Change! NATO Commanders Want New "Courageous Restraint" Award to Honor Those Who Avoid Using Their Weapons
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, May 5, 2010, 5:16 AM
When did Code Pink take over NATO?
Trained killing courageously restrained machines (Daily Mail Photo)
NATO Commanders are pushing for a new “courageous restraint” award to recognize and celebrate the troops who exhibit extraordinary courage and self-control by not using their weapons even when their lives are at risk.
The AP reported:
NATO commanders are weighing a new way to reduce civilian casualties in Afghanistan: recognizing soldiers for “courageous restraint” if they avoid using force that could endanger innocent lives.
The concept comes as the coalition continues to struggle with the problem of civilian casualties despite repeated warnings from the top NATO commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, that the war effort hinges on the ability to protect the population and win support away from the Taliban.Those who back the idea hope it will provide soldiers with another incentive to think twice before calling in an airstrike or firing at an approaching vehicle if civilians could be at risk.
Most military awards in the past have been given for things like soldiers taking out a machine gun nest or saving their buddies in a firefight, said Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Hall, the senior NATO enlisted man in Afghanistan.
“We are now considering how we look at awards differently,” he said.
British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter, the NATO commander of troops in southern Afghanistan, proposed the idea of awarding soldiers for “courageous restraint” during a visit by Hall to Kandahar Airfield in mid April. McChrystal is now reviewing the proposal to determine how it could be implemented, Hall said.
…”There should be an opportunity to recognize and celebrate the troops who exhibit extraordinary courage and self-control by not using their weapons, but instead taking personal risk to de-escalate tense and potentially disastrous situations,” the statement said.
Hat Tip Tim N.
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Busted!… Obama Headlined a DEMOCRAT SOCIALISTS OF AMERICA Event in 1996 **FLIER**
Published May 24, 2012 at 8:46 pm - 86 Comments
ahem commented:
Yeah, right. These people are insane.
DMartyr commented:
So, can it be awarded posthumously?
John C. commented:
The award is not necessary. Combat training already covers that particular issue.
JimBalto commented:
…and the pussification of the military continues. Sigh….
Stonewall, Black Jack, Patton, Clark, Eisenhower, et. al…..where have you gone?!?
Viv commented:
Maj. Gen. Nick Carter has spent his career as a remf, his statement is no real surprise.
Captain Fantastic commented:
Put those clown weenies on the front edge and see what happens with “courageous restraint”. They will cry like little plump babies.
NC Cop commented:
“So, can it be awarded posthumously?”
My thoughts exactly. Well said.
Mike commented:
Why don’t they encourage soliders to make friends with the enemy. The soliders can get awarded with stickers back at base if they are successful in inviting a terrorist back to the chow hall for dinner and a game of cards.
ProLifer commented:
Why not take the weapons away?
Then everyone can receive a reward!
(I.e., a military funeral.)
CARMELLA commented:
Is this a joke? I cannot handle this crap. This is just another liberal way of saying “we hope your troops die” while claiming to be about peace. THIS IS WAR YOU MORONS. Getting along is for PEACE TIME. OMG where did America go? I want her back!! GOD please bless our soldiers.
garrettc commented:
Perhaps we are no longer needed in NATO?
kate commented:
Kill or be killed.
Easy choice. It’s so much better to be revered at your funeral.
chuck in st paul commented:
The military only has two jobs:
1) kill people
2) blow s**t up
That’s it. KISS.
Anything else it NOT military. Why not send in all those folks from the UN HQ in NYC? Then no one would get shot [what do you mean the Taliban would shoot unarmed diplomats?? don't they know 'the rules of engagement'??] (/sarc)
ElectricPhase commented:
“McChrystal is now reviewing the proposal to determine how it could be implemented, Hall said.”
You’ve got to be kidding!
perlguy commented:
How about giving the award to those who don’t kill every living thing in an area that is sheltering terrorist scum?
StrangernFiction commented:
Are these people aware of history? You know the “bad stuff” that happened in the past. Or is it their view that these unfortunate events would not have occured had they been around with brilliant policies like this.
Astonishing ignorance!
daryl commented:
Do I qualify for this “prestigious” award?
I, just now, almost went postal on my monitor while reading that s**t but forcefully restrained myself from doing harm to an innocent machine.
(that plus the cost of replacing it).
dnb commented:
I’m sure this will make soldiers’ loved ones sleep peacefully.
The Elector of Saxony commented:
Pay attention, people. It’s a rare opportunity to watch as a Civilization perishes.
As a child, I read everything I could get my hands on about the Roman Empire, and I remember wondering how they could allow it all to die. Well, now I see. How sad that my children are going to have to live through the second Dark Ages, and to know that there won’t be a Renaissance this time around.
jerryl commented:
im sure the enemy will love this
Rock commented:
New award to be called PCSA (Politically Correct Stupidity Award), command expects most will be awarded posthumously. Next we will hear in anticipation of the new policy the White House will award a new contract for a increased supply of Body-bags made by GE. This insanity just gets worse with each passing day.
Warthog commented:
It is stories like this that cause me to be stymed by the profanity filters here.
(Those s******, m****************, c*******, Z******s!!!!!!! ….)
oldguy commented:
Served in U.S. Army, 1957-1960. How sad and ashamed I am for that.
Betsy Ross commented:
The award is a fake rifle with a flower sticking out of the barrel…
Robb76 commented:
My son, a two tour Iraq war vet and a trigger pulling infantry NCO is pulling the plug this month after 8 years. Thanks be to God!
Robb
US Army Retired
redc1c4 commented:
i haven’t used force on anyone in the ‘stan…. where’s my award?
Rock commented:
Served 1962-1982 only thing I’m ashamed of is the Silent Majority letting the 60′s radicals go unchallenged, and allowed to infect our Government. While we where busy defending our nation from foreign enemies, they allowed a domestic enemy to infiltrate our Capital.
Robb76 commented:
Viv # 5
REMF is right on. Most if not all, have never heard
a shot fired in anger, up close and personal.
Joanne commented:
Sure, encourager and reward those who put their lives in danger to avoid using their weapons of which they have to protect their own lives. I’m sure that will go over with their loved ones.
My dad was in Indo-China as a ‘peacekeeper’, and our dumbass government would not allow them to carry guns even though many were killed at the hands of those with intent to kill them. What kind of statement did that make? It made them look like easy pickings, which they were.
olds-mo-william commented:
“celebrate”
YAY!
Jim commented:
The real question is this: what soldier will wear the damn thing? “I got this one for not shooting when my life and the lives of my fellow soldiers were actually in grave danger.”
Finally a medal that John Kerry wouldn’t throw away.
mike commented:
#25 that funny!!!
Opaobie commented:
I thought we already had a name for that subdivision of the military: Conscientious Objectors.
JKB commented:
There is no reason that current medals and honors can’t be bestowed for “courageous restraint.” If the mission is accomplished but the soldier used restraint in firepower the reward that.
A friend, who is a police officer, just received an award for not killing a guy. The guy was a half a trigger pull from taking a bullet in the ear but he fumbled the gun. That provided the extra seconds that closed the distance. When he went for the gun, he got a punch in the head instead of a bullet. But he lives because my friend is one of the most trained and experienced officers in the state.
Unfortunately, this NATO award seems to be designed to encourage foolish risk taking rather than to reward experience and expertise.
West commented:
Well, then let’s just stop giving our soldiers guns, and then they can ALL get the award!
Win-Win! (except for the conflict, of course, but who cares about THAT).
gs commented:
Change! NATO Commanders Want New “Courageous Restraint” Award to Honor Those Who Avoid Using Their Weapons
It’s worse than that, GP. The article says they want to
dilutedistort existing awards:Thanks for this post, but accuracy is worthwhile.
Sandy commented:
The news is getting more insane by the minute. The reason they call it war is cause the other side is shooting at you–duh!
Sandy commented:
Someday this will become a sitcom. I hope to live to see it.
Mike commented:
“So, can it be awarded posthumously?”
Frequently, I would expect.
Retired from the Army 3 1/2 years ago. I hated being out, and still do, but this and a lot of the other crap going on has done a lot to mitigate my personal disappointment. Still not happy with this for all the guys I know that are still in.
Fuzzy commented:
lmao, this is truly hilarious. Talk about one “award” that would be shamefully hidden at the back of a closet.
fred commented:
It’s like NATO feels left out of the Special Olympics…
setnaffa commented:
The name for people like this is “dhimmi”…
SSG Jeff (USAR) commented:
So… maybe Michael Yon knows what he’s talking about on the subject of GEN McChrystal.
Arty commented:
What’s next, some kind of medal for Major Hassan?
WASF!
mojo commented:
I believe that’s placed next to the “Good Sport” award, and just below the “Got My Ass Kicked” ribbon…
Armageddon Rex commented:
The award ribbon will have a pink background with a miniature French tri-color in the foreground, all eclipsed by the silhouette of a chicken head and neck!
Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster.
If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast.
If the people raise a great howl against my barbarity and cruelty, I will answer that war is war, and not popularity seeking.
This war differs from other wars, in this particular. We are not fighting armies but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war.
War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.
General of the Army, William Tecumseh Sherman
We won’t win another war until we remember the lessons of General Sherman, and the classical way of western war. The handwringing PC bunch hate war, and soldiers, so they renamed war ethnic cleansing, and genocide, but those are the classical methods the west has employed to win wars for millenia.
Want to win in Afghanistan? Round up every military age male Pashtun, and shoot them or put them in prison camps for 5 years. Vet the 10-25% who can be retrained to renounce Islam and become Christians. Convert and retrain them, then you can really begin to build a nation.
Alana commented:
This is dumb.
And suicidal.
Karthanon commented:
It more sounds like NATO wants to hand out Xbox achievements, not medals.
Will they pay for Xbox Live posthumously?
Opaobie commented:
The fraction of a second of hesitation that will be created in the minds of engaged soldiers or marines or pilots or SEALs NOT to use their weapons may cost them and others who depend on them their lives. We already know of incidents where allowing “civilians” to walk away after contact with Special Forces missions have cost the lives of the benevolent Americans and lost the mission.
There is already pressure on our military NOT to use their weapons to avoid “collateral damage”, not shoot until shot at, etc., but there is NO hesitation by the enemy, and there never will be. It seems there is more effort being directed at running social experiments on our military than there is in training and providing them the equipment and SUPPORT and ENCOURAGEMENT to do what ONLY the military can do: fight and KILL the enemy.
Bargain on eBay: WWII French Army rifle. Never been fired, dropped once.
JD commented:
Well, this IS Europe we’re talking about here. I thought Europe was almost all Code Pink these days.
{^_^}
Opaobie commented:
JKB| #36, your police officer friend is to be commended, but police work among civilized AMERICANS and war against sucidal, fanatic savages are worlds apart, and the goals are also worlds apart.
LeBron Steinman commented:
Here’s the appropriate response to “courageous restraint”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a0ORdQU
Robert commented:
In related news, Afghan Floral Businesses Booming.
jt commented:
I’m sure this will inspire the UN to create its own very special medal for raping civilian children.
jgreene commented:
Yes, let them call it the “Courageously Restrained BS Award” or CRBA. NATO is so full of this BS that their Command Structure will all be hangin’ BS Medals around their necks.
Gutless, pusillanimous pukes!
Gary commented:
As a Veteren of Iraq and current enlisted soldier, I can honestly say I would not want , wear, or even display such a thing.
I can say that when put into a potentially harmful situation the last thing I ever thought about was “Gee what kind of medals will I get for this?” that being said I don’t think this will change the way anyone on a battlefield acts, reacts, or thinks!!!
clifford commented:
I suggest it be called the “Brave Sir Robin” Award, and be a brown ribbon with a big yellow stripe running down the middle.
techsan commented:
We can sign on to this right after the Taliban…Al Queda…Greenpeace…et. al. sign on. They seem to be the ones shooting first.
Captain Midnight commented:
I retired from th military and a current DoD employee, but I think actually might be a good idea. Things are different in a guerrilla war than they were in WWII. The center of gravity is the civilian population, not the enemy army. Uninhibited use of force can hurt our cause and help the enemy. On the other hand, restraint can mean accepting more personal risk for the soldier. Hence, I think an award for courageous restraint is appropriate for the kind of war we’re in.
BUZZ commented:
so the enemy already hids behind civilians. Does this policy put the civilians in more or less danger? Seems obvious to me.
bg commented:
++
as if the troops don’t already exhibit
ample “Courageous Restraint”.. gah!!
Obama is winning his war against US
God help our troops, Obama is setting them up for
International Tribunals (or whatever they’re called)
==
wGraves commented:
The only thing worse than being awarded one of these things would be having to wear it at parade. Maybe we could just award it to the enemy and they’d stop shooting?
Corky Boyd commented:
The British, depite the fact they were our allies in Iraq, basically sat out the war during the last year and a half (prior to Basra falling to the government). They cut a deal with the al Sadr militas in Basra that they wouldn’t enter the city if the militias wouldn’t attack them.
When Maliki cleaned out the militias in Baghdad, he set his sights on Basra in the British area of responsiblity. The British were unavailable, so Maliki sent his own troops (described as ill trained by the US and foreign press) and obtained the surrender of the militias in three days.
The Brits pulled similar stunts in Afghanistan, working unauthorized “truces” with the Taliban.
There are only three nations who can fight a successful war today: The USA, Israel and Australia. All the rest have a military with the main purpose of supporting an arms industry that can sell (bribe) their weapons to third world nations.
The British are now as defeatest as the Fench.
DocScience commented:
Why not just use the existing French award?
It’s a white rectangle, conspicuously displayed.
With yellow and brown undersash worn in the pants.
timothyJ commented:
The US is pretty much on it’s own, in spite of the alliances that we have made in the past, or the ones that Obey Won hasn’t destroyed in the present. It is truly time to get out of the UN and NATO. Let the loosers of the world take care of themselves. May no American Soldier die to protect these pathetic countries that despise us or our soldiers.
Alex commented:
I wonder if the courageous NATO “soldiers” in Srebrenica who did not raise their arms while Bosnian men and children were marched off will get this award posthumously (of course, that’s posthumously for those poor dead Bosnians). This is about as pathetic as a military force can get…
TrickyDick commented:
This should read……
Change! NATO Commanders Want New “Postmumous” Award to Honor Those Who Avoid Using Their Weapons
Friggin morons!
squeaky commented:
ok, an award for avoiding the use of their weapons to be immediately followed by an extensive investigation and critique if the benefituary of their restraint proceeds to go on to killing innocents. our not so swell profiling of a few gitmo detainees left us with egg on our face when they resurected as active taliban members actively trying to kill our people.
Stuart commented:
I was in a war once, over in Viet Nam. We came in second. Where’s my second place trophy?
Sandy from Chesterfield commented:
If we are not going to let our soldiers fight this war it is time to bring them home. NATO and obama are not letting our soldiers do their job and are just putting them at risk of loosing their lives with all of these rules of engagement. My son wants to serve his country but it will be over my dead body before I let him be taken advantage of by obama. He can wait until 2012 to enlist when more sensible minds will be in control!
max commented:
This medal is designed to strike fear into the hearts of the enemies of NATO. Of course those enemies are also known as citizens of NATO countries who do not believe that the appropriate response to being attacked is to curl into a ball and whimper, and this medal will strike fear into their hearts. Merely raising the idea of the medal has certainly increased my fear level.
Bob Dobalena commented:
This better not be awarded to any officer who doesn’t have a gun in their hands facing direct fire. I can see it now: Major Pink back at the command post is given a “courageous restraint” award when she radioed in “do not shoot orders” to her detachment in the field who came under fire and due to that order she saved the lives of x number of civilians with the loss of “only” four or five of her own troops.
Rock commented:
For those who have walked the walk, who would be comfortable with a recipient of this award sharing your foxhole in one of the worlds he$$ holes?
wanumba commented:
That suicidal tactic got the Belgium UN Peacekeepers slaughtered at the hands of the Hutus – who deliberately planned to kill them to get Belgium, and then the UN, to pull out of Rwanda. They were guarding the Prime Minister, they were told not to “provoke” anything, they surrended their arms, they were taken hostage, the Prime Minister was shot in her home, the Belgiums were taken to the army base and brutally murdered.
Troops were flown in to pull foreigners out of Rwanda as the terrified and surrounded Tutsi, men, women and children begged the soldiers for help.
Had those armed troops thrown away their orders and stood their ground and defended the Tutsi – the massacres would have been derailed at the beginning.
“Tears of the Sun” is the movie of what SHOULD have happened, but didn’t.
Patton was right. Never surrender. One loses total control, always for the worse.
richard commented:
On the surface, this sounds incredibly stupid, but under the right circumstances it might be OK.
Cicumstance 1. Soldier does not call in airstrike on house/vehicle because they fear civilian casualties, and couragiously take extra fire, and maybe extra casualties, because of it, and some of the Taliban get away. No award here, this is pure PC idiocy.
Circumstance 2. Soldier does not call in airstrike for fear of civilian casualties, but takes some risks and finds another way to kill all the Taliban, without friendly casualties, and spares the civilians. OK, I might buy an award for this case. He accomplished the mission completely, and managed to accomplish another goal, sparing civilians, while he did it. It would probably require a lot of training and skill to accomplish.
Unfortunately, any award they come up with to cover circumstance 2, will probably end up allowing idiotic awards for circumstance 1.
Mikee commented:
A Purple Heart can be awarded for honorable wounds received in battle from enemy action; I suppose it would be impolitic to use the same medal for allowing the enemy to wound your comrades.
wpngjstr commented:
I find it rather insulting that these morons think that we worry about medals when we’re doing the mission. Tells me a lot about their remf attitudes
Chris Watson commented:
This is a pretty good idea, and it reflects the reality of modern war. If you had sense you would commend it; instead you are all stuck in the mental attitude of ‘kill j*ps, kill j*ps, kill more j*ps’.
Did someone mention civilisation? How dare you, when you exhibit such primitive, savage attitudes.
As it happens, real soldiers often put their lives at risk to avoid killing the innocent: it’s both deeply moral and highly courageous, and benefits war aims. Men and women of that sort deserve to have their courage and moral fortitude rewarded.
Jim commented:
No wonder Obama likes McChrystal.
jonyjoe101 commented:
General George Patton had a name for those soldiers who showed restraint in combat, he called them “cowards”.
Hopefully when they repeal don’t ask don’t tell, they send that “batch” of soldiers to the frontlines. The will be more “peaceful” like the dutch soldiers.
War is to kill the enemy, this doctrine has been used since before the Romans. Countries who refuse to follow this doctrine eventually get conquered.
JesusTheViking commented:
1. Armageddon Rex is a xenophobic, warmongering jingoist.
2. I think a lot of people here are not “getting it”
The point of this award is to recognize the bravery of those who completed the mission without having to fire off a shot.
3. I highly doubt that troops will be clamoring to get this medal and take unnecessary risks.
4. The UN examples are flawed because they were under ORDERS to not fire, they were not motivated to do so by a medal.
Since this is an award, it is not mandatory for any of the troops to not fire.
Opaobie commented:
richard #80, there are medals for this type of heroism already; Medal of Honor, Silver Star, Bronze Star, etc.
I’ll give you an example taken from the Foreword of To Set The Record Straight, How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and the New Media Defeated John Kerry.
In the spring of 1969, U. S. Army Chief of Staff General William C. Westmoreland gave a presentation to the U. S. Armed Forces Staff College in Norfolk, Virginia. He concluded with this story:
“I recently had the privilege of decorating a young Captain for valor in Vietnam. He was in command of a battery of 105 howitzers. They started taking mortar fire. He had a then-experimental counter-mortar radar that showed the mortar fire was coming from a nearby village. All of his instincts and training said to traverse his guns and silence the mortar, but he didn’t do that. Instead, he ordered his men to take cover and led a platoon to the village on foot.
As they got there, they saw the villagers were gathered in the center of the village, so they silently moved forward behind the buildings. In the middle of that gathering there was a ten-foot diameter pit in the ground, and in the pit, three enemy soldiers holding guns on the villagers while the mortar crew fired at the American artillery position.
The Captain and two of his men went in low, screening themselves behind the villagers, lobbed grenades, and yelled. They and the villagers fell away from the pit. The grenades went off in the pit. They ran forward and cleaned up the situation, and that was that. No friendly casualties.
As I was pinning on his medal, I asked the Captain how he got so smart.
He said, “Oh, you could always expect ‘em to pull a stunt like that when there was an American TV crew in the province.”
Ladies and gentlemen, the Captain knows his war.”
–Col. Ben H. Swett, USAF (Ret.)
Vietnam veteran, 1969-70
The important difference here is, the Captain and his men suffered NO casualties, SAVED the civilians, AND achieved the objective of KILLING THE ENEMY.
Chris Watson commented:
Only in primitive societies is killing the enemy the objective of war – for the honour of it, or out of a magic belief that their spirits will be added to one’s own, for example.
In enlightened societies, war is recognised as politics by other means. Killing the enemy may be a means, but is an absurd objective.
As Sun Tzu says, the greatest general is the one who can win the war without even fighting a battle. Perhaps not understanding this is why America has historically had such a paucity of great generals and such an abundance of mediocre ones.
Opaobie commented:
Chris “sillyfingers” Watson #89 Blog not found
Sorry, the blog you were looking for does not exist. However, the name sillyfingers is available to register!
…your “wisdom” is as vapid as your blog. Have YOU ever commanded troops in battle, or do you just spout BS from your “philosophy” comics? “Mediocre” American Generals won World War II on two fronts and defeated every “enlightened” General in the German and Japanese militaries at the same time AFTER our “enlightened” politicians allowed the Germans to take control of Europe and the Japanese to bomb us at Pearl Harbor and AFTER the “enlightened” politicians” had reduce our military strength to next to nothing as a starting point.
We aren’t fighting “enlightened societies”, we are fighting stoneage, superstitious, suicidal savages who believe they will go to their concept of “Paradise” if they die killing US. There is no “civilized discourse” or negotiation with them. Once the fanatic leaders and screwball religious teachers have been dispatched, perhaps we can “unbrainwash” the survivors and educate and civilize the next generation…but, perhaps not.
Stephen commented:
I think this is a wonderful idea, and will aid our soldiers in our war against the terrorists.
Solder: See my “courageous restraint” badge?
Terrorist: No, you don’t seem to have one.
Solder: Exactly…
Chris Watson commented:
Ooops, WordPress not Blogspot, silly mistake.
But you’re wrong. A country the size of Europe? Where’s your Napoleon? your Marlborough? your Wellington, your Zhukov, your Guderian, your Model, your Rommel? your Montgomery, even?
You don’t have one. America time and again relies on brute force and massive firepower, and sees the utilisation of both as an end in itself. That’s why you paid the price in needless casualties in both World Wars, were beaten in Vietnam by a small Asian nation; and you can barely hold your own against a rabble of medieval tribes in Afghanistan.
They may be primitive, but they know more about military strategy than the commentors on this page.
Well, thankfully there seem to be some good military commanders in America nowadays – the war in Iraq was well-led in the end, and Afghanistan will probably turn out OK. But I see by these comments why Americans have made the same dumb mistakes time after time – it’s the yee-haa, gung-ho, shoot-em-up culture. It might be how you win barroom brawls, but not wars.
Ed commented:
As and active duty soldier that is one award that I will never strive for or will never earn.
Sorry General you can KMA
Top
Mullah Omar commented:
Oh I thinks it’s a swell idea, so does mt home boy Barak Obama.
Bill commented:
The Yellow Belly medal!
John commented:
Finally, #58 got it. Soldiers will do what they have always been doing. They will not be thinking about what awards they can get, just doing what needs to be done. If someone higher later thinks that a soldier deserves an award, so be it.