Edelweisse Posted February 5, 2017 Share #1 Posted February 5, 2017 Hi Folks, I recently picked this PTO period medal up and I couldn't pass it up...it has an arrowhead, a silver star and a bronze star..... Would this be USMC or US Army? Bottom line: I just like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMcollector Posted February 5, 2017 Share #2 Posted February 5, 2017 It's an Army version of the medal. Invasion arrowhead w/ 6 battle stars. U.S. Mint examples have a sharp edge around the rim and they are thicker than an Army example. The suspension knob is also rounded more than a U.S. Mint axample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Marine Posted February 5, 2017 Share #3 Posted February 5, 2017 Also the Navy and Marine Corps do not use the Arrowhead device. The Arrow head is only used by the Army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edelweisse Posted February 5, 2017 Author Share #4 Posted February 5, 2017 Thank you...I appreciate your quick replies. As stated...I like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edelweisse Posted February 6, 2017 Author Share #5 Posted February 6, 2017 I wonder which US Army units would qualify for this...especially nice the PTO was mostly fought by USMC etc.... but I could be wrong. 11th ABN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cw1979 Posted February 6, 2017 Share #6 Posted February 6, 2017 I wonder which US Army units would qualify for this...especially nice the PTO was mostly fought by USMC etc.... but I could be wrong. 11th ABN?Not the 11th Airborne; they qualified for 3 battle stars (New Guinea; Leyte & Luzon). I would like to point out the USMC did not fight most of the battles in the PTO. There were many more Army Divisions (17) involved than USMC ones (6). This medal with its six campaigns does not match any Division I know of; perhaps an amphibious battalion or an engineer outfit. Something battalion or maybe regiment size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edelweisse Posted February 6, 2017 Author Share #7 Posted February 6, 2017 Good point....Amphibious Bn or Engineer unit. Thanks for the info about all the US Army involvement in the Pacific. I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutiger83 Posted February 10, 2017 Share #8 Posted February 10, 2017 While there were more Army Divisions in the PTO, there were 21 Army and 48 Navy/Marine official campaigns of the Pacific Theater. The use of the word campaign versus battle is more accurate. A list of these are here along with more info: https://en.wikipedia..._Campaign_Medal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teufelhunde.ret Posted February 11, 2017 Share #9 Posted February 11, 2017 Not the 11th Airborne; they qualified for 3 battle stars (New Guinea; Leyte & Luzon). I would like to point out the USMC did not fight most of the battles in the PTO. There were many more Army Divisions (17) involved than USMC ones (6). Suggest you look into the definitions of military science; what constitutes a campaign and that which qualifies as a battle, prior to engaging further dialogue here. BTW, there were 21 active Army Divisions in theater during WW2 and only 5 active USMC in theater at any time. FYI the arrow head device was awarded to Army units for active participation during an amphibious landing, under fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cw1979 Posted February 11, 2017 Share #10 Posted February 11, 2017 Suggest you look into the definitions of military science; what constitutes a campaign and that which qualifies as a battle, prior to engaging further dialogue here. BTW, there were 21 active Army Divisions in theater during WW2 and only 5 active USMC in theater at any time. FYI the arrow head device was awarded to Army units for active participation during an amphibious landing, under fire.Thank you for your warm comments.I apologize for my poor memory. As for my earlier comment I stand by it; I am increasingly annoyed by the condescending tone and dismissive arrogance used by some members of this forum. If it makes one feel superior to constantly correct others so be it. It does not provide an open environment for the exchange of information which I thought was the point of forums such as this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cutiger83 Posted February 13, 2017 Share #11 Posted February 13, 2017 As for my earlier comment I stand by it; Given the definition of campaign vs battle, what are you using as the basis for your stance? Just trying to understand what you are using as the criteria for your stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigma9r Posted February 24, 2017 Share #12 Posted February 24, 2017 Given the definition of campaign vs battle, what are you using as the basis for your stance? Just trying to understand what you are using as the criteria for your stance. Good question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bheskett Posted February 24, 2017 Share #13 Posted February 24, 2017 I like the medal it looks great. Without know who it belonged to we will never know just why the combination is on the ribbon. It may be something as simple as the guy just grabbed a silver and a bronze star without realizing, or he was bounced from unit to unit,who knows. All the back and forth detracts from the conversation in my opinion. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cw1979 Posted February 26, 2017 Share #14 Posted February 26, 2017 Given the definition of campaign vs battle, what are you using as the basis for your stance? Just trying to understand what you are using as the criteria for your stance. The context of my post is lost due to the fact I was speaking of a post that was deleted by the moderators. My stance regarding "battle" stars is simply; they have been called battle, campaign, patrol and I'm sure other names by the men and women who earned them during WWII. I believe any and all of these terms are correct and no one is more correct. If one uses the blanket term "campaign" star then the following US Navy battles become independent campaigns: Pearl Harbor (12/07/1941) Coral Sea (05/04-08/42) Midway (06/03-06/42) Most people due not consider these battles separate campaigns of the war. The same is true of the naval battles in the Solomon Islands in 1942-1943; the Army considered the matter two campaigns; Guadalcanal and Northern Solomons while the US Navy lists something like 9 separate engagements. Which is correct to call campaign or battle? I say it depends on the situation and each case is different. Adding to this flexibility is the use of "battle" stars to represent war patrols by submarines; these were not campaigns but missions/patrols each one of which was recognized by a star on the campaign ribbon. Again to me these are not campaign or even battle stars yet some have called them by these names. As to the award listed I have no idea what unit could be represented; it has been stated by one poster that only amphibious landings under fire counted; this is not correct, airborne landings also were awarded the bronze arrowhead device. How under fire one had to be seems to have depended on the command authorizing the award with some flexibility being noticed during the war. The point of my original post was to say I think it is impolite to correct someone for using a term such as battle in place of campaign when discussing the stars on a campaign ribbon. It does not add to the subject at hand and comes away as a backhanded slight in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edelweisse Posted February 26, 2017 Author Share #15 Posted February 26, 2017 Thanks Bob....I like the medal..and it could be a vet put together but I doubt it. Bottom line...I like it. I didn't expect the battle vs. campaign discussion. I own a small 17th ABN group and I looked at the ribbon bar,,,,and it had an arrow head and 3 bronze stars....so as stated above...not for 17th ABN. Oh well...nice medal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bheskett Posted February 26, 2017 Share #16 Posted February 26, 2017 Not a problem. This is the reason I don't post very much, too many times things end in an argument for one reason or another. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cw1979 Posted February 26, 2017 Share #17 Posted February 26, 2017 I apologize for my part in the discussion going off topic. The award is beautiful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now