# Drone pilots to get medals?



## Brill (Jul 9, 2012)

I really am not one to talk here because I was "awarded" 5 Air Medals for sitting on my ass on a plane.  We got one AM for every 20 missions (lasting up to 12 hrs each) over "hostile territory".  However, I think the idea below is silly.  Where does it end?  Will the tanker pilots get DFCs now?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...to-get-medals/2012/07/09/gJQAF2PhYW_blog.html

The Pentagon is considering awarding a Distinguished Warfare Medal to drone pilots who work on military bases often far removed from the battlefield.

The proposed medal would rank between the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Soldier’s Medal for exceptional conduct outside a combat zone.


----------



## AWP (Jul 9, 2012)

Well....if the Bronze Star sans "V" can be handed out like candy to fobbitts everywhere, might as well make the drone crews feel special too.


----------



## SpitfireV (Jul 9, 2012)

Is there like a general "really good work" medal?


----------



## goon175 (Jul 9, 2012)

> Is there like a general "really good work" medal?


 
yeah, its called an Army Commendation Medal.


----------



## SpitfireV (Jul 9, 2012)

So...shouldn't these guys get that?


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 9, 2012)

goon175 said:


> yeah, its called an Army Commendation Medal.


 
For E-5's and below... :ehh:


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Jul 9, 2012)

The Navy has the NAM .


----------



## goon175 (Jul 9, 2012)

> its called an Army Commendation Medal.For E-5's and below... :ehh:


 
Come to USAREC if you want to see that concept disproven...


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 9, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Come to USAREC if you want to see that concept disproven...


 
Really?  In the unit I deployed with, things were really stupid when it came to awards.  Apparently E-6s and above were to get BSMs.  A couple didn't, but were allowed to re-submit for it.  E-5 and below were given ARCOMs, although were told half would be down-graded (randomly, not necessarily the turds that didn't deserve an award).

Nice to hear about some standards being adhered to.  Maybe it is a Guard thing.  Although I didn't see the same issue in the SF unit I was in.


----------



## goon175 (Jul 9, 2012)

Let me put it this way:

We just recently had a SSG who ETS'd after I believe 9 years of service. Purple Heart x2, BSM w/ V, was in the same company/same time as the unit salvator guinta was in when awarded the MOH. Not only did he have that deployment to the korengal under his belt, but also one to iraq. He was, in my opinion, the epitome of an airborne infantryman and of a soldier. He came down on orders to USAREC, and performed very well as a recruiter, despite his pure hate for the job.

What was this mans ETS award? If you asked me to guess, I would say "atleast an MSM right?"

Nope. He was given an ARCOM.

That ranks among my "top 5 moments that make me embarassed to be in the army"


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 9, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Let me put it this way:
> 
> We just recently had a SSG who ETS'd after I believe 9 years of service. Purple Heart x2, BSM w/ V, was in the same company/same time as the unit salvator guinta was in when awarded the MOH. Not only did he have that deployment to the korengal under his belt, but also one to iraq. He was, in my opinion, the epitome of an airborne infantryman and of a soldier. He came down on orders to USAREC, and performed very well as a recruiter, despite his pure hate for the job.
> 
> ...


Service awards are rank based which is why PCS awards should be outlawed.

As far as the original post/question; I don't have an issue with something for the stateside folks, RPV elements, Intel, etc.

I think it is a proper evolution, and we will see more remote air support.  I think you will see very few given out, and won't be surprised to see most go to RPV teams in-theater rather then stateside.


----------



## goon175 (Jul 9, 2012)

They should not be rank based, but rather what did you achieve? For the SSG I talked about above, his time in the Army was very "meritorious" and in my opinion was very deserving of an MSM.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 9, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Let me put it this way:
> 
> We just recently had a SSG who ETS'd after I believe 9 years of service. Purple Heart x2, BSM w/ V, was in the same company/same time as the unit salvator guinta was in when awarded the MOH. Not only did he have that deployment to the korengal under his belt, but also one to iraq. He was, in my opinion, the epitome of an airborne infantryman and of a soldier. He came down on orders to USAREC, and performed very well as a recruiter, despite his pure hate for the job.
> 
> ...


 
Holy shit!  That is retarded.  I know of some commands/leaders that refuse to give awards, or downgrade awards for no reason, but that is terrible!


----------



## Regulator3 (Jul 10, 2012)

Not to get off on a tangent, but I think a lot of it has to do with the unit assigned. I know some studs that in another unit would have risen head and shoulders above their peers and received awards accordingly, but at their current unit (not that they would switch), excellence was expected and awards given less frequently.


----------



## CDG (Jul 10, 2012)

goon175 said:


> They should not be rank based, but rather what did you achieve?


 
When I was in HOA, there were technically two parent commands you could be assigned to. There was JTF-HOA and then there was Camp Lemonier.  Everyone got medals at the end of a deployment there.  If your orders said, "Camp Lemonier" you received a Navy Achievement Medal or whatever your service equivalent was.  If your orders said "JTF-HOA" you were given a Joint Commendation Medal.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 10, 2012)

Regulator3 said:


> Not to get off on a tangent, but I think a lot of it has to do with the unit assigned. I know some studs that in another unit would have risen head and shoulders above their peers and received awards accordingly, but at their current unit (not that they would switch), excellence was expected and awards given less frequently.


 
Agreed.  I think that is part of it for sure.  I also think in some units, people are too lazy to write awards that people earned.  There are a lot of different factors.  But going back to the original post, there is no need for a special award for these guys.  Don't they already get an ASI now (F6 or F7 depending if you are a UAV pilot or Master Trainer)?  Why do they need a special award?  I think the standard ARCOM or AAM would suffice, or for super badassery, maybe an MSM?


----------



## Scotth (Jul 10, 2012)

Might as well give them hazard duty pay as well.

There isn't enough awards out there covering exemplary service you have to create a new one?  For a drone pilot to?  I mean pilot have a egos already but at least when they are actually flying there is a lot of work behind the scenes and there is always the threat of crashing even when they are flying at home.  Poor drone pilots might crash and burn getting up from there desk, better give them something big and shiny to keep them occupied and keep them motivated to stay in the fight?


----------



## AWP (Jul 10, 2012)

In the Guard back in the 90's our awards policy was rather "old school" in that you didn't receive an award unless your performance was exemplary. Being an SF BN our bar was a little higher than other units.

Then STPA came out and suddenly awards = promotion points that actually mattered...and the wheels fell off. In order for the support guys in most MOS' to remain competitive against their conventional peers our command started lowering the bar for one's performance to justify awards FOR AN AT PERIOD. 2 weeks of work for an ARCOM? I'm ashamed to say it happened in some cases, but it was done to give our guys a chance against their not-so-stellar MOS peers from other units with zero standards.

On the AD side how many NCOERs were all "Firewall 5's" in some units?

The system has caused the cheapening of awards. Everyone who was a junior enlisted in that timeframe are now E-6's at a minimum. They grew up in an era where standards were tossed for the sake of promotion points. "Medals for everyone" sin't surprising.

The system is broken.


----------



## Arrow 4 (Jul 10, 2012)

The Army's award system is broken and has been for a long time. Too often we reward people for all of the wrong reasons. I was a Cpl. running a CAT-A in Iraq even though my team had an E-6 (Later promoted to E-7 on the team) who was completely incompetent. My commander came out and told me that had I been and E-6 or above I would have recieved a BSM. It seemed to me that a lower ranking person who has to perform the duties of a senior enlisted would be more deserving right? Our company was going to give this same E-7 a CAB despite having shown cowardice under fire. It took me and a couple of other team members writing memos detailing his cowardice to prevent the award being given. The unit was not happy about being forced not to award him the CAB. Awards are a serious sore spot for me and probably a whole lot of others in the Army. In the end, despite having done his job and at half the pay, this incompetent and cowardly E-7 walked away with the same ARCOM I did.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 10, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> Agreed. I think that is part of it for sure. I also think in some units, people are too lazy to write awards that people earned. There are a lot of different factors. But going back to the original post, there is no need for a special award for these guys. Don't they already get an ASI now (F6 or F7 depending if you are a UAV pilot or Master Trainer)? Why do they need a special award? I think the standard ARCOM or AAM would suffice, or for super badassery, maybe an MSM?


 
I think the goal was to create an "Aviation Orientated" medal, and no, I don't think an AAM suffices as we give AAM's out for decorating the CG's Office (I personally witnessed that one).

Again, I don't think it's that big a deal, and doubt they will get awarded often.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 10, 2012)

SOWT said:


> I think the goal was to create an "Aviation Orientated" medal, and no, I don't think an AAM suffices as we give AAM's out for decorating the CG's Office (I personally witnessed that one).
> 
> Again, I don't think it's that big a deal, and doubt they will get awarded often.


 
I don't really like the idea, but I guess it kind of makes sense. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around these people being in aviation or called pilots. It makes sense, and I usually think about Raven "pilots", and not the big bird pilots. Maybe that's where my big hang up is.

Hell, Raven/UAV pilots already get a hooah badge, or at least they were pushing that when I went through the course... I can put that right next to my driver's badge... LOL


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 10, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> I don't really like the idea, but I guess it kind of makes sense. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around these people being in aviation or called pilots. It makes sense, and I usually think about Raven "pilots", and not the big bird pilots. Maybe that's where my big hang up is.
> 
> Hell, Raven/UAV pilots already get a hooah badge, or at least they were pushing that when I went through the course... I can put that right next to my driver's badge... LOL


Really (in my book) no different then a KC-10 taking off from Qatar(?) flying at 35,000 feet and returning, they get an Air Medal, 35,000 Ftt; 10,000 miles, really no different.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 10, 2012)

Except the drone pilots are kicking back in a building with their half frap soy latte with a lemon twist and no chance of dying if their bird crashes.

And people wonder why I was looking at doing a contract gig flying UAVs. LOL!


----------



## pardus (Jul 10, 2012)

A "guy I know" is being put up for a BSM for a mission he did along with others. It's ridiculous. I think some of the awards system is a joke (I'm not talking about combat earned stuff).


----------



## Brill (Jul 10, 2012)

The Air Force awarded 246 Bronze Stars for the Yugoslavian campaign, with 131 going to people within the combat zone and 115 going to those outside.

http://articles.dailypress.com/2000-06-13/news/0006130011_1_bronze-stars-medals-combat-zone

I never knew there were that many.  I do remember the commander of the MARG received a BSM for ... hell, floating around in the Adriatic?  Dunno, but I thought a battle medal to a Navy female who never set foot in Kosovo was bullshit.


----------



## Scotth (Jul 10, 2012)

If they want to create new medals.  Create a new valor or meritorious service medal system that separates the awards.  I understand the V device but I always hated seeing the same medal handed to someone for valor and then giving that same medal back home to someone who did there job well.  Putting that V on the ribbon just doesn't do the award justification IMHO.


----------



## Brill (Jul 10, 2012)

_[Jenko starts to crack up, Schmidt points to a medal]_ 
*Schmidt: *I mean this is a fourth grade participation medal for soccer. It's literally a medal for sucking!
*Annie Schmidt: *Now! Now!
*David Schmidt: *That is a medal for trying.
*Annie Schmidt: *Yes.
_[turning to Jenko]_
*David Schmidt: *Let me tell you something, this guy was always a great trier.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 10, 2012)

lindy said:


> I really am not one to talk here because I was "awarded" 5 Air Medals for sitting on my ass on a plane. We got one AM for every 20 missions (lasting up to 12 hrs each) over "hostile territory". However, I think the idea below is silly. Where does it end? Will the tanker pilots get DFCs now?
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...to-get-medals/2012/07/09/gJQAF2PhYW_blog.html
> 
> ...


 
The DFC and SM are for valor and heroism, respectively. There is no way a drone "pilot's" mission measures up anywhere near that. Drone operators can take their ARCOM or MSM equivalent and head on back home... you know, like they do every night after they "fly" their missions. No BSMs, no "war" medals, and definitely no "special" medals just for them. Next the cyber guys are going to be asking for something "special" too, because you know they are in the fight too. 

I think we have too many award as it is. Example: a medal for not getting an Article-15 or a court-martial for three years? (Good Conduct Medal) Seriously, in an all-volunteer Army? Isn't that why you get a paycheck and the right to wear that uniform in the first place? Dump the GCM and give troops a numeral device to wear on their respective service ribbon for every year of honorable service.

DFC and Air Medals... outlived their usefulness. We already have numerous valor awards, if a pilot does something heroic, put him in for a BSM(V), Silver Star, etc. Air Medal... see the preceding sentence in cases where it involves valor, otherwise, why do you get a medal for either doing your job or taking a taxi to work? Why not hand out special awards for people who go on convoys? I think statistically, that is WAY more dangerous than flying.

Maybe something we could look at is trimming down the number of medals, but creating a "C" (for combat) device to denote lower-level awards (MSM, ARCOM, AAM, and their joint/other service equivalents) to show which awards were given for service (i.e. physical presence) in a designated combat zone.

Once we get this uniform ridiculousness settled, the DoD should take a long hard look at its medals policy.


----------



## Brill (Jul 10, 2012)

F-117 goes down in Serbia...buddy does what we intel types do, gets a AM with V (of course, there is more to the story).  Right place at right time I suppose.


----------



## Kraut783 (Jul 10, 2012)

I have no problem with them receiving: Ariel Achievement Medal...think it would fit the bill.

The *Aerial Achievement Medal* is a decoration of the United States Air Force which was first created in 1988. The decoration is intended to recognize the contributions of aircrew members who would, otherwise, not be qualified for the award of the Air Medal.
The decoration is awarded in the name of the Secretary of the Air Force and is presented to members of the United States military or civilian personnel, while serving in a capacity with the U.S. Air Force, who distinguish themselves by sustained meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight. The achievements must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that normally expected of professional airmen.[1]
Operators of Unmanned aerial vehicles may receive the award. One was given in 1997 for successfully flying a disabled UAV back to its base.[2] According to a report based on Air Force statistics, from January 2009 to mid-2010 3497 medals were granted to operators, while 1408 more were given to pilots


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 11, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> The DFC and SM are for valor and heroism, respectively. There is no way a drone "pilot's" mission measures up anywhere near that. Drone operators can take their ARCOM or MSM equivalent and head on back home... you know, like they do every night after they "fly" their missions. No BSMs, no "war" medals, and definitely no "special" medals just for them. Next the cyber guys are going to be asking for something "special" too, because you know they are in the fight too.
> 
> I think we have too many award as it is. Example: a medal for not getting an Article-15 or a court-martial for three years? (Good Conduct Medal) Seriously, in an all-volunteer Army? Isn't that why you get a paycheck and the right to wear that uniform in the first place? Dump the GCM and give troops a numeral device to wear on their respective service ribbon for every year of honorable service.
> 
> ...


BSM is a ground award, and (By law) can no longer be awarded to someone outside the AOR.


----------



## QC (Jul 11, 2012)

Campaign Medal perhaps? Agree here with Scotth. We've had new ones here for the various ops over the past few years that obviously didn't exist before. Some kind of recognition IMO is fine.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 12, 2012)

New medals and badges for everyone!


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Jul 12, 2012)

Holy shit, Marauder06 has been on a clip art spree possibly equal only to pardus 's  hate fests.


----------



## Arrow 4 (Jul 12, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> New medals and badges for everyone!
> 
> View attachment 6346


 
If someone makes that badge I will buy it and hand it out to "deserving" folks!


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 13, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> Holy shit, Marauder06 has been *on a clip art spree* possibly equal only to pardus 's hate fests.


 
Yeah... beats the hell out of studying Spanish


----------



## dknob (Jul 13, 2012)

Drone pilots should get commendation medals for their service. Not Air Medals and not Valour awards/V-device. That would be a spit in the face to pilots everywhere.


----------



## Etype (Jul 13, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> Raven/UAV pilots already get a hooah badge, or at least they were pushing that when I went through the course... I can put that right next to my driver's badge... LOL


Raven operators don't get a badge that I know of.


----------



## dknob (Jul 13, 2012)

CDG said:


> When I was in HOA, there were technically two parent commands you could be assigned to. There was JTF-HOA and then there was Camp Lemonier. Everyone got medals at the end of a deployment there. If your orders said, "Camp Lemonier" you received a Navy Achievement Medal or whatever your service equivalent was. If your orders said "JTF-HOA" you were given a Joint Commendation Medal.


 wtf.. JCOM is a big award for just "showing up"


----------



## dknob (Jul 13, 2012)

who cares about medals these days anyway. The ASU sucks complete ass and you won't look good no matter what awards or badges you have.


----------



## pardus (Jul 13, 2012)

They should remove promotion points from awards. That would solve half the problem of "everyone is special and should get one".


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 13, 2012)

pardus said:


> They should remove promotion points from awards. That would solve half the problem of "everyone is special and should get one".


Semi-agree.
Make Campaign medal worth a point or two.  
That way deployers get a leg up on the Beltway Banditos.


----------



## pardus (Jul 13, 2012)

SOWT said:


> Semi-agree.
> Make Campaign medal worth a point or two.
> That way deployers get a leg up on the Beltway Banditos.


 
I Agree 100%


----------



## Johca (Jul 14, 2012)

A few point of clarifications pertinent to the RPA pilots and enlisted sensor operators to get medals.

1. As far as the long range permanently CONUS duty position based types (example 11th Reconnaissance Squadron (RS), Creech AFB NV), they have always been eligible for the Aerial Achievement Medal and some of these pilots and systems operators have been awarded the medal for the required number of sustained operational flight sorties.

2. There is a difference of being physically in a potential “all” combat risks environment of being in a manned/crewed aircraft flying through combat designated air space and being a remote pilot and sensor operator crewmember 10,000 miles away from the active ground combat zone and designated combat air space. This is the demarcation preventing the award of the combat medals (AF Combat Action Medal, Purple Heart, Bronze Star Medal, Silver Star, Air Force Cross and Medal of Honor). It is the no exposure to physical dangers necessitating courage, bravery, and voluntary risk of life preventing award of medal having Airman’s/Soldiers Medal, Air Medal, Distinguished Flying Cross precedence of recognition and reverence. 

3. What members and supporters of the RPA pilots and sensor operators are politically campaigning and public sympathy marketing for is a proposal for a new warfare medal having prestige and precedence between the Airmen’s Medal (AF equivalent to the Soldier’s Medal) and the Distinguished Flying Cross is needed for “exceptional conduct” for a specific combat support capability not exposed to physical dangers of combat.

Combat medals having Bronze Star, Airmen’s Medal and Distinguished Flying Cross precedence are not “conduct medals”. If for valor there is expectation of courage and bravery involving risk of life (Airman’s Medal requires voluntary risk of life). If for achievement (Distinguished Flying Cross eligibility is heroism or achievement) the quality or level of achievement expected is “must be entirely distinctive, involving operations that are not routine. Not awarded for sustained operational activities and flights.” Consequently the proposals must accurately and truthfully manned and unmanned exposure to “all” the combat risk are equal in frequency, duration and potential possibility and probability for risk of life. 

You all can read the following linked to documents to arrive at your own judgments of whether any published article or suggested course of action has accurately and truthfully compared the combat risk exposure. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/post/drone-pilots-to-get-medals/2012/07/09/gJQAF2PhYW_blog.html

“The Pentagon is considering awarding a Distinguished Warfare Medal to drone pilots who work on military bases often far removed from the battlefield.” And “The proposed medal would rank between the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Soldier’s Medal for exceptional conduct outside a combat zone. “
http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/pages-from-aspj-may-jun-2012.pdf
“I do not believe that RPA operators are in less danger than their manned counterparts. In fact, I assert that it may well be the other way around.” ; “In other words, if individuals immediately cue, fire, or guide weapons or if they are directly entrusted with the lives of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, or Marines going into harm’s way, then they are in combat.”; “By treating combat rather than prestige as sacred, we eliminate this contradiction and help these future leaders reconcile themselves to this new type of combat.” (a significant rewrite of being in combat and acting with bravery, courage and putting life at risk-the president is a combat veteran- and consequently get VA disability for service connected PTSD, significant implications with this reasoning). 

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&sid=cp112c6QGn&r_n=hr479.112&dbname=cp112&&sel=TOC_579916&

“House Report 112-479 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013, ….”RECOGNITION FOR REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT PILOTS. 

The Committee recognizes the important contributions remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) pilots have made in the theaters of operation. RPA pilots are crucial to missions overseas, flying some of the military's important weapons systems such as the MQ-1 and MQ-9. Their efforts have led to the collection of important intelligence by carrying out missions that would otherwise be too dangerous for manned aircraft. Their role in supporting the war fighters with precision fire support and high endurance surveillance is invaluable. Since the deployment of remotely piloted aircrafts into combat zones, they have proven to be a crucial component in the War on Terror. RPA pilots have supported their fellow war fighters in hazardous situations, both in the conduct of day-to-day activities, as well as special operations. The RPA mission has allowed service members to better execute their military missions, and has aided in the capturing or killing of many high value targets. The committee encourages the Secretaries of the military departments to properly recognize these pilots for their contributions and accomplishments. In particular, the committee is concerned that RPA pilots may not have fair and equal opportunities for promotion as compared to their manned aircraft pilot counterparts and urges the services to continue to review and improve their policies to address this issue.”



Many service members especially combat veteran of the WOT (Afganistan/Iraq) express belief the award and decoration system has become a joke. Holding the belief the awards and decorations system has become a joke requires revulsion and disgust the awards and decorations being presented (awarded) no longer exemplifies (falls short in actions and accomplishment) acts and deeds that is essential to courage, bravery, and level of voluntary willingness to risk life to accomplish an act, deed or service. Establishing a new warfare medal for purposes stated will do what to the credibility and integrity of the awards and decorations many service members already believe are nothing but jokes and career progression points?


It should also be consider whether training proficiency sortie to sustain combat skills and proficiencies or the combat support sortie the RPA pilots and sensor operators encounter no mid-air loss of life possibilities, no number 1, or 2, or 3 in the formation failing to clear a ridgeline while accomplishing a low level navigation sortie possibilities, no physiological hazards of hypoxia and spatial disorientation influencing conditions for loss of life resulting in high speed impact with the ground. At 10,000 feet in combat air space over the ground combat area of operation there is always possibility of emergency ejection or egress into an unfriendly ground environment that is lacking in sitting 10,000 miles away in a room on the ground.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 14, 2012)

Johca said:


> ///WAY to much text to repost.


 
Couple of problems. Johca, these are rhetorical questions/statements and are not directed at you.



> a new warfare medal having prestige and precedence between the Airmen’s Medal (AF equivalent to the Soldier’s Medal) and the Distinguished Flying Cross is needed for “exceptional conduct” for a specific combat support capability not exposed to physical dangers of combat.


 
"Between" an award for heroism (Airmen's Medal) and one of the top valor decorations in our military (DFC)? For operating a drone from home-country sanctuary? Above the PH, MSM, DMSM, and oh yeah the BSM? Hell no. The article said there is already an aerial achievement medal, right? Sounds like "problem solved" to me.



> “I do not believe that RPA operators are in less danger than their manned counterparts. In fact, I assert that it may well be the other way around.”


UAV operators (yes, I said UAV not RPA) are in more danger than pilots operating in Iraq and Afghanistan? From what, coffee spills? Paper cuts? Rush hour traffic? 

 




> The committee encourages the Secretaries of the military departments to properly recognize these pilots for their contributions and accomplishments. In particular, the committee is concerned that RPA pilots may not have fair and equal opportunities for promotion as compared to their manned aircraft pilot counterparts and urges the services to continue to review and improve their policies to address this issue.”


A new award is going to fix this... how exactly? By making UAV "pilots" feel better about not getting promoted?



> Many service members especially combat veteran of the WOT (Afganistan/Iraq) express belief the award and decoration system has become a joke. Holding the belief the awards and decorations system has become a joke requires revulsion and disgust the awards and decorations being presented (awarded) no longer exemplifies (falls short in actions and accomplishment) acts and deeds that is essential to courage, bravery, and level of voluntary willingness to risk life to accomplish an act, deed or service. *Establishing a new warfare medal for purposes stated will do what to the credibility and integrity of the awards and decorations many service members already believe are nothing but jokes and career progression points?*


 
Well, it's not going to make it any better.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 15, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Couple of problems. Johca, these are rhetorical questions/statements and are not directed at you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Something to remember, the AAM is an AF award, Army/Navy would have to recognize it as a joint medal (something they have not been keen on in the past).

Not all RPV guys/gals are CONUS. Each launch/recovery site has a team, so they get the same experience as the rest of the FOBBITs.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 15, 2012)

SOWT said:


> Something to remember, the AAM is an AF award, Army/Navy would have to recognize it as a joint medal (something they have not been keen on in the past).



That could work.  But then again each service could give awards (or not give them) as they see fit.  There are also plenty of extant joint awards that I think would be appropriate (JSAM, JCOM, etc.).



SOWT said:


> Not all RPV guys/gals are CONUS. Each launch/recovery site has a team, so they get the same experience as the rest of the FOBBITs.


 
Roger.  Then they could be eligible for "deployed" awards, which I'm pretty sure is already the case.  No need to create anything new.


----------



## Etype (Jul 15, 2012)

> At least that’s the word from Air Force Major Dave Blair – himself an MQ-1 Predator instructor pilot – in the latest issue of​_ Air & Space Power Journal_​
> …what is the differential risk between 10,000 feet and 10,000 miles in current conflicts? When a manned aircraft with two spare engines scrapes the top of a combat zone, well outside the range of any realistic threat, why do we consider that scenario “combat” yet deem a Predator firing a Hellfire in anger “combat support”? ​I do not believe that RPA operators are in less danger than their manned counterparts. In fact, I assert that it may well be the other way around. Recall that the individuals killed in the terrorist attack of 11 September 2001 on the Pentagon received the Purple Heart, a combat medal. This war is global, and our enemies have global reach as well. If we found ourselves in our enemies’ position, would we spend the time and attract attention attempting to purchase a high-profile missile when a terror attack on RPA operators in the continental United States would produce better results? God forbid that scenario comes to pass, but I argue strongly that the differential risk of being an RPA operator in this war is at least that of an in-theater pilot.​


​Air Force Major Dave Blair, that is remarkable. I hope that some Air Force pilots look you up on the global to discuss the matter. But until then, say what you need to say for self justification.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 15, 2012)

Etype said:


> ​Air Force Major Dave Blair, that is remarkable. I hope that some Air Force pilots look you up on the global to discuss the matter. But until then, say what you need to say for self justification.


 


​


> _At least that’s the word from Air Force Major Dave Blair – himself an MQ-1 Predator instructor pilot – in the latest issue of_​_Air & Space Power Journal_​
> _…what is the differential risk between 10,000 feet and 10,000 miles in current conflicts? When a manned aircraft with two spare engines scrapes the top of a combat zone, well outside the range of any realistic threat, why do we consider that scenario “combat” yet deem a Predator firing a Hellfire in anger “combat support”?_​


 
​They both sound like "combat" to me. The difference, dude, is that as a UAV operator, YOU'RE NOT THERE. Your aircraft is.​​


> _I do not believe that RPA operators are in less danger than their manned counterparts. In fact, I assert that it may well be the other way around. Recall that the individuals killed in the terrorist attack of 11 September 2001 on the Pentagon received the Purple Heart, a combat medal. This war is global, and our enemies have global reach as well. If we found ourselves in our enemies’ position, would we spend the time and attract attention attempting to purchase a high-profile missile when a terror attack on RPA operators in the continental United States would produce better results? God forbid that scenario comes to pass, but I argue strongly that _*the differential risk of being an RPA operator in this war is at least that of an in-theater pilot*_._


 
Oh, good, I guess since the threat is worldwide, I can draw combat pay and the CZTE while I'm stateside (with you, MAJ Blair). I suspect that drone operators are at more risk of getting killed by... well, just about anything than they are by anything that the enemy does to them. And let's just cut to the numbers, shall we? How many fixed-and rotary-wing aircraft and pilots have been lost OCONUS? Now, how many UAV operators have been killed by terrorists CONUS since 9/11. Well, that's an easy one, I'm not even going to link to it, ZERO. Not a f'ing one.​​If the logic of this guy is typical of the field, then I think it's likely that the reason UAV operators are not getting promoted with their pilot peers is not because of prejudice...​


----------



## Etype (Jul 15, 2012)

> _ but I argue strongly that _*the differential risk of being an RPA operator in this war is at least that of an in-theater pilot*_._


If we use this argument, then every soldier should draw some type of combat pay stateside- given the argument, I personally think SOF folks should just get full HFP year round.


----------



## SpitfireV (Jul 15, 2012)

The tanker/AWACS pilots and whatnot, while for the currents ops aren't really at risk from enemy air, in a full blown war they're one of the first targets and quite juicy ones at that.


----------



## Salt USMC (Jul 16, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Whoever said that is an idiot. UAV operators (yes, I said UAV not RPA) are in more danger than pilots operating in Iraq and Afghanistan? From what, coffee spills? Paper cuts? Rush hour traffic?


 
You're statistically more likely to get killed in a car accident than from enemy fire in Afghanistan.  This guy is 100% right!!  Quick, combat pay for everyone!  Make all RPA pilots drive to work in MRAPs!


----------



## Scotth (Jul 16, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> If the logic of this guy is typical of the field, then I think it's likely that the reason UAV operators are not getting promoted with their pilot peers is not because of prejudice...


 
I enjoyed this line and it made my morning.

Maj. Blair, seriously I don't know what to say about his comments but wow. Any manned flight crewmen is in more danger then a RPA pilot no matter where they are in the world.


----------



## RetPara (Jul 16, 2012)

I thought that the UAV operators were being press ganged from active pilots.  If so; the the fighter jock mafia will not look at a UAV tour the same as they would a tour piloting a F/A/B anything.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 16, 2012)

RetPara said:


> I thought that the UAV operators were being press ganged from active pilots. If so; the the fighter jock mafia will not look at a UAV tour the same as they would a tour piloting a F/A/B anything.


One of the reasons a RPV career field was created.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 16, 2012)

SOWT said:


> One of the reasons a RPV career field was created.


 
Aren't they still rated pilots? What is the rationale for having rated pilots operate UAVs instead of say... a commo guy, or an intel officer, or an NCO?


----------



## surgicalcric (Jul 16, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> ...I know of some commands/leaders that refuse to give awards, or downgrade awards for no reason, but that is terrible!


 
So you have served under a 5th SFG(A) CJSOTF as well I see.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 16, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> New medals and badges for everyone!


 
I created this Combat Admin Badge for our S-1 in 2008 or 2009. I would really like to find some place that would make these. I have a few people I would hand them out to. 





Etype said:


> Raven operators don't get a badge that I know of.


 
I think it was in the works about 2 years ago. I hadn't heard if it is still being pushed through, got denied, or was approved. I haven't seen it around. I did however see what they were supposed to look like. Unfortunately, I didn't care enough about it to remember specifics.



surgicalcric said:


> So you have served under a 5th SFG(A) CJSOTF as well I see.


 
Hahaha! No...


----------



## AWP (Jul 16, 2012)

LOST, you deserve a Bronze Star for creating that badge.


----------



## SpitfireV (Jul 16, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Aren't they still rated pilots? What is the rationale for having rated pilots operate UAVs instead of say... a commo guy, or an intel officer, or an NCO?


 
UAVs are still subject to airspace, aerodynamics and the laws of physics  Cheaper to have a pilot do it rather than spend even more money training someone else up.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 16, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Aren't they still rated pilots? What is the rationale for having rated pilots operate UAVs instead of say... a commo guy, or an intel officer, or an NCO?


They are reducing the number of rated guys (Reapers may be the exception) and going with guys who will spend 20 years droning (sorry, couldn't resist).


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 16, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> I created this Combat Admin Badge for our S-1 in 2008 or 2009. I would really like to find some place that would make these. I have a few people I would hand them out to.
> 
> View attachment 6377
> 
> ...


Korea, find someone in Korea to help you out.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 16, 2012)

SOWT said:


> Korea, find someone in Korea to help you out.


 
PAGING DOC DOOM!


----------



## Salt USMC (Jul 17, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> I created this Combat Admin Badge for our S-1 in 2008 or 2009. I would really like to find some place that would make these. I have a few people I would hand them out to.
> 
> View attachment 6377


 
There was a poster on here not too long ago, a support guy, who had an AV with a picture of a coffee cup that had a triple tab canopy of "POWERPOINT", "EXCEL" and "WORD".  I can say with no irony at all that I want one of those.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Jul 17, 2012)

Deathy McDeath said:


> There was a poster on here not too long ago, a support guy, who had an AV with a picture of a coffee cup that had a triple tab canopy of "POWERPOINT", "EXCEL" and "WORD". I can say with no irony at all that I want one of those.


 
The would be EverSoLost


----------



## CDG (Jul 17, 2012)

It's not going to matter who flies them, or what awards they are eligible for, if we don't start addressing the mental health needs of these drones.

http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/07/air-force-mq-9-reaper-diagnosed-with-ptsd-refuses-to-fly/


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 17, 2012)

CDG said:


> It's not going to matter who flies them, or what awards they are eligible for, if we don't start addressing the mental health needs of these drones.
> 
> http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/07/air-force-mq-9-reaper-diagnosed-with-ptsd-refuses-to-fly/


 
lol


----------



## Red-Dot (Jul 18, 2012)

I remember talking to a Pred. pilot while I was out on a particular mission. We had a "lull" in the action so we began to B.S.  I told him I had been up for about 24 hours straight and it was about 115 degress and hot as hell....His response, "when I get done with my shift my wife and I are driving up to northern California coast for a wine tasting!!!"   WTF!!!???   So no, they should not even be considered for this medal.


----------



## Etype (Jul 18, 2012)

I would have asked him to say again about 4 times.  Stupid things said over SAT deserve to be said again.


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2012)

Red-Dot said:


> His response,


 
And that's why people tend to hate the Air Force, not the Battlefield Airmen side (except you Security Forces, everyone hates you).


----------



## pardus (Jul 18, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> (except you Security Forces, everyone hates you).


 

LOL!


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2012)

Members of the Security Forces squadron on Bagram (of all ranks) have taken to wearing "Airborne" tabs, presumably for those who have completed BAC and are actually qualified.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 18, 2012)

SOWT said:


> They are reducing the number of rated guys (Reapers may be the exception) and going with guys who will spend 20 years droning (sorry, couldn't resist).


If they don't need rated pilots to operate the UAVs, why can't they have a platoon of enlisted operators, with an officer to handle "big picture" things like international airspace deconfliction, authorization to fire, etc.?


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> If they don't need rated pilots to operate the UAVs, why can't they have a platoon of enlisted operators, with an officer to handle "big picture" things like international airspace deconfliction, authorization to fire, etc.?


 
Because admitting that enlisted scum are capable of doing the same job as a rated, specially selected and trained aviator is anathema to them.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 18, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Because admitting that enlisted scum are capable of doing the same job as a rated, specially selected and trained aviator is anathema to them.


 
That's kind of what I was thinking.  Seems like an enlisted career track for UAV operators would solve a lot of Air Force angst.


----------



## Red-Dot (Jul 18, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> If they don't need rated pilots to operate the UAVs, why can't they have a platoon of enlisted operators, with an officer to handle "big picture" things like international airspace deconfliction, authorization to fire, etc.?


 
IMO they need to make certain career fields like that and also TACP, CCT and PJ into warrant officer slots. Once a NCO hits around E-6 to E-7 they should have the option of "crossing over". Plus nobody really fucks with WO's.


----------



## Red-Dot (Jul 18, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> If they don't need rated pilots to operate the UAVs, why can't they have a platoon of enlisted operators, with an officer to handle "big picture" things like international airspace deconfliction, authorization to fire, etc.?


Also airspace deconfliction is not that big of a deal and usually done via big picture DASC/CRC (on the tactical level it falls on the JTAC).....authorization to fire usually lies on the ground commander who owns that piece of dirt...the UAV guy cannot fire on his own free will= bad ju-ju.


----------



## Johca (Jul 18, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Members of the Security Forces squadron on Bagram (of all ranks) have taken to wearing "Airborne" tabs, presumably for those who have completed BAC and are actually qualified.


Are you sure it is not a "My Little Pony" manly man patch them Air Force Silly Folks (SF) are wearing?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/18/military-my-little-pony-fan-club/


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 18, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Members of the Security Forces squadron on Bagram (of all ranks) have taken to wearing "Airborne" tabs, presumably for those who have completed BAC and are actually qualified.


820th Sec Forces Group?


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2012)

SOWT said:


> 820th Sec Forces Group?


 
I'll check, but I doubt it and I've never heard of an Airborne tab being a skill tab.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 18, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> I'll check, but I doubt it and I've never heard of an Airborne tab being a skill tab.


 
Are they wearing it as a skill tab, or as part of their unit patch?  Not that it makes it any better, not sure Airborne tab is authorized w/Air Force unit patches.


----------



## AWP (Jul 18, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Are they wearing it as a skill tab, or as part of their unit patch? Not that it makes it any better, not sure Airborne tab is authorized w/Air Force unit patches.


 
Skill tab. One of them has a Ranger tab above his Airborne tab. All of the rest have just the Airborne tab at the top of the HUGE, empty swatch of pile tape which covers one's upper arms


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 19, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> I'll check, but I doubt it and I've never heard of an Airborne tab being a skill tab.


820th Sec Force Group has at least one Squadron on jump status, so that squadron may be in-theater now.  I still think the Abn Tab thing is ghey if they are  doing it.  Send a letter to the ACC Commander asking why cops are the only ones gettig to wear a tab


----------



## Johca (Jul 19, 2012)

The January 31, 2012 AFECD disclosed only a General 44 is required for classification into CCT. The new AFECD comes out sometime in August. 


If there is a change to a dual aptitude area requirement it would have to be a result of an interim message change provided to the Air Force Recruiting Service. A July 31st change certainly indicates an interim message change was put out.


Such changes typically are not disseminated down and out to the CCT worker be population as such changes don't affect them as the pipeline and training standards are not influenced to be changed by ASVAB test score requirement changes.

An Air Force unit having a parachutist capability does not result in the unit being a designate airborne force. If they be Army airborne as the tab indicates to comply with Army heraldry these Air Force Silly Folks (SF) would be approved and authorized maroon beret with airborne or Special Forces Flash. 

As the 820th has both female and male parachutists assigned and the unit has never made an operational airborne assault and never will the parachute quals is nothing but a morale incentive to get people to want an 82oth duty assignment.


Post a few pictures of the fools wearing the airborne tabs.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 19, 2012)

Johca said:


> ...
> 
> 
> Post a few pictures of the fools wearing the airborne tabs.


 
At least they're not My Little Pony tabs...


----------



## AdVictoriam (Aug 5, 2012)

Restored by Freefalling.

American SOF is renowned both for how well they fight and for how well they think. In the spirit of the latter, I'd recommend intellectually engaging full articles in military journals rather than emotionally engaging out-of-context snippets from pop media. (Incidentally, many of the arguments raised here I've addressed in the articles themselves.) Accordingly, here's the full articles.
Article - http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/digital/pdf/articles/May-Jun-2012/V-Blair.pdf
Rebuttals - http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/digital/pdf/articles/Jul-Aug-2012/RR-Senn.pdf
Backstory (Small Wars Journal) - https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=120526623337
Discussions of deficiencies in my intellect, experience or character are equal parts uninteresting and irrelevant to the argument at hand, and I'll save my time and yours by not engaging them. However, understanding how changes in technology can bring about victory in the wars we're in is crucially important. The point of the article isn't 'chest-candy' but ensuring that the LTs and Airmen employing fires danger close to friendly troops, just like manned aircraft doing CAS, view their responsibilities as life and death serious as they ought to.
The strategic reality is that RPAs have been dismembering our enemies worldwide, and their only effective counter thus far has been Information Operations - labeling RPAs as 'cowardly' makes their use more strategically costly. So, unfortunately, much of the chest-beating about who's braver and why ends up echoing Al-Qaeda talking points. This should be a very uncomfortable position to be in.
Bottom line - the only thing is to win as soon as possible at absolute minimum cost in blood and treasure, without forgetting who we are in the process. RPAs are a large part of that presently, and will save more friendly lives and take more enemy lives as we sort out RPA culture. 'What combat means in an age of sensors and BVR weapons' is an important question toward that end. If this is a discussion you'd like to engage, I'd recommend Lt Col Grossman's On Combat and On Killing, and if still interested feel free to contact me directly.
V/r
Blair.


----------



## pardus (Aug 5, 2012)

AdVictoriam said:


> POST AN INTRO FIRST BEFORE POSTING AS REQUIRED BY THE RULES YOU SIGNED.
> 
> THANK YOU.


 
What he said. Thanks.

I will return your post after you do so.


----------



## Etype (Aug 5, 2012)

AdVictoriam said:


> POST AN INTRO FIRST BEFORE POSTING AS REQUIRED BY THE RULES YOU SIGNED.
> 
> THANK YOU.


 
Whichever mod deleted that epic post robbed me of a scoff'ortunity.


----------



## Etype (Aug 5, 2012)

SOWT said:


> Abn Tab thing is ghey if they are doing it.


In the Army, the airborne tab is considered part of the unit patch.  Does the AF wear it differently?


----------



## AdVictoriam (Aug 5, 2012)

Copy all.  Intro post: Author of referenced article in thread.  3rd SOS MQ-1, AC-130 pilot.


----------



## pardus (Aug 5, 2012)

AdVictoriam said:


> Copy all. Intro post: Author of referenced article in thread. 3rd SOS MQ-1, AC-130 pilot.


 
Sigh...

Go to the intro section and post a *proper* intro thread.

Now please.


----------



## AWP (Aug 6, 2012)

Maj (or is it Capt.? The AF Global lists you as the latter) Blair,

In the interest of fairness I've restored your original post but banned your account. The staff will not entertain any thoughts of removing your posts or altering your profile.

Your repeated messages to the staff are rather laughable to be honest. You are a pilot, qualified in multiple airframes, with a Bachelor's and probably a Master's degree (I have not read any bio of yours), so you clearly aren't a dummy. What is disconcerting for us is your utter lack of situational awareness, particularly in light of the fact that you are an experienced pilot. Let's review: Your profile was sparse and almost resulted in us rejecting your account, you ignored the user agreement when you signed up, failed to read any of the FAQ's, and instead dove headfirst into this thread, defending your position. When told by a staff member to post an Intro you couldn't even do that properly...but we're not done.

Now you send several messages to the staff asking for your account to be deleted because of OPSEC concerns. If you had those concerns then why register in the first place? They are serious enough in your eyes to warrant the deletion of your account and yet you somehow failed to see any content on the board besides this thread? Sir, I hope your SA is better in the air than it is here on the ground.

See, had you bothered to do any research before rushing in to defend your position, you'd know that this board contains a number of intelligence professionals, many still serving, on top of a robust user base of very experienced SOF professionals. Door kickers, the guys you support, "boots on the ground," and you waltz in here and insult them like this? I wonder how many of them now associate Preds and AC-130's with you and your behavior. These users have no hesitation about reporting OPSEC violations. These users with active TS clearances have somehow to the last man and woman failed to see "OPSEC violations" that grabbed you with such intensity as to call for the deletion of your account?

Situational awareness fail.

Your actions make you out to be offended that anyone would disagree with you or tell you what to do so your only course of action was to throw the OPSEC flag to justify your departure.

We see through it. Have the best day ever.


----------



## Etype (Aug 6, 2012)

The ban hammer dropped quickly on that one.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 6, 2012)

It's too bad, he really missed an opportunity here to try to influence the opinions of a broad cross-section of the SOF community.  I know what it's like to try to defend an unpopular point of view, and would have welcomed the chance to obtain a deeper understanding of the author's rationale on this subject "straight from the horse's mouth," so to speak.  That's not going to happen now.

Unfortunately, this former member's conduct on the site only served to reinforce the initial assessments that several site members had of both him and his position on this subject.


----------



## Crusader74 (Aug 6, 2012)

You've just been THUNDER STRUCK!


----------



## Etype (Aug 6, 2012)

Army aviation is a better support asset anyway, Major Blair.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 15, 2012)

I think I found something that might solve this issue to everyone' satisfaction.


----------



## AWP (Aug 15, 2012)

To follow up my earlier posts, the Airborne "skill tabs" have disappeared.


----------



## AWP (Sep 19, 2012)

They aren't even trying now. I just saw two airmen with "Airborne" and "Air Assault" tabs made from Multicam fabric.

While I probably shouldn't, I'm emailing my Chief. The SFS airmen have surpassed "hooah" and crossed into the derp.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 19, 2012)

We're giving out tabs for that now? Cool, I always wanted tabs, but didn't want the hassle of going through Ranger School, the Q Course, or Sapper School. And I'm not a good enough shot for President's Hundred. But I am Air Assault and Airborne qualified. I wonder how multicam will look on my ASUs.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 19, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> And that's why people tend to hate the Air Force, not the Battlefield Airmen side (except you Security Forces, everyone hates you).


bahahahhahahaha so much win.


----------



## Red-Dot (Sep 19, 2012)

Everybody hates Security FARCES.... tools.


----------



## Etype (Sep 19, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I wonder how multicam will look on my ASUs.


Since you wear the little metal tabs on ASUs, maybe you can wear it all cool with the tab over the badge.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 19, 2012)

Etype said:


> Since you wear the little metal tabs on ASUs, maybe you can wear it all cool with the tab over the badge.


 
Hm, that's true, if I'm going to go through all that trouble I'll just have a little metal "ENABLER" tab made up, in keeping with the spirit of this "I need something to make me feel special too" thread.


----------



## Red-Dot (Sep 19, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Hm, that's true, if I'm going to go through all that trouble I'll just have a little metal "ENABLER" tab made up, in keeping with the spirit of this "I need something to make me feel special too" thread.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 19, 2012)

I already have my "Anti-Terrorism Level 1" Tab on order, and my "Information Assurance" badge in the mail. Best of the best...


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 19, 2012)

goon175 said:


> I already have my "Anti-Terrorism Level 1" Tab on order, and my "Information Assurance" badge in the mail. Best of the best...


 
Make sure you write an article about it and publish it in one of your service's magazines, along with a rationalization about the "residual risk" you endure in your job.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 19, 2012)

Hey Mara, I don't appreciate the way you are insinuating my job isn't dangerous, day in and day out I do arduos administrative tasks without even the slightest hesitation, even though I know full well I could very easily succumb to a papercut


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 19, 2012)

Dude, you are a recruiter in New York, that sounds pretty dangerous to me.  Seriously.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Sep 19, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Hey Mara, I don't appreciate the way you are insinuating my job isn't dangerous, day in and day out I do arduos administrative tasks without even the slightest hesitation, even though I know full well I could very easily succumb to a papercut


 
I got your back!  (see post #58)


----------



## QC (Sep 19, 2012)

I vote for a Crossed Pencils tab with the motto "Stay Sharp".


----------



## Etype (Sep 20, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Hey Mara, I don't appreciate the way you are insinuating my job isn't dangerous, day in and day out I do arduos administrative tasks without even the slightest hesitation, even though I know full well I could very easily succumb to a papercut





Marauder06 said:


> Dude, you are a recruiter in New York, that sounds pretty dangerous to me. Seriously.


There have been shootings at recruiting stations...


----------



## reed11b (Sep 20, 2012)

Red-Dot said:


> Everybody hates Security FARCES.... tools.


 But... they try soooo hard, and they "do everything the infantry does" just like every toolbag MP and 88M and 19D I have ever met.
Reed


----------

