Should the Army do away with Patches and go to one universal Symbol like the Marines EGA?

Put in the recruiting stations posters will the unit patches and let the recruiters explain the proud traditions of the Divisions and how proud it is to earn the right to wear one.

I was first a cook, then went back to school and became a Subsistence Supply Supervisor/Logistics. I was in the Third Armored Division, V Corps, USARV, Ft Lee, Ft Jackson SC, 8th Infantry Division, and Ft Leavenworth MP Brigade. I changed my Division patch with every transfer, and was always proud of the Division/Post I was stationed at. The Division/Post patch is a great tradition of the Army, and it should continue.

No. That is all.

From the first time that people have sent out groups of combatants to settle disputes, be it just to define hunting grounds or settle grudges over a stolen wife; mankind has utilized markings of some sort to identify who was in what unit. Ancient Egyptians utilized colors, the Spartans the inverted "V", the Romans had their unit standards lead the way, Israel adapted the "Star of David", in Feudal Europe this practice continued to identify not just the country but the family of the various unit commanders. (The art of heraldry is still in practice in many areas). During the Korean War the need for troops at the front was so rigorously enforced by the rear echelon military police, that combat engineers were forced at gun point to leave their assigned jobs and head to the front in an effort to round-up any malingers; this problem was solved, to a degree, when the engineers adapted a horizontal red stripe at knee level. (you don't get your supplies, you can't fight for long.)
There is also a side effect of Individual Unit Distinct Insignia and associated shoulder patches, that is the "esprit de corps" one develops being in such a unit. When combat lines were more defined, it was easier to define "the front", as my old man (who received a battle field commission, during his unit's first action in WWII) once informed several "older troops" during the early years of Viet-Nam (when Korea was the last big one), "His war is much different than ours, we knew where the front was and the enemy wore uniforms; in my son's, the front is 360 degrees and more than likely they're wearing civvies and you don't know when they'll turn" It has been that way ever since, every unit/individual, regardless of task, MOS, or assigned location has become a target (sometimes from our own misguided people).
There is much pride in being a grunt, and most of us can meet the major qualifications, set down in Audie Murphy's "To Hell And Back", i.e., "...take a bath in ditch water, pick off a guy at 100 yards with an M-1 Garand, and throw a grenade farther than anyone else in the block..." But we all have other jobs we must do as well; and if some civilian doesn't understand today's Army and the system of unit identification, either ignore them or educate them. The choice is yours, they think we are all grunts anyway.

They tried to change Navy ratings and failed. It is about tradition :the vets relate to the boots, in my lowly swabby opinion on anything Army. Thanks

The Air Force took patches off the service uniforms early on in its existence as a separate service. On the one hand that simplified the uniform, and made for a cleaner appearance (cynics would say that it was the first step toward McPeak's ideal of looking like airline pilots). However, the squadron, wing, and major air command patches were retained on the flight suit, and in my experience, were symbols worn with considerable pride. Army patches have a much longer heritage, going back to corps badges in the Civil War, and have always been worn with considerable pride, certainly so by combat veterans. Screwing with heritage and pride is never a good idea in an organization that depends on high morale for a good part of its combat efficiency. And seeing a patch on the shoulder is very much like seeing someone's ribbon rack and badges. You know something about who they are and how they fit into your universe.

We seem to be willing to do away with our history.and what makes us special.it needs to stop.for some reason our uniforms keep changing.as a paratrooper in the 82n we earned our berets.but it seems everyone wanted one so some higher up thought oh let’s give them to everyone.then it was the stress cards,the walk not run PT.change the boots,change the uniforms.these do nothing to boost morale.so stop screwing with our military history.and get back to being soldiers.

The Army uniform tells a story about the individual. No need to change the uniform. Be proud of it!

Is it just me or was that the dumbest question I've ever heard?

I enlisted in '92, just in time to miss Desert Storm. I was probably impressed by people wearing combat patches, possibly wished I had one so I wouldn't look like a POG. Then again, being in COSCPM at Bragg put me in a different world - "dirty, nasty leg".
Fast forward to '99 when I got to Campbell and met a guy who had SIX - 6 -patches. He wore a different uniform each day of the week. Still, I'm impressed, but didn't feel like I was "nothing". Once again, fast forward to '07. This time, I ended up deploying and got my first patch. (Hey, when one PCS to a TRADOC unit two months before stop-loss goes into effect, one kinda gets locked in)
And after my deployment? If someone doesn't have a patch, it doesn't affect me and I'm not about to look down on anyone. Being non-airborne at Bragg taught me that.