Should the Army uniform only show name and US Army? (Getting rid of patches and badges)?

I completely agree with this and while we're at it, let's pull the stupid velcro off and go back to sew on, and go back to rank on the collars( pin on or sew on). Badges should be kept as well.

In general not a bad idea except for two points. First it is a matter of esprit de corps and personal pride. Pride is a good thing in a Soldier. And second, sometimes it matters. When you are putting on your chute and need a Jumpmaster or a Rigger, it is good to see those wings. 

I won't lie, I find it pretty impressive to see someone's accomplishments. I think it is perfectly fine. After all, they had to work hard for it. They earned it and should be able to show it off. I doubt its the case, but some may go through the training just to look bad-a something something. More power to them and their accomplishments.

Interesting question.  THe AF just finally allowed members to wear "tabs" earned from the sisters.

All other debates withstanding, I am just anxious to get a camo pattern that actually works. UCP is a tragic failure. 

One of the biggest things I have seen is the former marines coming over to the army and feeling left out with the combat patches. They decide to wear the 1st Marine Division (Guadalcanal) patch which is against regulation. That is one thing I wouldn't mind losing. I defenitely agree with CW2 Vann with leaving it for the dress uniform.

Only a total of three badges are authorized. The occupational, joint and duty badges are not job specific. The occupational does display the "field" that you are in, and the skill level. In the army: the "job" would be a welder and the "field" would be the ordinance corp, but the army doesn't display a skill level nor do they display the "field" you're in. Badges should only be displayed that are joint(parachutist, etc.) or duty(MTL/drill instructor, security/MP, etc.)

I say keep them. All that I had was my EIB and my drill sergeant identification badge but I was proud of both and they do show people who and what you are. What is wrong with being proud of your accomplishments?

SSG Turkezer,
I work in a joint environment and I have to say that the Air Force and Navy both wear patches which identify specialties on their uniforms, other than rank, name and branch. This means they do not all look uniform. For example, a Navy PO1 next to me currently has a warfare specialty patch indicating he is additionally qualified in "Enlisted information dominance warfare", while another Navy PO1 on the other side has both that AND a separate patch indicating he did 'fly' duty. The LTJG (O2) down the way doesn't have any additional patches yet because he hasn't tested in any specialties. If a Navy service member goes on a sub or does 'surface' duty, they also have different patches...

Air Force is the same way. You have a patch on your chest which shows which branch or MOS (AFSC) you are in, and if you have done special duty, like Air Crew, you wear that patch- and you continue to wear it even after you leave air crew. This is all according to the Navy and Air Force personnel around me. The Marine has left for PT, so I cannot inspect his uniform. I see no reason to have our various accouterments on our uniforms, and I am proud of my badges and patches.

I think is fine the way we are right now, is part of a history, that what make us difference.

We also wear our warfare qualifications, and for things like flight suits we wear weapons school patches. The idea is to identify us as well as have a decent idea of what we're qualified for, if a senior needs to delegate a task, or a junior wants assurance the person giving the order has the authority.

I have found that most of the people that have butt-burn about badges .. don't have any.

Actually, Navy and Air Force wear plenty of chest candy. I am in a joint unit and I see plenty of them wearing Airborne, Air Assault, Expeditionary Warfare, Sea Warfare, Career Field, and many more. I have actually seen some Marines wear their Airborne wings as well.

The Army has worn unit patches and skill badges for quite a while now (WWI maybe??) as well as the distinctive headwear/footwear (airborne units, Ranger BNs, SF). Let's get us out of ACUs first (oh, and for officers bring back branch insignia).

I think that if you've earned the award/appurtenance than you should wear it. Yes, it is a pride thing and also a great conversation starter, but it's an individual's choice to wear it or not.

The basis of the question is incorrect. The Navy, Air Force and Marines all have their own service specific Badges that are authorized in utility uniform (ACU equivalent). Some Army badges are also authorized for them to wear as well. I've seen a Marine with Army Basic Parachutist Wings, and an Airman with an Army Combat Patch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badges_of_the_United_States_Navy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badges_of_the_United_States_Air_Force
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badges_of_the_United_States_Marine_Corps

Frankly, being in the Air Force, I've been jealous of the individual patches that the Army wears. To me even something as simple as the American flag on the shoulder would be an improvement to the ABU.

Can't get a school in my BN cause they give all the slots to officers. I say it's unfair for the soldiers that want to go. But as for me, I don't care to much for military schools. I agree with what your say SFC. I like how the Marines uniforms are. All you see is branch, name, and rank.... Most people don't respect NCO'S unless they have deployment patches or all kind of flair. It's the wrong answer but it's the truth.  

I agree with a lot of the comments. As MAJ Coger stated below, we are authorized, but not required, to wear the badges and tabs we have earned. I don't see an issue with personnel choosing to not wear things. It's their choice to spend the money or not. Like I mentioned in another thread about patches, badges and tabs are great discussion starters not to mention giving the junior enlisted something to aspire towards.