What does everyone think about this?

[HARRY THE MOLE]

Just read numerous articles where American soldiers had their original award upgraded to a MoH many years later, must be a different system.

You Americans have always been more liberal with your award system than we British. It used to be a standing joke with British soldiers that GI's probably got a medal for being first in the queue. No offence meant here at all, but American soldiers often display a chest full of medal ribbons which have absolutely nothing to do with operational service. The British soldier only received campaign medals and awards for bravery in the field. The whole idea of the wearing of campaign medals on parade was so that a soldiers operational service and combat experience could be viewed by the medals he wore. There were no medal awards for proficiency.

Back in the 19th and 20th century, there was a certain amount of snobbery involved with the award of medals for bravery. I suppose you could argue that it was a case of medals for 'other ranks' and crosses for officers. The Military Cross, which was instituted in December 1914, could only be awarded to officers with the substantive rank of Captain and down to the rank of Warrant Officer. From 1917, officers with the temporary rank of Major could also receive the award. The Military Medal was introduced in 1916 as an award for 'other ranks' to recognise acts of bravery in the field which did not meet the criteria laid down for the award of the Distinguished Conduct Medal. The DCM was introduced in 1854 as an award issued to Warrant Officers and ranks below for 'Gallantry in the field' and at the time was the highest award that 'other ranks' could receive. The Victoria Cross was introduced in January 1856 by Queen Victoria as an award which could be bestowed on ALL ranks, regardless of class or rank. It was only issued for 'valour in the presence of the enemy,' and there is a very strict criteria which has to be met to receive this award. The recommendation for the award had to be done by an officer, and there usually had to be three independent witnesses. There was actually a case in WW2 where a captured German officer recommended a British serviceman for the award.

On August 11th 1943, Oberleutnant Schamong of U468 was surface running and his boat came under attack by a B24 Liberator piloted by RNZAF pilot, Flying Officer Lloyd Allan Trigg. The U boat opened fire on the aircraft and mortally damaged it as it dived down to release its depth charges. But Trigg continued to press home his attack on the stricken U Boat rather than pull away and ditch his aircraft - and possibly save his own life and that of his crew. Severely damaged, the aircraft crashed into the sea in flames and all the crew perished. The U Boat crew had to abandon their vessel and were eventually taken prisoner. While in a prison camp, Schamong submitted a report to his captors on the bravery of Trigg. Based entirely on his account, Trigg was posthumously awarded the VC.

Cheers,
Steve

[RTH]

I completely agree that they are entitled to their opinion about his actions. However, one thing which seems to debunk the whole argument is that you only have to read the citations for other VCs awarded to understand that what he did, although brave, wasn't heroic enough to warrant the VC. John4022, one thing you have to understand over here is that the whole race situation is drastically different to the US. Although racism was prevalent in the past, and indeed exists now in very small numbers, we never really had anything like the Jim Crow laws. Sorry, not trying to bash you over the head with past events nothing to do with you.

Regards,
Rhodes