chickaree wrote: I'm not going to sit in my comfy armchair and belittle someone who has dedicated their lif to our nations defense. They do not face the personal danger of those who serve in combat zones, but their service also lessens the number of troops exposed to that danger.
You are correct. They do have a very important job, and yes they have actually saved lives. This is not about questioning their job and what they do, it about giving them a medal (no problem with that) that rates above the combat medals. They are not actually on the ground in combat. Bring the medal down to the level of a commendation medal or achievement medal, but not above the Bronze Star or Purple Heart.
chickaree wrote: I'm not going to sit in my comfy armchair and belittle someone who has dedicated their lif to our nations defense. They do not face the personal danger of those who serve in combat zones, but their service also lessens the number of troops exposed to that danger.
You are correct. They do have a very important job, and yes they have actually saved lives. This is not about questioning their job and what they do, it about giving them a medal (no problem with that) that rates above the combat medals. They are not actually on the ground in combat. Bring the medal down to the level of a commendation medal or achievement medal, but not above the Bronze Star or Purple Heart.
It wasn't the rating of the medal I was objecting to. It was the mocking and belittling tone being used towards the job. I, fo one, am not so foolish as to think that taking the lives of our fellow men, women and children is the emotional equivalent of playing video games. Anyone who thinks it is is a sociopath.
