Royal Marine who jumped on grenade awarded George Cross - Telegraph.co.uk

AdmiralAwesome

Active Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
3,116
Reaction score
19
I don't understand exactly how these awards work, but that guy deserved the VC. Had he rescued someone from a burning building or some such, fair enough, give him the GC - but he jumped on a booby-trap left by the enemy to save his friends. I think they should change the criteria for awarding the VC to something along the lines of 'valour in the face of the enemy, or valour in the face of danger caused by enemy action.'

To me, the guy that jumps on a grenade to save his friends, is as deserving, if not more deserving, than the guy that charges a machine gun by himself.
 

hughbrown

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Posts
471
Reaction score
0
I don't understand exactly how these awards work, but that guy deserved the VC. Had he rescued someone from a burning building or some such, fair enough, give him the GC - but he jumped on a booby-trap left by the enemy to save his friends. I think they should change the criteria for awarding the VC to something along the lines of 'valour in the face of the enemy, or valour in the face of danger caused by enemy action.'

To me, the guy that jumps on a grenade to save his friends, is as deserving, if not more deserving, than the guy that charges a machine gun by himself.
absoluty :iagree:
 

Seedytucker

Venerated Contributor
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
1
GC is for bravery not in the face of the enemy, VC is for bravery in the face of the enemy. they're both 'worth' the same though. if they changed VC as you suggest wouldn't that mean that the GC is defunct?
That guy is a *text deleted* legend man.
 

R. M. Pitt

Veteran Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
531
Reaction score
0
:iagree: I think the guys who strapped themself to the outside of a helicopter should get a VC aswell I heard they never got anything
 

AdmiralAwesome

Active Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
3,116
Reaction score
19
GC is for bravery not in the face of the enemy, VC is for bravery in the face of the enemy. they're both 'worth' the same though. if they changed VC as you suggest wouldn't that mean that the GC is defunct?
That guy is a *text deleted* legend man.
In the order of precedence, the VC is higher. If someone won both, the VC would be worn first. The GC is awarded for numerous things, and to people outside the millitary - anyone can get a GC. I'm not devaluing the GC at all, but I contend that this Marine deserves the VC. Bravery in the face of a booby-trap left by the enemy is the same thing as bravery in the face of the enemy. If someone had thrown the grenade at them, he'd probably have got the VC.
 

Seedytucker

Venerated Contributor
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
1
furry muff. i was under the impression they were the same, having since checked i know they're not though.
mind you this country doesn't really do the medal thing all that well in general. that being said i agree with you about if the gren had been thrown he'd have got a VC so it does rather make sense what you're saying.
that being said, to change what the VC is,would mean denying all before him that could have got a VC previously under similar circumstances, i think the point of a medal is to recognise service, which the GC does, though the fact that it is a civil award does seem rather, not sure, mean/tight (?). plus it would redefine what the medal is awarded for i.e:
"... most conspicuous bravery, or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy"
http://www.operations.mod.uk/honours/honours.htm
I think the guys who strapped themself to the outside of a helicopter should get a VC aswell I heard they never got anything
definitely agree with you there, not sure it should be a VC, but they should have gotten something. i thought they got mentioned in dispatches though. chance are i'm wrong mind.
 

Macca

Venerated Contributor
Joined
May 31, 2007
Posts
1,000
Reaction score
197
AdmiralAwesome I know you aren't trying to devalue the GC and i understand what you say and i also think he should have got VC but your not right in saying the GC award is awarded to anyone, obviously we know civilians are also elegible for this award too but its far from being awarded to just anybody mate
 

R. M. Pitt

Veteran Contributor
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
531
Reaction score
0
I think when he said anyone can get a GC he was just trying to say you dont have to be in the armed forces to get one
 

GreyWing

Nobody
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Posts
5,427
Reaction score
3,796
Guys I'm 99% sure of this so there is a little room for doubt, but for a VC to be awarded an officer has to be present.

If I'm wrong feel free to slap me around, but that may explain it.
 

stanley

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Posts
14
Reaction score
0
I'm pretty sure that if he had died he would have been awarded a posthumous VC.
 

AdmiralAwesome

Active Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Posts
3,116
Reaction score
19
GW,

As I understand it, there has to be witnesses to the act of valour, but they don't need to be officers. The recommendation for it has to be signed by a senior officer. I think it's all to do with how 'in the face of the enemy' is defined. The VC goes back to the days of the charge of the Light Brigade. It hasn't really changed in modern times, taking into account changes in modern warfare.

I don't think you're given the VC for valour during a mortar or artillery barrage, etc.
 

GreyWing

Nobody
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Posts
5,427
Reaction score
3,796
I may have misheard it then, it was going back several years and I couldn't be 100% sure. I know they are a lot harder to get now than when they first started. Possible might even been Jeremy Clarkson I heard it off, in one of his documentaries.

But I can only imagine that the George cross being awarded instead of a VC was down to one of the reasons that one of us mentioned. As it's on par with the VC as far as I know.

I know a guy won it (GC) in Iraq but he wasn't given a VC because it was friendly fire. That guy that ran in and pulled his mates out that burning tank.

But I suppose this guy's just over the moon with still being alive,
 

Chris

Veteran Contributor
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Posts
656
Reaction score
0
The Victoria Cross is awarded for valour "in the face of the enemy" while the George Cross is awarder for not in the face of the enemy.

While medals are nice they do nothing in my eyes to add to the fact that this man is a true hero and outstanding Royal Marine Commando, he did what he did to save his friends not for a medal and that is all that really counts. I doubt he would openly say he deserved the VC instead of the GC or downplay the GC he recieved.

Outstanding Gallantry.

Wonder what his parents thought about it? My mom and gran would slap me silly first for jumping on booby traps before thinking of how good a thing it was haha
 
Top