KIA Marine Again Denied Medal of Honor

[SlightlyCatholic]

November 20, 2008
Associated Press

LOS ANGELES - The Department of Defense has reaffirmed its decision not to award the Medal of Honor to a Marine from San Diego who witnesses say threw himself on a grenade to save his colleagues during fierce fighting in Fallujah, Iraq, in 2004.

Rep. Duncan Hunter and other politicians had appealed a decision to instead award Sgt. Rafael Peralta the Navy Cross, the second-highest medal the Navy can bestow for valor.

Peralta's nomination was tainted by reports he was hit in the head by friendly fire shortly before an insurgent lobbed the grenade, but witnesses described how the mortally wounded Marine deliberately grabbed the grenade and pulled it to his chest to protect fellow troops from the blast.

In a letter dated Tuesday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said five independent experts - three medical doctors, a general and a Medal of Honor recipient - reviewed the forensic evidence and unanimously found it did not meet standards because they could not be sure Peralta acted deliberately.

California's senators and five San Diego-area representatives wrote to President George W. Bush, asking him to reconsider the decision and recognize Peralta's sacrifice to his comrades and his country.

"Intentionally absorbing a grenade blast to protect one's comrades in arms has been traditionally recognized by awarding the Medal of Honor," they wrote.

"It doesn't seem fair or valid to me," the Marine's mother, Rose Peralta, 51, who lives near San Diego, told The Associated Press. "All the boys who were there say he was alive when he grabbed (the grenade)."

Peralta said she was surprised to get a response from Gates, when the politicians had directed their latest appeal to the president.

George Sagba, an attorney for Peralta's family, said he thinks the officials don't want to admit they made a mistake.

Sagba noted the experts did not rule out the possibility that Peralta, who had been shot in the head and upper body during a house-to-house search, could have intentionally reached for the grenade. Sagba said he is pursuing home video shot by Peralta's colleagues on the day he died.

"This video can show exactly who was there, the blast fragments, all that stuff," he said.

The family intends to appeal after President-elect Barack Obama takes office.

"People always ask me, 'How is the appeal going? Don't stop fighting. How can I help?'" Rosa Peralta said in Spanish. "Even without the medal, my son is a hero, just like all everyone who fights for this country and liberty."

Peralta was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment at Marine Corps Base Hawaii at Kaneohe Bay.

The reason this story is starting the thread is because it seems like this woman is campaigning for her son rather than honoring his memory. Maybe it's just me, but I think she should be happy that her son is going to A) be recognized for his actions and B) given the second highest award available to military people in the Department of the Navy. Is this lady wrong to be demanding the Medal of Honor for her son? I understand the reason for her persistance, but it just seems a little excessive to me. What's wrong with a Navy Cross?

[PaulR]

I was thinking the same thing Tim. I would be proud if my child were to receive the Navy Cross for something like that. I find it disappointing that attorney's are coming into the mix for a medal... If you ask me, it takes away from the Honor of BOTH decorations.

Pathetic, if you ask me. It sounds as if the parents are wanting "bragging rights" to their son's sacrifice. My perception of this case makes me feel nauseated.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Just out of curiosity, what would happen if Sgt. Peralta had survived and was doing the same thing that his mother is trying to do now? It just seems like bad form to get an award on behalf of your son and then say, "Well...I REALLY wanted him to have THAT one." I've always been taught that whenever I'm given any award or recognition, I should show gratitude and humility for having been recognized at all. I don't mean to diminish the sergeant's service to our nation, but I do think it takes away from his memory to have a battle about whether or not he should deserve more than the Navy Cross.

[reddog]

I agree with you, Paul and would bet that Sgt. Peralta didn't become a Marine just to win medals. I don't think his last thoughts were, "oh' goody, I'll get the CMH for this." His Congressional Medal of Honor belongs to everyone of us who wore the Uniform. His thoughts were about the safety of his Brothers at his side and a mission that had to be done. I am certain the Marine Review Board got it right, they do, most of the time. (Key word being 'most'.) It makes me sick too, just to watch them drag his Honorable Deeds thru the ugly media.
I often think of those who have performed incredible acts of bravery, most certainly deserving this Highest Honor, but not having them witnessed by any other than his Creator. That's what the CMH stands for, not the bragging rights of others. Rest in Peace Sergeant Peralta, you are not forgotten...
Easy Brother,
Reddog...

[txb&b]

Not that I agree with it, but had Sgt. Peralta survived I seriously doubt that he would have been awarded the MOH. In today's world, it seems to require being KIA'd to even be considered.

I do agree that his mother is dishonoring his memory by trying to make an issue of it. At the same time, if there is evidence that he acted deliberately then his chain of command should be pursuing it. On one hand, you have 3 doctors examining the forensic evidence (head injury) and saying that it didn't meet the standards and on the other hand I can think of 2 troops that continued to wage a fierce battle after sustaining head injuries that were ultimately fatal.

[SlightlyCatholic]

At the same time, if there is evidence that he acted deliberately then his chain of command should be pursuing it.

The chain of command should be pursuing it, but not a disgruntled family member. It seems a bit arrogant for the mother of a Marine to claim to know better than a former MOH recipient, a general, and three medical doctors, especially after a formal investigation has been conducted. Maybe it's just me, but I don't believe in fighting for an award. If an award is given to someone or to their family member, they should accept it with a spirit of gratitude and not indignation. I think it would be a different story if his MOH was downgraded to the Combat Action Ribbon or something, but what they're giving Sgt. Peralta is still an extremely high award. Also, what's this about bringing in legal counsel? Is she trying to intimidate the military into upgrading the award? I don't understand that...

[CAPSmith]

Also, what's this about bringing in legal counsel? Is she trying to intimidate the military into upgrading the award? I don't understand that...

Could just be an attorney that is familiar with dealing in military matters. She may have hired him to help her sort out her son's will and navigate through insurance paperwork, etc and is still on board while she's trying to get this "straightened out."

[SlightlyCatholic]

That's certainly possible. However, this:

Sagba noted the experts did not rule out the possibility that Peralta, who had been shot in the head and upper body during a house-to-house search, could have intentionally reached for the grenade. Sagba said he is pursuing home video shot by Peralta's colleagues on the day he died.

makes it seem like the family is using him to try to get the CMH for Peralta.

[CAPSmith]

That's certainly possible. However, this:
makes it seem like the family is using him to try to get the CMH for Peralta.

Working your way through the process of getting that video could be rather overwhelming. I wouldn't even know where to start. The lawyer has a better chance of navigating through the bureaucracy than she does.

It may not be that the actual motive is to "ensure that her son gets the MoH" but rather just having the knowledge of "how" her son actually died. May sound morbid, but she may just want those questions answered.

She's recieving conflicting stories about the death of her son and just wants to ensure that his name is remembered for the truth of his actions. Inadvertantly though, she appears to be dragging his name through the mud. Perhaps she'll get more information than she really wanted - that may be unfortunate.

Either way, Sgt Peralta saved the lives of his those around him and that is what he will be remembered for. If it were me, I'd leave it at that.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Either way, Sgt Peralta saved the lives of his those around him and that is what he will be remembered for. If it were me, I'd leave it at that.

Agreed. I hope this woman comes to the realization that her son is a hero regardless of the award he receives.

[wukong]

I have nothing but compassion for the mother. Her son may have made the ultimate sacrifice, but the mother also experienced an incalculable loss.

Tim, you need to look more to your written and perhaps spoken expressions when dealing with life and death. I believe most of us have little desire for a posthumous award. I would not posit that one should be "happy" with any posthumous award.

For a soldier the pursuit of an award for valor is something that most of us would consider petty. But the Marines mother is not a soldier and I would not fault her for pursuing what ever action that would benefit the memory of her son in HER eyes. It is not her responsibility to uphold the credibility of the MOH. Her individual pursuit will not diminish the actions of her son or in anyway reflect shame on this Marine amonst his peers.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Tim, you need to look more to your written and perhaps spoken expressions when dealing with life and death. I believe most of us have little desire for a posthumous award. I would not posit that one should be "happy" with any posthumous award.

That's a fair comment. I've never had a fellow servicemember perish in the line of duty, so I don't have the point of view that you or some of the other members here might. If this has caused my comments to come off as insensitive, I apologize. I was only trying to point out that it seemed to me that she was unnecessarily pushing for an award. You are correct, I don't think anybody wants a posthumous award.

[HairyEyeball]

Well put, Wu. I believe the crux of the matter is summed up by one sentence from the letter signed by the Congresscritters from his home district:

"Intentionally absorbing a grenade blast to protect one's comrades in arms has been traditionally recognized by awarding the Medal of Honor,"

Any speculation that it was not, as argued, a 'conscious decision' does not change the fact that Sgt. Peralta, in the finest tradition of the Marine Corps, did it. And those of us who have 'seen the elephant' are fully aware that this is not a 'reflex' or 'instinctive' action - this is the ultimate act of heroism, and should be recognized as such. The 'problem' is not that his mother is taking legal action, but that she 'had' to.

[wukong]

That's a fair comment. I've never had a fellow servicemember perish in the line of duty, so I don't have the point of view that you or some of the other members here might. If this has caused my comments to come off as insensitive, I apologize. I was only trying to point out that it seemed to me that she was unnecessarily pushing for an award. You are correct, I don't think anybody wants a posthumous award.

If there is a single characteristic that runs thru your correspondence it is that you have not recognized the power and force of language. You have apologized too often. Words are how we are perceived in the absence of body language. Words are powerful.

Those of us with a bit of graying in our sideburns have learned that it is more important to be not misunderstood than to be understood. Before putting your foot in your mouth you should reflect on how your words could be interpreted before clicking the "Submit Reply" button. You will find that your life will be made much easier in a military environment.

[PaulR]

But he has been awarded a NAVY CROSS?! Since when is that a small form of recognition?

[wukong]

But he has been awarded a NAVY CROSS?! Since when is that a small form of recognition?

I believe that you have missed the point. This discussion as far as the mother is concerned is not whether the Navy Cross is a small form of recognition. Peralta's mother is only concerned with her son. She probably does not know the difference between a Navy Achievement Medal and a Navy Cross or the various medals for valor or accomplishment in between. She does know that our nation awards the MOH for the ultimate level of gallantry for our service members. Perhaps Peralta the Marine acquired Peralta the mother fighting spirit. Let's see if the Navy Department has more "balls" than Peralta's mother.

[HairyEyeball]

Nobody is belittling the Navy Cross, nor is there any disagreement on the fact that the Sergeant acted 'above and beyond'. The disagreement centers on the fact that there is a long-established precedent for awarding the Medal of Honor for precisely the action he took. There is also 'precedent' in the Marine Corps for what may be termed 'a higher standard' for the award of combat decorations (see Puller, Lewis B. - but then, he survived). Not that it will influence the ultimate outcome, but many of us 'at the sharp point of the spear', both current and prior, believe Sgt. Peralta met the criteria traditionally considered for 'the big one'.

[Javelin66]

PFC McGInnis was originally awarded the Silver Star for taking a grenade blast and saving his buddies.

[SlightlyCatholic]

If there is a single characteristic that runs thru your correspondence it is that you have not recognized the power and force of language. You have apologized too often. Words are how we are perceived in the absence of body language. Words are powerful.

Those of us with a bit of graying in our sideburns have learned that it is more important to be not misunderstood than to be understood. Before putting your foot in your mouth you should reflect on how your words could be interpreted before clicking the "Submit Reply" button. You will find that your life will be made much easier in a military environment.

To put it bluntly, I wasn't putting my foot in my mouth- I was covering my ass (excuse my French). I stand by my words, and I will always do that here. What I apologized for is anybody who may be offended by what I said, which appeared necessary given your prior comment that showed displeasure toward my initial post. I have found that apologizing for any potential unintended side effects of one's post will usually fend off a swarm of criticism from those of you with "graying in your sideburns".

I've been accused of being too arrogant and not "turning the other cheek" here, and now I'm being told that I'm apologizing too much. I am making a concerted effort to improve both the quality and tone of my posts, but like every one else here, I am human and will make mistakes. I recognize the power and force of language, but I also recognize that one wrong word will get you slammed down by any number of moderators, hence my perceived need to apologize for anything that may be wrongly construed or interpreted.

I will certainly take your comment to heart, as I try to do with all constructive criticism. However, I would appreciate it if you could deliver all further comments via PM so as to not disrupt a topic and publicly call out a member here. Thank you.

[HairyEyeball]

From time to time you do show some signs, but you still don't get it. Put as simply as possible, make sure brain is engaged before setting mouth (or keyboard) in motion. Once you have decided 'what' to say, making the effort to think about how it will be interpreted by anyone not you can eliminate the 'need' to apologize in advance (you appear to have trouble apologizing after tasting your toes).

What you have repeatedly demonstrated is a lack of respect for, and comprehension of, the 'real world' and those who have seen it at its worst. It is not 'logical', it is not 'reasonable' and it teaches some hard lessons - including the fact that those who fail to respect and learn from the experience of we who've survived some of the worst it has to offer can end up dead (which tends to ruin your entire day).

You also seem to be unaware of the adage regarding the 'reason' for having two eyes, two ears, but only one mouth - and given your chosen profession, the need for true humility. Your 'observations' and 'opinions' may not be without value, but lack the perspective only experience - that very experience many here have the good grace to attempt to share - that prevents you from being taken as seriously as you take yourself.

[SlightlyCatholic]

I've already stated the sentiments I am about to post in various reiterations, but I'll say them again:

1) Just because I disagree with someone here doesn't necessarily indicate disrespect. There is a clear distinction between the two. Hairy, I realize that I have had my share of differences with you and a few other moderators/older members here but I don't think that equates to disrespect of the real world and the "real" people in it. I will disagree with you and every other member here as I see fit, being careful to sufficiently back up my arguments with relevant evidence. Respect does not require total agreement in any environment, real or otherwise.

2) I am aware of the adage which you referred to, as well as the need for true humility. I will respond to you by saying simply that attitude reflects leadership. The fact that you made it a point to demonstrate to me that you are exempt from apologizing for your conduct to anyone whom you feel doesn't deserve it makes me question your own prerogative to demand humility from me or any other member here. That's all I'll say on that.

Experience or no experience, civilian or military, we are all people here and people go on forums to debate and express their opinion. I intend to be courteous and respectful to all here but I expect that respect to be given to me as it is given to all members here, regardless of their background or experience. If anyone is offended by what I say or how I say it, please communicate that to me via PM. Public proclamations of deficiency only serve to belittle the accused and disrupt thread progress.

Thank you and God bless.

[HairyEyeball]

Thank you for taking three paragraphs to prove my point. You just don't get it, your arrogance is still exceeded by your ignorance, and no amount of lip service to 'respect' can disguise it.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Whatever keeps your naval vessel buoyant, Hairy...I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Can we get back on topic?