Soldier

Hi,

That looks like a civilian wearing parts of a uniform.

It does not look like a soldier in uniform to me.

That is not a soldier. That is a Vietnam era uniforrn and patches.

Captain America

Steady Hand wrote:
Hi,

That looks like a civilian wearing parts of a uniform.

It does not look like a soldier in uniform to me.

He was once deployed to Iraq and is visiting Canada to see his girlfriend. On Remembrance Day (Nov 11) friends conviced him to at least wear part of the uniform to the ceremonies.

CaptainAmerica wrote:
That is not a soldier. That is a Vietnam era uniforrn and patches.

Captain America

This is the uniform he wore recently in Iraq.

Sorry it looks disgraceful. Nice photo though.

Not much of an American soldier, if he's willing to disgrace the uniform in that manner. Either wear it, or don't!

It's amazing how many war-experienced people end up on FM.

Why is it amazing some of us have defended our country? Does that mean we can't love photography?

...holy crap, what is your problem? It was just an observation.

Chris Chris wrote:
Why is it amazing some of us have defended our country? Does that mean we can't love photography?

I'm pretty sure that Jeremy didn't mean anything by that.

Agreed that its a disgraceful way to wear the uniform.

Hi forum...

From my POV, whether the guy in the photo is "in or out" of uniform is secondary to the event that was photographed.

It was an event to "remember" those who have served their country.

Some never make it in a parade because of their service.

So, "peace" should be easy to find in a photography forum. Just remember the "Golden Rule."

As a veteran, I agree with Chris. Wear the uniform as intended, or not at all. Another slippage of our respect for those who serve or have served.

Hi fellows...

At first I tend to agree with "wear it fully and proper, or not at all."

STRACT! (or STRAC, depending on how you like your acronymns)

By the Regs!

Then I saw some of the other pics of the other, older vets who were from other conflicts or periods.

I see them in uniform, bits or pieces. Perhaps all they have left, or all they can wear now.

I have seen many older vets (ww2, korea) wearing bits and pieces too.

To deny one the right to wear that symbol of his service would mean denying ALL wouldn't it?

Or does youth or age matter, in your opinion?

Put another way, do you consider it OK to see a WW2 vet in a partial uniform, but NOT OK to see a Gulf War vet in partial uniform?

What do you consider fair or best?

Is it better that a person be proud to wear it as a symbol of service, amongst other vets who are also proud, and on a day of remembering that service by ALL, or is it better to strictly observe the rules and regs and so not wear any item of uniform at all?

I am curious about how YOU feel about that.

What is important to me is that this vet from the United States and even one from the French Foreign Legion came to mourn our war dead and wear the symbolic Canadian poppy.

Steady Hand wrote:
Hi fellows...

At first I tend to agree with "wear it fully and proper, or not at all."

STRACT! (or STRAC, depending on how you like your acronymns)

By the Regs!

Then I saw some of the other pics of the other, older vets who were from other conflicts or periods.

I see them in uniform, bits or pieces. Perhaps all they have left, or all they can wear now.

I have seen many older vets (ww2, korea) wearing bits and pieces too.

To deny one the right to wear that symbol of his service would mean denying ALL wouldn't it?

Or does youth or age matter, in your opinion?

Put another way, do you consider it OK to see a WW2 vet in a partial uniform, but NOT OK to see a Gulf War vet in partial uniform?

What do you consider fair or best?

Is it better that a person be proud to wear it as a symbol of service, amongst other vets who are also proud, and on a day of remembering that service by ALL, or is it better to strictly observe the rules and regs and so not wear any item of uniform at all?

I am curious about how YOU feel about that.

Hi Rick,

I actually thought of THIS image as I wrote the comments above. I am glad you posted it in this thread too.

I find this image interesting because of the MIX of uniforms present.

It is not every day one sees a Legionaire (French Foreign Legion) vet in the USA.

Perhaps more common in France or Canada. So, I thought it was cool to see the Kepi Blanc amidst the other uniforms. I like his expression too.

The group, they look like a mix who share something in common, despite the uniform differences, they were warriors.

I see a lot of people willing to pass judgement on this man, yet they do not know the extent of his service to his country, his sacrifices, his situation or why he did what he did. He served and is exhibiting his respect for those who served (and died) for their country. He does not deserve to be judge solely on how he is wearing a piece of clothing, symbolic or not.

Steady Hand wrote:
Hi fellows...

At first I tend to agree with "wear it fully and proper, or not at all."

STRACT! By the Regs!

Then I saw some of the other pics of the other, older vets who were from other conflicts or periods.

I see them in uniform, bits or pieces. Perhaps all they have left, or all they can wear now.

I have seen many older vets (ww2, korea) wearing bits and pieces too.

To deny one the right to wear that symbol of his service would mean denying ALL wouldn't it?

Or does youth or age matter, in your opinion?

Put another way, do you consider it OK to see a WW2 vet in a partial uniform, but NOT OK to see a Gulf War vet in partial uniform?

What do you consider fair or best?

Is it better that a person be proud to wear it as a symbol of service, amongst other vets who are also proud, and on a day of remembering that service by ALL, or is it better to strictly observe the rules and regs and so not wear any item of uniform at all?

I am curious about how YOU feel about that.

Alright Steady:

First off, it would be an egregious breach of AR670-1 for an active duty soldier to wear the uniform in that manner.... and this is coming from a guy who spent much of his time in "uniform" in a dish-dash, kefia, and sporting a beard. I'm not a uniform hound, but this is seriously off by anyone's standards.

So this person is either a soldier who is flouting authority, or a separated former soldier (obviously not a retiree due to age).

Former soldiers are permitted to wear their uniforms for ceremonial occasions, and the regulation states that the uniform must be worn in a manner consistent with active-duty standards, to include hair and grooming. Piece-meal wear of the uniform is against the rules, except for certain bits of insignia or awards that may be worn in a prescribed manner.

Often times, veterans (particularly older ones) are not forced to adhere to the "letter of the law" on this, despite the fact that the regulations are clear. For me (and I suspect many others), the dividing line is whether or not the person is making their best effort to respect the dignity of the uniform. The older veterans you reference typically make a truly poignant effort to effect the dignity of the service, even if their uniforms fail to pass the strictest reading of the regulation.

The person in this photo is unkempt, unshaven, wearing his dress green jacket over what appears to be a white low-necked t-shirt and a flower (?) on his beret. It is clear that no effort was made to respect the uniform by the person in that photo: quite the opposite. He appears to be flaunting his bastardization of the uniform, perhaps even for political effect (strictly prohibited in the regulation). I'm not judging him as a person, but his behavior as depicted in this image is very distasteful.

For those of us who have served, who have worn that uniform to the funerals of friends who also wore it.... many of us have strong feelings on this matter.

Regarding the image, I'm not seeing any other strong narrative or emotional content beyond the particulars of this person's choice of "wardrobe." There few technical factors to discuss: this shot really seems to be just about his wearing of that particular garment... Thus it seems to be the only thing to discuss here.

The red flower is a "Badge" or crimson or...a symbol of the Remembrance Day...a "Red Poppy" as in the "poppies of the fields of Flanders" etc..



Gee...even I knew that, without having to Google it...

But IF you want to learn more...go here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_Day