Everyone With a Black Beret?

[bossi]

(this is so hilarious - it reminds me of the logic behind the Canadian Tire camo garrison jacket, i.e. "elite troops have high morale, elite troops wear camo smocks, therefore we will give camo to everybody and their morale will improve" ... Hello??!!)

Army's Heads-Up: Berets All Around
_____Special Report_____

By Roberto Suro and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 18, 2000; Page A02

The Army's chief of staff announced yesterday that black berets--now worn only by an elite infantry unit, the Rangers--will become standard headgear for all soldiers next year, including cooks, clerks, drivers and chaplains' assistants.

The beret "will be a symbol of unity, a symbol of Army excellence, a symbol of our values," Gen. Erik K. Shinseki said.

With all the armed forces struggling to maintain war-fighting readiness, and with his own service in the midst of a difficult transformation to a lighter, more mobile force, some officers and enlisted personnel expressed dismay over Shinseki's fashion statement.

The sharpest reaction predictably came from Rangers, who treat their berets as a hard-won emblem of personal achievement.

"It's a slap in the face," said one Ranger officer, who asked not to be identified. "A beret is something you earn--it is not something you buy at a store."

Another officer said he would not want to be the first paymaster or mechanic to wear a black beret and go into a bar patronized by Rangers.

Shinseki made the announcement in his keynote address to the annual convention of the Association of the United States Army. The event draws thousands of active and retired soldiers, defense industry representatives and military experts to Washington every October.

Last year, from the same podium at the Wardman Park Marriott, Shinseki unveiled a dramatic plan to transform the Army's structure, equipment and tactics. That speech spawned a year of heated debate in mess halls, military journals and war college seminars, particularly because Shinseki said he thought the Army might have to abandon its beloved tank treads in favor of lighter wheels for armored vehicles.

Expecting an update yesterday on the wheels-versus-tracks controversy, the AUSA convention got berets-versus-caps instead.

A spokesman for Ranger headquarters at Fort Benning, Ga., said the elite unit would have no comment until it received a written directive.

"We'd like to keep it unique to the Rangers, but the chief of staff can do what he wants to do," said Minor L. Kelso, president of an association of Korea War-era Rangers, the first to wear the black beret.

By Army tradition, berets are worn only by elite combat units, and soldiers are awarded the new hats at induction ceremonies after they have completed rigorous training. Rangers wear black. Special Forces wear green. Paratroopers wear maroon.

Shinseki said the elite units would keep their berets, and that the Army's top enlisted man, Sgt. Major of the Army Jack L. Tilley, would develop new regulations on berets to go into effect next June 14, the Army's birthday.

Currently, regular soldiers wear stiff, round hats or flat, envelope-shaped caps with their garrison uniforms. All units wear baseball-style caps, broad-brimmed "boonie hats" or helmets with their camouflage combat uniforms.

Earlier this week, Shinseki had announced some other, more practical news for the troops. Addressing complaints that frequent overseas deployments are harming professional readiness as well as personal lifestyles, he told the convention on Monday that weekend work would be virtually eliminated for soldiers while they are in their garrisons. He also said that four-day weekends would become standard on federal holidays, and that short-notice deployments would be sharply restricted.

But the announcement about berets stole the show.

Today's Army Rangers trace their history to Maj. Robert Rogers, who created "ranger" companies of militia to use serve as pathfinders and employ guerrilla tactics during the French and Indian War of 1754-63. Even today, soldiers in the Army study Rogers's 19 standing orders, which includes admonitions such as, "Let the enemy come till he's almost close enough to touch. Then let him have it and jump out and finish him up with your hatchet."

Shinseki said he wanted the entire Army to capture the esprit de corps of the elite units by donning berets.

Wearing berets will be "another step towards achieving the capabilities of the Objective Force," Shinseki said, refering to the high-tech Army of the future he hopes to launch.

"It is time for the entire Army to accept the challenge of excellence that has so long been a hallmark of our special operations and airborne units," he said. "When we wear the black beret, it will say that we, the soldiers of the world's best army, are committed to making ourselves even better."

Some angry reactions mirrored the rhetorical weight Shinseki laid on his announcement.

"That is an absolutely ludicrous decision; headgear does not make excellence," said A.C. McGinnis, a retired Special Forces captain.

Others shrugged off the change. "I've never been happy with the black beret; I never wore one," said Bill Spies, a Vietnam-era Ranger. "The black hats are not very practical, except for show."
- 30 -

 

[Mkbb]

That is just plain sick!!!! This is an american example of how out of touch highewr echelon "leaders are from the troops they command .Absolutely ludicrous....

 

[bossi]

(in reply, here‘s a letter to the editor)

Reference : National Post, 18 Oct 2000 ("U.S. Army‘s black beret plan angers Rangers")

I‘m not sure whether Lieutenant Ken MacKillop was misquoted, misinformed, just plain stupid, or trying to be politically correct ("... All Canadian soldiers wear berets, green for normal troops and black for the armoured corps, and the headgear has never caused a fuss, said Lieutenant Ken MacKillop, a spokesman for the Department of National Defence ...").

Not all Canadian soldiers wear berets (thank goodness).

Balmorals, glengarries, Kilmarnoch bonnets and Irish cabeens are all authorised headwear and proudly worn by Highlanders, Scottish and Irish militia regiments within the Canadian Army (at least, for now - until the iconoclasts are successful in eliminating all traces of our rich Canadian heritage in the name of political correctness and revisionist history).

Furthermore, maroon berets are still worn by Canadian parachute troops (the word "Airborne" is also no longer politically correct, and sadly there is yet again a foolhardy, misguided move afoot to eliminate paratroops completely, under the guise of cost-cutting).

Military police wear red berets (reminiscent of the old Provost Corps, and hence the nickname "meatheads"), while Canadian soldiers serving on U.N. peacekeeping missions wear the light blue U.N. beret (but please, please, don‘t ever think for even a moment that "soldier" and "peacekeeper" are synonomous).

Lest anybody accuse me of ignoring the bright berets of our brave Canadian Search and Rescue (SAR) personnel, I would point out they officially belong to the Air Force vice the Army (ironic, since they often "exit from a perfectly serviceable aircraft" ... as they parachute to save those in distress).

As for "causing a fuss", this is a out and out lie - the bureaucrats have repeatedly tried to destroy military pride but the soldiers have fought back successfully, time and time again (to make a long story short - soldiers treasure certain traditions, and it is a sin to try and destroy the morale of those who have sworn to defend our country ... especially when they may be called upon to give their lives for Canada).

 

[bossi]

It has been pointed out to me that Lieutenant McKillop could be seen as "technically" correct (i.e. "normal troops ... [wear green berets] ..."), but this begs the question: "normal" (and, an error of omission, perhaps)????

Anyway, here‘s some more bumpf (this time, from the Washington Times - enjoy):

EDITORIAL • October 23, 2000

Black berets for all

Daft is the appropriate description of the Army chief of staff‘s decision to issue the hard-earned black beret of the Rangers to all soldiers — cooks and bakers, clerks and bandsmen and the GIs who count the shoelaces in the supply room. Gen. Erik Shinseki‘s diktat suggests that Potomac Fever is as virulent among the military brass as among politicians. Some generals and admirals forget what is important to the troops when they begin inhaling the exotic air at the Pentagon.
Gen. Shinseki‘s decision is a denigration of the terrific dedication and ability it takes to earn the shoulder tab of a Ranger and to be awarded the black beret. Evidently the green berets of the Special Forces and the maroon berets worn by paratroops also will be replaced by the all-hands black headgear — thus diminishing the pride that these emblems represent.
To those who‘ve never served, the beret fuss may seem parochial. A soldier‘s a soldier, right? Well, yes and no. It takes an unusual commitment to endure the often-brutal rigor of the training and earn the recognition that the warriors‘ berets confer — and this in no way demeans the rest of the troops. As America‘s governing class increasingly tries to squeeze out the competitive juices (prizes for all school children in contests so no one‘s self-esteem will be dented, ending valedictorian designations and the like), it now appears the Army thinks it must further civilianize to attract recruits — in which it now routinely falls short of requirements.
That is boneheaded. The Marine Corps, for instance, has been successful in attracting young Americans by the very fact of emphasizing how challenging its training is and how fulfilling it can be to prove oneself equal to it. Esprit de corps, that‘s known as.
The military is a different culture from that of the civilian world, and it must remain so if it is to be equal to its crucial obligations. By erasing distinctions, by dampening the pride of uncommon achievement, and by flattening the recognition of sacrifice and dedication, Gen. Shinseki‘s martial egalitarianism can be seen as more of the desperate effort to evolve from a proud and demanding subculture to a feel-good environment — the erosion that Stephanie Gutmann details in her book, "The Kinder, Gentler Military."
A news report quoted a serving officer as saying that he would not want to be the first pay clerk or mechanic to wear a black beret into a Ranger bar. That‘s the real soldierly world —about which Gen. Shinseki seems to have developed amnesia.
- 30 -

 

[bossi]

(Yikes - here‘s an letter to the editor from the Washington Times):

Military‘s new hats can‘t disguise lack of readiness

This week Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki announced in a speech to the annual convention of the Association of the United States Army that, starting next year, all Army soldiers will wear black berets, replacing the fold-up overseas caps, the saucer-like service caps, and the battle dress uniform caps currently in use.
Gen. Shinseki said he got the idea last week at a change-of-command ceremony for the U.S. Army Special Operations Command. "As I stood looking at those (soldiers), I was reminded of the special significance that the beret has come to symbolize for the United States Army," he explained. Army paratroops, Rangers, and Special Forces soldiers already wear maroon, black, and green berets, respectively, and will continue their use.
This is not a new idea, but it is certainly a discredited one. In the mid-1970s, during the malaise of the post-Vietnam reductions in force and reduced defense spending (sound familiar?), the Army briefly experimented with berets, worn with the fatigue uniform in a bewildering variety of colors depending upon the soldiers‘ branch (armor, infantry, etc.). The result was impractical caps that provided no warmth, no shade from the sun, were quickly dirtied, and, being made of felt, were not durable.
Discarding the berets, the Army experimented for a time with baseball caps that had the dubious virtue of making their wearers‘ heads resemble pineapples, before settling on the camouflaged battle dress uniform caps currently in use that provide a useful sun visor and ear protection for cold weather. The coffee-can shape resembled designs of the late 1950s and early 1960s.
As for also discarding the fold-up overseas caps and the saucer-like service caps, this would discard traditions of Army caps dating back more than 100 years; almost half the Army‘s lifespan. Few students of military history would fail to recognize a photograph of young George Patton in France during World War I, standing before a Renault tank wearing an overseas cap. And I recall how proud I was to be entitled to wear, after promotion to major, a service cap with the traditional scrambled eggs on the visor denoting field grade rank earned after many years of service.
Gen. Shinseki seems to want to disregard these previous failures of his new idea and discard traditions dating back at least half the Army‘s life. But it‘s not really simply a new cap at issue here — for the new cap he proposes is merely a fig leaf intended to cover the profound decrease in Army strength and readiness that has taken place on his — and this administration‘s —watch. Let us hope that the coming election will enable us to do something more meaningful about our nation‘s defense than selecting a new cap.
JOHN MERCER
Major, U.S. Army (Retired)
Alexandria

 

[bossi]

(from the Stars and Stripes)

Rangers may switch
color of headgear
By Chuck Vinch
Washington bureau chief

WASHINGTON — The elite Airborne Rangers may get headgear of a different color when the entire Army dons the Rangers’ traditional black beret next June, the service’s top enlisted man said Friday.

"We have talked about the Rangers adopting another color, and they may do that," Sgt. Maj. of the Army Jack Tilley said in a brief interview. "Those are things we’re going to have to work out."

Tilley said he has talked with Command Sgt. Maj. Walter Rakow, the top NCO in the 75th Ranger Regiment based at Fort Benning, Ga., about the possibility of switching the Rangers from black to an olive drab hue that would be slightly darker than the color worn by Army Special Forces troops, the "Green Berets."

In the first public comments by a senior Army official since Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki made the announcement Oct. 17 that the black beret would become standard Army headgear, Tilley defended the decision and predicted it will be a significant morale booster.

"The black beret has been used by our light and heavy forces before," he said. "It’s instilled pride in soldiers for years. This wasn’t pointed at anybody … we just selected the best color for us. It’s just what’s good for the Army.

"It’s transformation, and transformation is change," he said. "This is a positive change for us. I know it will motivate a lot of soldiers."

Shinseki’s decision has set off a firestorm in both the active-duty and veteran Ranger community as well as in the Army’s other two special operations camps, the Special Forces and the airborne units.

Shinseki said he wants to use the sense of pride that the beret has long represented to the Rangers to foster an attitude of excellence among the entire Army as it moves forward with its sweeping transformation effort to a lighter, more deployable, more agile force.

But the leadership might have miscalculated the depth of sentiment special operations troops have for their headgear, which are viewed as badges of honor earned for enduring the toughest military training and missions.

"The whole thing probably seems pretty silly to civilians, combat soldiers getting all emotional about a piece of headgear," said one Army officer in the Pentagon with Ranger experience. "But to the guys who earn the right to wear it, it’s a lot more than just a hat."

Tilley acknowledged that he’s gotten plenty of e-mails about the issue, but said they have been both pro and con. "The older troops and the veterans are probably a little more resistant" than the younger soldiers, he said.

Tilley will head a panel that will include Rakow to figure out how to implement the change, which Shinseki has set for next June 14th, the Army’s 226th birthday.

"I have contacted the regimental sergeant major, and he will be in the decision-making process of the panel," Tilley said. "We’re going to do this right for him and right for the United States Army."

The camouflage fatigue cap still will be used when troops are in the field, but Tilley said the flat garrison cap and saucerlike service cap "probably could go away," although a final decision on that has not yet been made.

Shinseki has talked of coordinating some sort of Army-wide "rite of passage" during which all soldiers would make the change together. "There are still a lot of details to work out," Tilley said.

Despite Tilley’s attempts to explain the Army’s rationale, the issue continues to burn up the Ranger e-mail network, with much of the commentary proving far too colorful to print in a family newspaper.

Most of the sentiments echo those of Jeff Pribyl, a veteran of the 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment from 1978 to 1980, who said that simply issuing new headgear will not automatically turn all soldiers into supertroops or give them the pride that the elite Rangers have always had in their black beret.

"If more soldiers tested themselves for a position in a Ranger unit, maybe they’d know how we feel," Pribyl said. "But what do I know? I bled and sweated for my beret."
- 30 -

 

[bossi]

(and more)

Army‘s Latest Headache: Headgear

Oct 20, 2000
Ed Offley
Stars and Stripes Washington Bureau Chief


Forget the readiness shortfall, prolonged deployments or aging combat equipment.

Never mind the tanks-vs.-wheeled-vehicle debate that has fixated the Army for more than a year as it wrestles with transformation.

The Army has found itself in a real kerfluffle this time. There is division in the ranks, derision from the troops toward the generals, a slamming of doors and a sealing of lips.

The beret war has erupted.

When Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki stood up before a luncheon crowd at the Association of the United States Army annual meeting on Oct. 17 to give a progress report on the ongoing transformation of the service to a more mobile force, he surprised the audience of active-duty soldiers, retirees and defense industry executives with the announcement that effective next summer, all soldiers in the Army will wear the black beret as standard headgear.

"The black beret will be symbolic of our commitment to transform this magnificent Army into a new force--a strategically responsive force for the 21st century," Shinseki said. "It will be a symbol of unity, a symbol of Army excellence, a symbol of our values."

Not really. The black beret has instead become a symbol for the loud crunching sound one hears when a new idea collides with an entrenched tradition. In this case, Army soldiers who already wear berets to mark their elite status as airborne paratroopers (maroon), Special Forces (green) or Rangers (black) have voiced anger, frustration and puzzlement from the Green Ramp at Bragg to the Ranger Battalion at Lewis.

"This will take the prestige away from them," groused former 82nd Airborne Division paratrooper Bill Griffiths, who served at Fort Bragg in 1995-96 and wore the maroon beret as a member of the 3rd Battalion, 325th Parachute Infantry Regiment. "It was an honor for them to wear that [beret] so people knew from a distance you were a Ranger or airborne or Special Forces."

One soldier compared it with the short-lived Air Force initiative to redesign dress uniforms to resemble the Navy‘s traditional garb where one‘s rank is affixed near the sleeve cuffs. That tradition lasted until 10 minutes after the chief of staff who had proposed it retired.

News reports from across the Army this week revealed a growing chorus of derision against the beret plan, particularly within the three Ranger battalions whose members wear the black beret. The hooting got so bad, in fact, that the Army issued a message ordering every soldier in the 75th Ranger Regiment to button his lips.

The Army directive, titled "Public Affairs Guidance for members of the Ranger Regiment," stated: "All members of the Regiment will refrain from making comment concerning the announcement. Please pass this guidance to the lowest level within your units in the event media representatives contact you direct."

At Fort Bragg, where most of the 45,000 soldiers already have berets, the Fayetteville Observer-Times came up with the reaction from a small cross-section of troops: "Bone-headed," one young jumper said. "I don‘t like it," echoed a combat engineer. "Absolutely terrible," another airborne soldier agreed.

Maj. Gary Kolb, a spokesman for the Army Special Operations Command--which includes the Green Berets and Rangers--said the unit will ultimately support Shinseki‘s decision, which will go into effect next June 14 after details are refined.

But Kolb told the Fayetteville newspaper that the Rangers are anxious to see how the policy details will shake out (that is, whether they will retain any aspect of the uniqueness projected by their current black beret).

To be continued.
- 30 -

 

[bossi]

(and, here‘s the edited version of the National Post letter to the editor):

Hats off

Clyde MacGregor
National Post
Re: U.S. Army‘s Black Beret Plan Angers Rangers, Oct. 18.

Not all Canadian soldiers wear berets (thank goodness). Balmorals and glengarries, for example, are authorized headwear and proudly worn by Highlanders, Scottish and Irish militia regiments (at least, for now -- until the iconoclasts are successful in eliminating all traces of our rich heritage in the name of political correctness). Maroon berets are worn by parachute troops. Canadian soldiers serving on United Nations peacekeeping missions wear the light blue UN beret. The bureaucrats have repeatedly tried to destroy military pride but the soldiers have fought back successfully, time and time again. Soldiers treasure certain traditions, and it is a sin to try to destroy the morale of those who have sworn to defend our country.

Dileas Gu Brath!

Clyde MacGregor, Toronto.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

It‘s a shame to see Mister MacGregor‘s letter was edited so badly. The editor left out reference to tam o‘shanters and caubeens entirely (more soldiers wear the TOS than balmorals in many highland regiments, and I thought the Irish wore the caubeen exclusively).

What exactly is he referring to when he discusses soldiers "(fighting) back successfully" to prevent "bureaucrats" from "destroy(ing) military pride"? All the soldiers I know follow orders and train to fight the enemy, not their own elected government. Pretty dramatic sounding.

I don‘t see that this letter has a point, but it is a good starting point for further discussion. Can anyone name one example of Canadian soldiers being successful in preventing a tradition from being destroyed? Considering we have lost the Sam Browne belt, khaki uniforms, the Lance Corporal appointment, umpteen regiments, paid pipe bands, the Coloured Field Service Cap and other coloured head dress, Patrol Dress, etc., etc., I don‘t see that "we" have "won" many (or any) victories in this field over the years. Garrison Dress was a joke and pissed off the Airborne, and the tans, the sharpest new uniform we have had in 30 years, are now gone!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

WHOOPS - didn‘t realize you were the one that did the editing, bossi, nor that the original was up there all along. Anyway, I can see the original addressed the points I just raised.

In defence of the NDHQ weenie, though - the majority of troops in the Canadian Army do wear green berets, and the armoured corps black beret is the only widespread exception (MPs are a small proportion of the troops), and I am sure the officer at NDHQ was trying to give a brief answer to the question, and was not stupid or mis-informed. If anyone asked me about berets in the CF, I would have said the same thing, and if I had a chance, would have elaborated about maroon, light blue, and maybe even talked about the khaki beret and its intro in 1943 (though the RMR did not get them until 1944), the difference between the Canadian beret (a true basque style) and the British General Service Cap (actually a bonnet), both intended to replace the Field Service Cap (also known today as a wedgie....) yadda yadda yadda....

I would still like an explanation as to what battles "we soldiers" have won in preserving our traditions? Perhaps the Oak Leaf as worn by the C Scot R and Calg Highrs....

 

[bossi]

1. The National Post did the editing, not me.

2. Battles won? The kilt. However, you‘re correct - the trend has definitely been in favour of the iconoclasts and continues to be so.


"A nation‘s traditions are its wealth."
(Stendhal [Henri Beyle]: A Life of Napoleon, xxiii, 1818)

"Every trifle, every tag or ribbon that tradition may have associated with the former glories of a regiment should be retained, so long as its retention does not interfere wth efficiency."
(Colonel Clifford Walton, History of the British Standing Army, 160-1700, 1894)

"The value of tradition to the social body is immense. The veneration for practices, or for authority, consecrated by long acceptance, has a reserve of strength which cannot be obtained by any novel device."
(Mahan, 1840-1914, The Military Rule of Obedience)

"Certainly it is our duty to keep these traditions alive and in our memory, and to pass them on untarnished to those who come after us."
(Rear Admiral Albert Gleaves, USN, 1859-1937)

"It is characteristic of good soldiers to cherish any little peculiarity of uniform or equipment which differentieates their own Regiment or Corps from others."
(Colonel Cyril Field, RMLI: Britain‘s Sea Soldiers II, 1924)

"Ships, men, and weapons change, but tradition, which can neither be bought nor sold, nor created, is a solid rock amidst shifting sands."
(Sir Bruce Fraser, 188

"Now is the time to popularise with the troops by giving to all regiments and units the little badges and distinctions they like so much ... All regimental distinctions shoud be encouraged."
(Winston Churchill: To Secretary of State for War July 1940)

"It takes the Navy three years to build a ship. It would take three hundred to rebuild a tradition."
(Sir Andrew Browne Cunningham, May 1941)

"The spirit of discipline, as distinct from its outward and visible guises, is the result of association with martial traditions and their living embodiment."
(B.H. Liddell Hart: Thoughts on War, v, 1944)

"Fortune is rightly malignant to those who break with the traditions and customs of the past."
(Winston Churchill: Note to the Foreign Secretary, 23 April 1945)

"This modern tendency to scorn and ignore tradition and to sacrifice it to administrative convenience is one that wise men will resist in all branches of life, but more especially in our military life."
(Sir Archibald Wavell: Address to the officers of the Canadian Black Watch, RHC, Montreal, 1949)


Dileas Gu Brath!

 

[JRMACDONALD]

ALL- Can we be more specific on what traditions are?Let us not confuse the keeping of traditions with hanging on to inefficient articles of dress( Does anyone ,really, want to go patrolling in a kilt? Wear a bearskin on defence? Spend three to four hours braiding wigs,or "pipe claying" their webbing?Wear scarlets in the field vice O.D.?The Navy‘s " buggery and the lash"?Lots of argument against the passing of those "traditions")
Dorosh- The Airborne was not"pissed off" at garrison dress. It caused us much mirth and merriment. We were Airborne, and everyone else WASN"T! As for tans, I believe,I‘d rather have an extra set of combats.( Don‘t we come from a Regt, where some "traditions" exist, "because they were done last year"!???)

 

[Andyboy]

The only way to hold on to a tradition is to put it in writing, in Regimental Standing Orders. A Private in the Guards is called a Guardsman no matter what the gender, this is a tradition conferred by King George V in 1918. Had it not been put into the Standing Orders you can rest assured it would have changed to something more politically correct IE Guardskateer.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Reading back over my post, I did realize I was confusing traditions as being only concerned with uniforms. (Hell, I‘m a uniform guy - check out the October issue of Military Modelling for my article on Canadian Army uniforms in the Korean War - but I digress!!!)

WO McDonald - if you want to discuss traditions in our regiment, tell me - why does the pipe band wear hose top flashes of the design worn by the Gordon Highlanders? Pipe Major H. (ask some of the regimental diehards about her, I won‘t discuss that in public) introduced them during her reign and for some reason they were authorized. The proper pattern to wear is the flash of the Argylls (minus the loops that the Gordons wear).

Whatever happened to the Clan of the Gallant Canadians awards? They came out strong with them a few years ago, but I can‘t recall the last time a serving soldier was presented with one. The chief clerk got one last spring, but I don‘t remember any riflemen getting them.

Why is the regimental plaque on City Hall in such a disgusting state of disrepair? I tried to polish it up a few years back - that metal WILL polish, if anyone bothers to do it. I spent two days getting the Tenth Battalion badge to shine, and was never able to carry on with the rest of it. The whole thing has returned to its original state of tarnish.

We do maintain some strong traditions - St. Julien, Walcheren, XMAS dinner, the Ladies Auxiliary, The Glen, etc., but I don‘t see that as a result of the soldiers "saving" them. The ones we have don‘t seem to have ever been in jeopardy. The one exception that leaps to mind is the oakleaf shoulder badge; don‘t know whose idea it was to make new shoulder titles back in the early 70s (when the new CFs without shoulder straps came out), but I‘m glad they did. But why hasn‘t anyone ever introduced one for the combat uniform? It would be simple to do - just olive drab embroidery on a slip on. No one seems to have ever been bothered. Too bad.

And one wonders about the wisdom of tradesmen being forced to wear branch badges (medical, logistics, EME) instead of unit badges - the branch badges have no history. During the Second World War, all Calgary Highlanders wore the regimental cap badge, regardless of their trade - as has been stated elsewhere, unit pride doesn‘t stop and start with the infantrymen. And at that time, the rifle companies only accounted for half the unit‘s personnel. It‘s not so bad today in a highland unit (at least tradesmen and support troops still get to wear the TOS with pride, as well as the tartan flash) but in the RHLI, Winnipeg Rifles, RMR etc., there is nothing to identify a tradesman as belonging to his regiment.

I have no real heartbreak with the tans and garrison dress going - the CF Green is distinctive, and if it means more money for combat uniforms, I am in agreement with you - lets have those instead. Khaki was a tradition for about 75 years in the Canadian Army, and the tans kind of reminded one of that tradition - but as you point out, traditions are where you find them - and CF Green has been a fact of life for 30 years now, and just as much a tradition by this stage.

I‘ll pass on the pipeclay and blanco, by the way. I thought Sergeant Russell was the only one that learned to do drill with Brown Bess, but it‘s comforting to know you‘ve been around the block, too! ;-)

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I better add here (since I‘m dumb enough to keep using my real name) that if I appear vocal or critical of the powers that be in the Regiment, far from it. I think our regiment is the best in the Army (judging from all the guys around here that sign their correspondence Dileas Gu Brath, I would say that the regimental system in Canada is operating the way it is supposed to). And I think the officers and men both do a lot to maintain a lot of traditions - just looking at all the "extra" kit they have to order, maintain, issue out, pay for, etc., one realizes the amount of work and dedication it takes. And the same faces keep coming back every September - a small number, to be sure, but you know who the dedicated ones are.

To be perfectly frank, I think that for someone to come from a proud regiment like the RCR (Never Pass A Fault, Milton Gregg VC, Paardeberg, Strome Galloway, et al) and so wholeheartedly devote himself to adopting the traditions of our "little outfit" is more than a little flattering and certainly an indication that we are doing something right. It certainly looks like the 48th are doing things right, as well. Ditto the PLF...

What I am really feeling is confusion - that in a city of 800,000 people we don‘t have more people adopting these traditions, or taking equal pride in them as we do. Kids still spend their money on cardboard cards with pictures of baseball players on them - motherfuckers who wear tight pants and get paid a million bucks a year to play a game where they can‘t even get hurt. While guys like you go around the world into places of danger, wearing the Canadian flag on your sleeve and helping people (and no chance of being a ‘free-agent‘, ready to skedaddle out of your home town the minute some rich American team offers you a half million more to defect).

With all the money they spent on that skateboard park outside the Armouries (you guys in Toronto won‘t BELIEVE that one!!!) they could have polished the plaque on City Hall for the next 10,000 years.

Onward.

 

[echo]

theres a skate park outside of the armoury???????!?!?!?!?!!?!!?
which one???!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!??!!??!
the 48th one on Queen?
this is rather intriging news.

 

[JRMACDONALD]

Yes, there is only one armoury in Canada!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Don‘t get any bright ideas, echo. And no, one or two of us on the this forum DON‘T live in the center of the Universe (aka Hogtown).

You know, one of the recruits on my basic actually rode down to parade on his skateboard while in uniform.

In those days you were allowed to give extra duties for stuff like that, so he spent a few hours polishing brass shell casings.

He didn‘t pass - but I ran into him in a barber shop a few months later and listened to him brag about how he was a security guard and got to "carry a gun" and everything. Uh huh.

Ah, the good old days - that was Frank‘s Five Dollar Flat-tops. He had actually been in the Hitler Youth during World War Two but never saw combat. Not sure if he learned to cut hair there or not - but can you imagine? Five dollars for a haircut!

Used to be I could take a dollar BILL to the Sev and buy a BOTTLE of pop, the latest Sgt. Rock comic book and a Crunchie bar - and still get some change.

What would the NDP do with the Army if they won a majority in Parliament?

 

[Brad Sallows]

>And one wonders about the wisdom of tradesmen being forced to wear branch badges (medical, logistics, EME) instead of unit badges - the branch badges have no history.

So if, say, the Calgary Highlanders and LER are amalgamated into the Alberta Highland Rifles, the new badge will have no history? Or are CSS corps exempted from perpetuating the traditions and achievements of their forebears?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Where would the "Rifles" come from? And of course the new badge would have no history, but then again, I haven‘t seen your proposed design. What would it incorporate?

You pick a lousy example anyway. When the Queen‘s Own Highlanders were created from the Seaforths and Camerons, they did have a badge with some history to it. I could see an amalgamation of the KOCR and the Highlanders - both came from the 103rd Calgary Rifles - to become the KOCH, and if that badge incorporated relevant symbols from both current badges, then yes, it would have history. There are other Canadian examples - ie the SALH.

I don‘t see the branch badges as a perpetuation of any history at all - historically, support tradesmen serving in a regiment have worn the cap badge of that regiment and that was where their allegiance was.

The EME badge, at least, looks like the old RCEME badge (at least one person I know of got away with wearing the RCEME badge in lieu, but of course, that was unauthorized). The CFMS still wear the stick and snake (but then again, what else would they possibly use?) The CME badge resembles the WW I CE badge. But the current Logistics badge has nothing to tie it to the old RCOC cap badge; ditto the RCDC, RCProC, RCASC, etc.

I know the EME guys do teach the history of the RCEME and still celebrate their 1944 birthday, even the ones serving in infantry/armoured etc. units. Do clerks out there celebrate the creation of the Adm branch (now defunct) or the Logistics branch? I know of one Chief Clerk who refuses to wear LOG shoulder titles and I don‘t suppose he is alone. There was much resentment among clerks over the change from Adm cap badges to Log ones, also.

All "allegiances" to a cap badge, regiment or branch are artificially created anyway, and you can make up any kind of cap badge and demand that troops be loyal. I guess the real question is - what is more important - pride in your regiment, or your branch?