Combat patches: Are they for show or do they really mean something??

Personally I'm not a fan of the AF wearing army combat patches, nor am I a fan of Army wearing Marine Corps patches. It has all gotten out of control in the last few years.

They do, usually to those who actually participate in combat. Let that sink in for you, oh and Kuwait isn't a deployment. It's a 9 month NTC rotation, I'm here too.

As a 35-year veteran, it is my experience that combat patches do what they are intended to do. Build morale and esprit de corps. As a young soldier, I always looked up to the men who wore the patches of WWII and Korea. I did not feel left out or demoralized, it merely added to the respect I had for these men who had done things I could only dream about doing in the service. I can't imagine the mentality of a unit commander who felt that his combat veterans should not wear their patches because it might hurt the feelings of others in the unit who had never deployed. WTH? Surely this PC BS is not beginning to permeate MY Army? The patches should be worn as awards of honor and service, just like an "I was there" ribbon. Does this commander also feel that his combat soldiers should not wear their authorized ribbons and awards because others in his unit didn't have them? What a crock! Combat patches should mean something to those who view them and to those who wear them. I can guarantee that those of us who wore them because we were infantry combat soldiers did so with great pride. If someone doesn't care whether they wear one or not, those soldiers are the ones who don't see the big picture of camaraderie and distinctive service. Patches send a message to all who understand them that this individual has been someplace where he has put his life on the line for the country. If the place is not that dangerous, then they should not authorize the patch.

Sadly, many Veterans put each other down by which combat patch they have or where it was earned. Yes, in my case, it meant I was in a combat zone during a certain era. For others, it was earned by serving in hot combat. The CIB or CAB provides this additional distinction. Combat patches, like ribbons, devices, and medals simply tell a Soldier's story. A one year tour in Kuwait between 2003 and 2014 was still a year away from a family and service to the nation. We should be proud of what we earned.

It means something to me. I deployed to Kuwait, but ran convoy security from Camp Buehring into Iraq. I got as far north as JBB. I'd be willing to bet I saw more of Iraq and spent more time outside the wire than a lot of those stationed in Iraq. I definitely feel like I earned it.

When I look at it now, it reminds me of those I served with. It also ties me back to that unit, as I've since transferred States. I'm proud to wear the patch of the best ARNG division (the 34th ID) in the nation.

We have been in some sort of combat in the Middle East since 1990 so they have been watered down in the 26 years.

To me, it is a big deal. I went to Iraq one time, saw combat, earned the right to wear it until I got out and still display them today. I hold them as dear as I do any award I ever earned and I think they should be worn if earned. It is not up to us as soldiers to ID combat theater but to go where we are ordered and wear what the Dept of the Army and our officers say we earned. Scouts Out!

It should mean something. I think people get upset because they sacrifice time to go to a foreign country and want to be recognized.

That's what medals and ribbons are for. Nobody else wears combat patches, and yes, other branches see combat.

For the non-blue cords out there, theres a difference between a combat badge, and a deployment badge. One you did nothing, the other you took rounds.

Kuwait is a non combat zone, the jobs that were upset need a new MOS