Bosnia combat patch

That's not incorrect usage; it's actually mandated by DoD policy. The purpose behind this is to harmonize DoD public communications with what is used most commonly in the media, so that the public sees consistent and more easily understandable terms. Considering that each service specifies its own internal abbreviations that often differ from each other even when referring to the same rank title, this is a perfectly reasonable policy.

That is their choice, and there's nothing wrong with it. Following a style guide rather than just doing what each individual writer perceives as "in vogue" promotes internal consistency to their writing.

Excellent points offered and focus on incentivizing future service especially at a period of time when the army struggles with recruitment, retention and a nebulous focus in the move to LSCO, large state actors and non-combat deployments to areas. One does not need to enter a combat role to gain experience worth acknowledging, especially when we have the CIB and CAB among other awards to respect those who do.

Perhaps they should have used that "same level of operational knowledge" in an environment that would have resulted in being awarded a combat patch or CIB instead of keeping it all theoretical? Sorry Doug, did you have any control over being in a unit that deployed to an area that offered a FWTS? Me neither. To your point, some of us have been lucky enough to get assigned into positions that enabled deployments.

I made some if my own luck by choices made qnd by volunteering. I am on the fence on whether or not deployments to areas other than areas qualifying for hostile fire pay should be signaled with a right sleeve patch.

For the OCP uniform my first position is no, they shouldn't but I'd support adding something extra to highlight service away from garrison but not in a combat zone.

Why not a tab in the right shoulder? I await the grumbling from others and must point out the multitude of non-kinetic support great Soldiers do all over the world. No control over unit assignment, duty station, whether that unit just got back or not etc…and so many other things that factor in. I didn't know the difference between Guard and Reserve nor had I any idea the infantry was itself a branch or job.

I found out was infantry was when I got to Benning. I'm just one city boy who had no known family history of military service. You guys make a lot of assertions and assumptions about what was in a kids brain at the recruiter's office. The problem is that thousands of young soldiers are increasingly choosing to not go on combat deployments and instead choose to join units like the 1st Cavalry Division.

Why didn't these soldiers just volunteer for a combat deployment instead? It gets more baffling since some of these soldiers decided to become infantrymen a job that gives them no equivalent civilian skills beyond janitorial skills and yet they keep choosing to not go on combat deployments.

Oh well, I guess we will never know why these same soldiers chose to be born too late to go on combat deployments. With the exception of the article that advocated for ditch-the-Abrams and go back to light tanks like the famously successful Sherman zippo lighter in WW2, this may be the most intellectually bereft article MWI has published to date.

Assertion: Army performance historically struggles below armed conflict non-combat operations like those in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, and Kosovo. Hint: Army performance in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, and Kosovo struggled under the common mastermind and commander-in-chief of those interventions, Bill Clinton. Lesson: Apply K. Tip: When you need to write a military academic paper, if your thesis is about how a uniform will dramatically change outcomes, you likely need to come up with a new thesis.

I have heard a lot of criticisms from senior folks about President Clinton but I never heard anything that indicated he micor-managed the National Security Staff or the Joint Chiefs. Given theses two Captains multiple factual errors, their complete lack of first hand knowledge of any of those operations and no evidence supporting the claim, their assessment that the Army "struggled" in them is questionable at best.

I agree with both your Lesson and Tip. I disagree that they wasted any time on research since I doubt any research was done at all. Although the Captains are credited with four "operational deployments", their responsibilities during those assignments would be pertinent to the discussion. In my 25 years of service, I witnessed many plans formulated in the "academic" atmosphere of a headquarters where the potential failure of one component of an operational plan was considered unlikely and the competitive plan failed when applied in the final operation.

I'm sorry, but the final exam of competence or effectiveness is still an operation where the circumstances are not controlled by assumptions, but by the opposing staff's imagination. While the combat patch is no guarantee of experience or responsibility under an active, unfettered situation, it is at least the start of a conversation to ascertain the individual's experience.

Our current awards and decoration apparatus provides for recognition of administrative competition, but the final exam is still in the uncontrolled environment of operations involving an enemy force.

Arguments such as this are almost always initiated by officers or senior enlisted that are not confident in their service for one reason or another and feel inadequate. Leaders such as this will always say their motivation is ensuring the junior enlisted don't feel alienated or excluded because they are not part of the "in" group.

However, the officers and senior leaders initiate these argument because their ego drives them. Seeking extrinsic gratification and career advancement are their priority. This "combat patch" discussion is a non-issue for a majority of the troops, I only hear this noise from careerist leaders. Please…spend your time on more relevant military, geo-political issues of the day.

The wearing of a combat patch has been a long honored tradition for those who have deployed to combat zones and have little or no impact on unit cohesion…much less on the overall goals of the US Army. If you want to be part of a unit…then excel in all the unit training and set a personal example! By the way, my father, both uncles, both grandfathers and my father in law all wore combat patches from various conflicts AND Combat Infantry Badges.

Sir, I know I'm a bit late to your comment and all however I thought I should note that the combat patch has morphed into something probably much different than before you retired. I have in fact seen it create small embers in unit cohesion because of the who, how and why behind plans to get personnel patches. Notice I said plans to get them patches as in your present assignment and duty location does not warrant a patch but maybe we can do something about it.

I have in fact witnesses, firsthand, suspicions on a commander's intentions and display of favoritism by who he insisted went to get a patch and who he delayed doing so. It also caused a lopsided leadership situation because joes were getting SENT to get their "combat" patches before their first line leaders.

Instead of mission, joes were worried about when am I going to go and get mine. I agree that it has become an issue and no longer commands the respect it once did. I was shocked to learn how many troops were actually playing hokey pokey games to be a part of this "tradition. I find it difficult to believe I just read this mess. What a mess of buzzword worship and convoluted confusion, with far more interest in singing Kumbaya than applying any measure of logic.

Yes, preparing for the last war is a terrible thing, and we're in a unique point in history where doing that could have dire consequences.

And this article seems to be based on multiple false premises. My combat deployments forced me to perform tasks which I hadn't performed before, and to train others on those unfamiliar tasks. As throughout military history, adapting and overcoming were necessary. So for me, the SSI-FWTS is the mark of someone who was successful in a situation requiring abrupt changes and creative solutions, not someone still out there stuck in the mud. And I simply don't accept that service in Iraq or Afghanistan means that one does not have a better understanding an adversarial situation.

Want to prepare for the next war? Want to implement the changes necessary to ensure the survival and success of liberty sorry, JFK in coming years? But AR isn't the place to drive those changes. In that last section the authors cite an Army article for their claim of Pentagon personnel returning back to wearing the service uniform as their duty uniform. I've spent the last 8 yrs in the Pentagon and only need to wear ASU Bs on Fancy Fridays and for the last 2yrs in a new office we do not even do that.

Reads like an acute case of, "Igotmineism. Combat is the Army's entire reason for being. To fight and kill. That does not mean support forces are not integral to the success of the mission, but the fact is some people volunteer for a specialty that has the threat of death every day and others for a job that keeps them back in the states.

This is an important differentiator. The men and women getting shot at deserve these visible signals of what they have done. That is why a combat patch and the CIB are so highly regarded.

I agree overall about those in combat and it is what the Army is supposed to do how I remember, "You're a soldier first". It should also be recognized that support forces in my case, intel also engage the enemy on occasion.

You do what you have to do, for those in your unit and your own preservation, as well. Nice to see that Captains still believe they know everything. As members of year group , I am wondering where you get your vast knowledge of how the Army operated in peace time? You assert as fact that "Unfortunately, Army performance, as part of larger joint force, historically struggles below armed conflict. Non-combat operations like those in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, and Kosovo exemplify where military action did not successfully create space for implementation of all national tools of power".

This statement is riddled with errors:. Im pretty sure you have seen Blackhawk down once or twice. Might think about digging into this a bit more. I surprised someone from the 82nd did have a story about not jumping into Albania and why.

Seems like something you could…. Ethnic Cleansing was stopped. The Dayton Accords have been in place and enforced by NATO for almost as long as the two of you have been on the planet. It signals a return to focusing on conflict with nation states and specifically names Russia and China.

The change is actually how Russia and China view conflict as an ongoing constant rather than something that occurs at the culmination of some sort of crisis and is entirely kinetic. It says that our biggest threats have decided to engage in daily conflict at different levels and so if we are to defend the nation our job, not optional we have to fight where the battle is, daily and at different levels.

This implies more conflict, not less, and with a higher chance of armed conflict, not less. Unit award go else ware on the uniform. Pro tip — once you leave the Division Army, you find out there is more to the Army than Divisions.

And since then our use of the patch has "evolved". Did you know that Army policies are not chiseled in stone from the deity with instructions to never change them? Oh wait, you do because you are advocating change. Pro tip — when advocating a change to a policy you should not site as a reason the fact that the current implementation is a change. Promoting a bad policy with a bad policy is a bad idea.

I get it, you want folks to feel good. Instead of looking at those folks and being angry, you might try talking to them and…. Or you can try to get rid of things that make you feel bad. Your choice. It was originally issued for WWI service for those who qualified for overseas service insignia. The authors' vastly misrepresent the WWII issuance significantly either out of ignorance or design.

When ships are being sunk next to your coast, then the combat zone starts there. I don't think the CPTs' modifications to AR change much, as each conflict and theater is individual managed. The basic tenants of the article are sound…. Army culture needs to change, change comes through action, action comes a great deal through incentives and culture. Although the US Army is an incredibly professional and first-class formation, if it doesn't change it will lose the next great power war.

Books have been written about how the US Army continually fails to prepare for the next major war…. The Army needs to adjust for this competition in many ways…it's not there yet. The authors offer a good starting point…what we see every day and something to move the force as a whole in the right direction. This was without a doubt, THE dumbest article I have ever read about revising an Army uniform policy. And since I'm nearing age 62 I've read quite a few. The "combat patch" mentality means the most to those who actually see "combat".

I seriously doubt the authors were in combat arms units leading young Soldiers in combat to have views like this. So we"re going to trash a hundred years of Army tradition because of a bunch of overwritten, buzz word filled babble by two young Captains. As though removing a patch will help the Army meet future challenges, really?

This article has to be, by far, one of the most lengthy "air sandwiches" I've read. And so, after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph of fancy words and lofty phrases, I'm still uncertain what the hell these authors are trying to convey.

Combat patches as they relate to the competitive culture within the Army? All of that higher education — and this master's thesis is the most pressing idea this pair can create? Just come right out and say: "Combat patches for everyone! First, I applaud the desire of these officers to contribute to the success of the US Army and the nation. However, I think the implementation of their proposed policies runs into some implementation issues.

First and foremost, as Congress starts declaring places "competitive zones", there would be diplomatic implications that would likely lead to politicization of the designation and thus a bias towards not designating truly competitive zones as such.

In this era of great power competition, the decisive operations of a campaign could be Chinese port and energy infrastructure deals in NATO allied countries that eventually leads to a weakening and eventual dissolution of the alliance. Never a shot fired, but warfare political and economic none the less. Never would a unit sent there see a patch for fear of alienating a faltering ally through a "competitive zone" designation.

Second, I've rarely read so many "get off my lawn" responses in a professional forum. Chiding CPTs who have ideas that you don't agree with for such vanities as using "buzz words" which come from legitimate research into organization and economic theory is not helpful. It could be chilling to innovation. These gents applied education that the Army is likely paying for to contribute to the institution's future success.

You might disagree and even find their argument ill researched, but attack the argument not the writers. Finally, as a proud 3ID Combat Patch wearer, I also appreciate that combat will likely not be what decides the vast majority of victories that the Army, Joint Force, and this nation will have over the coming decades.

Sure, there will be combat and we must maintain readiness to destroy the enemy through direct combat. I think these instances will be short, highly lethal, and likely decided well before the first shot is fired. Major General Charles A. Based on his ribbons, this photo is from sometime post Excellnent find sean, say he looks like an actor right!

But save that for the other topic in Movies LOL. Another th Infantry Brigade combat patch worn by a Vietnam veteran. From what I can tell, he deployed with the brigade from Fort Hood in and served with the st Radio Research Detachment.

As this soldier served only until , I assume this was for service during Desert Storm. I wonder if he hadnt been awarded them yet. I was medevaced from Iraq in January but wasnt awarded any of my decorations from Iraq till like April or May of that year. It might be due to the 11th being in Bosnia in the 's. That would make more sense to me. The National Defense medal ceased to be issued in and the unit was in theater well after that.

The information I have on him is that he served in the Army from to and did serve in Desert Storm but no mention of Bosnia When was the 11th in Bosnia? The Center of Military history does not show any campaign streamer awarded for Bosnia.

I'm not sure if there were any awarded for Bosnia, so were combat patches authorized for that service? The first handful of US troops in Bosnia got there in December , with the bulk of the Task Force arriving in early Combat patches were not authorized.

Though we received hazardous duty pay, AFEM, etc. There's nothing really rare about the Americal Division SSI being worn as a combat patch but this screenshot shows an Americal veteran in Munich, Germany in , so he has seen quite a bit of the world during and immediately after WWII. You need to be a member in order to leave a comment. Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy! The military operation also must have lasted for 30 days or longer, although exceptions can be made to this rule.

Army personnel who served in a designated area as civilians or as members of another service who were not members of the Army during one of the specified periods are not authorized to wear the combat patch. Finally, soldiers who have earned multiple combat patches may choose which patch to wear.

Soldiers may also elect not to wear a combat patch. These combat patches are sources of pride for an Army war veteran. However, if you are assigned to a new command, often you will wear that command patch when stateside to have a uniform appearance, like that of your new soldiers. The Class A Uniforms require full-color detail of patches earned on your sleeves. When in the field, the same patches will be worn but they will be subdued color green, black, brown with no bright colors, which could potentially give away your position.

Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Use precise geolocation data. Select personalised content. Create a personalised content profile. Measure ad performance. Select basic ads.