Gen. MacArthur's CIB

[seanmc1114]

Well for Stilwell, it was presented to him well on his death bed. He was awarded it the day before he died.

MacArthur is another story as he was awarded it in his later years when he gave up wearing a uniform.

 

here is a ca 1980s photo of Bradley wearing his "honorary" CIB:

I thought I recalled a picture of Bradley wearing the CIB not too long before his death. I believe he is in a wheelchair in that picture and it may have been taken at the dedication of the then-new Infantry Museum at Ft. Benning. I wonder if he put the items on the uniform himself; I would doubt it.

 

Note that he appears to be wearing a then-current Army dress green uniform with name plate, neither of which I believe were authorized or worn at the time of his retirement from the Army in 1953. Also note that he is wearing the ribbon of the Defense Distinguished Service Medal which was not created until 1970, and his National Defense Service medal ribbon appears to have a device on it (oak leaf cluster or possibly bronze star) indicating a second award for the Vietnam era, long after he retired.

 

That's very interesting.

[SpookyTeddyBear]

I thought I recalled a picture of Bradley wearing the CIB not too long before his death. I believe he is in a wheelchair in that picture and it may have been taken at the dedication of the then-new Infantry Museum at Ft. Benning. I wonder if he put the items on the uniform himself; I would doubt it.

 

Note that he appears to be wearing a then-current Army dress green uniform with name plate, neither of which I believe were authorized or worn at the time of his retirement from the Army in 1953. Also note that he is wearing the ribbon of the Defense Distinguished Service Medal which was not created until 1970.

 

you forget that since he was a 5 star General, he was on active duty for life. So he had to keep up with the uniform regulations throughout the years. He was awarded the DDSM in December, 1979.

He spent 69 years in the army!! If you think about it, Bradley had gone through a whole assortment of Army Service Uniforms:

1902 Olive Drab (closed collar)

1925 Olive drab (open collar)

1942 Ike Jacket

1942 Tan Service coat

1957 Green Coat!

[SpookyTeddyBear]

you forget that since he was a 5 star General, he was on active duty for life. So he had to keep up with the uniform regulations throughout the years. He was awarded the DDSM in December, 1979.

 

dang, sorry about this post! I tried editing my last post, but ended up posting a different one all together.

[seanmc1114]

you forget that since he was a 5 star General, he was on active duty for life. So he had to keep up with the uniform regulations throughout the years. He was awarded the DDSM in December, 1979.

I did not know that but it certainly explains the uniform and ribbons.

 

It is interesting that Bradley wore the CIB as I would think his would have been honorary as well. I don't believe he ever served in an infantry unit in combat, and he never served in combat as anything other than a general officer (Corps, Army and Army Group Commander).

[SpookyTeddyBear]

I did not know that but it certainly explains the uniform and ribbons.

 

It is interesting that Bradley wore the CIB as I would think his would have been honorary as well. I don't believe he ever served in an infantry unit in combat, and he never served in combat as anything other than a general officer (Corps, Army and Army Group Commander).

 

oh, well MacArthur, Marshall, Eisenhower, Bradley were all on active duty since they were 5 Star Generals. Bradley was the last surviving 5SG upon his death in 1981. During WWI, he was held from going overseas for training duty. He is said to have stated something along the lines of it being his greatest disappointment. he was appointed a Brigadier general in 1941, and Major General in 1942, so yeah, he never saw actual face to face combat. Still was an excellent commander nonetheless.

[rr01]

"Honorary". That word has popped up a lot here in the past few posts and it made me think about what it all means. Every single decoration I ever received was actually honorary. Each of them represented to me someone elses determination about the actions I was involved in and how to give me recognition. Every one of those decorations is covered by a specific regulation right down to the wording on the orders but that doesn't mean that every single situation is covered by a regulation. I once told a friend of mine the most coveted title I could ever have is "honorary flight engineer" because of the importance of that job to the Air Force. If sich an honor was ever made you bet I would wear the wings, proudly. And I would explain to anyone asking why I was doing so. If someone offered me a combat medics badge that I'm not entitled to in the Air Force I would find a proper place on my uniform for it. And offer an explanation why.

The difference is that I am still able to offer explanations for something not covered in the regs or that has a stipulation for wear. Am I dishonoring flight engineers or Army combat medics? Not in the least and I defy anyone to prove otherwise.

Yes, I'm being defiant, possibly even too aggressive for some here but I have a hard time accepting that any of these officers I greatly admired in my youth is actually any less the man for what is on their uniform than when I was a youth who saw only the results of their leadership.

Yesterday I posted a URL about an Air Force man killed in Afghanistan while in support of the Army. Suppose an Army four star showed up and pinned a CIB on his casket? Should one then be displayed by the family in a shadowbox?

[SpookyTeddyBear]

here is another photo of Bradley with his CIB: (Courtesy, rit1981, of Flicker)

[Robersabel]

Wailuna,

 

>I suggest that the directive that first promulgated the CIB was so vague on many points that it was interpreted to permit the award of the CIB to just about any U.S. soldier who fought as an infantryman (and that is "infantryman" with a small "i") at Buna in late 1942 (and at other places, such as Bataan in early 1942 and Guadalcanal in 1942/1943), which included cooks, clerks, and the corps commander. But read it and judge for yourself (see below). The "imperfections" of WD Circular 269-43 were soon evident as the changes were rolled out to rescind the preceding issuances in whole or in part: WD Cir. 186-44, WD Cir. 408-44, WD Cir. 450-44, WD Cir. 93-45 (and there might be more...) The CIB was a work in progress during WWII (and since).

 

You are correct with several statements.

 

You included War Department Circular 269. Could someone open my eyes to the restriction of awarding the badge to Generals? I believe it states including officers with no rank identified.

 

>were soon evident as the changes were rolled out to rescind the preceding

 

Correct, but the act(s) in combat met circumstances identified in WDC 269 and WDC 105 where the latter states the CIB may be awarded to any infantryman without requirements for the MOS of an infantryman and assigned to an infantry unit.

 

 

 

By the way, the MOS was not required until after WWII.

 

[Robersabel]

Please note para IV.Badge.

[Robersabel]

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/84541-gen-macarthurs-cib/page-2

[Robersabel]

Bluehawk,

 

Executive Order 9075 AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF WAR TO ISSUE CITATIONS IN THE NAME OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO ARMY UNITS FOR OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE IN ACTION

February 26, 1942

 

By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, it is ordered as follows:

1. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed to issue a citation in the name of the President of the United States, as public evidence of deserved honor and distinction, to any organization, unit, detachment, or installation of the Army of the United States or the Army of the Philippine Commonwealth for outstanding performance of duty in action on or after

December 7, 1941.

 

There was General Order 22, dated April 30, 1942 initiated identifying the above which was amended by General Order 46, published in 1948.

 

The above authorized “any” Army unit involved in the battles of Bataan and Corregidor the Distinguished Unit Citation aka Presidential Unit Citation. (All recipients of the DUC/PUC are entitled to the Bronze Star Medal.

 

No doubt General MacArthur was assigned to one of the listed. Note: “for outstanding performance of duty in action”

 

I realize WDC 269, dated 27 October 1943 was posted previously, but I would like to repeat several statements. WDC 105 is the only other guideline which applies to specific time frame of battles of Bataan and Corregidor. (7 December 1941 to 10 May 1942). It amended WDC 269 and made retroactive on or after 6 December 1941.

 

Combat Infantryman badge.---Infantrymen, including officers , establish

eligibility to wear the Combat Infantryman badge by---

a. Exemplary conduct in action against the enemy, or

b. By satisfactory performance of duty in action against the enemy in a

major operation as determined and announced by the theater commander.

 

Several words I would like to point out.

“officers” no specific rank

“satisfactory performance of duty in action against the enemy

announced by the theater commander …was not General MacArthur the theater commander?

“action” matches the description in EO 9075

 

The Combat Infantryman badge may be awarded to any infantryman. (ref: WDC 105, page 2, para IV BADGE).

 

There is not a requirement to be assigned to an infantry unit. Initiated by WDC 186, dated 11 May 1944.

 

There is not a requirement to possess the MOS of an infantryman. It was not listed until after WWII.

[Robersabel]

An unknown number, perhaps thousands of combatants who fought the enemy during battles of Bataan and Corregidor were assigned to units not designated infantry before the war, and possessed the MOS other than infantry. The time period: 7 December 1941 to 10 May 1942.

Records reveal the U.S. Army and USAR approved the Combat Infantryman badge (CIB) to veterans who were assigned to AAF units, Provisional Air Corps organizations, tank battalions, coast artillery regiments, ordnance units, etc., post WWII to as recent as January 2003.

 

Justification for awarding the CIB was based on two War Department Circulars, 269 dated 27 October 1943 and 105 dated 13 March 1944. The latter amended the former WDC and made retroactive on or after 6 December 1941.

 

Circumstances did not include requirement(s) to be assigned to an infantry unit or possess the MOS of an infantryman. The former requirement was not listed until 11 May 1944. The latter circumstance was not required until after WWII.

 

Yet, for the past number of years, civilian employees representing three offices of the USA mirror their responses by justifying denials on guidelines after the fact. They are dated 1944, 1945, 1948 or as recent as the Vietnam era.

 

A document dated 10 March 1952 (in part) states: Eligibility of a veteran previously assigned to the 31^st Infantry Regiment “caused a study to be made by a Board consisting of Air Force, Service Force, Ground Force, and a representative of the Adjutant General. The recommendation of General MacArthur were obtained. (It has been determined that General MacArthur did not say “No” to awarding the Combat Infantryman badge to this category of personnel. This office was mislead by part of a comment to this effect which has been placed in the policy file – see TAB . Even though General MacArthur recommended that the Combat Infantryman badge be awarded to those that acted as Infantry in defense of the Philippines, the Board recommended and its recommendations were approved by Assistance Chief of Staff, G-1, that the award be confined to officers, warrant officers, and enlisted men assigned to Infantry Regiments, Infantry Battalions, and elements thereof designated as infantry in Table of Organization and Equipment.”

 

WDC 408, dated 17 October 1944,

“1. Eligibility.---Effective 1 November1944 the award of the expert Infantryman

badge and the combat Infantryman badge is restricted to officers, warrant officers,

and enlisted men assigned to infantry regiments, infantry battalions, and ele-

ments thereof designated as infantry in tables of organization or tables of organi-

zation and equipment.”

 

According to the wording of above two paragraphs, the Board consisting of Air Force, Service Force, Ground Force, a representative of the Adjutant General, and Assistance Chief of Staff, G-1 have violated the U.S. Constitution.

 

A local attorney (retired USAFR Colonel, former JAG Officer) provided a five page letter of legal opinion. He states (in part), application of later guideline(s) to facts surrounding the time frame of the event constitutes ex post facto application of law, specifically prohibited in the U.S. Constitution by the prohibitions in Article I, Section 9, Clause 3, against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws. Awards and decorations, like other rights, must be considered as of the date the benefit was earned. Application of different standards, arising out of different sensibilities in different wars, wreaks havoc on any sense of equal application of laws.

It is common to locate a decision by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records denying veterans the Purple Heart and/or CIB based on guidelines after the fact.

 

What is the answer to correct such injustice? Court action would be one avenue, but who has $40,000 (quoted) to pay an attorney?

 

Robert

[TLeo]

In 1961 General MacArthur executed a deed of gift in which he gave the City of Norfolk all his trophies, medals, prizes, decorations, uniforms, flags, swords, battle souvenirs, personal papers, documents, records and other personal memorabilia. The library contains General MacArthur's original collection of 5,000 volumes augmented by gifts and purchases of books concerning the General, his times, and his associates. This is a non-lending reference and research library. The archives proper hold some 2 million documents, 86,000 photographs, 130 photograph albums, and 111 motion picture films in addition to sound recordings, newspapers, rare books, scrapbooks, and microfilms.

 

The archival collection is now available on 35mm microfilm. The film may be borrowed through interlibrary loan or purchased directly.

 

http://www.macarthurmemorial.org/archives.asp

...and he and his wife are buried there at the museum. I was really surprised years ago to find that out. I have been there however and it is a very nice museum.

[seanmc1114]

WDC 408, dated 17 October 1944,

“1. Eligibility.---Effective 1 November1944 the award of the expert Infantryman

badge and the combat Infantryman badge is restricted to officers, warrant officers,

and enlisted men assigned to infantry regiments, infantry battalions, and ele-

ments thereof designated as infantry in tables of organization or tables of organi-

zation and equipment.”

 

According to the wording of above two paragraphs, the Board consisting of Air Force, Service Force, Ground Force, a representative of the Adjutant General, and Assistance Chief of Staff, G-1 have violated the U.S. Constitution.

 

A local attorney (retired USAFR Colonel, former JAG Officer) provided a five page letter of legal opinion. He states (in part), application of later guideline(s) to facts surrounding the time frame of the event constitutes ex post facto application of law, specifically prohibited in the U.S. Constitution by the prohibitions in Article I, Section 9, Clause 3, against bills of attainder and ex post facto laws. Awards and decorations, like other rights, must be considered as of the date the benefit was earned. Application of different standards, arising out of different sensibilities in different wars, wreaks havoc on any sense of equal application of laws.

You're beating a dead horse. The CIB was only ever intended to be awarded to infantrymen assigned to infantry units. The fact that it has been erroneously, even though probably with the best of intentions, awarded to others does not change that fact.

 

An infantryman is not just anyone who happens to have picked up a rifle and fired it back at an enemy. The history of the award makes that clear. Infantrymen were specially trained for a particular role in war. Getting shot at and shooting back at the enemy was not incidental to their primary job. It was their primary job.

 

As to the constitutional argument, that has no merit. The provision against ex post facto laws pertains to criminal laws, not executive branch regulations.

[Robersabel]

>As to the constitutional argument, that has no merit. The provision against ex post facto laws pertains to criminal laws, not executive branch regulations.

 

I will pass your opinion to the Colonel. It was recognized by members of the Board for Correction of Military Records.

[seanmc1114]

An unknown number, perhaps thousands of combatants who fought the enemy during battles of Bataan and Corregidor were assigned to units not designated infantry before the war, and possessed the MOS other than infantry. The time period: 7 December 1941 to 10 May 1942.

Justification for awarding the CIB was based on two War Department Circulars, 269 dated 27 October 1943 and 105 dated 13 March 1944. The latter amended the former WDC and made retroactive on or after 6 December 1941.

 

Circumstances did not include requirement(s) to be assigned to an infantry unit or possess the MOS of an infantryman. The former requirement was not listed until 11 May 1944. The latter circumstance was not required until after WWII.

 

This is the preamble to the War Department Circular creating the CIB and EIB. As lawyers, we are taught to read all authority in harmony with each other and not to pick and choose parts that support our argument to the exclusion of contrary arguments.

 

As such, despite the fact that the CIB has clearly been awarded to soldiers other than infantrymen with an infantry MOS over the years, there is simply no reasonable way to read the regulations to suggest that it was ever intended to recognize anyone other than an infantry soldier with an infantry MOS. It seems that the Army has taken steps over the years to rescind those awards that were made in error contrary to the letter and intent of the regulations. The fact that all such awards may not have been located and rescinded, and the fact that some boards of correction have continued to make the same error does not change that fact.

[Robersabel]

>As such, despite the fact that the CIB has clearly been awarded to soldiers other than infantrymen with an infantry MOS over the years, there is simply no reasonable way to read the regulations to suggest that it was ever intended to recognize anyone other than an infantry soldier with an infantry MOS. It seems that the Army has taken steps over the years to rescind those awards that were made in error contrary to the letter and intent of the regulations.

 

The document reveals we all make mistakes...

 

I believe they followed WDC 105 where it states the Combat Infantryman badge may be awarded to any infantryman. By the way, a number of AAF units formed two battalions of the First Provisional Air Corps Regiment led for a period of time by Colonel Irvin E. Doane, 31st Infantry. Members fought the enemy as infantrymen.

 

Four sources decribed their involvement in battles. One source, a platoon leader lieutenent provided 26 pages of description of their participation in the battles. He provided the material to The Infantry School, General Section, Military History Committee, Ft. Benning Georgia. It was titled Advanced Officers Course 1946-1947.

 

 

 

[Bluehawk]

What an abundant body of knowledge we have created with so many contributions.

[seanmc1114]

here is another photo of Bradley with his CIB: (Courtesy, rit1981, of Flicker)

30852533...ef1bc346.jpg

 

Here's a picture of Gen. Bradley supposedly taken on Omaha Beach on the 25th anniversary of D-Day- June 6, 1969. Notice he is not wearing a CIB. Also note that he is wearing his name plate improperly. It should be on the right pocket flap, not above the pocket.

 

[seanmc1114]

At the risk of arguing against myself and vindicating Robersabel, I ran across this page from a 1947 Fort Benning OCS classbook. The instructor officer's bio seems to indicate that he may have earned the CIB as a member of an Air Corps unit serving in the Philippines at the beginning of WWII. Take it for what it's worth.

 

It would be interesting to see any orders that served as the basis of the award.

[firefighter]

Not sure what his whole bio is but I would say he was transferred to the infantry when he was fighting as a guerrilla.Probably got his CIB fighting with them?

[patches]

 

Here's a picture of Gen. Bradley supposedly taken on Omaha Beach on the 25th anniversary of D-Day- June 6, 1969. Notice he is not wearing a CIB. Also note that he is wearing his name plate improperly. It should be on the right pocket flap, not above the pocket.

 

Provided Brad was already awarded an Honorary CIB by 1969, perhaps Brad then had the foresight, and good taste not to wear it at Omaha in 1969, a battle were so many Infantrymen were Killed and Wounded.

[patches]

Here's another sighting of the Combat Infantrymans Badge being worn by a General who would really not have qualified for it.

 

Claude B. Ferenbaugh.

 

 

The Above photo was taken in 1955 when Ferenbaugh, known popularly throughout the Army as Buddy, was Deputy Commander of 8th Army, here we see the CIB, but where and when did he earn it?

 

He was a II Corps staff officer under Frendendall right, afterwards a War Planner at the Pentagon, then according to one source from January 1944 on, the ADA of the 83rd Infantry OHIO Division as a BG when the 83rd Div was still Stateside at Cp Breckingridge Kentucky serving as the ADA thoughout the war in the ETO.

 

In Korea he was the CG of the 7th Division, and did a excellent job. Could Buddy Ferenbaugh be another honorary CIB reciepent?

 

So I see no place when Buddy Ferenbaugh could of gotten the CIB, only two things come to mind,

1. He earned it [sic] retroactively while in II Corps, maybe he was out there at Kasserine trying to sort things out and try and get a handle on things that were going wrong, and that action or actions was noted in his record, and was put in for the new CIB when it was adopted later at the end of the year ? if so, unautherized by the regs yes, but as has been said, in the early days it was kinda loose and up to conjecture on who just would be eligable.

2. He was an Honorary Recipient, Korea, for his actions in the Newly Reborn "Bayonet Division" perhaps for his up front and hands on method in rebuilding and leading the Hourglass Division back from it's near total destruction up North around Chosen?

[patches]

Buddy Ferenbaugh 83rd Inf Div as a Brigadier General with his boss Major General Robert Macon, date and location unknown, maybe the Rhineland region in 45.

[audacia cum prudentia]

It's St Malo, 1944, very early use of buckle boots in the ETO