This is depressing. But it’s worth reading nonetheless.
Apparently the proposed US military deployment to West Africa to assist with the current Ebola outbreak is not exactly very well thought-out. It’s apparently gotten about the same amount of thought and planning to date as you’d devote to planing taking a shower.
Operation Massive Cluster, indeed. Unfortunately.
We’re all very aware of the Ebola outbreak in west Africa. But you really have to wonder about the intellect – or sanity – of some of those involved.
Recently, the government of Australia pledged a substantial contribution – $2.5M each to both the WHO and the NGO group Medicines Sans Frontiers, or MSF – to be used to defray costs associated with containing the outbreak. It also pledged a contribution of $2M to the UK government to help with their efforts in Sierra Leone. This brings Australia’s contribution to the effort to contain the Ebola outbreak to $8M.
MSF turned the money down. Why? On the grounds that Australia was “shirking it’s responsibility” to help contain the epidemic (or words to that effect) by not sending people.
What a load of horsesh!t.
Now, I think MSF is a fine charity. They’re doing great things, worldwide, in helping to reduce suffering. But here, they’re just freaking out to lunch.
They’re a charity. Charities help people when they can’t help themselves. They don’t make policy.
What follows is a message for the head of MSF:
“Listen up, f**kwit. No – don’t try to say a damn thing. Just sit down, STFU, and listen up.
You obviously don’t ‘get it’.
The government of Australia is helping the best way they feel that they can. They have advised their own citizens that they have no capability to evacuate them from western Africa should things go bad. They’ve determined that they don’t have the capability to provide help in kind – or that doing so is not in their national interest.
Your organization has no claim on Australia’s resources. And the government of Australia doesn’t have any ‘responsibility’ to anyone but Australians. They obviously don’t think it’s in their best interests to send large numbers of people to west Africa right now. That’s their call – not yours.
Get a grip, and remember who – and what – you are. Quit acting like a combination prima donna and spoiled brat who got a different toy from the exact one they wanted.
Take the Australian money, tell them thanks, and buy some sh!t your organization needs. Or use it to hire some folks to do things you can’t do now. But damn – quit being stupid. And concentrate on doing your freaking job instead of trying to tell others how to do theirs.
That is all. Now, get yer ass out of here and get back to doing something useful. You’re actually pretty good at that when you put your mind to it.”
Sheesh. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face . . . .
New Record: Pound of Ground Beef Tops $4 for First Time
It’s up 16.2% in the past year.
Five years ago, ground beef averaged $2.134 per pound. That’s an increase in 5 years of 88.1% – or an annual increase of more than 12.6% a year for five consecutive years. And of course, we all know that salaries have kept pace.
Yeah, that economic recovery is just plugging along – ain’t it?
Jonn’s earlier article concerning the scarcity of Medal of Honor (MoH) recipients during the GWOT piqued my curiosity. So I decided to do a little digging and number crunching – and see just where the numbers led.
Here’s the data I was able to find quickly, from various internet sources, for 5 major US conflicts since 1900. These conflicts were World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and the post-9/11 GWOT. I didn’t look up data for the first Gulf War; no MoHs were awarded during that conflict. I also excluded Somalia; that conflict, while arguably the real opening shots of the GWOT, is generally not considered a part of the GWOT. But even including the 2 MoHs awarded in Somalia doesn’t change what follows substantially. .
Here are the numbers.
World War I: Number serving in-theater: approx 2.2M Number of MoHs: 119 Rate: 0.00541% (5.41 per 100,000) World War II: Number serving overseas: approx 12M Number of MoHs: 472 Rate: 0.00393% (3.93 per 100,000) Korea: Number serving in-theater: approx 1.789M Number of MoHs: 146 Rate: 0.00816% (8.16 per 100,000) Vietnam: Number serving in-country: 2.6 M Number of MoHs: 258 Rate: 0.00992% (9.92 per 100,000) GWOT: Number serving in-country: approx 1.3M Number of MoHs: 16 Rate: 0.00123% (1.23 per 100,000). . .
I think the numbers rather speak for themselves. But I’ll give my 2 cents worth about them anyway.
Yeah, the current conflict got the short end of the stick with respect to the number of MoHs awarded so far. The numbers make that pretty damn clear.
A few further thoughts:
1. Prior to the GWOT, the historical modern rate of award for the MoH during major conflicts ranged between 0.00393% and 0.00992%. That’s a rough range of somewhere around 4 to 10 out of every 100,000 military personnel deployed in harm’s way.
2. World War I was primarily an infantry war, but at that time the concept of handing out medals was still relatively new; processes for doing so in a modern large war were developed on the fly. Still: with only a year or so of real combat, the rate of award for the MoH seems reasonable to perhaps a bit low, historically, for a largely infantry war like World War I.
3. Prior to the GWOT, World War II saw the lowest MoH rate. It is also the US war where Naval and Air Corps service in harm’s way was most extensive. No slight to our nautical or aeronautical sister services – but service at sea or in the air in general offers far fewer opportunities for the level of heroism required for award of the MOH than does land combat, so a lower rate of MoHs for this World War II should be expected. Fewer opportunities means fewer awards. Also, during World War II there were multiple theaters; multiple theaters means more of those deployed overseas were likely in relatively “safe” rear areas providing support. I couldn’t find or derive a good number for those serving where shooting was actually happening in World War II; the best I could find was that 75% of the military served “overseas”.
4. Korea and Vietnam were, in essence, infantry wars in Asia against foes that didn’t “play nice” with respect to the Geneva Convention. Their rates of MoH award are, as might be expected, higher than in other conflicts.
5. That said, the Vietnam War MoH rate numbers give me pause. Many units did acquire a reputation for being “easy” regarding awards during Vietnam. A man I once knew (an artillery officer who served in Vietnam) once told me that it was a running joke when he served there that officers inprocessing to Vietnam should have just signed for their award “packet” (BSM, VSM, VCM, and possibly Air Medal) during in processing in order to streamline things when they left. Award inflation reputedly included many awards for valor. Stories of undeserved Silver Stars being relatively commonplace exist; I can’t assess whether such stories are accurate or not – but where there’s smoke, there’s often fire. While I believe the services all avoided MoH inflation during Vietnam, I guess it’s possible some might have occurred. And the rate of MoH award in Vietnam is unusually high when compared to other US major conflicts – nearly 1 in 10,000. Dunno.
6. During the GWOT, the MoH has been awarded at a rate of nut much more than 1 out of every 100,000 troops serving in harm’s way. That’s barely 1/4 as often as during World War II, and about 1/8 as often as during Vietnam. And the GWOT – like World War I, Korea, and Vietnam – has been primarily a single-theater, “up-close-and-personal” infantry war. Something just doesn’t seem right.
. . .
Why? Well, I personally think it’s probably one last institutional legacy of Vietnam. Specifically, I think this is an over-reaction to the perception of awards abuse and inflation in Vietnam – which was, to some degree, IMO accurate. (How much is another question entirely.) But the correction has been far too severe. American troops haven’t become less brave today than they were in previous conflicts, and during the GWOT substantial opportunities for battlefield heroism have existed. The reluctance to award the MoH seems to me to be due to an excessive and misplaced fear of “cheapening” the MoH as is perceived happened to some awards in Vietnam. That’s a valid concern – but if anything, the effect appears to have been to slight many deserving heroes.
This has an unintended consequence: it sends an unintended message to the military itself, and to America. Few or no MoHs implies almost no one was no one worthy, that the fighting wasn’t severe and protracted, and that there simply wasn’t much battlefield heroim. But that’s decidedly not the case for either Iraq or Afghanistan.
Bottom line: the process appears effectively broken. IMO, it needs fixing. “Poor is the nation that has no heroes; but beggared is the nation that has and forgets them.”
Just my thoughts, and I might well be out to lunch. But my gut tells me I’m not.
_________________
Postscript: I’m still not personally convinced no one in the 1991 Gulf War was worthy of the MoH. However, ground operations during that war were short enough and the enemy so clueless that maybe that was the case.
Dunno. I wasn’t on active duty during the Gulf War; and I wasn’t mobilized during that conflict. So I don’t really have any personal experiences on which to form an opinion about the matter.
But I still have trouble believing it.
. . . the state has banned brownies and other chocolate treats in schools.
The late author Robert A. Heinlein said it best: “Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.”
Yeah, it’s late winter in the southern hemisphere. But this is IMO noteworthy nonetheless.
Recent satellite photos show that sea ice coverage near Antarctica has reached the greatest extent ever measured. The coverage area is now roughly 2x the size of Antarctica itself, and about 3x the size of Australia. (Graphic of sea ice coverage here.)
So, to what do those “esteemed, learned” climatologists attribute this condition? Well, I’m glad you asked.
They say it’s due to warmer air temperatures and ozone depletion. In other words, they’re saying global warming is causing more Antarctic sea ice.
Sheesh. IMO these guys are starting to rival ol’ “Baghdad Bob” when it comes to defending the absurd.
Of course, this is coming from the same crowd in Australia that recently got caught “adjusting” measured data in order to make it seem that global warming is occurring when the actual measured data says otherwise. So, for my money, caveat emptor is very much apropos regarding buying their claims about what’s causing the increase in sea ice.
DPMO has announced the identification of twelve US MIAs from World War II and another US MIA from the Korean War.
PFC Gavrin was buried on 12 September 2014 in Arlington National Cemetery. Funeral arrangements for the other individuals listed above was not immediately available; however, all will be buried with full military honors.
Welcome home, my elder brothers-in-arms. Rest in peace.
. . .
Over 73,600 US personnel remain unaccounted for from World War II; over 7,890 US personnel remain unaccounted for from the Korean War; and over 1,640 remain unaccounted for in Southeast Asia (SEA). Comparison of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from recovered remains against mtDNA from a matrilineal descendant can assist in providing a positive ID for those recovered remains.
Unfortunately, JPAC has recently reorganized their web site and no longer seems to provide by-name lists of the MIAs for whom there is a need for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). So if you have a relative that is still MIA from World War II, Korea, or SEA – please consider reading this JPAC fact sheet to see if you qualify to submit a mtDNA sample.
If you qualify to submit a mtDNA sample and have a relative from World War II, Korea, or SEA who is still MIA, please contact JPAC (there is an 866 number on the flier linked above) and see if they already have a mtDNA sample for your missing relative. If not, please arrange to submit a sample. By submitting a mtDNA sample, you may be able to help identify US remains that have been recovered and repatriated but not yet positively identified.
Everybody deserves a proper burial. That’s especially true for those who gave their all while serving this nation.
(Author’s note: the original version of this article misspelled the name of one of these returned fallen. My apologies for the error.)