You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Afghanistan
Army blocks 'narratives' of heroism
2007-12-12
On a clear night last spring in Afghanistan's eastern mountains, a U.S. infantry platoon went looking for an al-Qaida operative named Habib Jan, and they found him. Outside an abandoned village clinging to a rocky hillside, the platoon was ambushed in a rain of deadly rifle and machine gun fire. Twenty-seven Americans and five Afghan Army fighters together fought 90 or 100 of Habib Jan's Islamist extremists.

For 17 hours, the American platoon was pinned down. Bullets snapped and hissed as the enemy slowly closed in. Ammunition ran low. Water ran out. Sniper rounds plucked at the soldiers' helmets and sleeves and drilled through boots as they shifted and returned fire. Night stretched into day and on into night again and the fighting intensified.

-- From interviews with soldiers and an official Army account

Three American soldiers were awarded Silver Stars for valor in that battle. Their actions are detailed in official Army accounts drawn from eyewitness reports, radio transmissions and other corroborating evidence used as a basis for awarding the medals. These one- or two-page "narratives," as they are called, are the best accounts of American battlefield heroism. Apart from those who wear the Silver Star - the third-highest decoration for valor - few people even know the accounts exist.

But the Army won't let you read any Silver Star narratives. Though most are not classified, they are kept filed away from public view, a practice being challenged in Congress.

"Military honors, to me, should be public information," said Rep. John T. Salazar, a Colorado Democrat and sponsor of the legislation.
Posted by:Ulavirong Omavirt2060

#13  I would love to read more of these accounts, but I am concerned that it will reveal something that the enemy can use. I am fine with waiting a while if that helps keep our men and women safer or denies the enemy anything useful about our tactics, etc. It is hard to read accounts like this and not feel immensely proud to be a citizen of this great country.
Posted by: Unique Battle   2007-12-12 13:35  

#12  How else does someone like "reporting for duty" Kerry hide his record?
Posted by: M. Murcek   2007-12-12 10:19  

#11  This is an important issue because we have been soundly drubbed on the infowar front. And this is not just the fault of having an MSM rooting for the enemy. The Army and administration need to do a better job of getting the word out and helping Michael Yon and Bill Roggio to do it. But I am inclined to agree with Kojo when it comes to specific awards.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-12-12 08:41  

#10  Up until now The Privacy Act has trumped the FOIA when it comes to a serviceman's personnel records. Perhaps this is their first step (camel's nose under the tent) to change that

Helllooooooo Senator Kerry!
Posted by: Frank G   2007-12-12 08:25  

#9  Military honours are public information. The president hands them out at the White House and everything. All the honourable Representative Salazar need do is ask the honorees what happened, and listen to the answer. CNN and the hometown newspaper can do the same. I believe the technical term is interview... or perhaps it's conversation.
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-12-12 07:39  

#8  The war has been going on for multiple years now. If you see anything it is that the PAO function in the Army is manned by a lot of people who are operating in an sealed echo chamber that was closed in the 1950. They've operated like a bunch of old WWI French Generals trying to deal with the German's in 1940. They have the same gadgets/tech, but just keep operating in the old mode. As they teach at the War College from Clausewitz, war is an extension of politics. The PAO and too many GOs have been absent from that and this war.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2007-12-12 07:28  

#7  The recipient gets a copy. If THEY wish, they can release it to the public. To date they, as a group, have not. I will not second guess such men and women.
Posted by: Kojo Throlump4806   2007-12-12 06:55  

#6  Where do we find these people.

Seems like these are the kind of accounts that should be made public. Think I'm with Pappy.
Posted by: Icerigger   2007-12-12 06:17  

#5  Up until now The Privacy Act has trumped the FOIA when it comes to a serviceman's personnel records. Perhaps this is their first step (camel's nose under the tent) to change that.
Posted by: Kojo Throlump4806   2007-12-12 06:03  

#4  ...unless there is something that can be twisted or taken a advantage of, exploited by political wafflecrat hacks.

A very sad state of affairs, considering.
Posted by: twobyfour   2007-12-12 03:39  

#3  I share Pappy's suspicions. The Donk's will be looking for something or anything that they can twist into a 'war crime.' They've certainly shown that they're NOT driven by patriotic fervor, or any desire whatsoever to support the mission or the troops. And even if these accounts were available, would we ever see or hear about them anywhere but places like Rantburg? Cue the MSM crickets...
Posted by: PBMcL   2007-12-12 00:50  

#2  Maybe it's me, but any time Congress (especially the Democrat portion)advocates something 'positive' like this, I get suspicious.
Posted by: Pappy   2007-12-12 00:20  

#1  W0w.

I don't think I can form an opinion without more info.

How were heroic acts reported (or not reported) in WWII?
Posted by: Seafarious   2007-12-12 00:10  

00:00