First Medal of Honor Awarded during Iraq War

seinfeldrules

seinfeldrules

Newbie
Joined
Oct 3, 2003
Messages
3,385
Reaction score
0
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,152338,00.html

WASHINGTON — Outnumbered and exposed, Army Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith (search) stayed at his gun, beating back an advancing Iraqi force until a bullet took his life.

Smith is credited with protecting the lives of scores of lightly armed American soldiers who were beyond his position in the battle, on April 4, 2003, near the gates of Baghdad International Airport.

On Monday, exactly two years after his death, President Bush (search) is awarding Smith the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for valor, and presenting it to his widow, Birgit, daughter and son.

It is only the third Medal of Honor (search) given for actions since the Vietnam War, and the first from the Iraq war.
Click to expand...

Soon after Smith and some of his platoon began work, records show, one trooper spotted dozens of armed Iraqis approaching from beyond the gated walls of the courtyard. Another group of Iraqis occupied a nearby tower.

Smith summoned a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, and he and his troops gathered near the courtyard gate to fight the counterattack. An M113 armored personnel carrier joined the fray.

The Iraqis, perhaps as many as 100, attacked with rifles, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades, or RPGs. Smith threw a grenade over a wall to drive back some of the Iraqis, then fired a rocket.

Incoming RPGs battered the Bradley, which retreated. Then a mortar struck the M113, wounding the three soldiers inside and leaving its heavy machine gun unmanned. After directing another soldier to pull the wounded M113 crewmen to safety, Smith climbed into the machine gun position and began firing at the tower and at the Iraqis trying to rush the compound.

His upper torso and head were exposed as he manned the gun.

"This wasn't a John Wayne move," said Command Sgt. Maj. Gary J. Coker, the top enlisted man in the 11th Battalion, who was near the battle. "He was very methodical. He knew he had the gate and he wasn't going to leave it and nobody was going to make him leave it."

Still, Coker said, "it was absolutely amazing to stand up in that volume of fire."

During a stretch of 15 minutes or longer, Smith fired more than 300 rounds as Pvt. Michael Seaman, protected inside the M113, passed him ammunition.

Then he was struck by enemy fire and mortally wounded. At almost the same time, 1st Sgt. Timothy Campbell ended the threat from the tower with a grenade, and the surviving Iraqis withdrew. Medics tried to save Smith, and he died about 30 minutes later.

He and his comrades are credited with killing between 20 and 50 Iraqi soldiers.

Beyond his position were American medics, scouts, a mortar unit and a command post — all lightly armed and vulnerable.

"Sgt. 1st Class Smith's actions saved the lives of at least 100 soldiers," according to an Army narrative.
Click to expand...
 
I'm sure you'd like to hear some heroic stories of the insurgents :p
 
Sprafa said:
I'm sure you'd like to hear some heroic stories of the insurgents :p
Click to expand...


Seeing as howt the majority of them gave up, were killed, or imprisoned I don't see how they have many heroic stories.
 
A brave man indeed, and definately deserving of his award... But a medal can not replace him.
 
"He and his comrades are credited with killing between 20 and 50 Iraqi soldiers."


well since it was an unjust war, it's a war crime
 
CptStern said:
"He and his comrades are credited with killing between 20 and 50 Iraqi soldiers."

well since it was an unjust war, it's a war crime
Click to expand...

Says you because you sit on the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague. Oh you don't? Says you because you are an expert in International Law? Oh you aren't? Says you who passed the bar exam? Did a law degree? Attended any law classes at all?

So how the hell would you know what is a 'war crime' and what is not. War crimes are not whatever Stern does not like. It may surprise you to learn, that international criminal justice is a tad more sophisticated than this.

Because you can parrot some leftist rant on a webpage somewhere, does not mean that any war crimes have been committed, and certainly does not mean that this soldier who was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honour committed any.
 
Calanen said:
Says you because you sit on the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague. Oh you don't? Says you because you are an expert in International Law? Oh you aren't? Says you who passed the bar exam? Did a law degree? Attended any law classes at all?

So how the hell would you know what is a 'war crime' and what is not. War crimes are not whatever Stern does not like. It may surprise you to learn, that international criminal justice is a tad more sophisticated than this.

Because you can parrot some leftist rant on a webpage somewhere, does not mean that any war crimes have been committed, and certainly does not mean that this soldier who was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honour committed any.
Click to expand...


When pressed on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, he said: "Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."


the US signed the United Nations Charter, therefore it violated the laws they agreed to
 
A very brave British soldier won the first Victoria Cross for over a decade recently (wikipedia), which is the Commonwealth equivalent of the Medal of Honour. These guys are brave, and the list of VC winners is something very interesting to read. This one is a particularly good one.

Stern, whilst the war may be unjust, they fought bravely and deserved these medals for it.
 
CptStern said:
When pressed on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, he said: "Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."


the US signed the United Nations Charter, therefore it violated the laws they agreed to
Click to expand...

The UN is a joke. It's nothing more then a piece of paper and expensive get-togethers to satisfy pacifists. It's unrealist, a waste of money, and has done jack shit in time (key word there) for this world. Therefor, the UN is a flake, so that comment on how it's illegal to the UN charter is a flake.
 
So Kofi Annan says the war was 'illegal'. Big deal:

A) Doesn't mean that it was, that is his opinion only on whether or not the United Nations Charter was breached, and it counts for precisely nothing; and

B) even if the UN Charter has been ripped up and violated it does not mean any 'war crimes' were committed.

Going on from the same article you cited:

Australian Prime Minister John Howard also rejected Mr Annan's remarks, saying the legal advice he was given was "entirely valid".
Click to expand...

The panel that heads up legal advice to the Prime Minister is chaired by a Queens Counsel and a team of lawyers. I am going with the Queens Counsel and her team over what Koffi Annan and what Stern has to say.
 
there's no mistaking what he said: "it was in violation of the UN charters" therefore it is illegal. Of course the us isnt going to listen to what annan has to say ffs
 
there's no mistaking what he said: "it was in violation of the UN charters" therefore it is illegal.
Click to expand...

I don't think I am getting through to you -

Koffi Anan does not determine whether or not a nation violates the UN's Charter. It's just his opinion - and counts for nothing more than that.

All you have as your argument is Koffi Anan says that in his opinion, the US breached the UN Charter.

Again, big deal. Does not mean that the Charter was breached, and even if it was, does not mean that any war crimes were committed. The opinion of the Secretary General is not determinative of whether or not a nation state has breached the UN Charter. And certainly he is not able to convict states of war crimes.
 
Calanen said:
I don't think I am getting through to you -

Koffi Anan does not determine whether or not a nation violates the UN's Charter. It's just his opinion - and counts for nothing more than that.

All you have as your argument is Koffi Anan says that in his opinion, the US breached the UN Charter.

Again, big deal. Does not mean that the Charter was breached, and even if it was, does not mean that any war crimes were committed. The opinion of the Secretary General is not determinative of whether or not a nation state has breached the UN Charter. And certainly he is not able to convict states of war crimes.
Click to expand...


come again?

only the UN is allowed to judge what is in violation of the terms of the cease fire agreement of the first gulf war. It was the security councils jurisdiction not the US'

"The United Nations, the Clinton Administration, and Congress have demanded that Iraq comply with cease-fire agreements and applicable U.N. Security Council resolutions. "

and

"The Security Council passed Resolution 687 as part of the cease-fire arrangements ending operation Desert Storm. The resolution , among other things, required Iraq to rid itself permanently and unconditionally of all nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons capabilities and allow inspectors full access to verify and monitor compliance. The resolution established a monitoring and inspection mechanism UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission) to ensure Iraqi compliance. "

notice it says UNSCOM is responsible for iraqi non-compliance not the US

http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
 
Stern, this isnt about war crimes. It is about a brave man sacrificing his life in order to protect his fellow comrades and receiving the ultimate award for doing so. Do not degrade this with your political agenda.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Stern, this isnt about war crimes. It is about a brave man sacrificing his life in order to protect his fellow comrades and receiving the ultimate award for doing so. Do not degrade this with your political agenda.
Click to expand...


Agreed.

When the guy was defending his friends and comrades from death and sacrificing his life for them, i don't think him or his family were really thinking "did America really break the UN charter".

The guy gave the greatest gift anyone could give, his life, and for that, he has been honoured.

"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
Click to expand...
 
You might have your political opinions and what not. But that disappears on the battlefield. There is no politics on the battlefield. A brotherhood. They fight for each other, because when hell breaks lose that's all they got. So **** you and your war crimes. Ooorah Smith, Salud.
 
Was the "**** you" really necessary? No, it wasn't. Don't show yourself up.
 
I appoglize for the '****', but I get worked up when soldiers arent treated with the respect they deserve. The few simple issues we face day to day which bring conflict into our lives doesnt measure up to what a soldier faces.
 
I have a brave story about an insurgent. One day, a terrorist scum insurgent was looking for someone to decapitate. He decided on an older woman, an aid worker in Iraq all her life. Instead of simply executing her, she is made to beg for her life before she is beheaded and left in a baghdad suburb. Oh wait - theres nothing brave about the way these wankers fight. And theres no just cause for them either except to kill innocent people. I'm glad we have American and British troops who would lay down their lives for their country, its more than 99% of people would do.
 
I'm willing to bet that many an insurgent has died an honorable death in battle (ie not a suicide bombing or other such act) believing what they were doing was right, and that he was protecting his family, friends, and the people he loves. It doesn't truely matter whether that was correct or not, you have to grudgingly respect it either way.
As for the idea of this being a war-crime: it doesn't matter. Everyone who was there to see him fight and fall, who knew him, and who mourn his passing knows what he did. Politics can take a hike.
 
We are all talking about the honorable death of a soldier and you come trashing the thread with your "ilegal" war quote. Why don't you keep them in another thread man ? Was it ilegal? surely , perhaps Smith didn't believe in the war, but he believed in his fellow soldiers and gave his life for them.
 
Adrien C said:
We are all talking about the honorable death of a soldier and you come trashing the thread with your "ilegal" war quote. Why don't you keep them in another thread man ? Was it ilegal? surely , perhaps Smith didn't believe in the war, but he believed in his fellow soldiers and gave his life for them.
Click to expand...
yeah i agree,while i agree with alot of what stern says and wasnt really in favor of the war,im sure when smith was firing his weapon he was thinking about defending his life and his buddies and not 'was this military operation in iraq legal','am i a pawn for bush' etc?

not to sound to gung-ho but once that 1st bullet goes by your head,politics goes out the window
 
sigh, for anyone to say there's no place for politics on the battlefield is a complete sham ..politics is what put you into the battlefield in the first place. If you dont research why you're there, then you're a pawn simple as that ...but I wont intrude into this hero worship of a thread any longer ..sheep being led to slaughter, but even sheep must sometimes question where they're going
 
Good for the US for disregarding whatever charter there was in the UN. After World War 1 they set something up similar to the UN, it acted just as the UN did and guess what? World War 2 happened because of appeasement that was pushed on by guess who...yup the pacifists. The war is not the answer people. The people who thought that letting the Germans do whatever they want would help prevent World War 2. And now when we are in Iraq preventing so many from being tortured/murdered the "pacifists" have not learned their lessons based on history.

Im not saying just because it happened before its 100% set in stone that it will happen again, but it is highly probable. Not saying pacifists are bad people. Yet I am sure most of you against the war believe in not letting history repeat itself. Pretty hypocritical as being against the war in Iraq would be a pretty big leap towards letting history repeat itself. ONCE AGAIN it is possible that if we did not go in, that may have not happened after even 100 years. Yet that is highly improbable.
 
CptStern said:
sigh, for anyone to say there's no place for politics on the battlefield is a complete sham ..politics is what put you into the battlefield in the first place. If you dont research why you're there, then you're a pawn simple as that ...but I wont intrude into this hero worship of a thread any longer ..sheep being led to slaughter, but even sheep must sometimes question where they're going
Click to expand...
You would have lasted a long time in 'Nam, my Dad had to put up with shit like you when he was there, deserters and people who won't do their job because they think the war is "unjust", just because some arrogant asshole thought he was better than everyone else fellow soliders died. Whether people were put there willingly or unwillingly you have to do your job and not betray your friends.
 
wtf are you talking about Vietnam WAS NOT A JUST WAR!!! bombing cambodians was not a JUST act ...you people seem willing to throw yourself to your deaths over situations you dont even understand
 
you people seem willing to throw yourself to your deaths over situations you dont even understand
Click to expand...

Because anyone who disagrees with you, must clearly not understand the situation. There is only one point of view - yours and anyone who disagrees is by definition a fool. Good moderate viewpoint there.
 
CptStern said:
wtf are you talking about Vietnam WAS NOT A JUST WAR!!! bombing cambodians was not a JUST act ...you people seem willing to throw yourself to your deaths over situations you dont even understand
Click to expand...
Thanks again, no matter what you are always right and everyone else is always wrong, right? Thanks for twisting my words, thanks for not even TRYING to understand. What I meant was that when you are in a situation like that you don't say "I am morally opposed to killing, mmmk?" And then just walk away. You have an obligation to help out your friends, they are in the same situation as you and it is about survival. That is like not eating someone when they are the only food that would save you from dieing.
 
sigh, for anyone to say there's no place for politics on the battlefield is a complete sham ..politics is what put you into the battlefield in the first place. If you dont research why you're there, then you're a pawn simple as that ...but I wont intrude into this hero worship of a thread any longer ..sheep being led to slaughter, but even sheep must sometimes question where they're going
Click to expand...
Please keep your political agenda out of this thread. The man won the award not for protesting over the war, but fighting for his friends. He made the ultimate sacrifice for them, not for Bush, not for anything else.
 
Rest in Peace Smith. A brave man.

This thread should maybe go in offtopic. I can't believe you just accused this man of war crimes, Stern. That truly is low ;/
 
so says the guy who said one of our members should get his face smashed for stating his opinion

get back to your hero worship and stop spending so much time on little ol' me
 
Hero worship has no negative connotations when theres an actual hero involved.

It doesn't matter why he was there or what it was that caused him to fight in the army, or what he believed politically. Sacrificing yourself for others is a universal good.
 
CptStern said:
get back to your hero worship and stop spending so much time on little ol' me
Click to expand...
Stop spending so much time belittling people who believe in something more than themselves :upstare:
 
for the life of me i cant understand why someone would come into a thread like this and put down a dead soldier tell me something will you go to his funeral stand in front of his family and tell them what you said here?

and to ghost :well ghost i dont think CptStern understands the concept
 
It is the soldiers that give people freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to vote for who you want, not the politician or the anti-war protestor. And yes, it is also the soldier that can take them away.

And Stern, politics has no place on a battlefield, the soldiers are there for one reason and one reason only, not to debate why they are there, but to do their job and to do their duty. If you don't agree with why the soldier was there or what the soldier was doing, at least make up another thread, it is men like him that make the real difference when it comes to war, peace, politics, freedom, not the people sat in the White House, 10 Downing Street or anywhere else.
 
Bodacious said:
Seeing as howt the majority of them gave up, were killed, or imprisoned I don't see how they have many heroic stories.
Click to expand...


"Why do you kill me?"

"Are you not on the other side of the water ? If you were on this side, I would be a murderer, and as such, it would be unfair to kill you; but as you are on he other side, I am brave and this is fair! Curious justice the river separates! Truth here, lies beyond. Robbery, incest and the murder of the children and the parents, all that is within virtuous actions!"

Blaise Pascal
 
CptStern said:
sigh, for anyone to say there's no place for politics on the battlefield is a complete sham ..politics is what put you into the battlefield in the first place. If you dont research why you're there, then you're a pawn simple as that ...but I wont intrude into this hero worship of a thread any longer ..sheep being led to slaughter, but even sheep must sometimes question where they're going
Click to expand...
no what im saying is once someone shoots at you your not going to be thinking about politics etc,just saving your ass
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
The making of the world's first Half-Life fan comic
Replies
0
Views
18K
Barnz
B
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
B
Who's left or joined Valve in recent history
Replies
4
Views
32K
MFL
MFL
B
The cut missions of Half-Life: Decay
Replies
2
Views
21K
Evo
Evo
Back
Top