Tinsel & Ribbon

Napoleon's observation that a soldier will walk through hell to get a ribbon for his tunic did not mean that a given amount of hell invariably produced a given ribbon. To fighting men before and since, the inequities of medal awards have always been a sore subject. The current issue of the official Marine Corps Gazette gives Marine Captain Richard G. Hubler a chance to dig the old subject up again for World War II.

Captain Hubler's article, "Winning Medals and Alienating People," kicks off sharply: "To talk about tinsel and ribbon when death is the bitter fashion appears a travesty. It is necessary for two reasons. First, the men concerned with the giving and taking of honors--especially the latter--want to know about it. Second, the whole system of honoring American heroes is falling into disrepute."*

Hubler's quarrel (after taking a sideswipe at "indiscriminate" distribution of Purple Hearts for such casualties as an attack of malaria) is with the awarding of higher honors. Says Hubler: "A central board to determine awards . . . must act upon the recommendations of superior officers. It stands to human nature that partiality is shown to one's friends. . . . There have been instances of high officers decorating one of their own [number] without compensating awards to men in the ranks. These are rarely undeserved. But they are poor psychology for the enlisted man, to say the least."

Shifting Standards. Hubler notes that standards for decoration may vary according to the nature of the commanding officer.

"One, a blunt, forthright commander, may refuse to make recommendations; another, brought up in the tradition of bemedaling, may lean in the other direction. . . .

"The attitude of the Command must [also] be taken into consideration. The Army Air Forces is a highly publicity-minded outfit. . . . The musical play, Winged Victory, is proof. ... So is the efficient and outsized . . . A.A.F. publicity bureau. Result: a mort of publicity and medals. . . . One not-too-prominent Army pilot has 14 various medals. A comparable Marine pilot has two."

The Navy also has its faults, says Hubler, and cites an award of a medal for "diving a plane to a perilously low height." But for prodigality with medals he blames the Army most: "Navy men, viewing the mountains of color and insigne upon the left breast of Army men," often call out sardonically in bars, "Hey, hero, give me a light!"

The Anatomy of Heroism. Hubler, asking "What is Heroism?" wonders "which is the more deserving of the Congressional Medal of Honor: a pilot who has shot down seven planes . . . [in] 20 minutes* or a pilot who has headed a squadron and borne its responsibilities for months? . . . The former got a Medal of Honor, the latter a Navy Cross."

Hubler's conclusion is that "ratios of award should be established." Servicemen who agree with him point to the rigid parsimony with which Britain doles out her medals, particularly the nearly impossible-to-get Victoria Cross. Marines could also point to their missing ace, Major Gregory Boyington. He had knocked down 26 enemy planes without getting a single decoration.

* Extreme example: Dogs for Defense, Inc. proudly announced last week that "Chips," a combat dog, had been decorated in Italy (by Major General Lucian K. Truscott Jr.) with the D.S.C., Silver Star and Purple Heart.

*Marine Captain James E. Swett.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.