Pinks and Greens?

[Alpo]

"Also look at the best soldiers in the world, SOF, no two look alike."

 

Soldier Of Fortune?

[Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438]

3 minutes ago, Alpo said:

"Also look at the best soldiers in the world, SOF, no two look alike."

 

Soldier Of Fortune?

 

Uh, I think that would be Special Operations Forces, Alpo.

 

LL

[Two Irons]

4 minutes ago, Alpo said:

"Also look at the best soldiers in the world, SOF, no two look alike."

 

Soldier Of Fortune?

Sorry,  US special operation forces.  

[Utah Bob #35998]

50 minutes ago, Two Irons said:

I served as an infantry officer from 96-05 with 1 deployment to Iraq.  With the current optempo these soldiers are under, the last thing we cared about was dress uniforms.  As a company commander we would much rather devote the time available to combat training, equipment readiness, and then giving our young soldiers time with their families.  I understand ceremony is a big part of the history of the armed forces, but these young soldiers are either in iraq/afghanistan or in the field training to go there.  I had soldiers that arrived at my company 3 weeks before we deployed to iraq that just came off 1 year tours in Korea.  My buddy that relieved me in Iraq had a 3 year old son and hadn't spent 1 birthday home  with his son.  I believe that is why you see less of an emphasis on wearing dress uniforms everywhere like the old days and just focusing on war fighting and not adding extra, in MY opinion, task to an already over taxed army.  Best dressed does not kill the bad guy.   Also look at the best soldiers in the world, SOF, no two look alike.  Even regiment guys have long hair and non matching uniforms.  Haha im sure there are old CSM's that are getting chest pain thinking about that, but it doesnt matter, at least from my foxhole it didnt.  I would rather a soldier be disciplined with weapons maint than if his jump wings were on straight.

No disagreement. But we're not talking about combat though, just the appearance a professional makes when in public.

 

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

As I recall, one of the issues was that soldiers would wear their work uniforms, whether they were fatigues, ADU, BDU, or other work uniform, while on duty and then have to change clothes before driving home.  Similarly when going to work they could not be seen wearing the work uniforms in public. All that was seen as a rather chicken541t requirement.

[Utah Bob #35998]

22 minutes ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

As I recall, one of the issues was that soldiers would wear their work uniforms, whether they were fatigues, ADU, BDU, or other work uniform, while on duty and then have to change clothes before driving home.  Similarly when going to work they could not be seen wearing the work uniforms in public. All that was seen as a rather chicken541t requirement.

Changing before going home has never been a requirement. Duty uniforms have always been acceptable when in transit to or from your residence.

[Two Irons]

25 minutes ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

No disagreement. But we're not talking about combat though, just the appearance a professional makes when in public.

 

I totally agree with you Bob.  Soldiers should always have a professional appearance when in public.  I just dont think that you have to wear a dress uniform to have a professioal appearance.  I guess the issue i have with this is, it seems like a waste of time and resources.  With all the challenges facing the army today, the top enlisted soldier in the army decided to devote time and resources to yet another uniform change (dress uniform at that).   Its like when Shinseki took the black beret from the regiment and made it standard for the army.  I guess it gave him pleasure and something to put on his resume.  Did nothing for readiness, soldier welfare, or morale and cost a bunch of money.  Senior leaders, like politicians, are out of touch with what goes on with the people actually rowing the ship.