After sending out my latest news to all interested parties, I did get one typical reply that basically said, "I disagree with you because you weren't infantry." PERIOD! Well everyone is entitled to their opinion, but most folks are pure and simple arguing over SEMANTICS. I am not going to get into it again, because I and many of MY engineers have been over this a thousand times before. I am not about to argue with anyone here or there. I've said what I've had to say, and if you didn't get it in the above posts above, then it AIN'T worth repeating!

For those who DO AGREE and want to join OUR fight, fine. For those who don't, well that's fine too. For anyone interested, get in touch with me and we will discuss how you can help our cause. For those of you who fought on the front lines, were shot to hell and paid your dues, and for your brothers who died on the SAME FRONT LINES WITH RIFLES IN HAND next to the infantryman, here is our time!

Just sat down and read more of my mail this evening. You know what? If anything at all, we have gotten people's attention and that is THE BEST THING. Most comments have been with us. It has brought up a LOT of good discussion past and present. That is always positive. Me, I think that any discussion is better than NO discussion at all, and I will continue to be THE ramble-rouser!

Trust me, if you don't know me, I NEVER jump on anyone and I mean anyone's bandwagon lightly or AT ALL. But when I listen and read the hundreds of real-life stories from MY MEN, there is only one right way for me to jump. Night after night I sit at my computer, or hold pages from my engineers and hear all that they went through, and in my heart and in my logical mind, there is only one course of action.

When I read the "S" reports from battalion and regiment, and see for myself what they went through, and then have someone argue with me that they weren't qualified, well... When I read combat reports that state, on such and date, 2nd battalion was attached AS INFANTRY to the 45th division..., and then hear people tell me that it's wrong, well brother you are barking up the wrong tree.

Just sat down and read more of my mail this evening. You know what? If anything at all, we have gotten people's attention and that is THE BEST THING. Most comments have been with us. It has brought up a LOT of good discussion past and present. That is always positive. Me, I think that any discussion is better than NO discussion at all, and I will continue to be THE ramble-rouser!

 

Trust me, if you don't know me, I NEVER jump on anyone and I mean anyone's bandwagon lightly or AT ALL. But when I listen and read the hundreds of real-life stories from MY MEN, there is only one right way for me to jump. Night after night I sit at my computer, or hold pages from my engineers and hear all that they went through, and in my heart and in my logical mind, there is only one course of action.

 

When I read the "S" reports from battalion and regiment, and see for myself what they went through, and then have someone argue with me that they weren't qualified, well... When I read combat reports that state, on such and date, 2nd battalion was attached AS INFANTRY to the 45th division..., and then hear people tell me that it's wrong, well brother you are barking up the wrong tree.

Maid Marion; ON YOUR SECOND PARAGRAPH, I AM ONE OF YOUR MEN. AT TIMES I JUST GOT MY FEET WET AND A LITTLE MUD AFTER CROSSING THE RAPIDO, ARNO. AND VOLTURNO RIVERS IN ITALY. WHY??????***THECOMBAT ENGINEERS WERE AHEAD OF ME******* the rest of your article, I SAY**++##GIVE EM HELL MARION!!!!!! THIS OLD REDBULL SAID IT,ROCKY

Rocky, speaking for all MY engineers, we thank you deeply for your continuing support of OUR cause. We go on, as our motto adeptly states, Essayons! Still tried and true!

Here's yet another letter of support and PROOF that CIB's DID get awarded to our engineers during WWII.

Marion -

Please keep me posted on this. I have been trying for years to get one for

my grandfather. I have a picture of him wearing it. He was obviously awarded

on but was not in the medals I inherited from him.

He too was an engineer and it's been an adventure trying to prove he got it!

Steve

Gentlemen:

Our DOC is it's way to me right now. Received this letter this morning. Talk about being prompt and on-the-ball!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Caveats: NONE

Dear Ms. Chard:

Please send your postal mailing address, and we will make copies of the circular for you. There is no charge as it is a short document.

Sincerely,

Arthur W. Bergeron, Jr., Ph.D.

Reference Historian

U. S. Army Military History Institute

950 Soldiers Drive

Carlisle, PA 17013-5021

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Caveats: NONE

Received this today. Have not responded yet because want to take my time and carefully word my reply. I however did send a copy of the letter below to Captain John Fallon.

========================

Dear Ms Chard:

I'm writing this to clarify the circumstances under which the Combat Infantry Badge may be awarded. I don't mean to be verbose, but the subject requires considerable attention to details.

I speak with some authority on the issue. I am the National Historian for the Combat Infantrymen's Association, and in that capacity I am involved in research of personnel records of those who wish to join our organization, all of whom must prove that they are legitimately entitled to wear this prestigious award.

There are two ways an applicant can prove he received the award:

1. As every award requires documentation, usually in the form of Special Orders issued at the level of the unit in which the soldier is serving. Those "orders" will show the date of the award and the identity of the Unit the soldier was serving in at the time he qualified for the award. A copy of those orders were normally entered into the soldiers 201 file and, when possible, a copy was issued to the individual. In either case when the individual was separated from active duty he received Form DD214,or in the case of WWII veterans, a similar document. It is a one page record of assignments, wounds received, awards given and campaigns he participated in, along with other information such as his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). This form will not necessarily show all of his past military assignments or units. It will show the "most significant" assignment, usually the last assignment before being separated.

After separation from active duty the soldiers 201 file was sent to St. Louis,MO to be archived. Those records were more detailed that the DD214 and showed every interim assignment that the individual occupied, all of his medical records, letters of discipline or commendations etc. It is an unfortunate fact that the vast majority of WWII and Korean war veterans records were destroyed in a fire at the Records Center.

2. The applicant can also provide an original DD214, or a photo copy. If the soldier was awarded the C.I.B. that award will be so noted in his DD214. I goes without further discussion that if the documentation doesn't support his claim for the award he didn't receive it.

Because of that fire I've found it extremely difficult to reconstruct records of individuals. Most of our applicants waited for years before they decided to join our association. Their memories are not as vivid now as they were decades ago. This is not to say that we're totally unsuccessful. If any of the veterans joined Reserve units after they were separated from the Active army there is a possibility that those records were copied and forwarded to the Reserve component. I've made some inquiries and have been able to document the award from those records.

As to who qualifies for the C.I.B. you'll find that there is ample documentation, which I've included, that is specific in establishing the qualifications.

If you look closely you'll find that is award (CIB) is given only to those Army personnel whose PRIMARY duty is to close with and kill an armed enemy. It is the purpose for which they were trained.

This is not to degrade the actions of other military branches who are exposed to life threatening hazards while on active duty. There are numerous occupations in the Army that take people into harms way, but for the most part these folks do it on a sporadic basis and not a part of a full time killing function.

The Army, in recognition of the risks these people are faced with established the "Combat Action Badge", which recognizes the fact that these people were subjected to enemy fire when engaged with the enemy in a non-infantry capacity. This was brought about by the Iraq war where our troops were continually at risk even though they were not assigned as Infantry.

From time to time we find that the various branches of the Army attempt to establish an equivalent to the C.I.B. There were proposals for a Armor Combat Badge, an Artillery Combat Badge etc. These proposals were discussed and evaluated. All were rejected.

Now to the crux of the matter...Combat engineers awarded the C.I.B.

It is entirely possible that they were.....in error! This was especially true in WWII, a time when there was little stability in the mid level command structures due to reassignments, rotation of assignments between Army branches and a proliferation of directives, memos etc. Many awards were made in error, the C.I.B. not being the least.

There are numerous military occupations where the incumbent is at an even higher risk than the combat infantryman, but for the most part these assignments are limited to short periods of time. The Army recognizes some of these in the form of a badge, but these types of badges are primarily used to indicate the type of specialty that justifies singular recognition for technical expertise, ie:

Then we have situations where the C.I.B. was awarded to an individual who had been in a combat infantry environment and received the C.I.B. only later transferred to a non-infantry unit. I'm aware of holders of the C.I.B. who later transferred into the Navy and who wear the C.I.B.

The Navy and Marines have no badge equivalent to the C.I.B; they recognize combat service with a ribbon.

The Army has never varied the criteria. The C.I.B was approved 15 Nov 43 and instituted the same day. The War Department issued a Circular #186 on 11 May 44 which was used to disseminate the criteria Army wide and which is almost identical to the wording used in describing the award except that it delineated exactly what the phrase "action against the enemy" meant, and was interpreted as "ground combat against enemy ground forces" .

I hope this has clarified the issue.

Regards'

Louis Orlando

National Historian

Combat Infantrymen's Association

www.cibassoc.com

Marion, thanks for the latest info. about the C.I.B. I have filled out an application to become a member and I will mail it tomorrow. I think I qualify. Justput another feather in your cap!!! Love ya Rocky

Well the gentleman, Mr. Orlando is entitled to his opinion as is anyone else, but John and I just got done discussing it and we are still going ahead with our plan. It's only one man's opinion and I mean no disrespect, but he stated that the Army made a mistake and probably many mistakes giving out CIB's to engineers. Well we can also turn that around and say that Army made mistakes and didn't give them to the men who also deserved them. It works both ways.

Anyway to be fair to him and others, I printed his letter above, but it is also our prerogative to disagree with his viewpoint.

Essayons, the fight shall continue...

Well the gentleman, Mr. Orlando is entitled to his opinion as is anyone else, but John and I just got done discussing it and we are still going ahead with our plan. It's only one man's opinion and I mean no disrespect, but he stated that the Army made a mistake and probably many mistakes giving out CIB's to engineers. Well we can also turn that around and say that Army made mistakes and didn't give them to the men who also deserved them. It works both ways.

 

Anyway to be fair to him and others, I printed his letter above, but it is also our prerogative to disagree with his viewpoint.

 

Essayons, the fight shall continue...

Marion, after re-reading the above article and reading your response, I think I will withdraw my application to the C.I.B.A. I just looked at my ORIGINAL CIB in my shadow box and makes me wonder how much talk there is about it. I have had mine since Nov. 1943. Rocky

Quote from RockyMarion, after re-reading the above article and reading your response, I think I will withdraw my application to the C.I.B.A. I just looked at my ORIGINAL CIB in my shadow box and makes me wonder how much talk there is about it. I have had mine since Nov. 1943. Rocky

Rocky,

I'm guessin' the C.I.B.A. is probley a pretty good organization but I thik it would be alot better with you as a member.

I agree with Marion, that Mr. Orlando is entitled to his opinion, but I guess its up to a few of us to change those opinions.

I just re- read Dad's Presidential Unit Citation, and the words 53 % Casualty Losses and more than 180 days as Infantry seem to stand out clearly.

Chris

Yes Chris, those ARE the key words -

AS INFANTRY

They keep appearing over and over and over again in all our documents. They don't say, as BOOKKEEPERS. They don't say as SURGEONS. They say as INFANTRY!

So we will present our evidence and I will write our letter and take it to DC. We have nothing to lose. At least this way we can say we gave it our best. We gave it our ALL and we can be proud of ourselves.

Yes Chris, those ARE the key words -

 

AS INFANTRY

 

They keep appearing over and over and over again in all our documents. They don't say, as BOOKKEEPERS. They don't say as SURGEONS. They say as INFANTRY!

 

So we will present our evidence and I will write our letter and take it to DC. We have nothing to lose. At least this way we can say we gave it our best. We gave it our ALL and we can be proud of ourselves.

Marion; When you write D.C. tell them what this DOGFACE sez about the combat engineers. I am talking about the ones in front of me sweeping for mines, building pontoon bridges, telling the enemy not to shoot cause they didn't have the C.I.B... Give 'em hell gal. Rocky

Marion,

Pardon my French but Mr. Orlando is an *sshole. He is a sorry historian. He read's black and white but never looks at the grey in between. If what happened was told by historians alone we'd never have any idea what went on in the world. Please keep up your campaign. I'm on your side, as are many of these fine gentlemen.

Rocky, we've never spoke but I admire the hell out of you. You don't pull too many punches do you?

My admiration to you and Marion sir...

-Robert

Marion,

 

Pardon my French but Mr. Orlando is an *sshole. He is a sorry historian. He read's black and white but never looks at the grey in between. If what happened was told by historians alone we'd never have any idea what went on in the world. Please keep up your campaign. I'm on your side, as are many of these fine gentlemen.

 

Rocky, we've never spoke but I admire the hell out of you. You don't pull too many punches do you?

 

My admiration to you and Marion sir...

 

-Robert

"Emerson_Bigguns"---Robert; Thanks for the kind words, BUT, I just say WHAT I SAW AND SAW WHAT THE COMBAT ENGINEERS DID, in No. Africa and Italy, If you have a map of Italy, just look at the Rapido, Arno, and Volturno rivers, let alone all the mine fields. They would clear a mine field and string a path so we would walk on it and we dare not cross over the ribbon they tied. Just felt I had to say this. AND MAYBE,JUST MAYBE,THIS IS THE REASON I CAN WRITE THIS TODAY. PLUS THE BIGGEST THING IS THAT GOD WAS WATCHING OVER ME. ROCKY of the 34th.

I received this letter today. I left off the name for privacy. If said individual would like to reply, he may. I am also posting my reply.

===================

Mam,

Engineers of any variety, unless they meet extra special conditions, are not authorized the CIB. I appreciate your efforts on behalf of engineers but as recipients of the CIB they do not qualify. Read the regulation too. I too actually know a few non-infantry branched soldiers who received the CIB, however they met the in command of an infantry unit for 30 day or the Special Forces criteria. Engineers, unless they met the required criteria, are, essentially wearing or claiming to have earned the CIB, when not authorized, previous mistakes included. There was a book called "Stolen Valor" on this.

Additionally, I know of several aviators, having been shot down, fought with infantry units until they were able to be moved. NO CIB for them. I believe that your assn could better use its energy and time in working with all veteran's organizations to ensure that all vets are taken care of from the medical and other support standpoints. Unfortunately, the generally exclusive attitudes of WWII vets (our war was a "real war")(VFW and such) to Vietnam Vets and those of the conflicts since then have been one of the primary reasons for the loss of membership in such organizations.

====================

Dear (I left this off):

Thank you for your opinion, but we have a much different outlook on the situation. No disrespect meant.

I (we) have read every single document numerous times, and in our mind it leaves no doubt to their interpretation.

As far as your comparison regarding the pilot, it really doesn't apply since he was not designated AS INFANTRY, unlike many of my engineers WHO WERE, as clearly stated in many of the NARA documents we have. Our engineers were actually ASSIGNED as infantry for days, weeks or months at a time.

Sincerely...

===================

His response to me this afternoon:

No disrespect taken. Infantry is infantry and engineers are engineers. Combat vs. combat support.

========================

Guess some people don't get it. We aren't arguing about support troops sir. We are arguing with the ones WHO WERE INFANTRY. I won't say anything more because my next words are guaranteed to be NOT NICE! But as my dear friend friend who happens to be an infantry general, said last week, "Ignore them honey!"