But perhaps never has that distinction been less clear than in Iraq.
As the military prepared for Operation Iraqi Freedom II -- the phase of the war that followed the defeat of former president Saddam Hussein -- army planners recognized that heavy armor would be less effective in areas such as Baghdad, where it was hoped that soldiers would spend most of their time rebuilding infrastructure and, if necessary, quelling resistance in the capital's narrow streets.
Army Capt. Steve Gventer, normally a tank company commander, was hit by a grenade in Iraq after being retrained as an infantry officer. Under current rules, he is ineligible for the prestigious Combat Infantryman Badge.
(Steve Fainaru -- The Washington Post)
|
|
Both tasks required vast numbers of infantry, soldiers who primarily travel in five-man Humvees, then dismount, whether to rebuild sewers or fight insurgents.
Entire companies were ordered to trade in their tanks for Humvees and undergo months of retraining in urban warfare.
The transition was especially dramatic for the 1st Cavalry Division, which has operational responsibility over Baghdad. The real and fictional exploits of the 20,000-man division, which is based in Fort Hood, Tex., have been chronicled in movies from "Apocalypse Now" to "We Were Soldiers." Its very insignia features the black silhouette of a horse, representing the 1st Cavalry's historical evolution from horseback to heavy armor.
The commander of the division's 1st Brigade, Col. Robert. B. Abrams, is a former tank company commander. The M1 Abrams main battle tank is named after his late father, Gen. Creighton W. Abrams Jr., a renowned World War II tank commander who later served as overall military commander in Vietnam.
In an interview, Abrams said that for many soldiers, the badge has become "an emotional subject, but for me it's not very important right now. Perhaps after I've redeployed back to the United States it will become an emotional subject, but from my perspective and my expectation of my leaders, what we should really focus all of our intellectual and emotional energy on is accomplishing our mission and taking care of our soldiers and protecting the force.
"We can worry about badges and everything else later," said Abrams. "That doesn't mean it's not important, but in the Abrams version of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, it ain't there yet."
Current and retired soldiers on both sides of the issue emphasized the badge's symbolic importance. They offered widely different opinions on what they agreed was a highly charged issue.
Command Sgt. Maj. Stanley Small, of Huntsville, Ala., of the 1st Cavalry's 1st Brigade, said that expanding the award's recipients to include non-infantry units would be nearly impossible, given the range of soldiers who have been reassigned to combat roles in Iraq. He said it would inevitably dilute the award.
"I've got cooks out there -- not many, but some," he said. "I've got mechanics out there -- not many but some. . . . No matter how hard they try, they'll never be able to get the parameters right."
But Collins, the historian, said the Army runs a risk if soldiers essentially doing equal work are not rewarded equally.
"If they are going to be part of an infantry organization, then everybody in that organization is exposed to precisely the same risk," he said. "And to say that some of them are second-class citizens, I just think it would be a big mistake. It would encourage morale problems."
Gventer, a Baylor University graduate, said he did not want to be seen as emphasizing awards over mission, but he described the award as "huge." Both his father, a platoon leader in Vietnam, and his older brother, who fought in the Persian Gulf War, received badges.
