{"id":16932,"date":"2013-02-19T15:39:59","date_gmt":"2013-02-19T21:39:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/techcitement.com\/?p=16932"},"modified":"2013-02-19T15:40:02","modified_gmt":"2013-02-19T21:40:02","slug":"a-new-medal-for-a-new-brand-of-warfare","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/techcitement.com\/culture\/politics\/a-new-medal-for-a-new-brand-of-warfare\/","title":{"rendered":"A New Medal For A New Brand Of Warfare"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a><\/p>\n On Wednesday, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced that the Pentagon is creating a new medal to recognize an extraordinary achievement of servicemen outside of the combat zone via Remote Piloted Aircraft (RPA) or cyber warfare. The Distinguished Warfare Medal doesn’t require the recipient to have risked his or her life, setting it apart from all other combat awards.<\/p>\n Panetta’s announcement is steeped in controversy, most pressing of which would appear to be the so-called \u201corder of precedence\u201d of such a medal. At present, the Distinguished Warfare Medal ranks above both the Bronze Star for Valor and the Purple Heart, which are designated for battlefield conduct and battlefield injury, respectively. I\u2019m inclined to agree with the nearly 6,000 and counting petitioners to lower the precedence of the new Distinguished Warfare Medal<\/a>. Let\u2019s hope that the weight of the Pentagon\u2019s initiative isn’t lost on the injustice to Purple Heart and Bronze Star recipients that has angered veterans and their supporters; the new medal represents far more than a stirring of the ranks.<\/p>\n First, the servicemen in question should be given a bit more credit than they’ve received in response to the announcement. Drone pilots have the fate of hundreds of people\u2019s lives in their hands, often including those of their inter-military colleagues on the ground. Much like a commander in a war room who makes difficult decisions away from the front, these pilots have weighty, life-and-death calls to make, regardless of whether their own lives are at risk. For many facets of modern warfare, that immediate risk has been subjugated by the accompanying modern technology \u2013 ironclad warships, armored tanks, undetectable aircraft, and the gamut of enhanced firepower (the sniper rifle comes to mind). Although not risk-free, all of these technological advancements limited the opportunity for extraordinary acts of valor in the face of present danger at the time of their introduction. Since the introduction of these advancements, they’ve been assimilated into the theater of battle and respected for their contributions, their operators appreciated for their efficiency. And so it follows that we should reward our new fleet of servicemen when they demonstrate excellence in carrying out the duty they have been assigned.<\/p>\n However, recognition for excelling in one\u2019s duties is a far cry from valor or courage. Plato, by way of Socrates, offers a discussion in search of the vital meaning of courage in his work Laches, Or Courage<\/i>. Suffice it to say, Plato fails to reach a conclusion beyond recognizing the importance of such dialogues debating the matter, but in it, Socrates makes a scathing counter-argument to Lache\u2019s proposal conflating courage with enduring wisdom:<\/p>\n Take the case of one who endures in war, and is willing to fight, and wisely calculates and knows that others will help him, and that there will be fewer and inferior men against him than there are with him; and suppose that he has also advantages of position; would you say of such a one who endures with all this wisdom and preparation, that he, or some man in the opposing army who is in the opposite circumstances to these and yet endures and remains at his post, is the braver?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Of course, the U.S. Military isn\u2019t in the business of giving medals to the enemy soldiers simply because they’re brave in the face of a far superior military, but valor and what that entails is what we should strive to define and reward.<\/p>\n