Mr Harris I think you should remove your blinkers, 6, 7, 8 & 9 Divvies were AIF, the rest were AMF, AND a number of AIF soldiers did , and continue to, treat them as 2nd rate soldiers. 90 day wonders was also a term given the graduates from Scheyville during the Vietnam War, a number of whom did sterling work in Vietnam and some went on the command battalions. I never said Monash was a conscript, he was in the militia (a weekend warrior), an urban myth re the time spent in combat zones for Vietnam veterans, I suggest you are swayed by an urban myth. M. Tolley ----- Original Message ----- From: Val Harris <[email protected]> To: Maurie Tolley <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 11:35 PM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #39 > unfortunately most of your reply is untrue > > 90 day wonders were National service men of the early 1950's so they did not > fight in every conflict in which Australia has been involved. > > Monash was never a conscript. He joined as a private soldier and worked his > way to the top as a VOLUNTEER > > EVERY soldier in WW2 was AMF. Some were AIF some were CMF some were both but > every one was a member of the AMF > > If you think I don't know about the 39th look at > > http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww2/pages-2aif-cmf/39- > battalion.htm > > Troops in Viet Nam did spend more of their time in combat zones than WW1 > Diggers. That is an urban myth. Sorry. > > Ted > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Maurie Tolley" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 10:47 PM > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #39 > > > > Mr Harris > > > > I think your attack on the "90 day wonders" and the "weekend warriors" is > > both spiteful and unwarranted. Many in both of these groups fought in > every > > conflict in which Australia has been involved. To just name a few, Gen'l > Sir > > John Monash (WW1), Major Templeton of Kokoda fame, Tim Fischer of Vietnam > > and the list goes on and on. I guess the tripe that has infected > subsequent > > generations of veterans has not dimmed or diminished. The stigma that > > attached to AMF soldiers during WW2 is still felt today. Many AMF members > > tried to transfer to the AIF but were refused, many went on to fight > > valiantly and professionally in PNG and the South West Pacific theatre. > Very > > few had the luxury of the many months of training enjoyed by AIF > formations > > in the Middle Est but still acquitted themselves magnificently. The 39th > > Battalion, (chockoes, weekend wonders, koalas etc wrote a page in > > Australia's Battle Honours that would be hard to equal, curious that the > > 39th has not appeared in Australia's Order of Battle since they were > > disbanded. Jealousy, hypocrisy?)It brings to mind the patronising attitude > > directed at Vietnam Veterans by WW2 Veterans, Funny thing though, troops > in > > Vietnam spent a greater percentage of their time in combat zones than any > > serviceman in previous wars. > > > > I guess those that are left grow old but, unfortunately some have grown > > bitter. > > > > M Tolley > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 8:47 PM > > Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #39 > > >

Thanks Lola. Will let you know how I get on! regards, Annie QLD ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lola Workman" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 8:18 AM Subject: Re: Royal A. Artillery 1882 to 1902 > My g uncle served in Royal Aust Artillery also for 17 years from 1885, I > finally traced his records to National Archives of Australia, Melbourne > office - as this was pre-federation all early records were and many still > are kept in Melbourne. www [email protected] PO Box 8005 Burwood Heights > Vic 3151. I received about 15 pages of wonderful records, good luck. > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > The Military Historical Society of Australia > http://www.pcug.org.au/~astaunto/mhsa.htm >

My g uncle served in Royal Aust Artillery also for 17 years from 1885, I finally traced his records to National Archives of Australia, Melbourne office - as this was pre-federation all early records were and many still are kept in Melbourne. www [email protected] PO Box 8005 Burwood Heights Vic 3151. I received about 15 pages of wonderful records, good luck.

Hi, Can anyone tell me where I can find a regular army person's military record from 1882 to 1902. I have hunted through the normal military sites with no luck. He was in the Australian Royal Artillery Regiment for nearly 18 years.. I have his discharge number. Many Thanks, Annie www.williamsfamilyoz.com

unfortunately most of your reply is untrue 90 day wonders were National service men of the early 1950's so they did not fight in every conflict in which Australia has been involved. Monash was never a conscript. He joined as a private soldier and worked his way to the top as a VOLUNTEER EVERY soldier in WW2 was AMF. Some were AIF some were CMF some were both but every one was a member of the AMF If you think I don't know about the 39th look at http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/ww2/pages-2aif-cmf/39- battalion.htm Troops in Viet Nam did spend more of their time in combat zones than WW1 Diggers. That is an urban myth. Sorry. Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Maurie Tolley" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 10:47 PM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #39 > Mr Harris > > I think your attack on the "90 day wonders" and the "weekend warriors" is > both spiteful and unwarranted. Many in both of these groups fought in every > conflict in which Australia has been involved. To just name a few, Gen'l Sir > John Monash (WW1), Major Templeton of Kokoda fame, Tim Fischer of Vietnam > and the list goes on and on. I guess the tripe that has infected subsequent > generations of veterans has not dimmed or diminished. The stigma that > attached to AMF soldiers during WW2 is still felt today. Many AMF members > tried to transfer to the AIF but were refused, many went on to fight > valiantly and professionally in PNG and the South West Pacific theatre. Very > few had the luxury of the many months of training enjoyed by AIF formations > in the Middle Est but still acquitted themselves magnificently. The 39th > Battalion, (chockoes, weekend wonders, koalas etc wrote a page in > Australia's Battle Honours that would be hard to equal, curious that the > 39th has not appeared in Australia's Order of Battle since they were > disbanded. Jealousy, hypocrisy?)It brings to mind the patronising attitude > directed at Vietnam Veterans by WW2 Veterans, Funny thing though, troops in > Vietnam spent a greater percentage of their time in combat zones than any > serviceman in previous wars. > > I guess those that are left grow old but, unfortunately some have grown > bitter. > > M Tolley > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 8:47 PM > Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #39 >

Hi Dean, Check out Ted Harris site at http://www.diggerhistory.info/ it is a good military history site and you may find what you want there. Otherwise post again with what you can not work out and someone will be sure to help you. Robert Duggan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dean Martin Rees NEWMAN" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 7:49 PM Subject: WWII Unit abbreviations > Salutations from the "Coral Sea Coast" > (Lat 17.5s Long 146.4e) > Hi to All, > I am having difficulty in interpreting some of the Unit abbreviations > used in the WW II Nominal roll. > Does anybody on the list profess to be expert in this field and willing > to provide help? > Or, has anyone a referral to a text or person from whom help might be > obtained? > Or, should I address this query directly to the AWM? > Ask and it shall be given to you > Dean Newman, North Queensland Australia > "As time goes by" > [email protected] > "There are many paths to the top of the mountain, > but the view is always the same" > > ______________________________

----- Original Message ----- From: "Val Harris" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; ">" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 9:48 PM Subject: Re: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > replies inserted below > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[email protected]> > To: "Val Harris" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Robert Duggan" <[email protected]>; "AUS-MILITARY-L @ rootsweb . > com" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 9:33 PM > Subject: Re: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > Dear Mr Harris > > > > What can I say, It appears that you are a very angry man who thinks that > no one > > should have any medals that you do not have. > > No anger. just a desire to keep medals away from over-supply that deminishes > their meaning and value by giving some to everybody > > I have entitlement to 2 medals that are UNEARNED. I did not a bloody thing > for them. They are worthless. > > > > One wonders if this is the feeling of your Queensland RSL branch. > > Not my Branch, not their comments, no relevance. > > > > I remember the days when the RSL was against the Korean Vets being granted > > full returned membership. > > Not relevant > > > > One point that I should make is that I applied for the medal at the > request of the > > D.O.D. who then investigated and said that I did not qualify. > > You must be a genius. The DOD actually ask you to apply for medals to which > you are not entitled. I am impressed. > > > > I noticed that you missed the fact that my father was a POW and got > nothing from > > anyone for that. > > If he was a military POW he IS entitled to campaigm medals, no argument, > clear as crystal, black and white law. If he was a civilian POW, sorry, I am > not sure. > > > > WW1, yes I had family there including at the big G landing and I am proud > of them. > > Asw you should be. Don't diminish the value of their medals by giving one to > everyone who ever worn a baggy green uniform in Ausd for 20 minutes. > > > > I have never Jumped up and down demanding a medal (I don't have enough > milk > > cartons to earn the points as you suggest). > > If you are not "demanding" a medal, why start this email conversation? > > > > I think that the reply from Mr Kinney says it all. > > Mr Kinney is badly mistaken, in my opinion. > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Robert Duggan > > > > > > > Val Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Mr Duggan > > > > > > The difference between staying in Australia and training other people > > > to > > > kill (to use your words) and going overseas to a war zone and killing > > > and > > > being exposed to the deadly intent of the enemy is so different as to > > > not > > > (usually) need explanation. > > > > > > But of course you deserve a medal. Why not the "I stayed home award" > > > or the > > > "I didn't go away to fight" medal. > > > > > > Better still, why not give everyone one 5 medals so that no one > > > misses out. > > > Put them in cornflakes packets or hang them on milk cartons. > > > > > > Of course they won't have any value or command any respect but all > > > the 90 > > > day boys and the weekend warriors can all prance around on Anzac Day > > > as > > > though they had really done something. > > > > > > I hope my grandson gets a 'My Great Grandfather went to WW1 Medal" to > > > wear > > > to pre school next week, it will make him feel "special". Do you want > > > one as > > > well? > > > > > > > > > Ted Harris > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Robert Duggan" <[email protected]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:09 PM > > > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > > > > > > > Hi Paul (old Mate), > > > > > > > > I must agree with you on this matter (and most others). > > > > > > > > The issue of the 2 medals under discussion was not taken lightly by > > > the > > > > government. > > > > > > > > I have found over the years that most people who object did not > > > qualifiy > > > or > > > > their off spring have been "knocked back" when applying. > > > > > > > > I can answer to both these accounts one for my late father and one > > > for > > > > myself. "Knocked back" on both accounts. > > > > > > > > Not a bad record for a ex POW (dad) and over 20 years service > > > (myself). > > > > > > > > No I was not a Nasho. but as both Fulltime and CMF service I > > > trained > > > Nashos > > > > including a lot who saw service overseas, and, some did not return. > > > > > > > > I applied for the ASM (1945/1975) but was not approved as my > > > service was > > > > within Australia. > > > > Was I disapointed, yes, upset, no. > > > > > > > > Do I agree with the Nashos getting their medal, Yes. > > > > > > > > Now for a medal for the CMF guys. > > > > > > > > I do think that some people get confused with the difference of > > > service > > > > medals and awards. > > > > > > > > Do I have service medals No. > > > > Do I have awards, Yes, 2, RFM and NM both awarded by the Govenor > > > General > > > for > > > > service. > > > > Service 1958-1964 RAR - 1964-1979 CMF including Full Time duty > > > during the > > > > Viet Nam period. > > > > > > > > I was trained to kill and traind others to kill. > > > > > > > > I guess the includinding all the above and no medals I must done > > > "Bugger > > > > All" > > > > > > > > Paul keep up the good work. > > > > > > > > Kind Regard, > > > > > > > > Robert Duggan > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> > > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > > Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:35 AM > > > > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ms Val Harris > > > > > Dear Val, > > > > > My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any > > > > resemblance > > > > > between what really happens, and what is written, is more often > > > than > > > not, > > > > an > > > > > accident. > > > > > You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian > > > Award > > > system, > > > > > again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken > > > Australia > > > > > into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with > > > our > > > own > > > > > award system. > > > > > I noted your further comments about National Servicemen > > > and the > > > > > small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be > > > careful > > > though > > > > > when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service > > > medals are > > > > > given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they > > > do not > > > > nor > > > > > can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. > > > > > Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service > > > medal to > > > all > > > > > those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement > > > of > > > that > > > > > time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service > > > medal to > > > > > these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to > > > fight > > > in > > > > > an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was > > > a > > > reality > > > > > and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the > > > man > > > until > > > > > 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert > > > Menzies as > > > a > > > > > Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the > > > expected > > > war > > > > in > > > > > Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe > > > at the > > > > drop > > > > > of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National > > > Servicemen, > > > > from > > > > > whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where > > > fighting an > > > > armed > > > > > conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and > > > sailors > > > > where > > > > > committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas > > > and > > > > > Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 > > > had > > > > > instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular > > > army > > > > committed > > > > > in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, > > > our > > > > > National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement > > > of our > > > > army > > > > > would be based. > > > > > You state in your e-mail: > > > > > "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We > > > have > > > > > awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen > > > who did > > > 94 > > > > > days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men > > > who > > > did > > > > > buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, > > > we have > > > > > medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they > > > become > > > > > almost meaningless" > > > > > The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our > > > country > > > > can > > > > > finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have > > > worn and > > > > > wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you > > > become a > > > > part > > > > > of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or > > > Regular you > > > > are > > > > > a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. > > > > > 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest > > > of your > > > > > countries government, of possibly being called on to do active > > > service, > > > > when > > > > > and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. > > > Ninety-four days > > > of > > > > > training would give you a good chance to know some of the > > > rudiments of > > > > what > > > > > is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train > > > for, > > > to > > > > > kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help > > > out in > > > > floods > > > > > or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', > > > indeed. > > > > > The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding > > > the > > > > > Australian Active Service Medal: > > > > > "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently > > > > announced > > > > > the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 > > > (AASM > > > > 1945-75) > > > > > to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 > > > February > > > > 1975. > > > > > The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." > > > > > 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the > > > 1950's > > > > qualify > > > > > for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless > > > they > > > > joined > > > > > the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is > > > for > > > > > servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their > > > country in a > > > > > combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The > > > Korean, > > > > > Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the > > > > recognition > > > > > they deserve. > > > > > By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar > > > all' > > > to > > > > > receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days > > > in > > > Viet > > > > > Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can > > > be > > > > > described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what > > > your > > > > > definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you > > > are > > > most > > > > > probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent > > > now, > > > > still > > > > > believe that we where not in a real war. > > > > > "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result > > > is that > > > > they > > > > > become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not > > > > understand > > > > > or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. > > > > > To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done > > > for > > > your > > > > > country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a > > > welcome home > > > > > parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for > > > those of > > > us > > > > > who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in > > > Viet Nam > > > > any > > > > > further recognition they receive, from the people of this > > > country, for > > > > their > > > > > loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. > > > > > With our very own award system we can now recognise, and > > > have, > > > the > > > > > contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever > > > they > > > > > represent our country. The same can and will be done for our > > > people > > > going > > > > on > > > > > 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in > > > > Afghanistan > > > > > for instance. > > > > > Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get > > > back to > > > you > > > > on > > > > > that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of > > > our > > > armed > > > > > forces, who should know. > > > > > Respectfully yours > > > > > Paul Kinney > > > > > > > > > > >From: [email protected] > > > > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > > > > >To: [email protected] > > > > > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > > >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > > > > > > > > > > > ><< message2.txt >> > > > > > ><< message4.txt >> > > > > > ><< message6.txt >> > > > > > ><< message8.txt >> > > > > > ><< message10.txt >> > > > > > ><< message12.txt >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > ___ > > > > > MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. > > > Go to > > > > > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________ > > > > > > > > > >

To all the people who want to receive a medal for 20 minutes service in peace time in Australia, have a look at http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/too-many.htm and choose the one you want Ted

replies inserted below ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: "Val Harris" <[email protected]> Cc: "Robert Duggan" <[email protected]>; "AUS-MILITARY-L @ rootsweb . com" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 9:33 PM Subject: Re: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > Dear Mr Harris > > What can I say, It appears that you are a very angry man who thinks that no one > should have any medals that you do not have. No anger. just a desire to keep medals away from over-supply that deminishes their meaning and value by giving some to everybody I have entitlement to 2 medals that are UNEARNED. I did not a bloody thing for them. They are worthless. > > One wonders if this is the feeling of your Queensland RSL branch. Not my Branch, not their comments, no relevance. > > I remember the days when the RSL was against the Korean Vets being granted > full returned membership. Not relevant > > One point that I should make is that I applied for the medal at the request of the > D.O.D. who then investigated and said that I did not qualify. You must be a genius. The DOD actually ask you to apply for medals to which you are not entitled. I am impressed. > > I noticed that you missed the fact that my father was a POW and got nothing from > anyone for that. If he was a military POW he IS entitled to campaigm medals, no argument, clear as crystal, black and white law. If he was a civilian POW, sorry, I am not sure. > > WW1, yes I had family there including at the big G landing and I am proud of them. Asw you should be. Don't diminish the value of their medals by giving one to everyone who ever worn a baggy green uniform in Ausd for 20 minutes. > > I have never Jumped up and down demanding a medal (I don't have enough milk > cartons to earn the points as you suggest). If you are not "demanding" a medal, why start this email conversation? > > I think that the reply from Mr Kinney says it all. Mr Kinney is badly mistaken, in my opinion. > > Kind Regards, > > Robert Duggan > > > > Val Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Mr Duggan > > > > The difference between staying in Australia and training other people > > to > > kill (to use your words) and going overseas to a war zone and killing > > and > > being exposed to the deadly intent of the enemy is so different as to > > not > > (usually) need explanation. > > > > But of course you deserve a medal. Why not the "I stayed home award" > > or the > > "I didn't go away to fight" medal. > > > > Better still, why not give everyone one 5 medals so that no one > > misses out. > > Put them in cornflakes packets or hang them on milk cartons. > > > > Of course they won't have any value or command any respect but all > > the 90 > > day boys and the weekend warriors can all prance around on Anzac Day > > as > > though they had really done something. > > > > I hope my grandson gets a 'My Great Grandfather went to WW1 Medal" to > > wear > > to pre school next week, it will make him feel "special". Do you want > > one as > > well? > > > > > > Ted Harris > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Robert Duggan" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:09 PM > > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > > > > Hi Paul (old Mate), > > > > > > I must agree with you on this matter (and most others). > > > > > > The issue of the 2 medals under discussion was not taken lightly by > > the > > > government. > > > > > > I have found over the years that most people who object did not > > qualifiy > > or > > > their off spring have been "knocked back" when applying. > > > > > > I can answer to both these accounts one for my late father and one > > for > > > myself. "Knocked back" on both accounts. > > > > > > Not a bad record for a ex POW (dad) and over 20 years service > > (myself). > > > > > > No I was not a Nasho. but as both Fulltime and CMF service I > > trained > > Nashos > > > including a lot who saw service overseas, and, some did not return. > > > > > > I applied for the ASM (1945/1975) but was not approved as my > > service was > > > within Australia. > > > Was I disapointed, yes, upset, no. > > > > > > Do I agree with the Nashos getting their medal, Yes. > > > > > > Now for a medal for the CMF guys. > > > > > > I do think that some people get confused with the difference of > > service > > > medals and awards. > > > > > > Do I have service medals No. > > > Do I have awards, Yes, 2, RFM and NM both awarded by the Govenor > > General > > for > > > service. > > > Service 1958-1964 RAR - 1964-1979 CMF including Full Time duty > > during the > > > Viet Nam period. > > > > > > I was trained to kill and traind others to kill. > > > > > > I guess the includinding all the above and no medals I must done > > "Bugger > > > All" > > > > > > Paul keep up the good work. > > > > > > Kind Regard, > > > > > > Robert Duggan > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:35 AM > > > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > > > > > > > Ms Val Harris > > > > Dear Val, > > > > My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any > > > resemblance > > > > between what really happens, and what is written, is more often > > than > > not, > > > an > > > > accident. > > > > You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian > > Award > > system, > > > > again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken > > Australia > > > > into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with > > our > > own > > > > award system. > > > > I noted your further comments about National Servicemen > > and the > > > > small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be > > careful > > though > > > > when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service > > medals are > > > > given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they > > do not > > > nor > > > > can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. > > > > Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service > > medal to > > all > > > > those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement > > of > > that > > > > time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service > > medal to > > > > these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to > > fight > > in > > > > an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was > > a > > reality > > > > and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the > > man > > until > > > > 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert > > Menzies as > > a > > > > Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the > > expected > > war > > > in > > > > Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe > > at the > > > drop > > > > of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National > > Servicemen, > > > from > > > > whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where > > fighting an > > > armed > > > > conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and > > sailors > > > where > > > > committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas > > and > > > > Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 > > had > > > > instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular > > army > > > committed > > > > in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, > > our > > > > National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement > > of our > > > army > > > > would be based. > > > > You state in your e-mail: > > > > "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We > > have > > > > awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen > > who did > > 94 > > > > days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men > > who > > did > > > > buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, > > we have > > > > medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they > > become > > > > almost meaningless" > > > > The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our > > country > > > can > > > > finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have > > worn and > > > > wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you > > become a > > > part > > > > of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or > > Regular you > > > are > > > > a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. > > > > 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest > > of your > > > > countries government, of possibly being called on to do active > > service, > > > when > > > > and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. > > Ninety-four days > > of > > > > training would give you a good chance to know some of the > > rudiments of > > > what > > > > is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train > > for, > > to > > > > kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help > > out in > > > floods > > > > or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', > > indeed. > > > > The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding > > the > > > > Australian Active Service Medal: > > > > "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently > > > announced > > > > the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 > > (AASM > > > 1945-75) > > > > to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 > > February > > > 1975. > > > > The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." > > > > 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the > > 1950's > > > qualify > > > > for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless > > they > > > joined > > > > the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is > > for > > > > servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their > > country in a > > > > combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The > > Korean, > > > > Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the > > > recognition > > > > they deserve. > > > > By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar > > all' > > to > > > > receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days > > in > > Viet > > > > Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can > > be > > > > described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what > > your > > > > definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you > > are > > most > > > > probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent > > now, > > > still > > > > believe that we where not in a real war. > > > > "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result > > is that > > > they > > > > become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not > > > understand > > > > or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. > > > > To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done > > for > > your > > > > country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a > > welcome home > > > > parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for > > those of > > us > > > > who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in > > Viet Nam > > > any > > > > further recognition they receive, from the people of this > > country, for > > > their > > > > loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. > > > > With our very own award system we can now recognise, and > > have, > > the > > > > contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever > > they > > > > represent our country. The same can and will be done for our > > people > > going > > > on > > > > 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in > > > Afghanistan > > > > for instance. > > > > Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get > > back to > > you > > > on > > > > that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of > > our > > armed > > > > forces, who should know. > > > > Respectfully yours > > > > Paul Kinney > > > > > > > > >From: [email protected] > > > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > > > >To: [email protected] > > > > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > > > > > > > > > ><< message2.txt >> > > > > ><< message4.txt >> > > > > ><< message6.txt >> > > > > ><< message8.txt >> > > > > ><< message10.txt >> > > > > ><< message12.txt >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > ___ > > > > MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. > > Go to > > > > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp > > > > > > > > ______________________________ > > > > > >

Mr Harris I think your attack on the "90 day wonders" and the "weekend warriors" is both spiteful and unwarranted. Many in both of these groups fought in every conflict in which Australia has been involved. To just name a few, Gen'l Sir John Monash (WW1), Major Templeton of Kokoda fame, Tim Fischer of Vietnam and the list goes on and on. I guess the tripe that has infected subsequent generations of veterans has not dimmed or diminished. The stigma that attached to AMF soldiers during WW2 is still felt today. Many AMF members tried to transfer to the AIF but were refused, many went on to fight valiantly and professionally in PNG and the South West Pacific theatre. Very few had the luxury of the many months of training enjoyed by AIF formations in the Middle Est but still acquitted themselves magnificently. The 39th Battalion, (chockoes, weekend wonders, koalas etc wrote a page in Australia's Battle Honours that would be hard to equal, curious that the 39th has not appeared in Australia's Order of Battle since they were disbanded. Jealousy, hypocrisy?)It brings to mind the patronising attitude directed at Vietnam Veterans by WW2 Veterans, Funny thing though, troops in Vietnam spent a greater percentage of their time in combat zones than any serviceman in previous wars. I guess those that are left grow old but, unfortunately some have grown bitter. M Tolley ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 8:47 PM Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #39

Dear Mr Harris What can I say, It appears that you are a very angry man who thinks that no one should have any medals that you do not have. One wonders if this is the feeling of your Queensland RSL branch. I remember the days when the RSL was against the Korean Vets being granted full returned membership. One point that I should make is that I applied for the medal at the request of the D.O.D. who then investigated and said that I did not qualify. I noticed that you missed the fact that my father was a POW and got nothing from anyone for that. WW1, yes I had family there including at the big G landing and I am proud of them. I have never Jumped up and down demanding a medal (I don’t have enough milk cartons to earn the points as you suggest). I think that the reply from Mr Kinney says it all. Kind Regards, Robert Duggan > Val Harris <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mr Duggan > > The difference between staying in Australia and training other people > to > kill (to use your words) and going overseas to a war zone and killing > and > being exposed to the deadly intent of the enemy is so different as to > not > (usually) need explanation. > > But of course you deserve a medal. Why not the "I stayed home award" > or the > "I didn't go away to fight" medal. > > Better still, why not give everyone one 5 medals so that no one > misses out. > Put them in cornflakes packets or hang them on milk cartons. > > Of course they won't have any value or command any respect but all > the 90 > day boys and the weekend warriors can all prance around on Anzac Day > as > though they had really done something. > > I hope my grandson gets a 'My Great Grandfather went to WW1 Medal" to > wear > to pre school next week, it will make him feel "special". Do you want > one as > well? > > > Ted Harris > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Duggan" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:09 PM > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > Hi Paul (old Mate), > > > > I must agree with you on this matter (and most others). > > > > The issue of the 2 medals under discussion was not taken lightly by > the > > government. > > > > I have found over the years that most people who object did not > qualifiy > or > > their off spring have been "knocked back" when applying. > > > > I can answer to both these accounts one for my late father and one > for > > myself. "Knocked back" on both accounts. > > > > Not a bad record for a ex POW (dad) and over 20 years service > (myself). > > > > No I was not a Nasho. but as both Fulltime and CMF service I > trained > Nashos > > including a lot who saw service overseas, and, some did not return. > > > > I applied for the ASM (1945/1975) but was not approved as my > service was > > within Australia. > > Was I disapointed, yes, upset, no. > > > > Do I agree with the Nashos getting their medal, Yes. > > > > Now for a medal for the CMF guys. > > > > I do think that some people get confused with the difference of > service > > medals and awards. > > > > Do I have service medals No. > > Do I have awards, Yes, 2, RFM and NM both awarded by the Govenor > General > for > > service. > > Service 1958-1964 RAR - 1964-1979 CMF including Full Time duty > during the > > Viet Nam period. > > > > I was trained to kill and traind others to kill. > > > > I guess the includinding all the above and no medals I must done > "Bugger > > All" > > > > Paul keep up the good work. > > > > Kind Regard, > > > > Robert Duggan > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:35 AM > > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > > > > Ms Val Harris > > > Dear Val, > > > My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any > > resemblance > > > between what really happens, and what is written, is more often > than > not, > > an > > > accident. > > > You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian > Award > system, > > > again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken > Australia > > > into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with > our > own > > > award system. > > > I noted your further comments about National Servicemen > and the > > > small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be > careful > though > > > when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service > medals are > > > given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they > do not > > nor > > > can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. > > > Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service > medal to > all > > > those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement > of > that > > > time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service > medal to > > > these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to > fight > in > > > an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was > a > reality > > > and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the > man > until > > > 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert > Menzies as > a > > > Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the > expected > war > > in > > > Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe > at the > > drop > > > of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National > Servicemen, > > from > > > whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where > fighting an > > armed > > > conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and > sailors > > where > > > committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas > and > > > Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 > had > > > instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular > army > > committed > > > in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, > our > > > National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement > of our > > army > > > would be based. > > > You state in your e-mail: > > > "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We > have > > > awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen > who did > 94 > > > days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men > who > did > > > buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, > we have > > > medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they > become > > > almost meaningless" > > > The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our > country > > can > > > finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have > worn and > > > wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you > become a > > part > > > of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or > Regular you > > are > > > a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. > > > 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest > of your > > > countries government, of possibly being called on to do active > service, > > when > > > and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. > Ninety-four days > of > > > training would give you a good chance to know some of the > rudiments of > > what > > > is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train > for, > to > > > kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help > out in > > floods > > > or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', > indeed. > > > The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding > the > > > Australian Active Service Medal: > > > "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently > > announced > > > the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 > (AASM > > 1945-75) > > > to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 > February > > 1975. > > > The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." > > > 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the > 1950's > > qualify > > > for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless > they > > joined > > > the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is > for > > > servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their > country in a > > > combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The > Korean, > > > Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the > > recognition > > > they deserve. > > > By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar > all' > to > > > receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days > in > Viet > > > Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can > be > > > described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what > your > > > definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you > are > most > > > probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent > now, > > still > > > believe that we where not in a real war. > > > "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result > is that > > they > > > become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not > > understand > > > or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. > > > To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done > for > your > > > country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a > welcome home > > > parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for > those of > us > > > who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in > Viet Nam > > any > > > further recognition they receive, from the people of this > country, for > > their > > > loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. > > > With our very own award system we can now recognise, and > have, > the > > > contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever > they > > > represent our country. The same can and will be done for our > people > going > > on > > > 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in > > Afghanistan > > > for instance. > > > Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get > back to > you > > on > > > that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of > our > armed > > > forces, who should know. > > > Respectfully yours > > > Paul Kinney > > > > > > >From: [email protected] > > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > > >To: [email protected] > > > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > > > > > > > ><< message2.txt >> > > > ><< message4.txt >> > > > ><< message6.txt >> > > > ><< message8.txt >> > > > ><< message10.txt >> > > > ><< message12.txt >> > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ ___ > > > MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. > Go to > > > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp > > > > > > ______________________________ > > >

Mr Duggan The difference between staying in Australia and training other people to kill (to use your words) and going overseas to a war zone and killing and being exposed to the deadly intent of the enemy is so different as to not (usually) need explanation. But of course you deserve a medal. Why not the "I stayed home award" or the "I didn't go away to fight" medal. Better still, why not give everyone one 5 medals so that no one misses out. Put them in cornflakes packets or hang them on milk cartons. Of course they won't have any value or command any respect but all the 90 day boys and the weekend warriors can all prance around on Anzac Day as though they had really done something. I hope my grandson gets a 'My Great Grandfather went to WW1 Medal" to wear to pre school next week, it will make him feel "special". Do you want one as well? Ted Harris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Duggan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:09 PM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > Hi Paul (old Mate), > > I must agree with you on this matter (and most others). > > The issue of the 2 medals under discussion was not taken lightly by the > government. > > I have found over the years that most people who object did not qualifiy or > their off spring have been "knocked back" when applying. > > I can answer to both these accounts one for my late father and one for > myself. "Knocked back" on both accounts. > > Not a bad record for a ex POW (dad) and over 20 years service (myself). > > No I was not a Nasho. but as both Fulltime and CMF service I trained Nashos > including a lot who saw service overseas, and, some did not return. > > I applied for the ASM (1945/1975) but was not approved as my service was > within Australia. > Was I disapointed, yes, upset, no. > > Do I agree with the Nashos getting their medal, Yes. > > Now for a medal for the CMF guys. > > I do think that some people get confused with the difference of service > medals and awards. > > Do I have service medals No. > Do I have awards, Yes, 2, RFM and NM both awarded by the Govenor General for > service. > Service 1958-1964 RAR - 1964-1979 CMF including Full Time duty during the > Viet Nam period. > > I was trained to kill and traind others to kill. > > I guess the includinding all the above and no medals I must done "Bugger > All" > > Paul keep up the good work. > > Kind Regard, > > Robert Duggan > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:35 AM > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > > > Ms Val Harris > > Dear Val, > > My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any > resemblance > > between what really happens, and what is written, is more often than not, > an > > accident. > > You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian Award system, > > again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken Australia > > into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with our own > > award system. > > I noted your further comments about National Servicemen and the > > small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be careful though > > when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service medals are > > given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they do not > nor > > can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. > > Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service medal to all > > those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement of that > > time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service medal to > > these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to fight in > > an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was a reality > > and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the man until > > 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert Menzies as a > > Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the expected war > in > > Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe at the > drop > > of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National Servicemen, > from > > whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where fighting an > armed > > conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and sailors > where > > committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas and > > Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 had > > instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular army > committed > > in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, our > > National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement of our > army > > would be based. > > You state in your e-mail: > > "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We have > > awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen who did 94 > > days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men who did > > buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, we have > > medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they become > > almost meaningless" > > The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our country > can > > finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have worn and > > wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you become a > part > > of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or Regular you > are > > a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. > > 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest of your > > countries government, of possibly being called on to do active service, > when > > and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. Ninety-four days of > > training would give you a good chance to know some of the rudiments of > what > > is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train for, to > > kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help out in > floods > > or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', indeed. > > The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding the > > Australian Active Service Medal: > > "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently > announced > > the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 (AASM > 1945-75) > > to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 February > 1975. > > The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." > > 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the 1950's > qualify > > for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless they > joined > > the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is for > > servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their country in a > > combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The Korean, > > Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the > recognition > > they deserve. > > By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar all' to > > receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days in Viet > > Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can be > > described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what your > > definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you are most > > probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent now, > still > > believe that we where not in a real war. > > "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result is that > they > > become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not > understand > > or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. > > To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done for your > > country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a welcome home > > parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for those of us > > who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in Viet Nam > any > > further recognition they receive, from the people of this country, for > their > > loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. > > With our very own award system we can now recognise, and have, the > > contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever they > > represent our country. The same can and will be done for our people going > on > > 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in > Afghanistan > > for instance. > > Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get back to you > on > > that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of our armed > > forces, who should know. > > Respectfully yours > > Paul Kinney > > > > >From: [email protected] > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > >To: [email protected] > > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > > >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > > > > > ><< message2.txt >> > > ><< message4.txt >> > > ><< message6.txt >> > > ><< message8.txt >> > > ><< message10.txt >> > > ><< message12.txt >> > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to > > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp > > > > ______________________________ >

Dean I dont know of a comprehensive list that has been published except at the start of various unit and other histories. However if you post a list on the list I am sure someone could help. Or send me an email and I will try Cheers Graham ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dean Martin Rees NEWMAN" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 4:49 PM Subject: WWII Unit abbreviations > Salutations from the "Coral Sea Coast" > (Lat 17.5s Long 146.4e) > Hi to All, > I am having difficulty in interpreting some of the Unit abbreviations > used in the WW II Nominal roll. > Does anybody on the list profess to be expert in this field and willing > to provide help? > Or, has anyone a referral to a text or person from whom help might be > obtained? > Or, should I address this query directly to the AWM? > Ask and it shall be given to you > Dean Newman, North Queensland Australia > "As time goes by" > [email protected] > "There are many paths to the top of the mountain, > but the view is always the same" > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > Please support RootsWeb who make this list possible > http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/how-to-subscribe.html >

Hi Paul (old Mate), I must agree with you on this matter (and most others). The issue of the 2 medals under discussion was not taken lightly by the government. I have found over the years that most people who object did not qualifiy or their off spring have been "knocked back" when applying. I can answer to both these accounts one for my late father and one for myself. "Knocked back" on both accounts. Not a bad record for a ex POW (dad) and over 20 years service (myself). No I was not a Nasho. but as both Fulltime and CMF service I trained Nashos including a lot who saw service overseas, and, some did not return. I applied for the ASM (1945/1975) but was not approved as my service was within Australia. Was I disapointed, yes, upset, no. Do I agree with the Nashos getting their medal, Yes. Now for a medal for the CMF guys. I do think that some people get confused with the difference of service medals and awards. Do I have service medals No. Do I have awards, Yes, 2, RFM and NM both awarded by the Govenor General for service. Service 1958-1964 RAR - 1964-1979 CMF including Full Time duty during the Viet Nam period. I was trained to kill and traind others to kill. I guess the includinding all the above and no medals I must done "Bugger All" Paul keep up the good work. Kind Regard, Robert Duggan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:35 AM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > Ms Val Harris > Dear Val, > My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any resemblance > between what really happens, and what is written, is more often than not, an > accident. > You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian Award system, > again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken Australia > into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with our own > award system. > I noted your further comments about National Servicemen and the > small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be careful though > when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service medals are > given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they do not nor > can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. > Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service medal to all > those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement of that > time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service medal to > these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to fight in > an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was a reality > and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the man until > 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert Menzies as a > Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the expected war in > Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe at the drop > of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National Servicemen, from > whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where fighting an armed > conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and sailors where > committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas and > Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 had > instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular army committed > in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, our > National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement of our army > would be based. > You state in your e-mail: > "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We have > awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen who did 94 > days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men who did > buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, we have > medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they become > almost meaningless" > The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our country can > finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have worn and > wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you become a part > of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or Regular you are > a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. > 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest of your > countries government, of possibly being called on to do active service, when > and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. Ninety-four days of > training would give you a good chance to know some of the rudiments of what > is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train for, to > kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help out in floods > or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', indeed. > The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding the > Australian Active Service Medal: > "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently announced > the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 (AASM 1945-75) > to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 February 1975. > The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." > 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the 1950's qualify > for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless they joined > the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is for > servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their country in a > combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The Korean, > Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the recognition > they deserve. > By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar all' to > receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days in Viet > Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can be > described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what your > definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you are most > probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent now, still > believe that we where not in a real war. > "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result is that they > become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not understand > or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. > To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done for your > country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a welcome home > parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for those of us > who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in Viet Nam any > further recognition they receive, from the people of this country, for their > loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. > With our very own award system we can now recognise, and have, the > contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever they > represent our country. The same can and will be done for our people going on > 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in Afghanistan > for instance. > Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get back to you on > that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of our armed > forces, who should know. > Respectfully yours > Paul Kinney > > >From: [email protected] > >Reply-To: [email protected] > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > > > ><< message2.txt >> > ><< message4.txt >> > ><< message6.txt >> > ><< message8.txt >> > ><< message10.txt >> > ><< message12.txt >> > > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp > > ______________________________

Thanks Paul. I am Ted not Val (just using her machine while mine is with the man with the spanners) 805 Charlie Harris spent 3 years and 32 days on active service in WW1 and got 2 campaign medals (and the MM) QX54455 Phil Davidson spent 929 days on active service in WW2 and got 4 campaign medals You spent (I assume) 365 days on active service and got 2 campaign medals and a Vietnamese award -------------------- I spent 1 year and 48 days in Malaysia (not considered active service) and have recently been deemed as qualified for 1 service medal and 1 anniversary of Nation Service medal. ------------------- how any one can suggest that my service (2 medals) in any way equalled that of my Dad (see Charlie Harris above) (2 medals) is beyond me. --------------------- You seem to have your facts tangled about the difference between the Australian Active Service Medal and the Australian Service Medal. check the details on http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/1945-1975.htm and on http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/oz-recent.htm#asm ------------------------------------ another thing that beats me is this. WW1 and WW2 and Malaya and Korea vets all came home and got on with their lives. So did most of the Viet Nam blokes. Why do a small group of vets from SVN still after 30 plus years, run around bleating about how badly done by they were? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:35 AM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > Ms Val Harris > Dear Val, > My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any resemblance > between what really happens, and what is written, is more often than not, an > accident. > You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian Award system, > again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken Australia > into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with our own > award system. > I noted your further comments about National Servicemen and the > small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be careful though > when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service medals are > given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they do not nor > can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. > Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service medal to all > those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement of that > time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service medal to > these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to fight in > an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was a reality > and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the man until > 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert Menzies as a > Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the expected war in > Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe at the drop > of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National Servicemen, from > whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where fighting an armed > conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and sailors where > committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas and > Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 had > instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular army committed > in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, our > National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement of our army > would be based. > You state in your e-mail: > "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We have > awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen who did 94 > days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men who did > buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, we have > medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they become > almost meaningless" > The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our country can > finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have worn and > wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you become a part > of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or Regular you are > a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. > 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest of your > countries government, of possibly being called on to do active service, when > and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. Ninety-four days of > training would give you a good chance to know some of the rudiments of what > is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train for, to > kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help out in floods > or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', indeed. > The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding the > Australian Active Service Medal: > "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently announced > the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 (AASM 1945-75) > to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 February 1975. > The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." > 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the 1950's qualify > for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless they joined > the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is for > servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their country in a > combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The Korean, > Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the recognition > they deserve. > By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar all' to > receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days in Viet > Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can be > described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what your > definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you are most > probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent now, still > believe that we where not in a real war. > "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result is that they > become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not understand > or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. > To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done for your > country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a welcome home > parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for those of us > who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in Viet Nam any > further recognition they receive, from the people of this country, for their > loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. > With our very own award system we can now recognise, and have, the > contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever they > represent our country. The same can and will be done for our people going on > 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in Afghanistan > for instance. > Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get back to you on > that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of our armed > forces, who should know. > Respectfully yours > Paul Kinney > > >From: [email protected] > >Reply-To: [email protected] > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 > >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > > > ><< message2.txt >> > ><< message4.txt >> > ><< message6.txt >> > ><< message8.txt >> > ><< message10.txt >> > ><< message12.txt >> > > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp > > ______________________________

Salutations from the "Coral Sea Coast" (Lat 17.5s Long 146.4e) Hi to All, I am having difficulty in interpreting some of the Unit abbreviations used in the WW II Nominal roll. Does anybody on the list profess to be expert in this field and willing to provide help? Or, has anyone a referral to a text or person from whom help might be obtained? Or, should I address this query directly to the AWM? Ask and it shall be given to you Dean Newman, North Queensland Australia "As time goes by" [email protected] "There are many paths to the top of the mountain, but the view is always the same"

Carolyn Rains needs a bit of help from you uniform/badge/medal experts in identifying her Great grandfathers Unit, badges and medal. Have a look at the photo on the ID Wizard http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-uniforms/id-wizard.htm and help if you can, please Ted

Ms Val Harris Dear Val, My apologies, I do not read newspapers. I find that any resemblance between what really happens, and what is written, is more often than not, an accident. You are absolutely correct regarding the Australian Award system, again my apologies, I had forgotten that we had once more taken Australia into the bold new world of being a country in our own right, with our own award system. I noted your further comments about National Servicemen and the small amount of time they spent in the service. You must be careful though when you compare Service medals with bravery awards. Service medals are given to show the areas where a soldier has been on Service, they do not nor can they be taken to represent acts of bravery. Your e-mail noted the award of the National Service medal to all those who served in the 1950's by doing the 90 + days requirement of that time, quite frankly I believe the award of the National Service medal to these men was long over due. Remember, they were being trained to fight in an era when Communism was at it's most rampant. The cold war was a reality and a bloody terrifying one at that. Joseph Stalin was still the man until 1952, and then came Nikita Kruschev. This country had Robert Menzies as a Prime Minister and England would have been in trouble if the expected war in Europe broke out, and 'Ming' would have sent our Army to Europe at the drop of his hat. Who would have defended Australia? The National Servicemen, from whom? Indonesia was going communist, the communists where fighting an armed conflict in Malaya and Viet Nam. Australian troops, airmen and sailors where committed to the Malayan conflict alongside the British, Ghurkas and Indians. At the same time China and North Korea from 1950 to 1954 had instigated and and fought the Korean War, so with our regular army committed in Malaya and the government in need of backing the regulars up, our National Servicemen where the backbone on which any enlargement of our army would be based. You state in your e-mail: "What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We have awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen who did 94 days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men who did buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, we have medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they become almost meaningless" The benefit of the Australian Awards system is that our country can finally recognise the service rendered to it, by those who have worn and wear, it's military uniform. When you put that uniform on you become a part of something special, the ANZAC tradition. Whether, Nasho or Regular you are a serviceman, it was and is a thing to be proud of. 'Buggar all'. To be placed in a position, at the behest of your countries government, of possibly being called on to do active service, when and if your country needs you, is hardly 'buggar all'. Ninety-four days of training would give you a good chance to know some of the rudiments of what is required to survive in combat. Combat is what servicemen train for, to kill the enemy. Not for parades, or to fight bushfires or help out in floods or assist at major disasters, but to kill people. 'Buggar all', indeed. The following will help you to understand the reason for awarding the Australian Active Service Medal: "The Minister for Defence Industry Science and Personnel recently announced the creation of the Australian Active Service Medal 1945-1975 (AASM 1945-75) to recognise warlike service between 3 September 1945 and 14 February 1975. The award was approved by the Queen on 11 December 1997." 'Warlike service', as none of the National Servicemen of the 1950's qualify for this medal it is not possible for them to receive it. Unless they joined the regular services and did do 'warlike services'. This medal is for servicemen and women who put their lives at risk for their country in a combat zone. Again it is an award that was long overdue. The Korean, Malayan, Sarawak and Borneo campaigns have finally received the recognition they deserve. By your definition Val, I am one of those who did 'buggar all' to receive that medal. I was a national serviceman, I spent 349 days in Viet Nam as a rifleman in the Infantry. If what I and my mates did can be described as 'buggar all', I would be intrigued to find out what your definition of the opposite to buggar all is. Be advised that you are most probably not on your own as the RSL then, and to a certain extent now, still believe that we where not in a real war. "Medals for this and medals for that and the end result is that they become almost meaningless", only in the eyes of those who do not understand or fully know the significance of what they are seeing. To finally receive acknowledgement of what you have done for your country, after having had to wait fifteen years for even a welcome home parade, is, like the parade, a part of the healing process for those of us who served in Viet Nam. For the families of the men who died in Viet Nam any further recognition they receive, from the people of this country, for their loss, is more than deserved, even if it is a medal. With our very own award system we can now recognise, and have, the contributions of our Peace-Keeping forces wherever and when ever they represent our country. The same can and will be done for our people going on 'Active Service' or who have gone on 'Active Service, our SAS in Afghanistan for instance. Will there be a quota system? I think not, I will get back to you on that, when I have confirmed it, with several serving members of our armed forces, who should know. Respectfully yours Paul Kinney >From: [email protected] >Reply-To: [email protected] >To: [email protected] >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #36 >Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 10:00:01 -0700 > ><< message2.txt >> ><< message4.txt >> ><< message6.txt >> ><< message8.txt >> ><< message10.txt >> ><< message12.txt >> _________________________________________________________________ MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp

There are contact details for BCOF Association on http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-conflicts-periods/other/bcof-japan.htm They might be able to help Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Griffin" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 9:39 AM Subject: D COMPANY - 66TH BATTALION BCOF > Hi > Would like to make contact with any who served in D Company - 66th Battalion BCOF 1946/1947 who may have been based in Eta Jima or Kurehiro and worked in the clearing of Arsonal Tunnels and Sheds. > > Thankyou > Suzanne Griffin > > ______________________________

I seem to have subscribed under several email addresses over the past few years and need to get them all off and start again with my default one. Please take me off all of these addresses and I will re-subscribe a little later on the email addresses that may be applicable are; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]