Combat Engineers probably kept the war in Europe from dragging on for another 6 months when they denied those tanks a place to cross the river during the Bulge, just to mention one incident where they became Combat Infantry!PS- I always thought that all American ground forces were riflemen first and (whatever else) after that!
Jim
The book: The Damned Engineers is about the engagement you mentioned. It's a good read. Author is Janice Giles.
AJ:
Thanks for the recommendation. Our members are always clamoring for another GREAT book!
The book: The Damned Engineers is about the engagement you mentioned. It's a good read. Author is Janice Giles.
Thanks AJ. I have a History Channel DVD about it too..."Unsung Heroes of WWII."
Dogdaddy 
Here is a copy of Captain John Fallon's letter to me regarding the CIB. I am also attaching my reply to him which I also sent to David Wagner of the 39th.
Some years back I got the CIB without much trouble mostly because I had sent for a copy of the Company Morning Report for the day I was wounded the first time. It said very clearly "wounded while fighting as Infantry". I sent along a copy of the Purple Heart Order and I promptly got the CIB and my congressman offered to make an award at a ceremony which I quickly refused.
Since then for a long time I have been trying to get the award for others in the 36th and I finally had to realize tht this is a personal and not a unit award. I tried to get around that by writing to several congressmen to try to get an ordinance passed that would state that the 36th Engineers were an Infantry Regiment during certain periods but mainly I laid on the 45 days at a stretch at Anzio.. This went no place.
I am going to give this one last chance. Marion tipped me to a researcher who found a copy of an Army Bulletin of 1944 that had been used to get the awrd for soldiers in the 540th. It appears to me that one of our Regimental Commanders could have used this Bulletin to get the CIB for our fellows but it never happened. There is one paragraph, the last one which gives us some hope where it states that if the applican believes himself entitled to the CIB etc. This can also be attached to the last paragraph in the Army Regulation governing the CIB which states that the CIB can be awarded to remedy an injustice.
All this can get pretty wordy to send to all of our people so I decided that in the newsletter which will go out in just about a month I will tell the fellows that If they want to follow up on this that they should write to me, even a postcard, and I will send the best instructions I can think of. It's surely a long shot but I certainly think it is worth the effort.
Have you any comments on this approach?
36 Engineers are rugged......John Fallon II. Capt. USA Ret.
My reply which I sent CC to David:
John and Dave:
I am putting you in touch with my buddy whose name appears in the CC of this email to you. So gentlemen I am introducing you to each other. John Fallon this is Dave Wagner of the 39th. John's letter is below and he is a member of the 36th.
I have a copy of the circular which I am enclosing.
John, I can also write something from my father's perspective, so let me know.
With hugs to you both.
Essayons,
Marion
Attached document is War Department Circular 186 - May 11, 1944
Most soldiers are expected to have to fight occasionally. For the Infantry it was expected as a usual thing in day to day
life when in combat.. Also the Infantrymens life was not like any other branch of service life day to day living. Read
the complete A.R. Regs as to why ithe C.I.B. was initially brought about and read it carefully about WW 2.
http://www.americal.org/awards/cib.htm One question: I wonder just how many paratroopers
recieved a air medal although the pilots did when in combat conditions dropping them ??? Please recall that I was in Combat Engineer Basic training prior to all our training groups being transferred to Infantry training for 6 weeks . My combat engineer MOS sure was not Infantry MOS (which is a C.I.B. requirement), but my Infantry MOS sure was, and served
as a Infantry rifleman in the 3rd Inf Div only, during my time in the ETO. Each soldier had a special job (MOS) at his time
and this was our main and only job. Kill, take ground and hold ground. How about it Roque? Agree or not?
Most soldiers are expected to have to fight occasionally. For the Infantry it was expected as a usual thing in day to daylife when in combat.. Also the Infantrymens life was not like any other branch of service life day to day living. Read
the complete A.R. Regs as to why ithe C.I.B. was initially brought about and read it carefully about WW 2.
http://www.americal.org/awards/cib.htm One question: I wonder just how many paratroopers recieved a air medal although the pilots did when in combat conditions dropping them ??? Please recall that I was in Combat Engineer Basic training prior to all our training groups being transferred to Infantry training for 6 weeks . My combat engineer MOS sure was not Infantry MOS (which is a C.I.B. requirement), but my Infantry MOS sure was, and served
as a Infantry rifleman in the 3rd Inf Div only, during my time in the ETO. Each soldier had a special job (MOS) at his time
and this was our main and only job. Kill, take ground and hold ground. How about it Roque? Agree or not?
Hi Joe !!! it's 9pm May 7. Just got back from /Branson,Mo. Reunion of the ""ANZIO BEACHHEAD VETERANS ASSOC."" Met some guys from the 3rd,45th,34th, and 1st Armored.
Sure was a good get together. You are right and I guess when the orders were written up, the BRASS only thought of the combat infantry, because they were on the front line night and day til relieved. If they were alive. But I also say that the combat engineer that went across the river ahead of the infantry or swept for mines SHOULD HAVE SPECIAL RECOGNITION. I will stand by that .. Something like, C.A.E. Combat Action Engineer. This will always be a subjecft of discussion. Just like at the meeting in Branson. One would say,--I did this or that and another would say, Hell that wasn't nothing compared to what I did. I just walked away from them. I think they drank to many diet cokes. I'll e-mail you later Joe. Take care and
God Bless you and yours. Roque
Here's the latest...Received this from Odis Warren this morning:
Subject: H.R. 2267
This is what I just sent to my senators and representative. Please do the same:
Please add your support to this and its companion bill. I fought in Vietnam as a Combat Engineer and would qualify for this award, as would thousands of other from other 20th Century engagements. It is unfair to exclude us.
ARMY COMBAT ACTION BADGE UPDATE 01: In 2005, the Department of the Army authorized the creation of the Combat Action Badge to recognize U.S. soldiers who engage the enemy in battle. This badge applies to men and women in our armed forces who might not qualify for awards such as the Combat Infantry or Combat Medical Badge, which are limited to those individuals serving with infantry or medical units. There is no doubt that the Combat Action Badge is a great idea; in Iraq and Afghanistan we are seeing soldiers from every military occupational specialty distinguish themselves in battle. However, the Army's current policy limits eligibility to only those individuals who meet its criteria after 18 SEP 01. While the Combat Action Badge recognizes those who have served their country bravely in the 21st century, it overlooks the thousands of veterans who made similar sacrifices in previous wars. To rectify this injustice Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL-05) introduced H.R.2267 on 10 MAY 07 to retroactively award the Army Combat Action Badge to those members of the U.S. Army who were engaged by the enemy from 7 DEC 41 to the present day. The bill was then referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. This bill currently has only 27 cosponsors and will die in committee unless veterans take action to move it to the house floor. Those who would like to see the award of this badge to those who meet its criteria prior to 18 SEP 01 are encouraged to contact their legislators and request they support this bill.
[source: The American Legion Online Update 29 May 08 ++]
http://www.legion.org/vision/currentevents...ction_badg.html
Here's the latest...Received this from Odis Warren this morning:
Subject: H.R. 2267
This is what I just sent to my senators and representative. Please do the same:
Please add your support to this and its companion bill. I fought in Vietnam as a Combat Engineer and would qualify for this award, as would thousands of other from other 20th Century engagements. It is unfair to exclude us.
ARMY COMBAT ACTION BADGE UPDATE 01: In 2005, the Department of the Army authorized the creation of the Combat Action Badge to recognize U.S. soldiers who engage the enemy in battle. This badge applies to men and women in our armed forces who might not qualify for awards such as the Combat Infantry or Combat Medical Badge, which are limited to those individuals serving with infantry or medical units. There is no doubt that the Combat Action Badge is a great idea; in Iraq and Afghanistan we are seeing soldiers from every military occupational specialty distinguish themselves in battle. However, the Army's current policy limits eligibility to only those individuals who meet its criteria after 18 SEP 01. While the Combat Action Badge recognizes those who have served their country bravely in the 21st century, it overlooks the thousands of veterans who made similar sacrifices in previous wars. To rectify this injustice Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL-05) introduced H.R.2267 on 10 MAY 07 to retroactively award the Army Combat Action Badge to those members of the U.S. Army who were engaged by the enemy from 7 DEC 41 to the present day. The bill was then referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. This bill currently has only 27 cosponsors and will die in committee unless veterans take action to move it to the house floor. Those who would like to see the award of this badge to those who meet its criteria prior to 18 SEP 01 are encouraged to contact their legislators and request they support this bill.
[source: The American Legion Online Update 29 May 08 ++]
http://www.legion.org/vision/currentevents...ction_badg.html
I POSTED MY COMMENT Roque
Not giving CE's the CIB is totally insane! The main mission of the CE's is mobility and counter mobility. Does it help to obstacles in the rear echelon areas? No! You kind of need those at the front. Where does one normally obstacles to take down? Yeah, normally find those at the front, too. And what does every boot-a** Lt learn at the The Basic School (a 6 month crash course on EVERYTHING following OCS in the Marines)? Obstacles without observation and fires covering it are useless! As I'm sure the Germans knew this, that pretty much means that the CE's were having to reduce obstacles (frequently mined or simply a mine field) while people were shooting at you or dropping artillery on you. Not an enviable place to be. If they didn’t rate the CIB, maybe there should have been a Combat Engineers' Combat Badge that was cooler looking than the CIB!
You know what the problem was, right? The Army was run by infantry guys.