February 11, 2009 5:32 PM

Where Are The Medals For Troops In Iraq?

By
James M Klatell
(CBS)  The war in Iraq is lumbering toward its fourth year, and the American body count has passed 3,000. But, as CBS News correspondent Thalia Assuras reports, questions are being raised about why so few medals for valor have been awarded to the men and women who have sacrificed so much in this conflict compared to wars of the past.

Some of the fiercest fighting of the war was in Fallujah in November 2004 –a month that saw 136 U.S. soldiers killed.

Staff-Sergeant David Bellavia remembers. He was there. "The embers were flying everywhere, tracer fire like a hornets nest, just exploding in a room," he says. "There was no safe spot."

Bellavia – who was videotaped by CBS caring for a wounded soldier during the battle – took on a house full of insurgents – alone.

"I used my weapon and I used my helmet and my plate and a knife and everything I had in my power because I was literally fighting for my life," he says.

Bellavia lost his entire chain of command in Fallujah, but that day in that house he fought and won, killing at least four insurgents. Bellavia's unit recommended him for the military's highest award - the Medal of Honor.

He was awarded a Silver Star.

"It's the most humbling thing in the world, but it's embarrassing," he says now.

Embarrassing, says Bellavia, because so many others are not being recognized with valor medals.

"I think we would be in a better state right now as a military and a nation if we honored those young men and women who are doing their jobs," he says.

Past wars seem to have produced more heroes. In World War Two, the military awarded 464 Medals of Honor; in Vietnam 245. But in Iraq, there have only been two.

As for service crosses, which are the second highest honor that the Army, Navy and Air Force award: 8,716 were given out in World War Two. So far in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have now lasted longer than WWII, just 26 have been given.

Military analysts say part of the reason fewer medals have been awarded in this conflict is that it's a different kind of war.

Some of the reasons why:

  • Iraq is not a traditional battlefield.

  • Fighting is often done with high-tech weapons rather than hand to hand combat.

  • IEDs are often the enemy, rather than human beings.

    "There are simply different opportunities, I think, in a conflict to demonstrate heroism and this particular conflict may present opportunities that are different from the past," says Bill Carr, the acting Deputy Undersecretary of Defense who is the head of a multi-branch commission reviewing the pentagon's award policy.

    The commission is expected to recommend some changes this summer, but Carr says they will only be minor revisions. He sees no reason to change the policy for the highest valor awards.

    "Each Medal of Honor that I've seen has met the standards precisely," Carr says. "It's been carefully reviewed by commanders asking questions of each other, checking back with witnesses, so the process is a comprehensive one."

    That explanation doesn't really satisfy Bellavia. He says there needs to be a complete overhaul.

    "We need every branch of service on the same page," he says. "And obviously, we need someone from the Unites States Congress to supervise."

    Bellavia is on a crusade to make that happen.

    "It's extremely personal and only because of the fact that my best friends have bled and died," he says. "I lost 36 brothers in one year."
  • Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
    Add a Comment See all 22 Comments
    by popwood January 8, 2007 12:56 PM EST
    I will not for a moment deny that there are people deserving of medals who do not receive them. However, the difference in the number of medals conferred in WWII and the current conflict may well be in large measure due to the sheer numbers of troops imvolved and to thw intensity of the battles fought.

    Put it in perspectve by comparing the number of combat troops on the lines during WWII with the numers in the current conflict, and by comparing the numbers of casuaties in both conflicts.

    Also, what about Korea, and Viet Nam? How did they compare in numbers of troops on the lines, numbers of casualties, and numbers of Medals of Honor.
    Reply to this comment
    by mh4cbs1 January 8, 2007 1:36 AM EST

    MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!! The following buried news is one more example of what American people don't know and won't hear about. From the wire today 1/7/07....

    "... The Iraqi Council of Ministers is expected to approve, as early as today, a controversial new hydrocarbon law, heavily pushed by the US and UK governments, that will radically redraw the Iraqi oil industry and throw open the doors to the third-largest oil reserves in the world. It would allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil companies in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972. "
    Reply to this comment
    by bobverick January 7, 2007 10:55 PM EST
    I think they don't want to award the Medal of Honor due to finances. Once a person is awarded the MOH they are entitled a monthy stipend from the VA. They are also entitled to heatlh care under the military's Tri Care Health insurance system. What a crappy way to award our troops.
    Reply to this comment
    by bluestardad January 7, 2007 5:48 PM EST
    The Neo-Cons are quick to send other peoples children to war but slow to award their sacrifice. This trait comes from having never served themselves!
    Reply to this comment
    by jdweymouth January 7, 2007 2:24 PM EST
    I've said this before: The United States is the "United Nations". It has no power without us, proving its uselessness comparable to the
    Pre-WW2 League of Nations. The thing about the U.S. and war is that Congress alone can declare war, and us asking another organization if we can, and basing our decisions on foreign decisions: it's in violation to the constitution

    I'm not offended; you're putting up a legitimate argument.

    Part 3/3
    Please don't take offence, but do you know what each medal signifies? The Congressional Medal of Honor can only be presented by act of congress, therefore, we shouldn't blame Bush, his cabinet or anyone but congress as a whole. Remember there were and are dems in congress along with republicans. The immediate officers and theatre generals are at fault for any lower medal (excluding presidential medal of freedom) because they have the say for the awarding of medals.
    Reply to this comment
    by jdweymouth January 7, 2007 2:23 PM EST
    Part 2/3
    In regard to Halliburton, granted, they are filthy rich thanks to Iraq but give Bush either the benefit of the doubt, or not too much credit. Once again falling back on history-many industries and individuals (including people close to FDR) benefited from WW2 but it was a necessary war. George W. Bush is nowhere near the best president we've ever had, but I do believe him to be a I'm an American, but I don't live an America at the moment, I've been living in China since 2004. When I said don't "dishonor our soldiers", I meant: don't say they're fighting for a corporation or corrupt individuals. Whether or not it's true, remember, our troops have accomplished a lot-getting rid of a dictator to name one who did much worse thins than few stressed out soldiers. (I'm not defending their actions; I'm saying they deserve extenuating circumstances)

    In regard to Halliburton, granted, they are filthy rich thanks to Iraq but give Bush either the benefit of the doubt, or not too much credit. Once again falling back on history-many corporations benefited from WW1-Vietnam, but those were necessary wars. George W. Bush is nowhere near the best president we've ever had, but I do believe him to be a patriot, and not one who would kill Iraqi civilians, let alone or own soldiers, without cause.
    Reply to this comment
    by jdweymouth January 7, 2007 2:22 PM EST
    Part 1/3
    amerigirl28: Thank you for your civility. My response...
    I'm an American, but I don't live an America at the moment, I've been living in China since 2004, and will be going back soon. I follow events closely back home, and have access to the same material you do.

    When I said don't "don't dishonor our soldiers", I meant: don't say they're fighting for a corporation or corrupt individuals. Whether or not it's true, remember, our troops have accomplished a lot getting rid of a dictator to name one thing. A dictator who did much worse things than few stressed out soldiers. (I'm not defending their actions; I'm saying they deserve extenuating circumstances) I did not say you shouldn't speak about the war.
    Reply to this comment
    by dnamedtech January 7, 2007 3:08 AM EST
    I am amazed that the current forum has forgotten our brave children in Iraq and In the Middle East. The past is irrelevant. Wake up my friends, and call for our children to come home.
    Jerry





































    preiss
    Reply to this comment
    by beasia January 7, 2007 3:04 AM EST
    jdweymouth


    do you live in America? You wrote that we have no evidence that this is a private war. Have you seen fareignheit 9/11? I know its a propaganda piece, but you have to at least consider the fact that haliburton--the vice presidents company (also where bush is largly invested) has gotten filthy rich because of their contracts in Iraq!

    I'm not a crazy liberal. I am an independent voter who has voted republican before and I can tell you this war

    WASN'T U.N. SANCTIONED! That makes it illegal. There are so many more things that could be said sir.

    I hope I am not offending you. I really think you should do some research.


    also: supporting the troops doesn't mean you cannot speak about the war, the troops raping and murdering, etc. if we don't question we're not in a democracy.
    Reply to this comment
    by beasia January 7, 2007 2:59 AM EST
    this story makes me worried. I think what the man in the article did was absolutely amazing and definitely worthy of a much higher medal.

    My concern has to do with why we want the medals. I don't want our people there and it seemed that WWI and WWII medals may have been overgiven in an attempt to unify and pacify the country.

    Perhaps in this era our country is not united in any sense. Perhaps, the military is seeing the result of our own inner turmoil.
    Reply to this comment
    See all 22 Comments
    .
    Scroll Left
    Scroll Right More »
    CBS News on Facebook