Skip to comments.Outrage:"The Big Red One" as a FASHION STATEMENT???
Posted on 09/10/2008 12:45:45 PM PDT by gimme1ibertee
Amazing...Check this out on breitbart TV. My apologies in advance if this is already in circulation here. Sears apparently has a deal in the works to launch a line of clothing with the "Big Red One" patch on it. Amazingly stupid,not to mention a slap in the face to all who served with that patch on their uniform. Here's the link..... http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=171143
This may be a misunderstanding among some vets...Sears is one of the very few stores that guarantees those veterans who worked at Sears that their jobs would be there for them when they returned from their military duties. Also, Sears is one of the few corporations who actually donated a portion of their sales to military charities.....
Guess it is just me, I don’t see anything offensive about it.
I’m not against generic “army” gear or “navy” gear. But selling unit patches, IMO, is a no-no.
Speaking as one who has never served in the military, I am appalled that anyone would who has not served would ever have the temerity to wear any kind of US military insignia.
It strikes me as not only phony, but downright disrespectful of our brave service people and the sacrifices they have made. The way I see it, if you didn’t have the stones to serve, how do you develop the stones to wear something that gives people the impression that you did?
It’s like lying on your resume, and IMHO not only shows utter disregard for those who have served our beloved nation in uniform, but also demonstrates a total lack of class.
No problem here.
The US Army has agreed to this. Shame on the Army!
As far as the army is concerned, unit patches aren't exactly "won"...they're worn for identification on the left sleeve during one's period of assignment to that unit. When you're reassigned, you change to the patch of your new unit. If you serve in combat with a unit, you wear that patch on your right sleeve for the remainder of your career, and in that regard, I suppose it's "won" or earned.
As far as unit patches being used to market clothes, I'd kind of see it like a pro football player would see some kid wearing his team's jersey.
What I object to are the actual badges, tabs, patches, ribbons, medals, and distinctive uniform items (i.e. berets) that are earned.
In the article it says that Sears is paying a licensing fee for the Big Red One to the army to help pay for “support programs that benefit troops and their families”
I wear a Big Red One patch on my right sleeve. (Desert Storm)
My late father wore one on his. (Korea)
This torques me off.
As the son of a WWII Big Red One infantryman, this is outrageous. What the hell was the Army thinking? Let’s hope this is stopped, and people are held accountable.
You may be the only one that read it ;^)
It could be the patch used for 0bama’s youth corp uniforms.
Right. They sell the patches online and in the surplus shops. Anybody could do it. I don’t have a problem with it.
I'll almost completely agree with you. The only exception would be the wives (sorry, no, not "girlfriends") and kids of men serving and kids - I'm talkin' young kids here - that want to join the Army when they're old enough.
People don't generally wear logos or symbols of things they despise or don't respect. People are going to wear these logos because they believe the unit it represents is a good thing.
What's classless about wearing a logo or symbol of something you're not actually a member of? I have t-shirts from colleges I didn't attend, and no one thinks I'm trying to pretend I went to Duke or West Point.
I'm just guessing you weren't around during the 60's.
Sorry, I disagree with the outrage.
Is it wrong to wear an “USS New Jersey” baseball cap if you’re from New Jersey and think battleships are cool?
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.