View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dane Lt.Jg.
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 Posts: 114 Location: Chile
|
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:06 pm Post subject: great ad idea! |
|
|
Mr. Thurlow has publicly announced that if he had known that hostile fire was a prerequisite for the Bronze Star, he would never have accepted it. How about an ad showing him formally returning the medal to the Navy Department and stating that he did not know that it was awarded under misrepresented circumstances? And then challenging Kerry to do the same!
Dane
Last edited by Dane on Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:07 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dane Lt.Jg.
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 Posts: 114 Location: Chile
|
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pardon me. That should read "stating that he did NOT know..." |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wing Wiper Rear Admiral
Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 664 Location: Oregon
|
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dane: If you want to correct a post you made, open it and use the "edit" button, then "submit" again and it will make the change. I figured this out after a few of my own typos. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dane Lt.Jg.
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 Posts: 114 Location: Chile
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks. Works pretty well! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wing Wiper Rear Admiral
Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 664 Location: Oregon
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Alright. I'm glad you didn't take that the wrong way. It's a good idea for an ad, but from what I've read, Thurlow was the only guy that day that deserved a medal. I'd hate to see him give it up because Kerry lied about the "enemy fire". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dane Lt.Jg.
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 Posts: 114 Location: Chile
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that he deserves a medal or decoration of some sort. But the regs are the regs. If we say that Kerry didnīt deserve his due to the lack of hostile fire then nobody did. There are other awards that recognize heroics not under fire. Before I go too far with this, Iīm going to review the 1650.1. Back soon
Dane |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wing Wiper Rear Admiral
Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 664 Location: Oregon
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I thought Thurlow got a Bronze Star for his action in saving the ship and crew. Are you sure he needed to be under fire to rate that? I really believe it wouldn't make much difference. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wing Wiper Rear Admiral
Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 664 Location: Oregon
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
I thought Thurlow got a Bronze Star for his action in saving the ship and crew. Are you sure he needed to be under fire to rate that? I really believe it wouldn't make much difference. But you're right, the regs are the regs. I'd bet Thurlow would give it back to sink Kerry, but it's his decision, and I wouldn't question what Mr. Thurlow decided.
And notice after I told you how to edit a post, I ended up with this mess? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Covan MI Seaman Recruit
Joined: 07 Aug 2004 Posts: 8 Location: Florida
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
If he givs the BS with "V" back he should get a BS for Achievement (does not require hostile fire) and the USN equiv of Soldiers Medal for his bravery. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dane Lt.Jg.
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 Posts: 114 Location: Chile
|
Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oops. I think a lot of us may be operating under a false idea of the requirements. I donīt know what was in effect in 1969 but the following comes from the recent 1650.1G:
quote
b. Eligibility Requirements
(1) Awarded to any person who, while serving in any
capacity with the Armed Forces of the United States, distinguishes
himself/herself on or after 7 December 1941 by heroic or
meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation
in aerial flight.
(a) while engaged in an action against an enemy
of the United States;
(b) while engaged in military operations involving
conflict with an opposing foreign force; or
(c) while serving with friendly foreign forces
engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in
which the United States is not a belligerent party.
(2) To justify this decoration, accomplishment or
performance of duty above that normally expected, and sufficient
to distinguish the individual among those performing comparable
duties is required, although less than the requirements for the
Silver Star or Legion of Merit. Minor acts of heroism in combat
or single acts of merit or meritorious service in connection
with military or naval operations may justify this award.
SECNAVINST 1650.1G
2-19
(3) The recipient must be in receipt of Imminent
Danger Pay during the qualifying period.
c. Combat Distinguishing Device. The Combat Distinguishing
Device may be authorized for valor (heroism).
end quote
My read is that he deserved it. His actions were the result of an enemy attack (a mine) during a time of conflict with an enemy of the U.S. It was a command-detonated mine so there were enemy forces present and he had no idea whether or not he would come under fire. There is no mention of the need for "hostile fire". Somebody should get word to him that his decoration was not wrongfully awarded. I apologize to him in absentia for having thought otherwise.
On the other hand, Kerry did nothing heroic. He helped a perfectly healthy, unwounded, fully swimmer-qualified SF guy climb aboard his boat in a situation where there was absolutely no danger in letting the guy remain in the water another hour. That hardly constitutes heroic or meritorious achievement or service.
Dane |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|