We could have used you. Patton was America's greatest general. He would have invaded Russia following Germany's defeat if he could. Imagine the great warrior invading Iraq. Ah yes, here are some of his quotes which could make the most ardent antiwar activist long for battle. (Sardinia probably doesn't like him, he invaded Sicily. LOL) “War is simple, direct, and ruthless.” "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tire, more hungry. Keep punching." "In war the only sure defense is offense, and the efficiency of the offense depends on the warlike souls of those conducting it." “Never let the enemy pick the battle site.” “I am a soldier, I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight. If I do my full duty, the rest will take care of itself.” (Below is the famous "Patton Prayer" and Christmas greeting sent to the men of the Third Army December 8, 1944 during the Battle of the Bulge with the 101st Airborne beseiged at Bastogne) "Almighty and most merciful Father, we humbly beseech Thee, of Thy great goodness, to restrain these immoderate rains with which we have had to contend. Grant us fair weather for Battle. Graciously hearken to us as soldiers who call Thee that, armed with Thy power, we may advance from victory to victory, and crush the oppression and wickedness of our enemies, and establish Thy justice among men and nations. Amen."
For all those suicide bombers. "No dumb bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. They won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
On a related note, why does the US issue medals for being shot? I think it debases the general worth of the more, shall we say, earnt medals. Sorry, a little aside. Back to topic...what was it again? Oh yes, bollocks.
I'm sure they would. I'd expect no less. But simply getting shot shouldn't warrant a medal. Outstanding this or outstanding that, mixed with gallantry this and that, should and does. A medal should reward action. Yes, some purple hearters may have recieved the wounds doing some act of derring-do. But then they should get the medal for their action, not the being wounded part. And then there are those that are just inept and got shot because (for example) they weren't following orders properly etc. It's not vastly important, just wanted to know if anyone knew why the US decided to do it. Oh, and if any otehr countries give out medals for the same.
I think a brave individual like yourself should determine what medals should and shouldn't be given to combat veterans. You clearly have the best perspective on it. This victory by the US/UK is just killing you isn't it? Maybe you should get a Purple Heart for severe indigestion, poor thing.
What the hell are you talking about? Yes this victory by my own country in this series of battles is really getting me down. The genuine disinterest I had in the number of fatalities our armed forces were suffering - was unbounded. The fact that the US/UK (are on their way to) winning this 'war' means that fewer UK casualties will arise - so obviously I'd love this war to continue to Vietnam length and awfulness. Prick. How, for one second, do you have any information at all on me. What if, for example I said I was a veteran of the Falklands war? I'm not, but don't you think you ought to know a little more about someone before supposing they know nothing of which they speak? I have far more, and closer, links to the miltary than most will ever have. I have the utmost respect for those that have to go into battle, and as such have total and utter respect for those that achieve something truly great under those most arduous of situations. For that reason I believe that the 'purple heart' is totally superfluous to requirements. You got shot - have a medal, well done. And well, if it was left up to me which medals combat veterans should receive, then the purple heart would be the first to go. Combat veterans already get medals for turning up. Now if you've finished patting yourself on the back for a job well done in Iraq, I believe I asked a few questions, which in your red mist, were left unanswered. PS - As I'm not on your level of total ignorance - I shall ask nicely. Are you a purple hearter?
Re: For all those suicide bombers. According to Movies In History, the excellent program on "The History Channel," Patton never actually said that. It was a line written for George C. Scott for the movie.
Re: Re: For all those suicide bombers. An excellent program, among other reasons, because it once showed Victory! as one of its "Movies in History"
Reading your posts. Wow. Good point(?) "I'm sure they would. I'd expect no less." I know you said that. That was an arrogant, assinine comment. I know that about you. You "expect no less" from Purple Heart awardees, but you tell me I should know more about someone before supposing they know nothing of which they speak? You probably don't see that, do you? Congratulations - I'm impressed. I have links to the military also. So what? They give medals for that ALSO. The requirement is to be wounded in battle. That is what a Purple Heart is for. It is not a Medal of Honor, Legion of Merit, etc. See how it works? And I'd like to see how that legislation would go. No. Point? It's not an "accomplishment" to get shot or wounded in battle. But why do you begrudge a soldier being recognized for getting wounded, sometimes terribly, in service to his or her country? That person clearly made a sacrifice. There are other medals that could be reconsidered for justification, but not the Purple Heart. Why are you bitter? Maybe you are, to quote you, just a "prick".
you must not have read his posts very well then... you are really barking up the wrong tree here ugluk.
I'm not on any team roster here. I don't care what he does or doesn't support. I responded to his flippant remarks about combat veterans. And I read just fine.
Maybe I'm a bit more 'hard-line' in my attitude than yourself. To explain - I think being wounded (yes, maybe badly) unfortunately, is all part and parcel of 'joining up'. Yes they made a sacrifice, but that's what they are there for. No, not to get shot, but there is always the potential for that to happen. In my, perhaps 'old fashioned' thinking, is that awards should be given for actions that benefitted someone or something. As you say, there are other medals given out for exceptional actions - the purple heart seems to be a little redundant. I'm not bitter at all, just curious. And I've been called worse.
I have a story about a cheap Purple Heart. A late co-worker of mine who fought in Korea was asleep in a bunk underneath a cupboard. A shell exploded nearby and woke him up. As he poked his head out from the bunk another shell went off and felled a can of beans off the cupboard that hit him on the head and knocked him out. After he was stitched up and came to, he couldn't remember a thing, but someone put him up for a medal and he got it.
That's the only problem with it:abuse. There's a lot of REMF's that get a scratch and get themselves put up for one so they can show off a medal that got fighting in a war, when they ended up fighting it behind a typewriter.