His actions should be recognized by his country, not ours.

I don't think this should be much of a debate.  The Brits, along with the Canadians, are our closest allies.  We have all fought side by side many times throughout the last century.  If our friends performs a brave act saving an American life(s) they should be recognized appropriately.  From the write up I saw the MOH is the appropriate recognition.  Lets always do the right thing in dealing with brave men.

Why, Grin_N_Barrett, why is that so?

Why should any country not be free to award an honor to a foreign national when it deems that his/her actions warrant it?

What basis (other than racism) is there to limit a country's freedom to recognize an act of bravery by a foreign national that has directly benefits its own nationals?

A previous post suggests that the SBS guy may have been a U.S. citizen. I imagine that if this proves to be true, that would make all the difference to you and you would have no objection?

But there was no difference in the danger involved, there was no difference in the selfless act of extreme bravery! So, what exactly is your objection?

If it's some pathetic, candy-assed "rule" that you would base your objection on – wonder if that CIA guy would agree with you?

I am of two opinions on this one...

1) Speaking as someone holding decorations for Valour, I realise that this is something that goes on in each major national Military Force.  The Britons are well able to recognise their own.

2) Then again, the actions to be recognised were carried out in an attempt to save an American National AND Inteligence Asset.

Hmm, add in Sir Winston being offered the American Citizenship (honourary - thank you for reminding me of that, as I had forgotten!) and there becomes a partial precedent for it.  Add in the general attitude and motivation of the SBS (and SAS, I have worked with both!) and I see no reason why it should NOT be so.

Throw in Canada offering their own decorations to Americans in service to them (people who wanted to get into WWI and WWII and didn't think we were moving fast enough) and it becomes a distinct possibilty, and perhaps something that very well SHOULD happen!

Do I personally think it's a good idea?  The jury's still out.  Do I think it's a good idea re: our Allies?  Yes, it is.

FFZ

He saved one of ours, pure and simple, and we should recognize him for that if he truly deserves the MOH. My .02.

It sounds to me like he earned the medal. The Brits always stand with us and they have recognized our soldiers in the past. This was undoubtedly a courageous and selfless act.
I say give him the medal.
ARH

Not all of the facts are out, be prepared for a surprise on this particular case.

I Bet "DAVE" the CIA spook would probably give the guy his if he had one.

If what's being reported is true, the Brit is one brave MOFO.

The troop wouldn't wear the badge if he didn't earn it. IMHO.

I certainly agree this member of the British SBS unit deserves recognition but right from the Congressional Medal of Honor website FAQ section [url]www.cmohs.org/medal/medal_faq.htm[/url]
regarding "Is it required to be a U.S. citizen in order to be awarded the MOH?"   It is not required to be a U.S. citizen, [u]but you must be in the U.S. military in order to qualify[/u] for the Medal of Honor.

Some call if petty or picky but those are the rules so give him a VC.  To change makes it political & then the PC crap comes in.  Next thing ya know Clinton will win one.

Grin_N_Barret,

Thanks for the source for the "rule". Like so many "rules" it seems simply to 'remain on the books' without any apparent rationale.

Half the post on this entire forum are ravings against similar, pointless, irrational "rules" – all those that that chip away at the 2nd Amendment!

What's the basis for supporting this particular piece of legal pap – I mean, what's the point?

Congress can set this aside any time they want by passing a special bill. Its been done before. That is how we gave the MOH to the two Austrailians. Congress passed special legislation, a bill, to give the MOH to those two men. They were NOT given under the the normal MOH regulation, the Medals awarded were Army pattern MOH's just like American winners get, but the authorization for their issuance was a special act of congress. It was not a amendment to the regulations, it was a one time bill.

This is what will be followed in giving the SBS man the MOH.

Nationality means nothing when it comes to recognizing the facts of the matter at hand. The MAN put his ASS on the line to rescue one of ours, and as such we owe him a debt of sincere gratitude-one that is definately worthy of the Medal of Honor. The worth and meaning of any military commendation/award is embodied in those who have had it bestowed upon them. Their blood has permanently etched the standard by which heroic and brave actions are to be judged. The standard to award the medal can be found in those who have earned it, deservingly so, in the past-rather than in some arbitrary regulation.

I had the privilage to save a couple of fellow soldier's lives when I was in the Army. I was put up for an award that I did not want. The award was down-graded by someone outside of the chain of command. Did I care that I got an award? No. Did I care that the award was down-graded? No. What really matters to me is that two of my fellow soldiers got to walk away from the edge of death, got to see their families agian, got to live their lives for a little while longer. What did I want in return for my actions-nothing-the fact that I did what should have been done and that those actions resulted in people continuing to live on was more than enough for me.

Will the cries of the few who do not want this man to get the award take away from what happened that day-no. It cannot take away his honor, his bravery, his courage. It cannot take away the gratitude that I am sure that Dave has in his heart for him. What will happen if we do not recognize his actions-America will be tarnished in her own eyes and will be less honorable than she was before that day in Afghanistan. Give credit where credit is due-it is the honorable, just, and AMERICAN thing to do. All those who object to this need to think about what this country means to them and also about the blood that has paid for their freedom-both AMERICAN & ALLIED!

I don't care if he is from Mars. Given the story as currently stated, he earned it.  I work with Canadian and British troops everyday, they are here on Ft Hood to train on Apaches and other weapon systems.  Good people all of them, none would give a second thought to nationality in the thick of it, neither would the American troops. Brave deeds deserve recognition, not petty legal maneuvering by armchair warriors. As for the SEAL, you cannot link one to the other.  They are separate incidents in different situations. It may be the SEAL deserves a MOH, but it does not have anything to do with anyone else getting one.  One point not brought up yet.  The whole process had to have been started by American military witnessing the act on scene and recommending him in the first place.  If the guys on the ground at the time believe he deserves a MOH, it's fine by me.