PDA

View Full Version : Black Berets for Everyone



John Lindsey
27th October 2000, 19:12
By Ken Swarner
Special to Military.com

WASHINGTON (Oct. 17, 10:30 p.m.) -- Call it Transformation for headgear: starting next year, every soldier in the U.S. Army will wear a black beret.

"This shows our commitment to transform into a significant Army," said Army chief of staff Gen. Eric Shinseki, calling the beret "a symbol of Army excellence."

Delivered Tuesday at the Association of the U.S. Army's national convention, Shinseki's announcement dropped jaws. "I am going to need some time to think about this before commenting," said Sgt. First Class Jason Shipley, platoon sergeant for the 1-23 Infantry Battalion.

Many attendees wondered about Army Rangers, for whom the beret is a symbol of their elite status. "They are going to be pissed," said one special ops officer, who insisted on anonymity.

Read the full story at:

http://www.military.com/Content/MoreContent?file=NL_blackberet_swarner

maney
27th October 2000, 20:02
That is going to really stir up the waters.

I guess it won't be too bad if they still use different colors to differentiate the SpecOps, Rangers and GreenBeanies from the rank and file troops, and I have to agree that the berets just look snazzier (and from experience, though not in the Army, *are* much easier to stow), but I can definitely see a bunch of people getting rather pissed about this.

Along the same vein though, I have to admit that I would really like to see more standardization across the services in the everyday dress uniforms. I mean, other than the history involved, what's the point of all different uniforms? I can understand it for the Class A and Class B dress uniforms, but for the regular duty uniforms?

I'll bring this up to my dad and my uncles and see what they think. I'm sure this will be interesting.

fpsm

Ron Tisdale
27th October 2000, 20:31
What's that? Members of the armed forces are going to wear Black Ferrets on their heads? I'd think the ferrets would be pissed.....Ooooohhhh, *berets*, not ferrets. Sorry....Dyslexia can be a *terrible* thing....

Ron Tisdale :)

Joseph Svinth
27th October 2000, 20:52
A true story of long ago and far away.

The USMC did some field testing at Camp Pendleton in 1976 to see what the next generation cover (hat for you civilians) would be; the idea was to eliminate the need for starching and square-blocking the standard issue utility cover.

Three designs were tested. One was similar to the issue cover, which was originally based on an old railroad design, except that it used stays to give the front a squared shape. A second was a beret, and a third was the Jones fishing cap like that used by the South Africans, Rhodesians, and the like.

The modified cover always looked square, thus it was almost useless as a patrol cap. (Square = human, and draws fire.)

The beret looked good in garrison but sucked in the field because it didn't keep the sun out of one's eyes and the rain off one's glasses. (Hey, if you wear glasses, this is a serious issue.)

The Jones fishing cap prevented sunburn, kept wind and rain out of one's face, camouflaged well, and really annoyed the sergeants-major because it was impossible to make look squared-away.

Due mostly to the insistence of sergeants-major wanting Marines to look squared away in garrison, the modified cover was adopted and is still in use today.

Now, all that said, a beret is a far more practical garrison hat than either the frame cover worn by US Army officers or the obscenity-deleted cap worn by US Army enlisted. The theory of the modern Army is that everybody wears a Fritz helmet whenever across the cattleguard, so there is no real reason not to change garrison wear.

The two logical colors for the Army are black or green, and thanks to John Wayne, the popular mind Green Beret is already taken in the popular mind. That leaves black.

Officers are the ones hit hardest by the requirement to have multiple uniforms; about major, you're expected to buy dress mess uniforms worn maybe once a career unless assigned to the Pentagon. (At which time most other uniforms go in mothballs.) But basically each service has field ("utility") uniforms, Class A & B uniforms (equivalent of shirt & tie or suit), and two separate dress uniforms, one the equivalent of a tuxedo (the Marine dress blues are the most commonly observed) and another that is the equivalent of tails, complete with cummerbund. The Navy and Marine Corps add summer and winter weight uniforms to the collection.

Each service has its own uniform board, and it wasn't until the early 1980s that they paid any attention to what the others were doing. Due to budget crunches gradually they began talking to one another, and as a result the current issue Army and USMC raincoats are designed similarly, only in different colors, and while other work uniforms continue to be popular (think the Navy and Coast Guard), everybody wears the same battledress/utility (BDU) uniform.

Now, all this said, the men's uniforms are generally fairly practical attire. However, if you want to see clothing that is entirely impractical, check the military women's clothing. It's better than it used to be, but still absurd designs -- no pockets, hard to fit, and placing ribbons and such is a total nightmare.


[Edited by Joseph Svinth on 10-27-2000 at 02:55 PM]

Steve Williams
27th October 2000, 22:41
Originally posted by maney
That is going to really stir up the waters.

I guess it won't be too bad if they still use different colors to differentiate the SpecOps, Rangers and GreenBeanies from the rank and file troops, and I have to agree that the berets just look snazzier (and from experience, though not in the Army, *are* much easier to stow), but I can definitely see a bunch of people getting rather pissed about this.



In the UK armed forces they use different colours for different branches/ specialisations/ services:
beret: army air corps - sky blue
beret: british parachute units - maroon
beret: royal marines - green
beret: royal signals officers' - navy blue
beret: royal military police - red
Cannot recall the other colours but they are used.

So does this not keep the "elite" branches happy?

William
27th October 2000, 23:39
Well, from here in the bowels of Ft. Bragg, I can say that most people I've talked to think making the black beret standard issue is a very bad idea. Most concerns are along the lines that it will not raise the bar Army-wide, but lower the standard that is now perceived when someone in the military sees someone else who is wearing a beret. Although General Shinseki's goal is admirable, I don't know that a change in headgear will do it, or even contribute significantly. As one NCO at the AUSA convention said, "In the end, its just a hat."

William Johnson

Juan Perez
28th October 2000, 01:14
Most of my soldiers reacted negatively about the idea about the Army-wide implementation of the black beret; mainly, out of respect for their Ranger Regiment brothers.
The usual response regarding the projected uniform change was "I don't want to wear that sh--t, sir... I didn't earn it."

Personally, while I don't like to think that I hinge my personal pride on a piece of cloth... I have to say that I understand the Rangers' displeasure since I would probably react similarly should everyone in the Army be allowed to wear the Ranger tab I wear, regardless if they have earned it or not. I think is simply because I worked so damn hard for it. The Regimental life, as far as their OPTEMPO, is extremely demanding. The distinctive insignia and clothing they wear is ALL earned... the hard way. I hope that this policy gets a second look.

Lastly, implementation of the black beret seems to be aimed at two aspects: the symbolic transformation of the Army (which is monumental at this point), and the strengthening of troop morale. The problem is that my soldiers' morale would probably be better affected if we see an increase in soldier pay, the restructuring of the Army's health care system, and an increase in the total force in order to offset the number of days spent abroad in deployments with our increased world-wide commitments.

To be fair, let me state that the Chief of Staff has made more positive, and innovative changes to the total force than anyone else before him. He has made many ripples in the pond with his effort to both modernize and stabilize the force. This draws many attacks (as well as praise) from both soldier-leaders as well as civilians; it takes courage to do what he is currently doing.

Yet, a mere change of hats will not do to increase morale when it comes down to it.



[Edited by Juan Perez, Jr. on 11-08-2000 at 08:16 AM]

George Kohler
28th October 2000, 01:55
Well, since I am a former Ranger from 1st Bat (born and raised), I guess I'll have to burn my beret. I really hope he changes his mind.

Joseph Svinth
28th October 2000, 04:15
Hey, what's the problem with black berets? Female soldiers have worn them for years, and now the men can look stylish, too.

Brently Keen
28th October 2000, 05:58
Is this Bill Clinton's sick idea? I seem to remember a photo of Monica Lewinski in a black beret.

Now we've also got the "Monica's view" photo of the president assaulting our senses. What's next folks? Let's pray Al Gore's enhanced package remains on the newstands and out of the White House.

Brently Keen

Neil Hawkins
28th October 2000, 09:27
Aw, come on guys, what's all the fuss about?

In Australia they changed the dress regulations to say that all personnel must wear the slouch hat in barracks and the 'bush' hat in the field. Even the SAS lost their sand coloured berets, commandos lost their green ones and the tankies lost their black ones. The theory was that berets offer no protection from the sun, this is the same reason that we all have to wear our sleeves rolled down and sunglasses can be worn wilst on duty. "The end of the world as we know it!" cried the RSM ;)

But between you and me, these rules are largely ignored, especially by the SAS who still get issued and wear their berets. Though I'm told that the soldiers club buys them as the system won't provide, but this is just hearsay so don't quote me. When you go bush, some wear kepis (similar to the old foriegn legion hat but softer) some wear 'bush' hats (floppy fishing style hats, with a number of brim sizes) but many SF and recon guys wear the shemargh(sp?) (an arab style square of material). this is my favourite as it is very versatile, it can be used as a towel, cloth and hat, often with the ends wrapped around the face for what is called the 'ninja look'. :)

Neil

John Lindsey
28th October 2000, 14:31
The hardest thing I see about wearing a beret...is wearing a beret. It is not something you just toss on your head and wear. You have to rip that thick liner out, groom it with care, and then it looks good.

Looks like I will be thru with my drill sgt training by next fall and will have to deal with privates and berets at Fort Sill :-).

Onikudaki
28th October 2000, 19:44
While there is no doubt that berets carry with them the connections with the US Army's Special Operations and Airborne units (and the attendant history, tradition, pride and belonging), choosing to bring them to the whole of the Army is a big step.
For those who are not in the know: Most Army soldiers wear the "patrol cap" with their BDU/camoflage uniform. If you've never seen it, it kind of looks like a camoflage baseball cap. Those in Airborne (parachute) units wear a maroon beret, those in Special Forces units wear a green beret, those in Ranger (long range patrolling, antiguerilla tactics, etc) units wear a black beret. Few would disagree that the beret has a distinctive look, but those in the units i have just mentioned have "earned" theirs. To just give them out must cheapen the meaning of the beret to the Rangers. For example, what if the instructor at your school one day decided to give out black obis or give hakamas to all students in your school, regardless of rank? How would you feel?
Many instructors do this sort of 'giving' on an idividual basis, hoping the pride that goes with the uniform will spur the student to greater efforts in an attempt to 'grow into' or 'earn' the rank. Perhaps this is what the Army leadership is looking for.
I would have preferred a different color, though. The Rangers have too much history and pride wrapped up in that beret for me to wear it. I am not a ranger, and have not been to ranger school, and i admit to mixed feelings about donning the black beret.
How about a dark brown one, as the British SAS has? A different color with which to start a new history. Hmm. Time will tell.
Any Rangers out there? Care to comment? Please don't leave it to a REMF to have the final say on this one.

Jason Silvernail
1st COSCOM
IIXX Airborne Corps

hoshizawa
29th October 2000, 01:22
Totally agree on this one!
Why not just give the army brown berets like the dark ones of the 50's and let's move on. The idea is to also have everyone move into them including Airborne and Special Forces. Nothing wrong with change, but let's do it tactfully.

Heck the lack of money to train Joe properly is what I would like to see improved. Force 21, new head gear, what's next and where is all of this money going to come from? We cant even give unit patches to incoming privates.LOL!!!

Earnie Warnick
7TH INF DIV
XVIII ABN CORP
24TH INF DIV
3RD INF DIV
82ND ABN DIV
USJFKSWCS
P.S. I'll be just fine with a PC and a Kevlar!

Jeff Cook
30th October 2000, 03:58
Gee, I didn't realize that it was the cover that made SF so special! I thought it was the training....

Besides, they always have the tab to show they are different.

It really doesn't make a difference to me; in the field, we all wear the same thing. If it means that much to the SF and Ranger bunch, then I say it's a bad idea - wouldn't want to hurt their sensitive feelings! I respect them for what they do, not what they wear in garrison.

More important stuff to worry about, like where the training dollars are coming from so I can send my soldiers to NCOES, buy more GTA's, have more pyro available for FTX's.

Jeff Cook
Wabujitsu

Dan Harden
31st October 2000, 01:25
HATS??

With what their doing to the best fighting force in the world, I would suggest a cover to go with the new Job description;

First
While you are getting head in the oval office by a federal employee......then lying about it under oath.


Take away the training
second take away the ordinance
then take away the spare parts
fail to renew the private industry resupply contracts

Then send your troops to far away places without a supply or exit strategy
Send them out and seldom rotate them
when they EVENTUALLY do get home
rotate them out again in four days

then give them a polyester black hat with a big shiny visor
white gloves
and a whistle
and No weapons!!!


can anyone spell P-O-L-I-C-E......
Dan



[Edited by Dan Harden on 10-30-2000 at 07:38 PM]

Onikudaki
31st October 2000, 19:39
All excellent points, gentlemen!

Why is it that we on the ground are able to cut through the BS and see what is really important, whereas those in a position to influence events are so concerned with surface trinkets?

Heartily agree!

Jason Silvernail

Joseph Svinth
1st November 2000, 12:14
How S*** happens.

In the beginning was the Plan, and the Plan was without form, and substance. And darkness was upon the face of the sergeants.

And the sergeants went to the captain, and said, the Plan is a crock, and it stinketh.

And the captain went to the colonel, and said, the Plan is a container, and it smells badly.

And the colonel went to the Chief of Staff, and said, the Plan can barely be held, and none can abide its odor.

And the Chief of Staff went to the General, and said, the Plan is mighty, and none can resist it.

And happiness was upon the face of the General, and the Plan was approved.

And that is how S*** happens.

***

For a less whimsical view, see John Peters, "Hucksters in Uniform," *The Washington Monthly,* May 1999, 9-12, which begins: "We have entered the age of the impassioned butcher, with a crude weapon in one hand, a cell phone in the other, and hatred in his soul," and concludes, "We [the people of the United States] have an Army run by a 'Board of Directors' that is a combination mafia conference and small-town business club, a Navy intent on fighting the future rather than against our nation's likely enemies, and an Air Force whose only strategy is budgetary gluttony. Something must be done. We are about to spend that trillion dollars (perhaps less, but don't count on it) on an arsenal of mediocrity. If no one rises to lead our military by example, our next significant expenditure may be in lives."

Some equally scathing (and heartfelt, and honest, and probably true) articles by Peters include "Our New Old Enemies," Parameters, 29:2 (Summer, 1999), 22-37, http://www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters , "Our Soldiers, Their Cities" in Parameters, http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/parameters/96spring/peters.htm and "The New Warrior Class", http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/parameters/1994/peters.htm .

John Lindsey
1st November 2000, 13:11
Some of you might be too young to remember, that the Navy once tried to do away with bluejeans in its attempt to become a modern nuclear Navy. Didn't last too long as I remember.....

Jason Chambers
1st November 2000, 18:14
I remember those tight fittin' bell bottom jeans that graced the campus... err, post at Ft. Sam Houston. Highlight of the day... Pity they fit the same for men and women.

Jason Chambers
1st November 2000, 18:23
I, like most former soldiers, think that the Army Chief of Staff has really shot himself in the ding ding with this one.

This IS SO disrespectful to the Rangers (or any of the SPECOPS guys for that matter). Hell, why not just let everyone wear drill hats again?

John, your opinion would be an interesting one... I know 2/75 is BOILING right now.

bomb tech
1st November 2000, 19:10
Ballad of the Black Beret

Fighting Finance at their desk
They'll pay some...and screw the rest
For the grunts there'll be no pay
"Cause now THEY wear a black beret

Shield of shame upon their collar
The AG Corps will whoop and holler
Because they join the elite today
As they don their black beret

Up their ass with bugs and gas
Chemical Corps is lightning fast
They'll poison troops in great new ways
'Cause now they have their black berets

Medical Corps...reduced to tears
No more hair below their ears
Haircuts they must get today
So they can wear a black beret

Transportation--truck and troops
In motor pools, in little groups
No cargo moves at all today
'Cause they can't drive with that black beret

Spooks and Redlegs...they're a gas
Shooting targets really fast
Their aim's improved a bunch today
'Cause now they've got their black berets

Tanks and Bradleys in a row
Roaring Treadheads, set to go
Republican Guard a match--no way
'Cause now they wear the black beret

Air defenders shoot 'em down
Patriots fly...wreckage on the ground
They're first to fire, 'specially today
'Cause now they, too, have a black beret

The QM Corps supplies us all
Our stuff's delayed...but they have a ball
With crates of new hats on the way
Now they're the elite with black berets

MacArthur, Brad, and Shy Meyer, too
Readiness problems, they're nothing new
To raise morale, THEY found a way
Didn't involve NO black beret

Back at Benning, a young wife waits
Her Ordinance Trooper has met his fate
Black Beret he's wearing ...NOT
Met some Rangers in a Parking Lot.

Campbell, Bragg, and Lewis too
Soldiers are PISSED...you know it's true
After a five miles run in PT today
They'll probably burn THEIR damn berets.

It's a hat - get over it! What we are wearing on our heads should be the least of the Army's concerns. How about money and time for TRAINING! Oh well, I guess it's easier to worry about a hat.

Jeff Cook
1st November 2000, 19:29
Hey, beenie-boys -

Do you think the French might have been a bit p-o'd when you fellas decided to steal their beret for your own use?

As the last wise poster suggested, get over it. Your whining about it implies that us non-SF/ranger folks strive to pretend that we are as high-speed as you are, which of course you all know will never happen, as we are not worthy. Believe me when I say most legs could care less about the issue. Most of us are too mission-oriented to worry about such trivial matters as head gear in the rear, or how cool we look to people we don't know.

Again, the SF crowd is respected for, and should be proud of their training and heritage, NOT what they wear in garrison. Besides, you all are still a lot prettier than us common folk, as you do have the greenie-beenie, the special tabs, and other trinkets to distinguish you.

In my experience, the people most bothered by an issue like this are the E-4's and below that haven't done a HALO jump yet. You won't hear the older experienced guys crying about it.

Jeff Cook
Wabujitsu

jerkyguy
2nd November 2000, 23:48
Let me tell you about the canadian military which in the late 90's allowed all seving members of all branches to wear the beret. This mada for a unorganized look as blue berets were worn by the airforce, black was for both the armour corps and the navy. The beret was a distinction of fighting troops versus non- combat tradesmen. Sadly this has been forgotten, as has the peoples' pride in the national fighting men. What is next? Guardsmen will no longuer be called guardsmen in fear of demeaning them?





Originally posted by John Lindsey
By Ken Swarner
Special to Military.com

WASHINGTON (Oct. 17, 10:30 p.m.) -- Call it Transformation for headgear: starting next year, every soldier in the U.S. Army will wear a black beret.

"This shows our commitment to transform into a significant Army," said Army chief of staff Gen. Eric Shinseki, calling the beret "a symbol of Army excellence."

Delivered Tuesday at the Association of the U.S. Army's national convention, Shinseki's announcement dropped jaws. "I am going to need some time to think about this before commenting," said Sgt. First Class Jason Shipley, platoon sergeant for the 1-23 Infantry Battalion.

Many attendees wondered about Army Rangers, for whom the beret is a symbol of their elite status. "They are going to be pissed," said one special ops officer, who insisted on anonymity.

Read the full story at:

http://www.military.com/Content/MoreContent?file=NL_blackberet_swarner

MartialArtist
14th October 2003, 02:16
Former Cpt., 2nd Battalion

This is sad, especially since Shinseki has a Ranger tab (although he never served in the regiment so he doesn't have the scroll which to a lot of people, MEANS YOU'RE A RANGER, not RANGER-QUALIFIED).

Then it's him with his Stryker idea. Glad he's retiring. :rolleyes:

tmanifold
14th October 2003, 04:27
Let me tell you about the canadian military which in the late 90's allowed all seving members of all branches to wear the beret. This mada for a unorganized look as blue berets were worn by the airforce, black was for both the armour corps and the navy. The beret was a distinction of fighting troops versus non- combat tradesmen. Sadly this has been forgotten, as has the peoples' pride in the national fighting men. What is next? Guardsmen will no longuer be called guardsmen in fear of demeaning them?

Actually combat arms trades can still be recognized by their use of The "Cap Brass" or a metal unit badge rather than a cloth trade patch. Scottish units have worn a Balmoral or Tam for ever and were still fighting men. They do wear a Metal Cap badge though.

Personally, I don't really care about who wears berets. I do admit that the black beret for Armoured and Navy not to mention blue for air force and people on UN tours is a bit of a problem. You can however always use the cap brass as an indicator. For me the only one that stuck out as "owned" was the maroon berets. Mainly because I have seen people lose teeth over wearing airborne t-shirts when they haven't earned them let alone a maroon Beret.

MartialArtist
15th October 2003, 03:22
Tell that to the Rangers or the SF.

Jock Armstrong
16th October 2003, 01:37
Reguler officialdom has never liked the SF- they represent an un welcome thinking in the ranks. Sergeants and troopies who can think??? What next- stupid officers being recognised as incompetent?? Egad, non of that thank you. This is the Commands way of removing their recognition as "special" give everyone a black beret! It then becomes meaningless and is military officialdom's revenge. The SF, whether SAS, Green Berets, Commandos or whatever were all born of necessity AGAINST the wishes of the establishment.

MartialArtist
16th October 2003, 03:58
Originally posted by Jock Armstrong
Reguler officialdom has never liked the SF- they represent an un welcome thinking in the ranks. Sergeants and troopies who can think??? What next- stupid officers being recognised as incompetent?? Egad, non of that thank you. This is the Commands way of removing their recognition as "special" give everyone a black beret! It then becomes meaningless and is military officialdom's revenge. The SF, whether SAS, Green Berets, Commandos or whatever were all born of necessity AGAINST the wishes of the establishment.
The term SF means Special Forces, not the SAS or the Rangers or the SEALs.

The Special Forces are the Special Forces. The Green Berets are another name for the Special Forces, but it is not a welcome name and is considered an insult. Do not call someone by the color of his beret, they are SF, not Green Berets. Commandos are Special Forces as well.

The Rangers are seperate from the Special Forces. The Navy SEALs are different from the Special Forces and the Rangers. The Marine Force Recon are also different from the US Special Forces. Same with CCTs or PJs. However, one thing they have in common is that they are all elite, flexible, and able to deploy anywhere quickly. I think the term you're looking for is not Special Forces, but special operatives or special ops soldiers. Special Forces is one type of special ops group.

Jock Armstrong
16th October 2003, 04:16
I used the term SF as a blanket for all special forces, not in the narrow US only term. If you don't think that SAS units are special forces best you think again. BTW What was the point of your post? My post was about the efforts of "The Brass" to denigrate what they see as unmilitary wild men lurking on the battlefield and getting a decent training budget.

Mekugi
16th October 2003, 04:23
I think the black beret is a style thing; perhaps an attempt to look more French to keep up the ever so Euro-trash appearance on the forefront of the fashion world...

Just be glad their 'Frenchinization is going this route...

http://meurte.com/backseat/beret/pics/images/beret_liberty_jpg.jpg

and not this route

http://www.christopherking.net/images/halloween2.jpg

MartialArtist
16th October 2003, 04:36
Originally posted by Jock Armstrong
I used the term SF as a blanket for all special forces, not in the narrow US only term. If you don't think that SAS units are special forces best you think again. BTW What was the point of your post? My post was about the efforts of "The Brass" to denigrate what they see as unmilitary wild men lurking on the battlefield and getting a decent training budget.
The SAS are NOT Special Forces. Ask anybody in the SAS, they do not consider themselves Special Forces. They consider themselves elite, yes, but out of respect for the SF, they don't consider themselves Special Forces. Well, NOBODY BUT THE SF considers themselves the Special Forces. Special Forces is not a general term. It might imply that but it is just not true. It is nothing against the SAS, but the SAS does not stand for the SF. The SAS is just as hardcore as any other elite group, from the Special Forces to the SEALs if not more hardcore than many of the special ops soldiers in the US, but that still doesn't change anything dealing with terms.

The SF is not a blanket for all Special Ops soldiers. Special and forces are two generic terms together, but put them together, you get a very specific group of people. And many other countries use the name Special Forces to name a particular group in their military as well. The Special Forces are not superior than the other Special Ops soldiers such as the Rangers or the ROK Marines. There are different groups that focus on different areas. But I stress again, Special Forces is not a generic term which can encompass all special ops soldiers.

An example would be USSOCOM. All the members of USSOCOM are elite, all are special and a cut above the rest. However, it doesn't work to call a Ranger or a member of the 160th SOAR a SF as it wouldn't work to call a SF a Ranger. There are exceptions though, as many SF members served in a battalion.

The point of my post was to set things straight with terms, as a former member of the Special Ops myself. Call a SF Sgt. or an officer a Green Beret and be prepared to get some heat about it.

Juan Perez
16th October 2003, 16:38
First to clarify some things:

1. The term SF is correctly applied, in the US, to the Army's only Unconventional Warfare (UW) component; the Special Forces, or commonly known to the public as "Green Berets".

2. UW is defined as a "broad spectrum of military and paramilitary operations, normally conducted by indigenous, or surrogate forces who are organized, trained, equipped, supported, and directed in varying degrees by an external source." (JP 1-02). The "external source" refers to SF along with any augmentation to the force (TACPs, CCTs, ect.). As such, the SF are the only UW force in ARSOF.

3. The term "Green Beret" is not the term used "in-house" (that is, we don't refer to one another that way), but we accept it. I have never seen anyone get upset over it. We just understand that some people don't read FM's, TM's, or Joint Publications for a living and may not know any better; that's not a big deal.

Now to get this thread back on track:

I've heard over at the "rumor mill" that the future of the "Black Beret" in the conventional Army is not as solid as it once was.

By the way, the SF's "Green Beret" is the only such headgear actually protected by a Presidential Executive Order (thanks to the fateful meeting between General Yarborough and President John F. Kennedy on 12 October, 1961). So, ain't nobody taking that away from us. ;)

MartialArtist
17th October 2003, 03:33
Originally posted by Juan Perez, Jr.
First to clarify some things:

1. The term SF is correctly applied, in the US, to the Army's only Unconventional Warfare (UW) component; the Special Forces, or commonly known to the public as "Green Berets".

2. UW is defined as a "broad spectrum of military and paramilitary operations, normally conducted by indigenous, or surrogate forces who are organized, trained, equipped, supported, and directed in varying degrees by an external source." (JP 1-02). The "external source" refers to SF along with any augmentation to the force (TACPs, CCTs, ect.). As such, the SF are the only UW force in ARSOF.

3. The term "Green Beret" is not the term used "in-house" (that is, we don't refer to one another that way), but we accept it. I have never seen anyone get upset over it. We just understand that some people don't read FM's, TM's, or Joint Publications for a living and may not know any better; that's not a big deal.

Now to get this thread back on track:

I've heard over at the "rumor mill" that the future of the "Black Beret" in the conventional Army is not as solid as it once was.

By the way, the SF's "Green Beret" is the only such headgear actually protected by a Presidential Executive Order (thanks to the fateful meeting between General Yarborough and President John F. Kennedy on 12 October, 1961). So, ain't nobody taking that away from us. ;)
It appears you are a member of the US SF from your avatar. ;) What group are you in?

Juan Perez
17th October 2003, 06:36
Mr. Han,

I'll answer your specific questions via PM. (You know ... OPSEC/PERSEC)

dingodog1
17th February 2004, 08:05
In an effort to lend more esteem to the masses, they do not diminish the grace that the elite have earned however they do disservice to their fallen comrades. They also make the themselves look silly due to the fact that there is no rationale that can be used to justify clothing everyone in berets; they're not practical for any reason. They were just a trademark in the U.S. for SF and Rangers to distinguish these studs from the rest of em. Just as well since the pro's would just as well be discreet.

DaveB
10th March 2004, 20:51
A little late, but a nice article by Bob Black.

http://www.kw-airborneranger.com/beret.php3

Dave Boylan

Maro
10th March 2004, 22:35
Easiest way to get your Beret to fit is to soak it in Warm Water and then Mould it into the shape you want. Then leave it ti Air dry - works a treat!

Mr. Buster
14th March 2004, 02:10
Its nice to boost the morale and confidence of the typical foot soldier, but the uniform [cover] of SF has always set them apart. They EARNED it and deserve the distintion imho.

Juan Perez
15th March 2004, 03:36
The ironic thing is that around the company and battalion headquarters, we prefer to wear our field patrol caps. They are easier to put on (don't have to stand in front of some mirror and make sure it looks right). Around the rest of the post, however, we wear the Green Beret. Still, I hate having to bring two hats to work. :)

Shison
15th March 2004, 05:21
Juan Perez Still, I hate having to bring two hats to work.

Should be more than that... ;)


Mr. Buster Its nice to boost the morale and confidence of the typical foot soldier, but the uniform [cover] of SF has always set them apart. They EARNED it and deserve the distintion imho.

Yes, but what did it accomplish? The beenies (at least some of them) were made in China, which sparked a whole plethora of controversy, and (I could be wrong) it didn't really help morale all that much. OTOH, it ticked off America's elite QRF by pulling their distinctive headgear, well, you get the idea. BTW, the new ones look snazzy against a black background...

FWIW, Mike Wallace (of 60 minutes) had a good article about it

<--Glad I got out when our previous administration gained office.

This all happened quite a bit of time ago, and I'm curious why the thread has been ressurected...

joe yang
16th March 2004, 18:17
Let's just give everyone a rasberry beret and be done with it. Don't forget, the beret is a French thing. Real men wear baseball caps!

Juan Perez
17th March 2004, 01:16
I guess that there are at least two factors at work regarding this issue:

1. Tradition

2. Unit Pride (related to tradition)

Most SF guys are utilitarian in nature. We like the patrol cap because it keeps the sun out of your eyes. It is camouflaged and thus, blends in with some of the vegetation. Also, it is considered a work hat, we don't mind getting it dirty, or even ripping it apart. We sew marking panels on it, glint tape (for identification by aircraft overhead), luminous tape, nametape, etc.

But, the Green Beret is a part of the tradition of the 1st Special Forces Regiment. It sets us apart from everyone else. In a sense, it is the "mark of distinction" and the "badge of courage" that JFK intended it to be. Of my original class of just over 300 soldiers, less than 17% got to wear the beret at the end of the course (nearly two years later). The phrase "earned, not issued" is applicable here.

In the end, it is true that we do not define ourselves by what we wear. I don't think any uniform can do that (which explains why the black beret did not have the intended effect). However, we understand what the beret represents. It is a symbol that reminds us of where we came from, and how we got here. It connects us to a long line of tradition dating back to 1952. In this respect, I can understand why the Rangers were pissed off.

About it being of French origin, I don't care. After all, the French didn't get it all wrong. I mean they came up with the "French Kiss", the "French maid outfit", "French toast", and the idea behind waving the "white flag" :D

tsurashi shondo
17th March 2004, 01:58
American friends,
I don't know what your problem with the French is.
Your Statue of Liberty is french, The red, white and blue and much of your governmental structure and constitutional fabric were borrowed from or influenced by France.
I understand that current U.S. sentiment has France playing a scapegoat role for the purpose of propagandising an illegal war, but I've never once heard a frenchman complain about how the U.S. of A. remained out of WW II
for three years while the slaughter was in full swing in Europe.
It is also noteworthy that the grandfather of President G.W. Bush was selling
petroleum to the Nazis through Swiss brokers up untill the end of 1941. That is a fact and not just more bigotry.
Now,.. as you are all loading up to flame me down, I feel it imperitive to state that I have nothing but respect for the men and women in the field and I pray for their safe return home.

Juan Perez
17th March 2004, 02:44
Originally posted by tsurashi shondo
American friends,
I don't know what your problem with the French is.
I don't have a problem with the French. The French government is merely reaching for international influence and power, which is what I expect any viable power to do (we do it all the time). I was kidding about my previous comments regarding the French in my previous post about the Black Beret (the real topic in the thread). Don't be so sensitive ... or, is that a French thing? :p


Originally posted by tsurashi shondo I understand that current U.S. sentiment has France playing a scapegoat role for the purpose of propagandising an illegal war, but I've never once heard a frenchman complain about how the U.S. of A. remained out of WW II for three years while the slaughter was in full swing in Europe.

That's probably because we made up for that oversight with the nearly 9,000 American soldiers buried in the Colleville American Cemetery, in Normandy. I hope this number is acceptable to you. Our apologies for the wait.


Originally posted by tsurashi shondo It is also noteworthy that the grandfather of President G.W. Bush was selling petroleum to the Nazis through Swiss brokers up untill the end of 1941. That is a fact and not just more bigotry.

Honestly, I don't care. Actor Woody Harrelson's father is a convicted murderer; it doesn't make Woody Harrelson a murderer too.


Originally posted by tsurashi shondo Now,.. as you are all loading up to flame me down, I feel it imperitive to state that I have nothing but respect for the men and women in the field and I pray for their safe return home.

Thank you ... Have a nice day! :D

Jim_Jude
29th March 2004, 20:48
having been in the Navy during such an issue as this, when they phased out the "Dixie Cup" white cap & brought in the Unit/Command Specific Ball Caps, & having also been 8404 with 1st MarDiv, I might contribute.
The dixie cup was cool. I liked wearing it ahead of some stupid Command Ballcap. At that time, it was still optional if you wanted to keep wearing the Dixie Cup you could, only the command a$$-kissers were wearing the ball cap. But I guarantee, if we went to war, all those !!! kissers would be wearing a dixie cup, especially after using it to stay afloat in the pool, that was just snazzy.
I think alot of it is just tradition.

Concerning the garrison vs. field cover, when I was a Corpsman with 1st MarDiv, we wore the squared off cover in garrison & when the Old Man was around, but out in the field, we wore boonies (or Jones caps, I believe) almost exclusively. Thats because it kept the rain out, & really broke up your silhouette(sp?). & if you know how to make a ghillie suit, you could REALLY make a high speed field boonie.

Concerning the Black Beret, I see it as a symbol of acheivement. Rangers & Special Forces earn their berets. They were given the Beret by foreign forces for a job well done. Why role it on to the rest of those Army poges so they can feel special? Let 'em earn it! Even the USMC Force Recon earn their dive bubble & jump wings, SEALs earn the Trident, USAF PJs earn their badge & Beret, I say let the average everyday enlisted stay that way.

Doc Jude out