tour in Vietnam. I’m not saying they don’t deserve it. What I’m saying is, we’re talking about the government thinking long and hard about additional recognition (which is where this thread started). Additional recognition. I think it’s worth being sure it’s warranted, and not just minting a couple of hundred extra trinkets which are by themselves worthless, but in the wider context, are extremely damaging to the integrity of the honours system.

]]> By: Antibush http://strange-land.com/2006/08/long-tan-medal/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Antibush Thu, 15 Feb 2007 04:18:19 +0000 http://strange-land.com/?p=30#comment-48 Watch subject. Bush goes ballistic about other countries being evil and dangerous, because they have weapons of mass destruction. But, he insists on building up even a more deadly supply of nuclear arms right here in the US. What do you think? What is he doing to us, and what is he doing to the world? Are we safer today than we were before? The more people that the government puts in jails, the safer we are told to think we are. The real terrorists are wherever they are, but they aren't living in a country with bars on the windows. We are. Watch subject. Bush goes ballistic about other countries being evil and dangerous, because they have weapons of mass destruction. But, he insists on building up even a more deadly supply of nuclear arms right here in the US. What do you think? What is he doing to us, and what is he doing to the world?
Are we safer today than we were before?
The more people that the government puts in jails, the safer we are told to think we are. The real terrorists are wherever they are, but they aren’t living in a country with bars on the windows. We are.

]]>