Posted on 03/05/2010 9:24:20 AM PST by llevrok
Edited on 03/05/2010 3:09:39 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
The Sun reports that Flight Lieutenant Ian Fortune, 28, had flown in to pick up casualties as a firefight raged between American and Afghan forces and heavily-armed rebels near Garmsir in Helmand Province.
Flt-Lt Fortune - who had TV presenter Mike Brewer on the aircraft filming a documentary - was advised to hold off on approach to the battle as it was "too hot" on the ground. He circled until troops reported incoming fire had calmed down.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
The Victoria Cross is for a level of courage in the face of an enemy where the person should have died.
Call me Mister Cynical but doesn't getting shot between the eyes rise to the level of where he should have died?
Yes, but he didn’t expect to be shot between the eyes. He knew there was a risk of being wounded or killed but so do all those who go into combat. We don’t give the VC to all soldiers who are killed or wounded.
Unusual courage of the type that is decorate is displayed when the risk reaches an unusual level. It’s the man who stands up when he could be lying down. It’s the pilot who flies into withering anti-aircraft fire, he cannot hope to survive, not the pilot who accepts the normal risks in being fired at.
I beg to differ, flying into any LZ that is under fire has the prerequisite risk called for.
Wow. Just wow.
The Victoria Cross is the highest award for bravery in British and Commonwealth forces - generally seen as equivalent to the United States’ Medal of Honor.
Do you believe every pilot who ever flew into a landing zone under fire should have received the Medal of Honor? Or do you believe it should be reserved for the extraordinary acts for which is bestowed?
No but not every pilot that flys into an LZ gets shot between the eyes and continues to fly the aircraft either.
It would do you well to read many of the Medal of Honor stories especially those given to Pilots and Air crew.
For instance Read the one Jimmy Doolittle received.
I know the criterion for U.S. Awards but defer to you on the criterion for the Crown’s Awards.
Very brave, but VC’s are reserved for actions regarded as even braver.
Only 1356 or so since 1856.
I’m a military historian and I have read about most twentieth century Medal of Honor recipients. I’ve also read about most twentieth century recipients of the Victoria Cross and have met a number of them.
I was an officer of the Australian Defence Force for over twenty years and was specifically trained in the criteria for which various British and Australian decorations are awarded, and in the processes by which you recommend somebody for such a decoration.
The DFC is a decoration bestowed for “an act or acts of valour, courage or devotion to duty whilst flying in active operations against the enemy”. In my view that is a correct and accurate description of what Flt-Lt Fortune did.
Flying into a landing zone under fire is what Flt-Lt Michelle Goodman DFC did in 2007. It is what Lieutenant Nichol Benzie RN DFC did in 2007. It is what Major Mark Hammond DFC did in 2006. It is what Flt-Lt Christopher Hasler did in 2006. It is what Flt-Lt Craig Wilson did in 2006. Most of them did it multiple times.
I know the criteria. I know what is being awarded.
I am, by the way, well aware of the Doolittle raid and I know that the citation for General Doolittle’s Medal of Honor specifically refers to the fact that his mission was considered to be one that was virtually certain to end in death or capture. Not just a risk, but an unusual risk.
I yield to your knowledge of Her Majesties Regulations.
So far, in this war, I've correctly picked the awarded decoration in all but one case - in that one the GC was awarded for something I'd have recommended an MC for, so I could be wrong again.
This bit leaps out at me though: Flt-Lt Fortune - who had TV presenter Mike Brewer on the aircraft filming a documentary - was advised to hold off on approach to the battle as it was "too hot" on the ground. He circled until troops reported incoming fire had calmed down.
It indicates that he held off his approach until the circumstance had become less dangerous. No criticism of him - he was advised to do so, he may well have been ordered to do so, and you have a duty to be smart, not just brave, and to preserve your life and aircraft, not just risk it - but it does wind up making a difference. It would be hard to press the claim that the situation was one of the most extreme danger.
Have you read MacArthur’s as well?
You’re wrong, getting shot between the eyes while your aircraft is under heavy fire in a hot LZ and having the courage to fly out a battle damaged aircraft is your very definition of what the Victoria Cross should be given for.... Courage under fire to the point where you don’t know whether or not you will live or die.
Or would you deny him the medal just because he didn’t have a gun in his hands?
I’m sorry, but I disagree and I believe my training and experience in this area entitles me to disagree.
I believe Flt-Lt Fortune was extremely heroic and extremely brave and the medal I would recommend him for is one that is awarded to those who are extremely heroic and brave. In my view, your attitude cheapens that decoration by suggesting it’s awarded for a lower level of courage than it is, in fact, awarded for, implying those that received it were less brave than they actually were.
The fact that Flt-Lt Fortune was not carrying a gun doesn’t effect my view of what decoration he’s entitled to at all. The Victoria Cross has been awarded, many times, for acts that involved rescuing people, rather than killing the enemy. Two of the three men to have received it twice were non-combatant Medical Officers. It is sometimes entirely appropriate for it to be awarded for such actions.
In my view, this case does not rise to quite that level - it comes close which is why I would recommend him for the DFC, or even possibly for the CGC.
The CGC, by the way, would make him the most decorated RAF officer of the current war.
And, yes, I’m aware of MacArthur’s Medal of Honor as well - if he’d been British, he probably would have got the DSO not the VC for his defence of the Philipines (although I certainly believe he had earned the Medal of Honor at least once, if not twice, before and had not received it then.)
We’ll see if they do him a great disservice then.
Just by way of interest. If there were US wounded on that flight could he be up for a US gong?
Yes.
The United State does on occasion, bestow US military decorations on troops in foreign services in such cases.
One example that comes to mind - an Australian soldier Keith Payne who rescued a force consisting of Australian, South Vietnamese and US forces under his command was awarded the Victoria Cross by Australia, and the Distinguished Service Cross by the United States. (Among his many many decorations, he also has America’s Silver Star).
I think that would be the VC.
Furthermore, we know how many raiders did not return home. Even launching a fully loaded bomber from a WWII era aircraft carrier had an unprecedented mortal risk.
As a side note, I am so glad you post here to bring sanity and understanding to keyboard commandos such as we. Thanks mate!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.