Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Army announces new Combat Action Badge eligibility
Army News Service ^ | June 10, 2005

Posted on 06/12/2005 3:36:34 AM PDT by mark502inf

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, June 10, 2005) -- The Army announced this week the eligibility requirements for its new Combat Action Badge.

The requirements are laid out in a Department of the Army letter published on June 3. The letter also discusses changes to the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Combat Medic Badge.

The CAB, whose design features both a bayonet and grenade, may be awarded to any Soldier performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized, who is personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy, and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement, according to the specific eligibility requirements.

Award of the CAB is not limited by one’s branch or military occupational specialty; however, to receive the CAB, a Soldier must not be assigned or attached to a unit that would quality the Soldier for the CIB or CMB.

The CAB's creation was approved by Army chief of staff Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker on May 2, 2005, to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engage or are engaged by the enemy.

“Warfare is still a human endeavor,” Schoomaker said. “Our intent is to recognize Soldiers who demonstrate and live the Warrior Ethos.”

"The Global War on Terrorism and its associated operations will be the first era of conflict considered for this award," said Lt. Col. Bill Johnson, Human Resources Command chief of military awards. "September 18, 2001, is the effective date for the new award. That is when President Bush signed Senate Joint Resolution 23, authorizing the use of military force against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States."

The CAB should be available late this summer or early fall through unit supply and military clothing sales stores.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; army; combatactionbadge; iraq

1 posted on 06/12/2005 3:36:34 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

How many people in OIF have actually used grenades and bayonets while fighting?


2 posted on 06/12/2005 4:08:06 AM PDT by Voice in your head ("The secret of Happiness is Freedom, and the secret of Freedom, Courage." - Thucydides)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head

Not many--and I expect those who did are getting CIBs, not this badge.


3 posted on 06/12/2005 4:21:15 AM PDT by mark502inf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

Didn't use much imagination in the design did they?


4 posted on 06/12/2005 4:43:02 AM PDT by Wu (Excuse me while I kiss the sky......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
During the Revolutionary war, three awards were given. Not three types, three total. U.S. Grant, going from Capitan to four star received none. It appears that the military is reflecting the self esteem cult of the general status/symbolic culture pervading American.
5 posted on 06/12/2005 4:58:29 AM PDT by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head

Good point.

I suspect this new medal is a result of those with a non-infantry MOS wishing to be recognized for time spent under fire IE arty and engineers.



6 posted on 06/12/2005 5:08:00 AM PDT by wingman1 (University of Vietnam 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wingman1

At this rate, why not just give everyone a Congressional Medal of Honor, to help their self esteem?

That way no one will have to feel left out.


7 posted on 06/12/2005 5:37:25 AM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf
I think that OIF and OEF has shown that traditional awards do need to be augmented, but within reason. My son was stonked - and missed - by terrorists' mortars on a regular basis for 12 months, yet an award beyond his campaign ribbon would be a bit much. Nevertheless, belittling or ignoring some soldiers simply because their units aren't infantry outfits (in a zone where there are few truly safe places) isn't right.

The krauts had the Infanterie Sturmabzeichen as well as the close combat assault badge, and I don't think there was a great deal of confusion over the matter; the analogy is not exact in this case, but there are levels of combat, and there are levels of combat. A civilian like myself may not know the shorthand, but throughout history, men-at-arms can distinguish s**t from shoe polish.

Designwise, I'm unimpressed with this award, but I suppose it is intended to echo the CIB, which it "kind of, sort of" does.

8 posted on 06/12/2005 5:47:48 AM PDT by niteowl77 (I see seven senators badly in need of emergency RINOplasty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

"The letter also discusses changes to the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Combat Medic Badge."
First the berets, then a Combat Action Badge that sounds like it was designed by the Italian milita, and now they are gonna muck around with CIBs and CMBs!?
The CIB was designed, in part, to honor a traditional connection with every American combat infantryman since the Colonial era. And the CMB was, in part, a grassroots effort by WWII combat infantry to recognize the special roles that combat medics, God Bless 'em, play.
Just damn!
Leave it to somebody with the "Five Oh Ducks" to ruin my breakfast Danish. ( From a guy who who served with the Five Oh First).


9 posted on 06/12/2005 6:04:28 AM PDT by womcg (was in the hospital longer than Kerry was in-country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

this will really help with enlistments!...look like the wimps that Clinton promoted are still incharge!


10 posted on 06/12/2005 6:08:40 AM PDT by jrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrd

I have mixed feelings about this. I had a non-combat MOS and got the crap pounded out of me in enemy engagements. The VC/NVA did not care what your MOS was. Our unit also did short range patrols. I did many things beyond my MOS that put me at greater risk.

Having said that, the guys out in the bush should have special recognition for what they did. The bulk of the KIA's and WIA's were those guys. Their living conditions were horrific and personal risk was always much, much greater for them.

For me, getting an award for 'combat actions' would not make any difference. That is not why I was there.


11 posted on 06/12/2005 6:43:31 AM PDT by Stashiu (RVN, 1969-70)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

12 posted on 06/12/2005 6:47:27 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Taglines often reveal a lot about the inner person...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mark502inf

From what I've been able to read about it. The changes to the CIB and CMB are to allow Special Forces medics to receive the CIB rather than the CMB. There will be no changes to the appearance of the badges themselves. Special Forces medics differ from their regular Army counterparts in that they are allowed to carry arms and directly engage enemy forces. Many Special Forces medics feel more akin to the infantry aspects of their jobs than they do the medical aspects. After some of the knock down drag out fire fights in OEF/OIF they felt shortchanged receiving a medical badge while their buddies received the CIB.


13 posted on 06/12/2005 6:49:30 AM PDT by Boris99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CondorFlight

I was at a county fair 5 years ago and there was a young couple making up custom license plates.

The next day I brought my "Vietnam Service Medal" ribbon and asked if they could make a VSM on a license plate. They did and did it with some sort of tape. I had my doubts about the different colored tapes holding up, but the plate is still on my truck.

I think just having served is something to be proud of, regardless of recognition for valor or gallantry.


14 posted on 06/12/2005 10:32:59 AM PDT by wingman1 (University of Vietnam 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Boris99

"Special Forces medics differ from their regular Army counterparts in that they are allowed to carry arms and directly engage enemy forces."

Our Army medics carried M16s. Something must have changed since then.


15 posted on 06/12/2005 10:36:09 AM PDT by wingman1 (University of Vietnam 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wingman1

In the AF (I am most familiar with those rules, back in the day) medical types carried special Geneva Convention ID cards and were not allowed to carry 'offensive' weapons - pistol OK, M-16, no. I said 'screw that', carried a GAU 5 and a 45. - my ID card looked like everyone elses.

I beleive most SOF medics have more than one job (cross-trained) so the change in the CMB makes sense. at least IMO.


16 posted on 06/12/2005 11:40:25 AM PDT by ASOC (Insert clever tagline here: _______)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wingman1; ASOC

In my experience, Army medics (91B/W) always carried 9mm pistols for self defence, but as ASOC stated, due to their status under the Geneva Convention they were not supposed to carry offensive weapons. Maybe since OEF/OIF the rules have been bent a little to include the M-16 for self defense. Special Forces medics are "shooters" first and medics second.


17 posted on 06/12/2005 7:24:04 PM PDT by Boris99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: womcg

Geronimo!!

"A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon"
Napoleon, 1815


18 posted on 06/12/2005 7:38:16 PM PDT by Skeeve14 (De Opresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Boris99

One of our medics was a CO, but all the others carried M16s.

After the CO medic was dusted off, I distinctly remember hearing our Captain tell someone in the rear that he did not want any more medics who could not carry arms.

I had no idea that the Geneva Convention had provisions for this. Our unit used mechanical ambushes, and at that time we did know they were against the Geneva Convention.


19 posted on 06/12/2005 8:19:48 PM PDT by wingman1 (University of Vietnam 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wingman1

I believe that the policy changed after Operation Just Cause in 1989. James Markwell was a combat medic in 1st Ranger Battalion. He was killed in action by direct fire, during the initial assault. He was armed only with a 9mm and he had expended all ammunition. I believe that was a catalyst for the change to medics carrying rifles. Combat medics carry rifles in OIF/OEF. I do not know if this is technically proper, but it is common practice for logical reasons.


20 posted on 06/14/2005 5:35:08 PM PDT by Voice in your head ("The secret of Happiness is Freedom, and the secret of Freedom, Courage." - Thucydides)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head

"I do not know if this is technically proper, but it is common practice for logical reasons."

Ain't it funny how Americans handcuff themselves with rules?


21 posted on 06/14/2005 5:46:06 PM PDT by wingman1 (University of Vietnam 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head

The gals have finally gotten their CIB.


22 posted on 06/16/2005 2:50:38 PM PDT by Meldrim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson