Posted on Jul 23, 2015
Why So Much Confusion Surrounding Former Wartime Shoulder Sleeve Insignia?
24.6K
85
42
5
5
0
FWSSI, The AR's are pretty straight forward Only Army Patches, with two exceptions, and both of those are reserved for Soldiers who were assigned to support the USMC. So why is it so hard for a lot of people to make on the spot corrections on Former Marines who wear USMC patches on an Army Uniform?
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
I make those corrections alll the time. One, because it's the right thing to do, and two, because I'm also a former Marine who would REALLY prefer to wear my Divisional patch, so if I have to do the right thing, then dammit EVERYONE is gonna do the right thing =o)
(5)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Hey! Another comment like that jarhead comment and I'll be filing on of these reports. I don't think you want that, do you?
(5)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Lmao. @ssg William Mansfield- when you submit the form do you automatically receive water 800mg ibuprofen and a DX for a tub of butt paste?
(5)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Ha ha, one thing about all of us who serve in the U.S. Armed Forces regardless of what branch, we share a sense of humor civilians will never know.
(7)
(0)
I have more respect for those who deployed by my side than the letter of the law of an AR that limits their ability to display their experience. We need to amend the AR, not strip the pride from our brothers and sisters in arms who cross services. It's a total force we should focus on and changing things to accommodate that will certainly not hinder our readiness and strength but bolster our respect and cohesiveness.
(3)
(0)
SGT(P) Gregory Daniel Collins, Jr.
I see your point. I just find it hard to for the AR to substantiate any real consistency if there are no boundaries besides the arm patches.
Badges are worn across branches and even on foreign military's.
The parachutist badge is proprietary to the Army.
At the end of the day, these patches are symbolic action and carry pride and weight for those that want to wear them, and the should be able to display their experiences instead of being looked at as a boot that's stayed CONUS, or outside a combat zone their entire career.
Like a SGT in my unit, prior recon Marine with 4 tours, but unless you talk to him, you -must- assume that he has no experience overseas based on how the Army has limited his ability to display his service.
I just don't think the AR has any standing logic behind it.
Badges are worn across branches and even on foreign military's.
The parachutist badge is proprietary to the Army.
At the end of the day, these patches are symbolic action and carry pride and weight for those that want to wear them, and the should be able to display their experiences instead of being looked at as a boot that's stayed CONUS, or outside a combat zone their entire career.
Like a SGT in my unit, prior recon Marine with 4 tours, but unless you talk to him, you -must- assume that he has no experience overseas based on how the Army has limited his ability to display his service.
I just don't think the AR has any standing logic behind it.
(2)
(0)
CW3 Kevin Storm
The logic is based on heraldry. I see your point, but the other service have no real patch per se, so how can you wear what doesn't exist in the service you came from?
(2)
(0)
SGT(P) Gregory Daniel Collins, Jr.
Heraldry is honorable. However, so is a fair display of experience. Servicemenbers that served vaillently overseas have been short changed in their perception of experience by the dynamic of the Army uniform and the archaic, yet legalistic AR that seems to discriminate against prior service. The symbols of their units is unilaterally decided by the Army not to display. I was given patches from all branches in my joint task force deployment, as exhange or appreciation. Their "patches" exist, which is the entire cause of this banter in the first place.
(1)
(0)
CW3 Kevin Storm
SGT(P) Gregory Daniel Collins, Jr. - But if their service does not recognize the patch to begin with, why would you wear it?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next