2008 Army Signal Ball Manhattan Kansas

[Nervous Jock]

In my opinion, this young man has not earned the right to wear them, I think it is wrong.

I have come in late to this but I find this opinion really sad.

[rdjmchris]

I am waiting for the pics of the outfit worn to the Signal Ball. Enough grandstanding on the right or wrong of wearing daddy's medals and what not. Let's get back on topic.

[starbkjrus]

Well, I think the outfit that Rogerson785 has decided to wear will look great!

Hear hear!

Back on board.

MrBill

I am waiting for the pics of the outfit worn to the Signal Ball. Enough grandstanding on the right or wrong of wearing daddy's medals and what not. Let's get back on topic.

Hear Hear!! Sounds like an excellent outfit.

Yes, we want pics as soon as your gear all arrives.

[macwilkin]

Hear Hear!! Sounds like an excellent outfit.

Yes, we want pics as soon as your gear all arrives.

My apologies, gentlemen. I didn't mean to offend anyone.

Todd

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

James, I have tremendous respect for those that have made the sacrifice of serving in this country's armed forces.

But one thing that absolutely sickens me to death is to watch those that have served walking around beating their own breasts about it.

Once a Marine, always a Marine? Sorry, but from where I'm sitting, that was then and this is now. It is what you are doing today that is defining who you are, not what you once did. Welcome back to the world.

A few points with which I do, and do not, agree:

I think we all have profound respect for those who have served in their nation's armed forces. What right thinking person would disparage those who devote their youth, and often their entire life, to defending those liberties which we, in free societies, cherish most?

Most former servicemen and women are exactly like your father; they are proud to have served their country and modest about that service. But, and this is important, most of those individuals you are complaining about have seen little, or no military service. Those who have served their country are as appalled as you are by this boorish behaviour.

In the same way that it would be wrong to be dismissive of the clergy by saying: "Once a priest, always a priest?-- I don't think so, look at the scandals priests are involved with." I believe you have over stepped the mark with your comments: "Once a Marine always a Marine?".

Respectfully, there is a defining moment in every man's life. For the clergyman that defining moment came when he decided to seek ordination. For the soldier that moment came when he decided to enlist in his nation's armed forces.

It is wrong to be disparaging toward military personel for the way military service shaped their life in the same way it is wrong to be disparaging of the clergy because of the way a religious calling has shaped their life. Both make an invaluable contribution to the daily lives of us all.

People are defined not only by their present actions, but by their past actions as well. Past actions determine the direction individuals, as well as societies, will take in the future, and should not be dismissed in a condescending manner.

The line "Welcome back to the world." smacks of a disrespectful cheap shot-- something that was probably unintended when written, but none the less implies, at least to this reader, that your world is the real world and that those who choose to define themselves as former military, and proud of that service, are not a part of that world, and certainly not worthy of respect.

And that "cheap shot" is what I find disagreeable in your posting.

(TO RODGERSON 785 -- and everyone else: I'm sorry that I seem to have been the instigator of this thread being hijacked by the X Marks Orders and Medals Society-- perhaps now we can get back on track? It's either that or move all this stuff to OFF TOPIC or HERALDY and continue the buffeting. --Scott)

[McMathTX]

After what's gone on before, I'm reluctant to bring this up, but I really want to know. I think I've heard conflicting information about mess jackets on this thread. Is it ok for retired or active military personnel to where their mess jackets in lieu of a PC?

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Is it ok for retired or active military personnel to where their mess jackets in lieu of a PC?

No it's not okay. Uncle Sam is pretty strict about wearing uniforms and "mixing and matching" is strictly forbidden by all US service regulations. As retired military you can wear full mess dress to all appropriate civilian functions, provided it is worn in accordance with the regulations in force at the time you were separated from the service.

If you would like a military-style mess jacket you can go on line to: MARLOW WHITE UNIFORMS and order the jacket without trimmings. The white mess jackets worn by army and navy officers make an excellent alternative to the PC jacket during the hot summer months.

Hope this helps--

[Sir Robert]

When I advised the poster (to wear the fullsized medals) it was one serviceman talking to another serviceman in the context of a military ball. Some one picked this up, read it wrong and went on a rant about people who arn't military wearing medals, not what is being discussed at all.

For most service persons you are issued the full sized medals but do not wear them, one wears the ribbons on class "B" uniforms and minatures on the "Dress" uniform. So when do you wear them? The answer is well nowhere. This is utter BS.

If a Soldier or Vet is entitled to wear a medal (because orders were written awarding the medal to the person in question) then why not wear the full sized medals? Federal law trumps military regulations. Under current US Law Currently serving Military and Veterans may wear the uniform but the law does not specify what a uniform is or is not. The lack of definition of what is or is not a uniform is important. In addition a Veteran may under law wear either the current uniform but also his "historical" uniform. This trumps the military Regulations that forbid "old" uniforms. This is why you see WWI vets still dressed in Doughboy uniforms, they can, by law.

If the Soldier in question was on-duty then the Kansas ARNG Regulation KN-670-1 applies but off duty (when the ball will take place) then US Federal law applies and he is a "Veteran wearing his uniform to a military function" as provided for in law. Technially National Guardsmen can not wear their uniform off duty, that is the crime of "impersonating a federal official" as the NG uniform is exactly the same as the Regular Army's uniform. It is the Federal Law, not Kansas ARNG Regulations, that allow the wear of their uniforms off duty.

This is the oddball byplay between two seperate and distinct sets of Laws/Regs that do in fact contridict each other. This is not advice for Civillians just GI to GI.

As far as what is or is not a uniform, it is the buttons and the piping (cords on the edges) that define a uniform. So converting a military jacket to civillian means removing all the do-dads and changing the buttons, which is the oppisit of how the Army "militarized" a dinner jacket into a uniform.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

For most service persons you are issued the full sized medals but do not wear them, one wears the ribbons on class "B" uniforms and minatures on the "Dress" uniform. So when do you wear them? The answer is well nowhere.

This is utter BS.

WWI vets still dressed in Doughboy uniforms, they can, by law.

So when are full size medals worn?

Aside from being worn when presented, regardless of uniform, full size medals in the Army are worn on dress blues when so ordered. Admittedly these occasions are few and far between. But that's when Army regulations says they are to be worn.

The same regulations state that only miniature medals are to be worn on the mess uniform; either the "tropical" white mess jacket or the blue mess jacket. Both of these are separate items of uniform, distinct from "dress blues".

The customs of the service permit retired service personel to wear the uniform that conforms to the regulations in effect when they retired. So no one would have a beef with the two surviving WWI veterans wearing their old doughboy uniforms.

I'm not a JAG, nor a barracks room lawyer-- I was an S5 for most of my service-- so I'm not commenting on Federal Law vs. Army Regulations (which do have the force of Federal Law if I remember my UCMJ).

I respect your desire to wear your full size medals, and I commend you for your service to your country. By all means feel free to wear your full size medals where ever and when ever and how ever you want.

That said, most people, will adhere to the regulations.

(again appologies to all for going so far off topic)

[BonnieT100]

My big issue, being a Signal Officer, is why is the Signal Ball being held in Kansas and not at the home of the Signal Corp, Fort Gordon, GA?

I have only seen one person wearing full medals on his dress blues and it didn't look right at all. I considered wearing mine, but the top ones would obscure the bottom ones, and really, we're all so used to seeing the ribbons that no one would really recognize the actual medal, with the exception of the BSM, SS, or DSC. Besides, if you have an odd number of medals, it looks kind of funny. I'll have 7 by the time I get out of Iraq (hopefully my one from my 4 years in the 101st finally makes it through the system by then), and I think it would look unbalanced. The Army puts everything on the left side of the jacket, so the whole thing is lopsided as it is. Adding a bunch of medals would just increase the weight.