<p>"but wouldn't the satisfaction already come from knowing that you risked your life to protect your country? do you need the medal so others would know that you're a hero?"</p>
<p>I beleive they deserve recognition from the public who probably don't know what they medals mean and from their peers who I assume do.
I don't think it is showing off at all to wear medals you earned, and as usna pointed out, it is part of the uniform, if you are wearing the uniform you don't get to pick and choose what part of it you wear.
What I think is showing off is PHDs who insist on being called Dr. or what is even more laughable are honorary Phd s insisting on that title.</p>
<p>My niece who is graduating with honors is rushing out to buy a pin, it is silly I think, as it is money they can illafford, but to her it seems to be acknowledgement that she needs to see.</p>
<p>if medals were not given out in the first place, soldiers won't have to wear the medals because there won't be any. if the war is truly justified, if there's reason to believe that serving in it will make the country safer, and if war is truly the last resort, then everyone who has benefited, on a continual basis, from the US & state governments should fight in the war. if everyone is made to enlist (God forbid circumstances that may necessitate a war) some time in his/her life, no one would need a medal since his/her service would an Obligation.</p>
<p>my grandpa is a US veteran but his service is no big deal to him. his take on this issue is that he needed to protect his country, so it was only right for him to enlist and fight (provided that the causes of war are justified). if service in war were indeed an obligation, why would a soldier need a medal to be a permanent part of his/her uniform? would you need a medal to state that you attended 6th grade? no, because it's compulsory. a piece of paper acknowledging his or her service is more than enough.</p>
<p>I really tried to understand your position, Angry, or at least what I thought (hoped) your position was. It appears that I gave you too much credit. Print this thread out and take it to your Grandad. It's my bet he'll help you understand. I'd suggest Veteran's Day. Be ready to duck.</p>
<p>ace rockella wrote:
"you must be kidding me. what the hell is wrong with giving out medals. maybe we should get rid of every single award then. i mean nobel peace prize winners should really just be content with the fact that they helped out, huh. you f-ing tard, get a life."</p>
<p>i wrote on the premise that every individual who has benefited from the services of the government on a periodic basis should be obliged to fight in defense of his or her country. if a soldier were obliged to fight, why would he need a medal? your example is not parallel with the issue at hand, since nobel peace winners are not obliged to accomplish what they accomplished. if a soldier accomplished something extraordinary, his or her deed would still fall under the category "in defense of his country" which is still an obligation. high expectations are set for the military, but many are not able to fulfill such expectations despite their best effort. regardless of whether they have met the high expectations or not, they still made an effort to go to war, and they had to because defending one's country is an obligation.</p>
<p>also, do we really need to give out purple hearts? it's not the soldier's choice to be wounded.</p>
<p>my posts reflect how i truly feel, ignorant or otherwise. i have to be honest with myself. i'm sorry if i offended anyone, but i still stand firmly by my view.</p>
<p>I understand what your trying to say angry and kinda agree with what you are saying. For the others, its just his viewpoint its not like hes starting an Anti-Veteran organization. The ducking part was funny though.</p>