Since GTMO (the detention camps only) is now authorized for imminent danger pay and every other pay besides tax exemption, I bet an MP serving there could theoretically receive the CAB, if assaulted by the enemy (detainee).
What do you guys think.......is GTMO now a loophole or an opportunity?
8–8. Combat Action Badge a. On 2 May 2005, the Chief of Staff, Army, approved the creation of the Combat Action Badge (CAB) to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engaged, or are engaged by the enemy. b. The requirements for award of the CAB are Branch and MOS immaterial. Assignment to a Combat Arms unit or a unit organized to conduct close or offensive combat operations, or performing offensive combat operations is not required to qualify for the CAB. However, it is not intended to award all Soldiers who serve in a combat zone or imminent danger area. c. Specific eligibility requirements. (1) May be awarded to any Soldier. (2) Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized. (3) Soldier must be personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy, and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement. (4) Soldier must be assigned or attached to a unit that would qualify the Soldier for the CIB/CMB. For example, an 11B assigned to Corps staff is eligible for award of the CAB. However, an 11B assigned to an infantry battalion is not eligible for award of the CAB. d. In addition to Army Soldiers, the CAB may also be awarded to members of other U.S. Armed Forces and foreign military personnel assigned to a U.S. Army unit, provided they meet the above criteria (for example, KATUSA’s in the 2d Infantry Division). e. Award of the CAB is authorized from 18 September 2001 to a date to be determined. Award for qualifying service in any previous conflict is not authorized. f. Second and subsequent awards of the CAB are as follows: (1) Only one CAB may be awarded during a qualifying period. (2) Second and subsequent award of the CAB will be indicated by superimposing one and two stars respectively, centered at the top of the badge between the points of the oak wreath. g. Retroactive awards of the CAB are not authorized prior to 18 September 2001. For service on or after 18 September 2001, applications (with supporting documentation) for retroactive awards of the CAB will be forwarded through the first 2-star general in the chain of command to the USA HRC, ATTN: AHRC–PDO–PA, Alexandria, VA 22332–0471. h. The CAB is categorized as a Group 1 Badge. See AR 670–1 for specific wear instructions. i. Soldier may be awarded the CIB, CMB and CAB for the same qualifying period, provided the criteria for each badge are met. However, subsequent awards of the same badge within the same qualifying period are not authorized. j. The CAB may be awarded by any commander delegated authority by the Secretary of the Army during wartime or the USA HRC, ATTN: AHRC–PDO–PA. Effective 3 June 2005, Commanders delegated authority to award the CAB may further delegate award authority to commanders in the grade of major general or above. The CAB will be announced in permanent orders.
I gotta go with a big NO on this one. Are detainees really considered the enemy? Once an enemy combatant drops his weapon in surrender, their status changes and they must protected as a detainee.
Even if a detainee makes a shiv and comes at a guard, this is a lot different from being engaged by the enemy (although the individual soldier might not feel that way).
Now, as said earlier, if there was a complex attack at GTMO or the detainees were somehow able to gather in large numbers and arm themselves, then maybe. But, that would lead to much bigger issues.
Lets go back to the status of the person who is attacking. Wether someone surrenders, or is captured, I believe their status changes as was mentioned before. They are no longer enemy combatants wether they attack prison guards or not. No matter how serious, or organized the attack may be, this is very different from engaging an enemy in a combat zone. In a combat zone the enemy is more or less free to plan and organize an attack, complex or not, until he is defeated or has his capabilities destroyed or hampered. At gitmo the bad guys were not only no longer enemy combatants, and they were in a damn prison. I would think there is a fundamental difference.
Using that train of thought, had the CAB been authorized on 11 Sep 01, would the folks in the Pentagon been eligible for the award? Technically, the suicide bombers were enemy combatants.
