Would you support a standard uniform for all branches of service? Why or Why not?

I love the Navy and our traditions, but it probably no longer makes sense even to have separate services. Our military budget is larger than all other countries' on the planet, COMBINED. Does it really make sense to have 5 separate air arms and at least 4 sets of Special Forces? I'd say it doesn't. Not only is it more expensive the way we do things now, but our equipment doesn't always interoperate. An F-15 or 16 or whatever the USAF is using now can't land on an aircraft carrier. Even if it could, the pilots don't have those skills. It makes most sense to move toward a common force, which many would say we're doing already. Marines have been used to operate at least hundreds of miles from water, as have SEALs. Navy and Marine Aircraft assault as far inland as USAF and Army aircraft. I've even known Surface Warfare Officers (ship guys) like me to command FOBs in Afghanistan. CENTCOM sent me there instead of Army officers on staff. Maybe we should just stop pretending and go all out integrated.

I don't think it woild work. Not only because every service CHOOSES to have its own distinctive uniform, but because each service also has its own globe of dominance, woth very few exceptions. Army on the ground, Navy/Marines/Coast Guard (who may be my only exception) on the sea, Air Force to the sky. Therefore, each needs a duty uniform duly displaying their separate realms of authority. Combat uniforms should be unanimous only if the services are all deploying to the same environment, much like the multicams are used for. But duty and dress uniforms should NOT be the same military-wide.

I hope your kidding... this isn't some 3rd world Military. Uh..Well it wasn't before Obama got elected.

I support it even though retired. Seems like a waste ro have more than one pattern per area of the world. I could see a couple but they should be the same across all services. The field is the field. Might save a few dollars.
I think the Army went astray by prescribing the field uniform for almost all wear. I think if ID becomes important, one can read the branch on a nametape.

Yes. The cost to maintain 4 different "combat uniforms" is becoming prohibitive. Keep the dress uniforms separate. The concept of a camouflaged uniform is to prevent the enemy, when in or near contact, from seeing you. On a ship, it doesn't matter if the enemy sees you, they are in a plane or another ship and YOU are not the target. Same thing with a flight line or hangar. The new OCP uniform and/or MARPAT are both equal in camo, so either is fine. Having one uniform, would increase the quantity of the contract, decreasing the cost of the uniform and provide a stable base of matching OCIE as well. So, the costs of all accessories like t-shirts, belts, socks, boots etc would all go down as well. Simple equation. Take the emotion out of the decision and make a smart business decision. All these items costing less equals less tax dollars needed, cheaper replacement costs in AAFES for the warrior as well. And while we are at it, name-rank-unit-branch-combat patch ONLY. I don't need to know you, like everyone else who attended, graduated Air Assault. That information is not necessary to fight and win. It's not like I move around the battlefield, wanting to set up a DZ, looking for dope on a rope. I know who my Pathfinder and AA guys are. More reduction in cost to the Soldier, less stuff for the 1SG to waste his time inspecting. We have to start reducing costs in a dwindling budget economy or more important stuff like weapons, armor, ISR gear will be sacrificed.

I'm all for a unified camo uniform. But for dress uniforms, tradition and culture matters. As much as I never liked my cracker jacks, I'd be sad to see them go.

Doesn't the military have better things to spend money on besides a fashion statement?

Each service should have a different uniform. It promotes pride in service. and those in that uniform are part of that team. However, since you ask, I do not approve of the periodic dress uniform change that goes on in each military branch every so often. I think the return to the Pinks & Greens by the Army is just a waste of money that can be used elsewhere. Work/Camo uniform changes I can understand because of the constant change of technology on the battlefield. However, the dress uniform is nothing more than a make money scheme for certain suppliers. I think if we follow the money we could find out who is friends with who in our procurement system. If someone tells me this constant change promotes pride in service, I say BS. Just saying.

I was in more or less universal field or utility uniforms for a good part of my career. The fatigue uniforms had generally the same patters with the Marines having a map pocket in their version. When we went to the newer fatigues with the thicker buttons, the marines lost their map pocket the Air Force lost their black steel buttons. Then the services went to woodland camo and we were all still the same, to differentiate themselves from the other services they rolled their sleeves differently. I was in the Air National Guard for 6 years I went into the salvage store at McClellan AFB and bought a surplus Air Force Arctic Parka. My brother was serving as a submariner and on deck watch was freezing. He called me and asked me to send my surplus Air Force Arctic Parka. I did so and the entire crew used it on deck watch. He told me he wished he had the stock number for that parka. I told him in was on the label on the back of the collar, he ordered it and the requisition got up to base supply and it was rejected as not authorized for navy. Too bad the best item can not be used for all services!!!

Absolutely not. People join the various branches of service for a multitude of reasons. Those reasons are as expressive as the individuals. By differentiating the uniforms, we allow all of those entering each branch to be immediately identifiable by, and take pride in the uniform of their CHOSEN branch.
Thomas Agostini,
SGT., USMC