Posted on 01/19/2010 3:40:00 AM PST by tlb
A lot more trouble and expense!
.....they revert back to form (military haters)
Die, NY Times, die!
Effin’ Liberals and their influences. Heaven forbid we have WARRIORS that work at the PENTAGON.
Surprised it took a year after Obama took over for this to happen. He probably wasn’t paying attention.
And to THINK that this slug Robert Gates was considered not only the protege of the finest DCI in U.S. history (the late William J. Casey in the Reagan Administration), but was treated almost like a son by former Director Casey, who must surely be spinning in his grave.
I'll have to support Gates on this one.
Personal camouflage including faces and helmets would probably work there, if all of the walls were painted in the same camouflage colors and patterns inside and out. Oh...and the lights dimmed quite a bit.
“Surprised it took a year after Obama took over for this to happen. He probably wasn’t paying attention”
He was on vacation or playing golf.
What are you saying, that camo should only be worn where it blends in? Please explain.
Back to the Hillery doctrine.
Ahh... but you see, it became September 10th as soon as Barry was installed.
Now shine those shoes, Marine!
aka. “Stand Down”
In my time in the navy (long time ago) we had ‘undress blues’ for admin areas. I would think most other branches still do also.
I always thought ‘flight suit’ was uncalled for, unless on stand-by status or scheduled to fly. There were better suited uniforms for admin positions.
Agreed. I was joking about camouflage, of course.
Construction design and planning are important security considerations for the homes of civilians, too. Granted, they won’t be the same considerations, but they are worth much thought. Home invaders, for example, can be inhibited by many things before actually trying to break in to a home. Firearms and liability dogs (dangerous animals) get too much attention, IMO.
Fences, lighting, recording devices (including visual), alarms (including good dogs), security of records (remote servers for video files), obstacles (safe obstacles—not liability obstacles), directions of visibility, approaches, materials, elevations and many other things are more important. The list is virtually endless.
Course, they’ll probably have casual Fridays.
“I’ll have to support Gates on this one.”
I agree with you.
My son is a Naval Academy grad and now an officer of Marines. My daughter is an Army officer. I have been struck that Navy and Marine personnel in general are only authorized to wear fatigues in garrison or aboard ship. Otherwise, they are in professional-appearing service dress. And, official events (graduations, winging, etc) are almost always in dress uniforms.
The Army, on the other hand, seems to do everything in BDU’s, and I think, inappropriately so.
A good example is that, a few years back, the Military Channel did a big show on the day of the Army-Navy game. During the pre-game, the Superintendant of the Naval Academy and a senior USMC officer were being interviewed; the interviewers were in jacket and tie and the military officers were in service dress. When it came time for the Supe of West Point to be interviewed, he was in BDU’s, and looked ridiculous.
If it were up to me, the Army would go back to the WWII era tobacco brown/khaki service uniforms: they had real class.
Just my $0.02
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.