Posted on Apr 26, 2014
Do you really have a choice on which Combat Patch to wear?
72.2K
137
34
14
14
0
When I was in the 101st, 1st BCT, you were very highly discouraged from wearing any other combat patch aside from ours if you deployed with us. You would be pulled aside, and told you weren't a "team player". I had an NCO who wore a 1st Cav patch, and our CoC actually told him to "We don't wear pony patches around here". Seems kind of insulting...
One day, I gave my combat patch to one of my soldiers who forgot to put on his unit patch (After him paying for it ofcourse [in pushups]) I was publicly called out by an SNCO for not wearing my combat patch. I informed the SNCO of the ALARACT(Feb 2006) that stated the SSI-FTWS is optional to the soldier. Weather they wear it or not, or whichever one they choose to wear.
By forcing soldiers to wear a certain combat patch, or wearing one at all, isn't it taking away from the regulation, not adding to it?
One day, I gave my combat patch to one of my soldiers who forgot to put on his unit patch (After him paying for it ofcourse [in pushups]) I was publicly called out by an SNCO for not wearing my combat patch. I informed the SNCO of the ALARACT(Feb 2006) that stated the SSI-FTWS is optional to the soldier. Weather they wear it or not, or whichever one they choose to wear.
By forcing soldiers to wear a certain combat patch, or wearing one at all, isn't it taking away from the regulation, not adding to it?
Posted in these groups: 
Combat Patch (SSI-FWTS)
Combat Patch (SSI-FWTS)
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 24
3
3
0
It all falls on the Soldier. I've got orders to wear a few, but I choose to wear the 310th ESC patch, and why, well that's a solid story.
The 310th Patch (attached) is a connected set of links that display the importance of all units in the command (a chain is only as strong as its weakest link). To me, it looks like a bulls eye, and it was the patch that I was wearing when some 'unfriendly types' tried to tag me with a mortar round (I know, who tries to hit a point target with area effect?). Suffice to say, they missed, and I got some shrapnel to remember the moment. But, the patch helps remind me of the good and bad times of deployment...
And, that no matter how rough military and personal life can get--things could always be much worse.
The 310th Patch (attached) is a connected set of links that display the importance of all units in the command (a chain is only as strong as its weakest link). To me, it looks like a bulls eye, and it was the patch that I was wearing when some 'unfriendly types' tried to tag me with a mortar round (I know, who tries to hit a point target with area effect?). Suffice to say, they missed, and I got some shrapnel to remember the moment. But, the patch helps remind me of the good and bad times of deployment...
And, that no matter how rough military and personal life can get--things could always be much worse.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Ehh. It's merely a matter of unit pride. Yes, you can wear any patch that you are authorized to wear. What's on your right sleeve bears no true significance to me, personally. With that, I don't get wrapped around the axel over senior leaders "suggesting" I wear the current unit's combat patch.
This is small potatoes and there's no need to mash 'em.
This is small potatoes and there's no need to mash 'em.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
That last part about "add to but not take away" is tribal knowledge and not in the regs. It's a cop out for lazy leaders.
(3)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
True. Everytime I hear someone say that, I ask that person to show me the reg in black & white that states that. In 8 years, no one has been able to do that (because there IS NO reg that says that.)
The standard answer I get is that "it is understood that local commanders can do that." By what authority? A lot of leaders don't even KNOW most of the regs that should be used on a daily basis, so how would they know what is "taking away" or what is "adding to" a regulation?
The standard answer I get is that "it is understood that local commanders can do that." By what authority? A lot of leaders don't even KNOW most of the regs that should be used on a daily basis, so how would they know what is "taking away" or what is "adding to" a regulation?
(0)
(0)
1SG Frank Rocha
It's covered under commanders discretion. however, in this case there is nothing left to interpretation. It's clear as Chrystal. A soldier can wear whatever combat patch he prefers so long as he has earned it. This is both deployed and stateside. That stated, a commander will sometimes implement uniform guidance based on operational need such as stale uniforms.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
the 101st has that mentality, I choose to wear my first combat patch but get looked down upon by those who have never tasted the mixture of blood and sweat and sand. But it is my choice.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
If a unit is well-led and effective, with high morale, the members will want to wear that patch as a combat patch. If not, trying to require it is just bullying people into submission. I have a choice between a MACV patch and 2nd ID patch, and have always chosen the latter simply because of the difference in how I was treated as a member.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
We required Soldiers to wear the currently deployed combat patch at the ceremony on the day they were issued it, and when we cased the colors at the end of deployment. The rest of the time it was whatever one they had earned and preferred. Some of the patches carry a great deal of meaning to individuals based on events of the deployments that went with the patch. We realized that and didn't want to dampen that. I think that's why we didn't encounter issues like this. Sometimes you give a little ....get a lot back.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I have earned multiple CSIBs over the years as well and back when i was an NCO....I preformed a sort of social experiment with this. I noticed a immediately and sometimes dramatic difference in how i was perceived, reguarded, and geneally treated by all Soldier demographics. With that knowledge it was easy to attempt to fit in more or less with which ever demographic i matched most. Ive had long hard, emotional talks with vets wearing 4id and been welcomed by AR and NG guys when wearing theirs, as well as seemed more approachable and sought out by young Soldiers wearing no patch at all. Command teams will seek you out in your silence for them or ignore your valid input without. If you don't think it matters (and you can) try it out next time you go TDY. Missions, conferences, schools...you'll be surprised and frustrated. Its like a form of discrimination. We must live by the Creed...be fair and impartial out there troops.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Not a regulation thing, more an "encouraging espirit de corps" thing... "The beatings will continue until morale improves".
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
DA PAM 670-1, paragraph 21-18 b: "Soldiers who are authorized to wear more than one SSI–MOHC have the option of choosing which SSI–MOHC they will wear. Soldiers will not sew the SSI–MOHC on the combat uniform. Soldiers may also elect not to wear a SSI–MOHC."
That being said some individual commands have dictated otherwise. For example when I deployed to Afghanistan the first sergeant told us after the combat patch ceremony that for the rest of that deployment and until we transfer out of the company we had to wear the current unit patch as the combat patch. He said that it meant we were loyal to the unit or something like that.
That being said some individual commands have dictated otherwise. For example when I deployed to Afghanistan the first sergeant told us after the combat patch ceremony that for the rest of that deployment and until we transfer out of the company we had to wear the current unit patch as the combat patch. He said that it meant we were loyal to the unit or something like that.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google