On Oct 4, 6:30 pm, MightyJo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
>
> Well, in my son's case, he's in a tank company in an Infantry
> battalion. He says they run a lot. I hear that "regular" armor units
> don't run as much.
Interesting; makes sense.
> I guess driving something that weighs 60 tons and getting to shoot
> those big guns has a strong appeal to young guys.
Yeah, like I said, it appealed to me, too -- only I was thinking it
was a death trap, "metal coffin for four brothers"....
> It has actually. They're just working out the details now.
They should reinstate the "belt"...belts give tunics/suits a more
military look....
> I think it was because the Commander in Chief at the time wanted to be
> reminded of Monica.
Was she wearing black berets??
I'm wondering if ****nseki was getting back at some RI he once
had...he's got a Ranger tab, right? Probably got it back during
Vietnam when the Army required all officers to get 'em...now that's an
interesting policy...I wonder why they didn't just limit that to
infantry officers only...****nseki must have some secret reason for
switching everyone to black berets...can't imagine a former Ranger
wanting to cheapen his own black beret....
> I'm with you - black berets are for Rangers, Red for Airborne, and
> Green for Special Forces. They're the only ones who should be wearing
> berets.
Well, not "red" exactly -- "maroon," like a burgundy red kind of
color.
I really wish some general would change it back. I wonder if that's
possible? I'm still shocked ****nseki was able to do what he did. Did
no one with power over him give a damn?? I know a lot of Rangers were
pissed.
Frankly, though, I think berets look rather silly -- too European
looking, French sidewalk cafe intellectuals and all. But if the Army
must have them, the old scheme was good.
|
