Why do we wear an Army "Combat" Uniform when we are not in combat? i.e. Garrison?

2014-02-10T23:15:12-05:00

What's the point in calling it a combat uniform when 90% of the folks who wear it are not in combat?

Why am I wearing a "combat" uniform walking around inside a hospital in South Carolina?

Why do I need to be camouflaged or digitized at the PX on family day?

As a matter of fact, the folks who are actually in COMBAT in Afghanistan, don't even wear the Army COMBAT Uniform.

This is pissing me off the more I think about it. Why I ask....just why?

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2014 11:54 PM

2014-02-10T23:54:15-05:00

Well, prior to that, it was the Battle Dress Uniform in Garrison.

Wearing ASUs all day might be a tad bit more annoying.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 11 at 2014 12:15 AM

2014-02-11T00:15:24-05:00

I have the unpopular opinion that we should go back to the OD green uniform in garrison. My reasoning:

1.) Professional and useful in a training environment. Not as great as multcam but the cost-benefit is not to be discounted.

2.) it can be ironed and starched with the boots spit polished for daily inspections

3.) cheaper!

4.) larger rank. I've been known to promote a 1SG to CSM in low light conditions... But on the downside I would miss seeing the older SPC that I work with being saluted because the rank together with his salt and pepper hair is sometimes construed as LTC especially by other services.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 11 at 2014 7:34 PM

2014-02-11T19:34:31-05:00

I have long advocated the four uniform system. IPFU for PT; ACU for field or duty under arms; coveralls for all manual labor; and ASUs/Bs for everything else.

We came to adopt 100% combat dress because we were suddenly an Army at war. That it why we authorized the sowing on of the reverse flag insignia on the combat vehicle crewman uniform amongst other things. The Pentagon people couldn't hop out of their dress uniform and into some fatigues fast enough to show that, even though they were currently non-promotable REMFs, they supported the fight.

Now we have a generation of leaders who know nothing but that and it's scary.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Feb 11 at 2014 10:47 PM

2014-02-11T22:47:51-05:00

Because it's cheaper to have ONE type of uniform to issue and maintain than two.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 12 at 2014 1:37 AM

2014-02-12T01:37:57-05:00

How about we go back to Khaki's (C or charlies) in garrison? The WWII style uniforms were suitable for everything in the garrison setting, and still present a sharp appearance. Brown leather shoes can be shined daily, and the uniforms could be pressed/starched as needed.

Then those working in the motor pool, mechanics, combat vehicle crew, etc, could use coveralls as needed in their work areas without having to change in 2-3 different uniforms.

This would leave the ACU or its replacement for field use only, and duties "under arms" (MPs, gate guards etc) could still be carried out in the "C" uniforms, leaving the ASU/Bs as a dress/formal uniform.

It worked for years, but was changed for "better" uniforms, which have only seemed to get worse, and more expensive over the years.

Response by SFC Eddy Weezar made Mar 3 at 2024 11:53 AM

2024-03-03T11:53:54-05:00

I think it shows that you are always ready to go to combat! Fight how you train type of thing…