The Medal of Honor

       On December 9, 1861, a senator from Iowa introduced a bill that would “promote the efficiency of the Navy” by distributing “medals of honor”. Then on December 21^st the bill was passed and 200 medals were produced "which shall be bestowed upon such petty officers, seamen,landsmen and marines as shall distinguish themselves by their gallantry inaction and other seamanlike qualities during the present war (Civil War)." This was the birth of the Navy Medal of Honor. Two months later, a similar bill was introduced to the Senate by Senator Henry Wilson, only this Medal of Honor was for the Army. Then in 1876 after the influx of candidates from the Battle of Little Big Horn, the criteria changed so that "the conduct which deserves such recognition should not be the simple discharge of duty, but such acts beyond this that if omitted or refused to be done, should not justly subject the person to censure as a shortcoming or failure."

Medal of Honor- Present day-
Army

Medal of Honor- Present Day-
Navy

                                           

     

                    Medal of Honor- Present Day-
         Airforce

        






    On September 27, 1942, SFC Douglas Munro earned the Medal of Honor for going above and beyond the call of duty. Munro’s mission was to rescue a battalion of marines trapped by Japanese troops at Point Cruz, Guadalcanal, and “aftermaking preliminary plans for the evacuation of nearly 500 beleaguered marines, Munro, under constant strafing by enemy machineguns on the island, and at greatrisk of his life, daringly led 5 of his small craft toward the shore.” Munro was killed in action before his mission was complete. Fast forward to modern day and 19 soldiers have been awarded the Medal of Honor since September 11, 2001, the most recent being Captain William D. Swenson, USA, War on Terrorism (Afghanistan). Captain Swenson received the Medal of Honor for risking his life to help save U.S. troops and Afghan allies and retrieve the bodies of four Americans killed in the Ganjal Valley in Eastern Afghanistan on September 8, 2009. This was a rescue and retrieval that was captured on video.

          

  

         

  Over the years, the recipients of the Medal of Honor have changed, however the reason for being awarded it have not. The soldiers that receive the Medal of Honor go above and beyond the call of duty, and that makes me, for one, more than proud to be an American. So why is it that we don't hear more about these men? Why is it that when it comes down to it, all we hear about is national debt and what big scandal is going on with a congressman this week? Our soldiers risk their lives so that we can sleep peacefully at night, and it is not right that they do not all get the credit they are due. I, for one, am growing increasingly angry over the fact that our country seems to be ignoring the fact that we are indeed still living in war times. We are all in this English Composition 101 class together, meaning that we are young. I bet that you are all thinking that there is nothing we can do about this, and if you're thinking that, you are wrong. During the Vietnam War, most protest took place on college campuses. That means that when we think of all the emotions stirred and all of the hatred of the war that we think about began on a college campus. I don't know if you guys have noticed, but we live on a college campus. We have the power to remind people what is really important, we have the power to speak up and raise awareness for our soldiers. We have the power to change the way people see this war, we have the power to remind them that freedom isn't free. 

Kill or Be killed?

This past week while watching The Hurt Locker, I noticed that Sandborn, Elridge, and James never took out a possible threat. Take for instance, the scene where James is attempting to defuse a bomb and there is a man with a camera pointed at the Team on the roof of one of the buildings. The men did not know why he was there or what his purpose was. That man could have easily killed them without a second thought. This stuck out in my mind and when I was researching why, I came across Marcus Luttrell and his story.

June 28,2005, Luttrell and  SEAL Team 10 set out on a mission to kill or capture Ahmad Shah. Shah was a high-ranking Taliban leader who was responsible for several killings in Eastern Afghanistan and the Hindu-Kush mountains. Luttrell was part of a 4 man team, he and Matthew Axelson were the snipers, Danny Dietz was in charge of communications and Michael P. Murphy rounded out the team as Team Leader. The men came upon a group of goat herders, fearful of what could happen if they allowed the men to leave, they discussed what to do with the herders. The team took a vote and Murphy made the decision to let the herders go. Luttrell believes that the herders betrayed the team’s location to the Taliban immediately and the team was under attack within the hour. In the ensuing battle, the other three members of Luttrell’s team were Killed in Action. An MH-47 was sent to retrieve the bodies and Luttrell, however it was shot down before it could reach the team killing all 16 members of its crew. Luttrell then crawled 7 miles to avoid capture and was taken in by a friendly Afghan Tribe who alerted American forces of Luttrell's location. After healing from his wounds, Luttrell returned to Afghanistan to complete one last tour saying, "I will never quit. My nation expects me to be physically harder and mentally stronger than my enemies. If knocked down I will get back up, every time. I will draw on every remaining ounce of strength to protect my teammates and to accomplish our mission. I am never out of the fight."

The article tells us that, “Team leader Michael P. Murphy was awarded the Medal of Honor for his actions in the battle. Danny Dietz, Matthew Axelson, and Marcus Luttrell were awarded the Navy Cross." Marcus Luttrell’s story is heart wrenching. Why did Murphy allow the herders to go free? The article says that he was just following protocol. Why is this protocol? Why is it okay for American troops to allow possible threats to walk free? Three men died in a battle that could most certainly have been avoided. Was it worth it? Were the sheep herders lives more important than the lives of ¾ of SEAL Team 10? Personally, I say no! I say that these men should not have had to lay down their lives because it all could have been avoided. I don’t have the answers to these questions, and I wish I did. However, this has been another week for “food for thought”. Let me know what you think!

Forever & Always,

Me

Marcus Luttrell

President Bush awarding Luttrell the Navy Cross

My problem, your problem?

    This past week while watching Black Hawk Down, one of my classmates posed a very interesting question. Why is it that the United States insists on intervening in other country's problems? In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington said, "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible." So why is it that America continues to refuse to heed the warning of one of our all-time greatest presidents? 

    On Wednesday, November 28, 1984, the Honorable Caspar W. Weinberger (pictured below), Secretary of Defense, addressed the public, saying, "In today's world, the line between peace and war is less clearly drawn than at any time in our history. When George Washington, in his farewell address, warned us, as a new democracy, to avoid foreign entanglements, Europe then lay 2-3 months by sea over the horizon. The United States was protected by the width of the oceans. Now in this nuclear age, we measure time in minutes rather than months." I don't know about you, but this goes a long way in answering my questions. When George Washington spoke of staying out of Foreign Affairs, we really had no reason to even begin to get involved in them to begin with. In those days, the United States was completely isolated, there was no United Nations, and the actions of other countries could not and would not directly affect the United States. Today, things are very different. We now live in a world where communication with another country can happen in mere seconds. 

    
    I'm not an expert, but I believe that the United States continues to have a strong military presence in the world because we are protective of those that, in our eyes, cannot protect themselves. 

    The picture above shows all of the military bases around the world in 2002. It shows how strong of a military presence we have around the world, but I believe that it also shows the strength of our actual military. For years, the United States has prided themselves in being a strong military force and protecting those whose rights are being infringed on, we fight to protect our home, but we also fight to protect the home of others. This is something that works for us, so why should we change that?

       When enlisting in the military, each person is required to take an oath. This oath reads, "I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." What exactly does this mean? How far does "defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies" go? I don't have these answers, and I don't think anyone does. When I began this blog post, I was determined to prove a point to all of you. I was determined to prove to you that it is important for the United States to have a strong military presence. However, now I'm not so sure that that is something that can be proven, by me or anyone else for that matter. Do I believe that it is a good thing? Yes, but that's my personal opinion and I can't prove anything on that basis.

       I don't think that this ended up being a topic that could be argued, take it as food for thought. Take what I've said, and form your own opinions, because if we can not learn from our past, we are doomed to repeat it. 


Forever & Always,
Me