Mitchell: Medal of Honor?

[SG-25B11]

Giving Mitchell the Medal of Honor does not mean he is better than SG-1. The President said after the battle:

"I don't know how we're ever going to be able to thank you."

This comment was directed to the people of the SGC. SG-1 did not receive the Medal of Honor because even it is not enough to thank SG-1 for their contributions over the years. Mitchell's actions that day were significant enough, in my opinion, to have earned him the Medal of Honor. Once again, it does not mean he is better than SG-1.

[ReganX]

Giving Mitchell the Medal of Honor does not mean he is better than SG-1. The President said after the battle:

"I don't know how we're ever going to be able to thank you."

This comment was directed to the people of the SGC.

What episode does this quote come from?

[Ace]

What episode does this quote come from?

Lost City Pt II... President Hayes was addressing Hammond with that quote. After Hammond had announced that the enemy had been defeated

Ace

[Mandysg1]

In Lost City part 2, I saw many F302 ships battling over Antarctica, many were shot down and they all seemed to be doing the same job...keeping the Goa'uld away from SG1, which was the objective of the mission. So Cam was doing what every other pilot was doing in that battle. He did nothing above and beyond what the other pilots did, so no he didn't deserve the CMOH.

[RealmOfX]

Giving Mitchell the Medal of Honor does not mean he is better than SG-1.

Yes it does.

You do not get one unless you are better than everyone else, it is one of the criteria to receive the medal. It is also one of the reasons that so few people receive it.

"so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his comrades" which Mitchel did NOT do.

[jckfan55]

Yes, no denying he was brave--but so were all the other pilots in the battle.

[ReganX]

Yes it does.

You do not get one unless you are better than everyone else, it is one of the criteria to receive the medal. It is also one of the reasons that so few people receive it.

"so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his comrades" which Mitchel did NOT do.

Perhaps there is a loophole in TV land - if necessary, the CMOH may be awarded to justify placing an inexperienced officer on a specialist team and having him command said team, despite the presence of a more suitable candidate.

[Maj_Cliffhanger]

Perhaps there is a loophole in TV land - if necessary, the CMOH may be awarded to justify placing an inexperienced officer on a specialist team and having him command said team, despite the presence of a more suitable candidate.

Okay, I'm not going to argue whether he deserved it or not - questionable at best, and we don't know that he was the only one who got the MoH - I've made my opinion known about whether he coulld get it, deserved or not. No - but I will argue that there was NOT a more suitable canidate to lead SG-1. At the time Mitchell came aboard there was NO SG-1. Poof! They'd gone their seperate ways. Jack was at the pentagon, Daniel was going to Pegasus, Teal'c was on Dakara and Sam was at Area 51. Mitchell WAS SG-1. Period. Which is why he remains the designated leader of the team, albiet even Landry agrees it's more a co-leadership now that Sam came back.

[ReganX]

No - but I will argue that there was NOT a more suitable canidate to lead SG-1. At the time Mitchell came aboard there was NO SG-1. Poof! They'd gone their seperate ways. Jack was at the pentagon, Daniel was going to Pegasus, Teal'c was on Dakara and Sam was at Area 51. Mitchell WAS SG-1. Period. Which is why he remains the designated leader of the team, albiet even Landry agrees it's more a co-leadership now that Sam came back.

I'm not talking about Sam - although I believe that Landry's failure to return her to command the second she got back shows exceptionally poor judgement on his part. I'm talking about the almost thirty other SG team leaders, the other officers already stationed on SG teams and those undergoing training for places on SG teams.

In "Lockdown", Jack states that everybody on the base wants the fourth spot on SG-1; the CMOH and the ridiculous any post Mitchell wants offer were nothing more than a poor plot device to justify placing an inexperienced officer on SG-1 ahead of the other candidates. Sam's exceptionally convenient transfer a week before Mitchell shows up was supposed to justify giving him command. Not sure what's supposed to justify leaving the rookie in command after the experienced officer returns, especially when they are facing a formidable threat.

[Maj_Cliffhanger]

I'm not talking about Sam - although I believe that Landry's failure to return her to command the second she got back shows exceptionally poor judgement on his part. I'm talking about the almost thirty other SG team leaders, the other officers already stationed on SG teams and those undergoing training for places on SG teams.

In "Lockdown", Jack states that everybody on the base wants the fourth spot on SG-1; the CMOH and the ridiculous any post Mitchell wants offer were nothing more than a poor plot device to justify placing an inexperienced officer on SG-1 ahead of the other candidates. Sam's exceptionally convenient transfer a week before Mitchell shows up was supposed to justify giving him command. Not sure what's supposed to justify leaving the rookie in command after the experienced officer returns, especially when they are facing a formidable threat.

In certain aspects here, I definitely agree with you. Personally, I think Col. Reynolds should have been given command of SG-1 - but then, he already had command of SG-3, the Marine Unit, and they may not have wanted to 'break up the team.' That's another aspect of the show that's off. You don't normally keep such elite teams together for long periods of time - getting to familiar, comfortable and close is usually seen as a danger for such a team (IIUC, someone with more military background may correct me) Regardless of that, I agree bringing in a rookie to command SG-1 doesn't make a lot of sense - but than we are assume that the designation of 'SG-1' actually has some significance after the original team has disbanded. Frankly, I don't think it did. Without the original members, SG-1 was no longer the front line team; it was just a team that needed to be put together. SHRUG! If you're going to put a rookie team together you might as well give them a rookie leader (Bad policy, but I've heard of worse)

It would have been far better to give Mitchell a heroic history as the unknown leader of an SG team whom we've simply we've never seen before, rather than pull him in as an absolute rookie from the outside - I don't care if he won the MoH or not!

But... the writers didn't do that. (Gives them a slap on the back of their hand) Is Mitchell's history and placement as the leader of SG-1 contrived? Yes, but I just put on my suspension of belief glasses and get on with it.

As for giving Sam command the minute she came back - no. I don't believe that would be right either. Not unless she outranked Mitchell or had greater time in grade, which apparently she doesn't. There are certain black and whites in the military - one, it is very unusual to place a lower ranking officer in command over a higher ranking officer, regardless of experience, and time in grade DOES make a difference. And two, you don't play favorites with command positions. Mitchell was awarded the post for whatever reason. There would have to be a reason to remove him - and the simple fact that Sam came back isn't enough.

Such is my humble opinion anyway. Take it for what it's worth.

[RealmOfX]

No - but I will argue that there was NOT a more suitable canidate to lead SG-1.

<SNORT> You're not serious are you? There were lots of MORE suitable and experienced candidates already working at the SGC, unless they were mysteriously transferred the week before as well. ANY of the Colonels or any of the Lt Colonels - ALL more experienced and qualified. Anything further on this subject can be taken to another thread because it's OT.

[ReganX]

As for giving Sam command the minute she came back - no. I don't believe that would be right either. Not unless she outranked Mitchell or had greater time in grade, which apparently she doesn't. There are certain black and whites in the military - one, it is very unusual to place a lower ranking officer in command over a higher ranking officer, regardless of experience, and time in grade DOES make a difference. And two, you don't play favorites with command positions. Mitchell was awarded the post for whatever reason. There would have to be a reason to remove him - and the simple fact that Sam came back isn't enough.

Given the situation, when there is a known threat in the galaxy, it is irresponsible of Landry not to ensure that all teams, especially the the team most likely to get into trouble, are lead by the most experienced officers available.

Mitchell commanding SG-1 when, to the best of their knowledge, there was no major threat out there and the team were likely to be engaged in simple exploration missions could maybe be just about justified, but once they knew of the Ori threat, they should have put Sam, who has far more experience of stargate travel and offworld combat, in command. It need not be a bad reflection on Mitchell. I see it as a similar situation to the end of the first season of Atlantis, when Weir was relieved of command in favour of Colonel Everett. It did not mean that Weir had done a bad job up to that point - in fact, she was commended on a job well done - just that with the threat of the Wraith, an experienced military leader was needed.

[Ace]

I give up... It seems I am the only person in all of the Stargate fandom that believes he was worthy of the MOH. I have explained myself time and time again only to have people pop into this thread and state the EXACT SAME THING that the person before them did to which I feel I discredited!

I can accept that some people just won't see my side of things... that is completely understandable. What I can't accept is that people will try and argue the exact same material which has either been debunked or we have moved on from.

As I have said, since I seem to be the only one who feels as I do, I can't continue to defend my position against the seemngly thousands of people who come into this thread and don't read any of the previous posts.

So I say goodbye... I'm always happy to return if somebody wishes to argue something about the MOH that hasn't already been discussed 1 page back.

It has been a pleasure arguing various points with some of you... See you in another thread

Ace