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 > > ______________________________