Purple Hearts Revoked
Teranius
10-02-2005, 01:42
The Pentgon made the decision today to take Purple Hearts back from 11 soldiers who were wounded by friendly fire. I think that this is ridiculous. Does this cheapen the injuries that these soldiers suffered in the line of duty? Does it make the sacrifice made by families of friends of soldiers killed by friendly fire, or even the sacrifices made by the soldiers themselves, any less courageous and admirable? I think that the Purple Heart should extend to all injuries suffered in combat situations, whether by friendly or hostile fire.
Sumamba Buwhan
10-02-2005, 01:57
well maybe they were shot by friendly forces because they were just jerks!
lol - seriously I agree with you if they received the injury in battle no matter if they were hurt by incompetence or by agression
Cisalpia
10-02-2005, 02:04
Soldiers wounded by friendly fire are only eligible for the purple heart if the are injured as a result of of contact with the enemy, and if they were treated by a military medical specialist. If neither conditions are in place, then they are not deserving of the medal.
Summary: if a soldier is wounded by friendly fire in contact with an enemy, and is treated by an army medic, then he is eligible for a purple heart.
If the soldier is wounded by friendly fire without contact with an enemy, then the shooter is criminaly liable, and the soldier is not eligible - it is considered a workplace accident.
If the soldier is wounded by friendly fire in contact with an enemy but is not treated by an army medical specialist, then his wound is unverifiable, and therefore ineligible.
See purpleheart.org
Dontgonearthere
10-02-2005, 02:33
As said above, the Purple Heart is only presented to soldiers wounded by enemy action in combat.
If it were for every injury to a soldier, it would be pointless.
Of course, you could take your suggestion to the Air Force[/military humour]
Eutrusca
10-02-2005, 02:51
The Pentgon made the decision today to take Purple Hearts back from 11 soldiers who were wounded by friendly fire. I think that this is ridiculous. Does this cheapen the injuries that these soldiers suffered in the line of duty? Does it make the sacrifice made by families of friends of soldiers killed by friendly fire, or even the sacrifices made by the soldiers themselves, any less courageous and admirable? I think that the Purple Heart should extend to all injuries suffered in combat situations, whether by friendly or hostile fire.
This is probably in reaction against the tendency of awards to gradually "cheapen" over the years. In Vietnam, I knew a Lieutenant who got a Purple Heart because he ran out of his tent during a mortor attack and wrapped himself around some tent ropes and tent pegs! Groan!
Plus, if memory serves me correctly, the PH is awarded when a soldier is wounded as a direct result of "hostile action."
The Black Forrest
10-02-2005, 02:58
This is probably in reaction against the tendency of awards to gradually "cheapen" over the years. In Vietnam, I knew a Lieutenant who got a Purple Heart because he ran out of his tent during a mortor attack and wrapped himself around some tent ropes and tent pegs! Groan!
Plus, if memory serves me correctly, the PH is awarded when a soldier is wounded as a direct result of "hostile action."
It's not just the purple hearts. One of my friends great-uncle was in the infantry in WWII. I forget where the event happened and when for that matter but he told the story thus.
It was Christmas(i think), we were out in the snow and eating rations and the officers were in a tent having a hot turkey dinner. At one point we heard a "woosh-whoosh-whoosh" sound and a dude artillery round landed. I decided to teach them a lesson. I picked up the shell an ran it over to the tent and was going to throw it in when the flap went up and there was the major! "What you doing soldier!" "Ahhh, this round landed near the officers tent and I was removing it!"
He got a silver star. ;)
Then again the bastard might have been pulling my leg! :D
As a fellow soldier I know how hard these men train to defend their country, in my case it is the United States of America, I don't care what caused this injury, but nonetheless these soldiers that fight to defend our lands were wounded, and to take away the Purple Heart is a complete slap in the face, to take away something because they were shot by an allies bullet instead of an enemies, A BULLET IS A BULLET PEOPLE, where do they get off striping dignity away from these individuals by issuing them these medallions of courage and then taking them back and saying "oh sorry, you don't deserve this" if it was issued, even by mistake they should have enough respect to let these men and women keep something that they cherish, some people look on the Purple Heart as something to put in a drawer and never take pride in, but for those that recieved and injury on the battlefield, and realise how close they came to death everytime they look at this medal, they by law you should not be allowed to take the pride of anyone away like this, I could continue but you are tired of hearing what I have to say
Celtlund
10-02-2005, 03:41
The Pentgon made the decision today to take Purple Hearts back from 11 soldiers who were wounded by friendly fire. I think that this is ridiculous. Does this cheapen the injuries that these soldiers suffered in the line of duty? Does it make the sacrifice made by families of friends of soldiers killed by friendly fire, or even the sacrifices made by the soldiers themselves, any less courageous and admirable? I think that the Purple Heart should extend to all injuries suffered in combat situations, whether by friendly or hostile fire.
Would you mind posting some link to back up this story? Thank you.