• jordanlund@lemmy.world
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Reported as an invalid news source, because of course it is, however reading the article I’m going to allow it as a “even a broken clock is right twice a day” exception.

    The article does a good job explaining why the badge is problematic for him and, despite being intially issued by the Army, was legitimately revoked.

    “During the time of his service, the Lone Star rep was working as a civil affairs officer rather than an infantryman or Special Forces soldier, according to CBS.”

  • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’d also like to mention how boot (cringe) it is to put your medals on your civilian clothes. People with actual personalities don’t do that.

  • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    3 months ago

    “A recipient must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or SF primary duty in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy,” Army regulations stipulate.

    “Personnel with other than an infantry or SF MOS [Special Forces Military Occupational Specialty] are not eligible, regardless of the circumstances.”

    During the time of his service, the Lone Star rep was working as a civil affairs officer rather than an infantryman or Special Forces soldier, according to CBS.

    So he was working in an office, not in combat, but thinks he ‘deserves’ to wear the combat badge anyway.

    Classic example of selfish stupidity right there.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      They don’t love America. They love hierarchy.

      This representative probably thinks he deserves the combat badge because of his imagined status.