So when did military tradition become a one size fits all from private to general? On the field of combat everyone wears the same uniform, but off field, we have our traditions and they need to be followed, not denigrated because somebody may have a complex, get their panties in a bunch and feel "lesser".
If all the mom and dads are paying the taxes to provide the uniforms should the officer get better uniforms than the enlisted? For a bigger part of our history officers paid for their entire issue. In order to really be equipped today enlisted and officers still buy the bulk of their issue.
The US tradition is pretty egalitarian and officers and enlisted are for the most part similarly outfitted. The term "shoddy" was coined in the Civil War and officer and enlisted suffered uniforms that fit the term.
I fully agree that the uniforms have to show rank so that it is readily recognizable the seniors position but do enlisted get a uniform that the wind will blow through while the officers get one that will keep them warm?
A cross strap has a purpose to support a weapon that attaches to your belt. If you have a weapon on your belt regardless of rank it can serve a purpose. (My uniform cross strap also lets me know if I need more time on the tread mill. If I go to sit down and the break away clip goes "ping" it means there is too much fat accruing. Disturbs me that no one knows how to wear one correctly, instead of connecting to the belt immediately fore and aft of the supported weapon one end will be at the belt buckle and the other will be center back somewhere allowing the weapon to droop down cowboy style.
Where the cross strap becomes the tradition of the officers rank is because generally enlisted are armed with longarms and officers sidearms. Officers needed the cross strap the ranks didn't. With the elimination of swords and sidearms as regular dress it just became tradition.
But should someone be denied equipment that would serve them because its the tradition of officers to have that item?
Whats the better symbol of authority two bars worn by a captain or a cross strap? (As an aside I think both are pretty lame and Id defer to his ability but the adornment is the lawful designation of office that must be followed and that is 100 percent the way it must be).
I agree with you to a great extent Chorizo. I brought it up because I like to be a contrarian and there is a need to at least consider the equity between officer and enlisted when it comes to serviceable uniforms. Left to a martinet the enlisted would be uniformed in some potato sacks while the officers get to look like wedding cakes. Thankfully that is not the Marine tradition.
I can even accept someone like Patton in his haberdashery if it inspires the troops. Not opening a discussion on Patton because for all the good about him there can easily be found enough bad about him and ego probably magnified the good and the bad.
I like that Army uniform. It looks like it would be a serviceable working uniform. The white shirt of the blue uniform made it unsuitable for making it through a day without becoming a mess. The pinks/greens look like you could actually function in it and still look squared away.
Now if they could only get Mr Bolognese or Mr Yee to taylor them so they don't look like sacks of shit........
General consensus is the Army will need to also upgrade their PT program or the first image to come to mind will be General Leslie Graves.
