Monday - Time for some Random Observations
05.02.05 (8:16 pm) [edit]
Sorry for yet another bloglapse, folks. It's been busy here in the Land of Locked-Up Gold. I read a couple things today that I think deserve attention here, so, let's begin.
First - a challenge. I defy you to get through this article with a straight face. It's like battle of the sexes meets Animal House. Apparently, the mascot for P-Day is on "double secret probation," along with the dastardly hooligans who wanted male genitalia to get equal stage-time on campus with those of the female. I've never seen The Vagina Monologues, and after hearing so many jokes about it (or would it be 'them'?), I doubt I ever will. Besides, they'd probably boot a guy like me out at the door and tell me I was disqualified from watching.
In other, completely unrelated news, the Army has announced some modifications to the upcoming ACU (Advanced Combat Uniform), that's set to replace the current Battle Dress Uniform in April 2008, according to Army Times.
I can't find a link to this edition's article yet, but as I remember it, some of the more unpopular changes to the BDU are being made with the stated purpose of "saving soldiers' money." This is going to be done, they say, by replacing the sew-on rank, unit, and skill badge patches with subdued pin-on insignia, keeping us from having to spend the supposedly exorbitant fees at the dry-cleaners off-post.
However, the uniform's fielding is going to be timed such that the existing stock of sew-on patches will have time to be purchased and used on uniforms about to go out of date. I think this is a beautiful illustration of how well a labyrinthine bureaucracy can work.
That's not all. A set of BDUs costs, Army Times estimated, around $57. This isn't true - at least not if you buy your uniforms at AAFES. They estimate a brand-new set of ACUs (which we will all have to purchase) is going to run somewhere in the vicinity of $86.
Add to this the cost of patches lost in the laundry room and to "battle buddies" who are short on insignia, as well as the probably more-expensive Velcro-backed insignia themselves, and you start to see how this "saving soldiers' money" justification breaks down a bit.
Furthermore, the uniform looks awful. Aside from the New-Beetle Green shade they've chosen for the Marine-style "digi-cam" design, the blouse is cut too high ("Soldiers need to be able to access their pockets more readily" - that's nonsense, we're not supposed to be putting our hands in our pockets, are we, soldiers?), and at this point, having them pressed is completely unauthorized.
Let's see how long that lasts. I'm willing to bet that there's a sergeant major out there somewhere who's going to get pretty heated when he sees a battalion formation of soldiers who look like they've slept in their brand-spanking-new ACUs.
The good news is that the boots we'll be wearing are the rough suede desert boots, which will not require shining. Goodbye, Kiwi!
But if soldiers aren't going to be shining boots, or pressing their uniforms, or figuring out why in the name of Walter Kronkite we're wearing berets, or learning to fire their weapons (the XM-8, currently in development, looks like it's going to make a three-week rifle marksmanship course a thing of the past), or getting beaten up by drill sergeants, then what are they going to do in Basic Training?
That's all for now, faithful ones. Mahalo.
-30-
UPDATE: The Mudville Gazette has reposted their "How to Blog" entry. It's incredibly useful, and it's why I'm doing this update, actually.
First - a challenge. I defy you to get through this article with a straight face. It's like battle of the sexes meets Animal House. Apparently, the mascot for P-Day is on "double secret probation," along with the dastardly hooligans who wanted male genitalia to get equal stage-time on campus with those of the female. I've never seen The Vagina Monologues, and after hearing so many jokes about it (or would it be 'them'?), I doubt I ever will. Besides, they'd probably boot a guy like me out at the door and tell me I was disqualified from watching.
In other, completely unrelated news, the Army has announced some modifications to the upcoming ACU (Advanced Combat Uniform), that's set to replace the current Battle Dress Uniform in April 2008, according to Army Times.
I can't find a link to this edition's article yet, but as I remember it, some of the more unpopular changes to the BDU are being made with the stated purpose of "saving soldiers' money." This is going to be done, they say, by replacing the sew-on rank, unit, and skill badge patches with subdued pin-on insignia, keeping us from having to spend the supposedly exorbitant fees at the dry-cleaners off-post.
However, the uniform's fielding is going to be timed such that the existing stock of sew-on patches will have time to be purchased and used on uniforms about to go out of date. I think this is a beautiful illustration of how well a labyrinthine bureaucracy can work.
That's not all. A set of BDUs costs, Army Times estimated, around $57. This isn't true - at least not if you buy your uniforms at AAFES. They estimate a brand-new set of ACUs (which we will all have to purchase) is going to run somewhere in the vicinity of $86.
Add to this the cost of patches lost in the laundry room and to "battle buddies" who are short on insignia, as well as the probably more-expensive Velcro-backed insignia themselves, and you start to see how this "saving soldiers' money" justification breaks down a bit.
Furthermore, the uniform looks awful. Aside from the New-Beetle Green shade they've chosen for the Marine-style "digi-cam" design, the blouse is cut too high ("Soldiers need to be able to access their pockets more readily" - that's nonsense, we're not supposed to be putting our hands in our pockets, are we, soldiers?), and at this point, having them pressed is completely unauthorized.
Let's see how long that lasts. I'm willing to bet that there's a sergeant major out there somewhere who's going to get pretty heated when he sees a battalion formation of soldiers who look like they've slept in their brand-spanking-new ACUs.
The good news is that the boots we'll be wearing are the rough suede desert boots, which will not require shining. Goodbye, Kiwi!
But if soldiers aren't going to be shining boots, or pressing their uniforms, or figuring out why in the name of Walter Kronkite we're wearing berets, or learning to fire their weapons (the XM-8, currently in development, looks like it's going to make a three-week rifle marksmanship course a thing of the past), or getting beaten up by drill sergeants, then what are they going to do in Basic Training?
That's all for now, faithful ones. Mahalo.
-30-
UPDATE: The Mudville Gazette has reposted their "How to Blog" entry. It's incredibly useful, and it's why I'm doing this update, actually.
posted by: irishred (reply)
post date: 05.02.05 (5:26 pm)
Your posts are great as always. I always leave well informed. Thanls for that.
posted by: brogonzo (reply)
post date: 05.02.05 (5:47 pm)
Reply to: Godsmack
Now, be fair, April. By the time Bush got it, the Blue Book value had gone WAY down.
posted by: rinna (reply)
post date: 05.02.05 (6:51 pm)
it seems awfully elaborate (not to mention completely contradictory) to change your uniform now... and maybe i'm missing a loop here, but other than a few perks, it's all much ado about nothing.
I want to be a penis warrior. Free Testecles!
posted by: BroRizzo (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (5:49 am)
That uniform is ugly.. I don't see how a bright white/gray uniform is going to hide you in the jungle.
posted by: 11thACR (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (6:22 am)
You still can't put yur hands in yur Pockets....Where's JAG when ya need them???
:::LOL:::::
posted by: Devo (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (7:57 am)
Wow, Bro... I like your take on the Byzantine intricacies of the US Bureaucracy. And as far as the Blue Book value of our beater of a nation goes... I think it started to decline when they put that Pinto engine greedbucket Nixon in office. Or orfice, if you prefer...
I keed, I keed. Sho 'nuff I ain't here to ruffle feathers. Just poke with a stick. That's all.
posted by: brogonzo (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (11:10 am)
Reply to: Devo
Stick-poking is always authorized, especially in the case of dead bodies.
And Nixon wasn't a thief. He said so himself, remember? Haw haw haw.
posted by: newbie (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (7:14 pm)
I'm all for the Vag lollipops in school as part of sex ed...the easiest way to train boys! Wonder if they're life sized?
posted by: rinna (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (11:33 pm)
Reply to: newbie
I sure do hope you mean a Vag-LIKE lollipops. Otherwise, think about what you just said.
My face hurts from laughing. That was gold.
posted by: newbie (reply)
post date: 05.03.05 (11:57 pm)
lol you are such a smart-arse Rinna!
what can i do, i'm at work and the ph keeps ringing...
oh and you know what a dumb blonde i am.
shell
posted by: almsthvn (reply)
post date: 05.05.05 (8:03 am)
I believe if the two mascots could just get together for some jello wrestling, the world would be a better place.
Testecles was nothing short of brilliant, I say. I'm with Rinna!! Free Testecles! Free him from his bondage!
Umm... whatever.
And.. love the new pajamas. But what will they be wearing in the day time?