Skip to comments.Turban High (The Army needs Turbines, not turbans)
Posted on 02/04/2014 9:38:26 PM PST by Red6
Capt. Tejdeep Singh Rattan, a 31-year-old dentist, has become the first turbaned officer in a generation to graduate from the U.S. Armys officer basic training program.
Rattan graduated from Fort Sam Houston after securing an exception from the Armys uniform policy, which since 1981 has barred conspicuous religious articles of faith, such as headgears and beards.
An official link: http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/-images/2010/12/09/94230/
If we create double standards for women, why not for every other group that feels they are special? Turbans, facial hair, separate height weight standards for Polynesians, exceptions for their tattoos, orthodox Jews should be able to keep their beards too, of course: http://privateinvesigations.blogspot.com/2011/12/new-chaplain-dons-his-uniform.html
Come to think about it, marching, D&C and getting my head buzzed is all offensive too. It strips me of my individuality and hurts my feelings (sarc). I wonder, do people realize that the word "Uniform" means more than just some cool looking cammo clothing that one wears?
These were restricted since 1981? That means at one time, there were not such restrictions. Uniformity would be preferred, but maybe it is not completely essential to have a well run military unit. I’m more concerned about the dropping of fittness and academic standards in order to become ‘more inclusive’.
What gang problem in the military?
Come On, Man ! Besides, if the Sikhs want in, I'll take 'em.
Uniform will be replaced with Omniform.
I don’t have a problem with Sikhs wearing turbans in the U.S. military. I want them on our side since they’ve been fighting Muslims for hundreds of years now.
Then you shouldn’t have any issues with bearded orthodox Jews, bearded Muslims, tattooed and heavy set Polynesians either... And why not? Ever since we opened the door to women in the military, we had to create double standards in grooming, uniforms, height weight standards, fitness tests and all sorts of waivers or just doing away with the standards outright, because otherwise you wouldn’t have any women qualify.
There is more than one meaning to the word “Uniform.”
Von Steuben professionalized the US military and made it into a cohesive fighting force in the war of independence. Drill and ceremony, marching, a uniform, customs and courtesies, group fitness training, even the buzz that all recruits get serve this end. Battles are not won by individuals. The enemy will not be impressed by our diversity.
Your statement proves you don’t get it.
If we wear shorts and pith hats in our army, then we all wear shorts and a pith hats.
Weren’t Sikhs stalwarts of the British Army in WW2?
What sort of chemical weapons threat was their from either side in the civil war?
But to answer the question, since you're obviously going to be intellectually dishonest now, there were no nerve, blood, blister, or choking, agents. WWI saw the first real wide spread use of chemical weapons, and Sarin which was the first real nerve agent came out in 1938: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin
No seal on mask = dead.
Why do you think I used the example pith hat and shorts?
You really don’t get it, do you?
“Uniform” isn’t just a thingy you wear that looks cool.
Maybe this helps: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FClGhto1vIg
You don’t mess with the Sikhs or the Gurkas....You will get hurt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.