Should the services go back to a standardized battle uniform?

MSgt Ryan Tanner — Wed, 18 Sep 2013 18:53:36 -0400

Should each service have their own battle uniform or standardize back to a single, or even several uniforms.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 30 at 2013 3:06 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 15:06:12 -0400

We absolutely should. We all fight on the same planet. Multiple variants based on clime are to be expected, but beyond that, too many variants are a waste of resources and funding.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2013 4:30 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:30:13 -0400

I also think that we should go to a unified uniform. The Air Force ABUs were definately designed more for fashion than functionality. I remember coming back from AFG and feeling like a clown in my ABUs after wearing OCPs for 7.5 months. Every pocket on them were properly placed and the colors were subdued; unlike the loud colors of the ABUs. Uniforms need to be about functionality rather than fashion statement or looking unique. It will also save money to boot.

Response by MAJ Samuel Weber made Oct 29 at 2013 10:12 PM

MAJ Samuel Weber — Tue, 29 Oct 2013 22:12:16 -0400

I have to agree. We all had the same uniform for so long. The BDU was a success, we all had our own stylized ranks and uniform badges as well as unit patches. I was laughing the other day when I read an article about the top brass in the USMC fighting over individuality and keeping their current uniform. Really? We are all in the military. Having our Service Uniforms is distinction enough. I think we should all go to the marines two uniforms. The Greens Battle dress of CONUS and tan battle dress for deployments. The major hurdle the military has to overcome is that the Marines didn't do through proper development channels in DoD and now have a trademarked uniform that the other services can't use....Thanks Battle.

Response by CMC Robert Young made Oct 31 at 2013 7:51 PM

CMC Robert Young — Thu, 31 Oct 2013 19:51:54 -0400

One force. One fight. Why not one uniform? Think of the money that could be saved and spent on other things we need more than service specific uniforms.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 1 at 2013 1:43 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Nov 2013 13:43:30 -0400

Definitely. There is no reason we should have different battle dress uniforms based on service rather than environment.
Allow the Air Force to put their huge rank on the sleeve, the DON to sow name tapes on butt pockets, and let the Marines keep their jar head hat. Millions saved, joint environment strengthened, and less heckling from foreign militaries.
Additionally, if you want to be different from your brethren in the DOD, wear the dress uniform.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2013 12:24 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Nov 2013 00:24:47 -0400

There has been recent discussion on AFN about designing and developing a new patter for all services to wear. I personally feel that a unified uniform is a fine idea, however, designing a new pattern seems wasteful.

Since the implementaiton of OCP patter, and all related gear, why not stay with that pattern. All other branches, except the Marines, wear the OCP while deployed. Undoubtedly there are stockpiles of OCP at vairous CIF locations across the country, and all things considered, the OCP uniform is a good looking pattern.

By implementing use of OCP as the standard battle dress uniform across all branches of service, not only would we as a military gain an unified appearance, but tax dollars could be saved by not designing and fielding an all new pattern with all new gear.

The OCP pattern is readily avialable, has a proven track record, and requires little in way of fielding as it is already in play.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2013 3:22 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Nov 2013 03:22:17 -0500

Yes we should. I think it is fine for the military as a whole to come up with a new and or improved version of the uniform, but as a whole should have the same one. We are all part of the United States military, regardless of branch.

Response by SFC Cornelius Walsh made Nov 3 at 2013 8:49 AM

SFC Cornelius Walsh — Sun, 03 Nov 2013 08:49:31 -0500

We absolutely should. I think that there were enough differences in the rank/badges/patches on the BDU and now OCP, that we could still delineate branches while wearing a common uniform, and add small nods to our service heritage - i.e. different headgear, while still accomplishing the more important goal of making uniforms well-made, more affordable, and EFFECTIVE.

Response by CW3(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2013 11:36 AM

CW3(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Nov 2013 11:36:36 -0500

We probably should to save money over time. Its the different uniforms that make each service unique in itself. But then way not standardize more things to consolidate and save even more money.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2013 8:48 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Nov 2013 20:48:49 -0500

Yes, I think we should all go to a standardized uniform. Perhaps a different insignia on each, obviously different patches but the cost savings far outweighs the "history". It's a uniform, be proud, but we have a fiscal responsibility and lets get a uniform that actually works. The Army's fiasco was awful.

Response by SFC Aaron G. made Nov 4 at 2013 8:29 PM

SFC Aaron G. — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 20:29:18 -0500

When the BDUs were around, they worked great for what we had. The look of the new OCPs and the Marine digital uniforms seem to be the best out of the options we have now. There was an article put out in June about a universal uniform for all branches. I never really understood why we as a whole had to go to branch specific uniforms to begin with. Looking at where we were overseas and interacting with other services from the various different countries, we as a whole were less distinguishable than others. Depending on your mission or what branch you served in, you could be wearing your Marine uniform, the Army's ACUs, OCPs, or the Air Force's ABUs. One uniform only make sense not only fiscally but as a way to unify the US military services as a whole.

For those that want to read the article I've posted added the link here:

Congressional panel votes to create universal camo pattern

The House Armed Services Committee passes a measure to require all U.S. armed services to wear one camouflage pattern. The amendment ends service-specific camouflage and pushed the military to create ...

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 4 at 2013 9:56 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:56:18 -0500

Standardize! There are so many avenues for the DoD to save money, and this is definitely one of them. The other one would be letting go of the majority of civilians and putting GI's back on the job.

Response by SSG Zachery Mitchell made Nov 5 at 2013 7:14 PM

SSG Zachery Mitchell — Tue, 05 Nov 2013 19:14:10 -0500

I think that they should. I think their should be a standard across all DOD like there was with the BDUs. The forces would save so much money in uniform and equipment costs. This would still allow for each individual service to tailor their uniform policy to their specific needs.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 14 at 2013 4:00 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:00:11 -0500

I think we should all be wearing the same uniform. Each service has its own rivlary with the other services but in the end I would rather not get it into my mind that a soldier helped me versus another Airman. I would rather be able to look at the uniform and in my mind flash...a US member just helped me.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Nov 14 at 2013 4:04 PM

CPT Aaron Kletzing — Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:04:51 -0500

I am not clear on what the cost savings would be -- I would like to know this in order to think about how strong of an argument that is. But as I look at the DoD's changing mission set, it makes sense to me that we should have a much smaller number of uniforms. Whether that should be 1 single uniform is beyond my level of understanding, since I don't know all the branches' mission sets well enough. But spending money on tons of uniform variations is a hard thing to swallow when we are cutting back on major DoD programs that directly impact families and other programs.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 14 at 2013 4:24 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:24:45 -0500

I think that having separate uniform styles is better. It provides a source of Pride for Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, and Airmen while in their uniform.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 19 at 2013 10:39 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Nov 2013 22:39:31 -0500

Absolutely! When I look in my closet, garage and multitude of bags, its a g-darned debacle. I got so many different types of uniforms, I could fit a block of neighbors on Halloween, and for what? The BDU was perfect. The MARPAT is OK. The Multicams (or OCP) are pretty damned good. The ACU, ABU, Navy blueberries, USCG blues, flightsuit, desert flightsuit ... holy cow, when does it end?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 19 at 2013 11:24 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Nov 2013 23:24:01 -0500

Yes...Velcro sucks!!!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2013 9:08 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Nov 2013 21:08:51 -0500

I think that we shoud utilize the same combat/camoflauge uniforms. Frankly, MARPAT seems to be the best woodland/desert combo. However, if the Marines are going to be so particular about the rest of the DoD adopting it, lets go with the Navy's new uniforms (the woodland and desert, not the blue). They are very similar and the uniform seems to have pretty decent functionallity. Multicams could also be retained as a third option if needed for certain environments.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2013 9:32 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Nov 2013 21:32:42 -0500

Yes

Response by PO1 B. Kieth Cooper made Dec 2 at 2013 1:31 PM

PO1 B. Kieth Cooper — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 13:31:28 -0500

Unfortuantely the different branches and sub branches have different missions and needs. One uniform would not be approiate. But it seems that D.C. has gotten out of control for battle uniforms. I would not want to see any of the branches loose their destinctive dress uniforms. What is the practicality of 4 to 6 different uniforms in a seabag or footlocker in reality.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 5:39 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:39:21 -0500

Lets go for it !! we all serve for the same Commander in Chief so mind as well wear same uniform.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 5:39 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:39:38 -0500

If for traditions sake only, no.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 13 at 2013 6:27 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:27:18 -0500

I say no! I don't want some airman thinking he's as cool as me just because he dresses like me. ;-)

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Dec 13 at 2013 6:35 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:35:11 -0500

https://www.rallypoint.com/questions/20011-congress-wants-common-camouflage-uniform

Congress wants common camouflage uniform

If you had a choice, which uniform pattern/style would you want to wear?This year, the Joint Staff’s top enlisted adviser, Marine Sgt. Maj. Bryan Battaglia, said the mix of uniforms makes the U.S. mil...

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 6:49 PM

Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:49:13 -0500

I would suggest that we pick a pattern that the guys that wear beards for their job 95% of the time choose. They have obviously got enough street cred and what ever that pattern is, has been battle tested. Then you just have a "fire proof" i.e. NOMEX treated version for the folks that need it and a non treated for those that don't. Then you let the individual services cut up the pattern any way they seem fit. Everyone (service) can have their own look but you save in the supply line on raw materials and when you are working together, from a minimal distance, you look the same. This keeps folks like AF JTACs from standing out from the ARMY or MARINE folks they are supporting. Lets work smarter not harder.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2013 7:06 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 19:06:45 -0500

This kills me. We have already had this. I had BDU's back in the day and so did the whole military, to also include the Civil Air Patrol. I know there were some periods of time when uniforms were different for a particular branch but for the most part it has been the same service wide.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2013 7:25 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Dec 2013 19:25:26 -0500

From an economic perspective, it makes sense. One country, one uniform. Keep the patches, tabs, badges, etc. as is. Seems to me that having only one supplier, larger volume, lesser cost overall.

Response by PO1 Thomas B. made Dec 14 at 2013 11:55 PM

PO1 Thomas B. — Sat, 14 Dec 2013 23:55:03 -0500

I still don't understand why the Navy needs Cammies, other than the "Cool" factor. If the individual goes IA then they will obviously need whatever equipment is required for the assignment. But what do you need to hide from onboard ship? Your Division Officer? Your Chief? Killer Whales? Am I missing something? Dungarees worked fine for me...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 16 at 2013 7:07 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 07:07:03 -0500

I'd like to see a uniform where it doesn't look like a game of Galaga or Tetris is being played on it. I agree though, having all the services in one utility uniform would be cost saving and present a cohesive, unified look for our military.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 23 at 2013 10:23 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:23:54 -0500

Here's the funny art. When we were in BDUs we HAD a common service uniform. Then the craze was service specific uniforms. Now they're calling for a common service uniform again. We might as well have just kept the BDU/DCU combination.

I am in favor of a common uniform. We are in different branches, we are all serve the USA. We should wear a common uniform that shows unity between all branches and represent the United States Military. We will still have specific markings to show which branch/units we belong to.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Dec 23 at 2013 12:10 PM

1SG Michael Blount — Mon, 23 Dec 2013 12:10:58 -0500

A common field uniform (or pair of uniforms - one for summer, one for winter) would be fine, but makes too much sense. The services will spend more time squabbling about the design that we'll all be retired by then

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Jan 8 at 2014 6:40 PM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 18:40:37 -0500

The Marines aren't going to give up their distinctive look, give it up. But we can still go with two base lines. One for the Army/Air Force and another for the Navy/Marines.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 8 at 2014 8:23 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 20:23:58 -0500

As long as we abandon the horrible wretched experiment that was UCP (ACUPAT). I've purposefully avoided buying anything with UCP on it for the past several years in anticipation of getting rid of them. Crye's Multi-cam pattern is a truly good design, that actually does *gasp* camouflage, and I can't wait to switch over for good.

I also like CADPAT (Canadian Disruptive Pattern) but it really doesn't work well in most of the environments we currently operate in. Plus ripping a design off the Canadian's... A Bald Eagle might shed a tear.

Response by Lt Col Luis A. Rojas made Jan 8 at 2014 9:22 PM

Lt Col Luis A. Rojas — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 21:22:07 -0500

I'm all for it if it means saving money as oppose to cutting our military benefits, involuntary personnel cuts, etc.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 9 at 2014 3:31 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 03:31:23 -0500

Sounds like a good idea.
though i would advise one uniform for every-day use in garrison operations
and have deployment uniforms issued (and available on-demand in MCSS) to soldiers in advance of combat operations in order to better suit the environment of that operation (both in pattern and weather).

the current ACU's WITH (mind you) the GEN III EWICS (spelled that right?) system certainly has promise for keeping a year-round, world-wide standard possible. (provided command teams let soldiers wear their warm gear outside of formations and such)

Response by SFC James Baber made Jan 11 at 2014 10:57 PM

SFC James Baber — Sat, 11 Jan 2014 22:57:58 -0500

I think this is a good thread for those we are trying to get to join can see the substance of some things we discuss between us as current and former military, soft spoken as well as informational and mentoring types of postings.

We also have fun at times while remaining professional.

Response by SFC James Baber made Jan 15 at 2014 9:46 AM

SFC James Baber — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:46:33 -0500

I will believe when I see it, with the independent nature of all the services that has cropped up in the last 5 years, I have a hard time believing the full acceptance of all branches primarily the Marine Corps, as they have been dead set on not utilizing anyone else's design or letting anyone use theirs.

I would hope it could go back to how it was in the 80s/90s when most not all had the same universal uniform.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 15 at 2014 2:14 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 14:14:09 -0500

It would be smart, but I'll be surprised if it happens.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 16 at 2014 8:37 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 08:37:23 -0500

Simple answer is yes, but the question may be simple at the surface, but is very complicated.

Fiscally, it makes complete sense - the DoD can then have one supplier for all services - Army, Navy (and USMC as part of the Navy), USAF, and even the US Coast Guard (even though they are not part of DoD) - that can supply all of the standard uniform and uniform items. Then a single defense supply service center (like in Philadelphia) can equally support all services and save on warehousing, shipping, acquisition, etc.

Second - I believe Congress told the DoD to find a single, standardized battle uniform (duty uniform). I am not sure why we are fighting it -- if we can save money in this matter, maybe we can NOT cut monies in other areas.

Third, why not try to find areas where we can create efficiency and try to show that we really do want to save vital resources (money) and are not being wasteful? I do not understand why their must be such a big about a standard battle uniform. Their will be variants - obviously what works in SW Asia and the Pacific may not work in the Middle East or Africa, but if we can start with a single/standardized battle uniform maybe, just maybe we can build some cohesion among the services instead of creating divide.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 16 at 2014 11:40 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 23:40:18 -0500

My feelings are, and mind you I do not have personal interest
other than my input is nothing more than a tax payer now. The uniformed service
has put a lot of money, time, and hours into uniform changes in the last six years
and I think its high time to leave the uniforms alone.

Hill leadership is already looking at ways to reduce cost by
removing programs and reducing benefits that have been in place for a few
generations. To fund another round
of uniform reviews and re-tooling to write new regulations establish more
contracts for new textile and testing to me is a little over the top. Having
everyone wear the same uniform (Yep cross service standardize) across the board holding on the service
traditions by keeping the service dress uniform makes since and reduce the
number of uniform items required and developed a all service uniform that offers easier maintenance to
maintain a professional appearance.

Let’s focus our leadership on other important issues than re-inventing
the wheel on uniforms.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2014 2:45 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 02:45:58 -0500

Please do! I think what our troops are wearing right now in Afghanistan is good to go! Multi-cams for the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Marines wear MARPAT (Marine Pattern). I may even consider the multi-cams for the Corps but like most Marines, we like to ensure we look different and stand apart so that would be up in the air.

1. Save money.

2. Get rid of the foolish bluish camouflages, no offense but it's not effective.

3. More uniformity.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2014 10:38 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 22:38:34 -0500

I think it`s good for service by service moral; personally I don't want to get mistaken for a Marine, Airmen or Sailor, but if it means a better quality and overall more effective camo pattern then lets do it; most anything is more effective than ACUs unless your in a gravel pit of ugly sofa. There`s always going to be ways to distinguish ourselves as service members for example the Marines have their ega and 8pt cover. Another option is that the branches get together and pick 4 patterns, and only 4 patterns to use in various environments,for example, transitional, desert, woodland, and mountain transitional. Then each branch could wear a distinct pattern in a garrison environment, while deployed they can wear the pattern that best suits the region. It is simple meets the congressional requirements, and maintains individuality and operational effectiveness.

Response by Maj Walter Kilar made Jan 20 at 2014 10:47 PM

Maj Walter Kilar — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 22:47:29 -0500

I have an original idea. Let each of the services spend another billion dollars on designing different uniforms, and repeat this process every few years. It is not as if we are in a recession or anything.

Honestly, there should only be two types of fatigue uniforms--one for the regular combat troops and one for special operators/ special forces.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2014 4:23 AM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 04:23:17 -0500

I don't think that there should be a standardized uniform. The reason that I do not is because of two things, Mission and Distinguishment. Mission- the different services have a different primary mission. Some require different types of concealment and a different look than others. Distinguishment- I like all branches, but I am very proud to be an Airman. If I am seen in my battle uniform, I want to be distinguished as an Airman.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2014 2:10 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Jan 2014 14:10:49 -0500

MSgt, at bare minimum I think we should have a shared uniform while deployed. We should at least come off as a unified force when in the presence of foreigners.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 3 at 2014 10:20 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Feb 2014 10:20:53 -0500

If the Branches need to feel distinguishable, this is already accomplished through service/dress uniforms. Field/battle uniforms should be standardized. The MARPAT is a good example if two variations are required, but I also think the OCP/Multicam can be be equally effective in more (if not all) environments.

One of the greatest cost in fielding uniforms is not actually the uniform, it is the associated gear. One proposal I've seen suggests a single base color (i.e. coyote tan, which is found in multicam) for gear with a jungle and dessert variation camoflauge. This would be more cost-effective.

The biggest hurdle is likely to be the Marines not wanting to either a) give up MARPAT or b) share MARPAT. I understand their pride, but if being distinguishable by sight is that important, seperate headgear, patches, or even boots could accomplish the same goal without costing taxpayers as much money (or you could wear service/dress uniforms when not in the field).

At the end of the day our Soldiers need effective camofluage, quality gear, and professional clothing, with as little cost to taxpayers and Soldiers as possible.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 7 at 2014 12:04 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Feb 2014 00:04:45 -0500

I believe that a standard uniform should be issued across all branches. Now the question is should it possess the same camouflage or should it be different as identification of each branch as a portrayal of each branch's history? Either way, in the past 5 years, the Air Force alone has introduced and swapped out many versions of the ABU. From the standard ABU issue, to the lightweight tactical ABU with Velcro, to Ripcord lightweight and so on. One design should be manufactured to tackle all terrains in any part of the world.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 12:14 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 12:14:13 -0500

I think it makes sense, at least for operational uniforms, like camouflage. But Dress and Service uniforms should be different. The Service Branch have spent millions working on different BDUs and then keep changing them, would be cheaper to focus some of those funds.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 12:19 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 12:19:39 -0500

No offense to Navy but if there is anything needing revised is enlisted rank. Hell, Officer rank to. Pretty sure all other branches have rank that is easily recognizable to know who you are addressing. The dang eagle, chevron drives me up the wall.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 12:24 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 12:24:27 -0500

I agree that operationally it shouldnt matter in individualizing branches by uniforms. During deployment Airforce and Army wore OCP with no issues. It gets frustrating seeing different standards for each branch. If the DoD wants to go more joint ops than standardizing of things like uniforms and protocol need to follow. Otherwise you are met with 1st ignorance and frustration having to relearn standards in which you may or may not have to enforce when crossing interactions to other branches.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Feb 19 at 2015 12:30 PM

Cpl Jeff N. — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 12:30:03 -0500

I would prefer the Marine Corps keep their own unique digital utilities. There is no money to be saved here. Step two will be dress uniforms. Let's draw the line early with the politicians.

Response by SP5 Michael Cates made May 12 at 2015 6:21 PM

SP5 Michael Cates — Tue, 12 May 2015 18:21:05 -0400

One Battle Uniform!