Letters - Army Community - Army Discussions - Army Times

Letters

TRICARE FALLS SHORT

[There is a] gray area of denials and delays between injury and medical retirement [“New Tricare law affirms no penalties from health reform,” May 10]. Tricare benefits fail in the face of serious illness/injury with regards to durable medical equipment that cannot wait for Veterans Affairs benefits to kick in.

This has led to a greater reliance on nonprofits rather than fixing the period of denial and delay. While grateful for the nonprofits’ efforts, I am disappointed my fellow service members have to wait for the VA or accept charity while we are covered by Tricare.

- Lt. Col. Scott C. Johnson, Evans, Ga.

DITCH THE BERET

Here is how I would change the Army [“A beret bereft of support,” May 10]: The Army should dump the beret. It does not inspire the warrior spirit — combat does. Keep the patrol cap for the combat uniform and bring back the World War II-style Army Garrison Cap and Army Service Cap to maintain a military appearance.

It should dump the one-color-fits-all Army Service Uniform. It looks silly with all the add-on badges, two-tone look of light and dark shades of blue, etc. The Class B style with the short-sleeved white shirt is humorous in its resemblance to a “mall cop” uniform. Keep the green Class A and Dress Blue uniforms. The Army has had these two distinct uniforms since before World War I.

If we must change the Class A uniform, then adopt the World War II-style pinks and greens with khaki shirt and tie and Sam Browne belt. This uniform proved extremely popular when soldiers were given a poll on Class A choices a few years back. The World War II Army uniform looks like a true uniform.

- Lt. Col. Victor Sarna, Fort Belvoir, Va.

I never wear [the beret]. My Reserve command has us wear patrol caps and deployed soldiers never see it. I had to wear it once at a Noncommissioned Officer Education System school. I hate the silly thing.

- Sgt. 1st Class Jeff Duran, Baghdad

LEAD FROM THE FRONT

The article [“Holding leaders accountable,” April 19] shows just what problems are showing in today’s military. Our senior leaders have lost track of what being in combat actually means. What happened to generals being on the actual battlefield?

Officers study other officers that have been categorized as heroes among their ranks. But it seems to me they are all trying to reach the same status as Gen. George Washington from behind a desk.

The men they study with passion are known for what they did on the battlefield, not from the desk. In order for our senior leaders to get back in touch with what the actual foot soldier goes through and really needs, I want to challenge them to do what we do.

I challenge them to leave the office and go stay with the infantry, tank, scout and artillery units that fight the battles. Live among the units with the units, not visit them with a battalion security force. Go out and eat, sleep and fight along side them. If I were in a battle and saw a senior leader living and fighting as I am, my morale and respect for them would go up even more.

As NCOs, we do everything along with our soldiers. We earn their respect not just by our rank or position but by doing what we ask of them with them. We don’t have them do something we would not do ourselves.

- Staff Sgt. Mark Minor, Fort Knox, Ky.

MARRY FOR BENNIES?

In your editorial you write about linking Basic Allowance for Housing to service [April 26]. Has anyone thought about linking it to the length of one’s marriage?

Maybe soldiers would work a little harder at their marriage that way.

- Chief Warrant Officer 2 Joshua Roberts, Peoria, Ill.

WAIT TO REPEAL ‘DON’T ASK’

Homosexuality is a sin to believing Catholics. The official position of the Catholic Church is not only that homosexuality is immoral; it is a sin on par with adultery, prostitution and pornography. This is true not just for Catholics and many other Christians, but for some Jews and Muslims as well.

Part of being a compassionate atheist, then, is to acknowledge that homosexuality is indeed immoral and sinful in the eyes of millions, if not billions, of people around the world and in our own country.

Left-wing courts have passed gay marriage in five states, but this is judicial tyranny not in accord with the will of the people.

Until homosexuality becomes mainstream, normal behavior in at least one state, why play left-wing politics with the military and impose even tougher team-building conditions on leaders serving in a tactical environment?

- Staff Sgt. Nathan Berry, San Angelo, Texas

PRECEDENT FOR INTEGRATION

As a boy growing up I was taught many invaluable lessons by my grandfather. One of the ones that has always stuck out and served me well over the years has been, “Your rights end where the other fellow’s begin.”

I’m not a smoker, but I don’t begrudge anyone the right to enjoy tobacco. I don’t support abortion, however I feel if it’s not my kid, it’s not my decision. I believe that responsible adults should be allowed to own and operate any weapon commercially available, but I’m not going to force my beliefs on anyone.

Having said that, I am not a homosexual, but I don’t think I should be able to tell anyone that they should or shouldn’t be one either.

I enjoy an interest in military history and I recognize a lot of the arguments against letting gays and lesbians serve. Many of them were uttered more than 60 years ago, except then they were made against African-Americans or women serving. “We can’t integrate because of the cost of separate facilities” or “They would need their own showers, restrooms and sleeping quarters” or “Letting them serve next to regular troops would be detrimental to good order and discipline as well as impact readiness.”

Somehow the military made the transition then, and I believe it will again. Some day down the road, people will look back on these arguments through the lens of history and realize that it was nothing more than a waste of time and resources better spent elsewhere.

- Staff Sgt. Clinton R. Beene, Forward Operating Base Sykes, Iraq

SEW ‘EM ON

If I’m not mistaken, the reason for doing away with the sew-on skill badges was to save the soldiers from having to expend the additional cost to have them sewn on [Letters, March 29]. However, I believe the choice should be given to the individual soldier. This should be one of the changes that should be implemented along with uniform changes.

As a senior noncommissioned officer, I would prefer to have my qualification badges sewn on. The Air Force and Navy allow their members to sew on badges. Does it create such an expense for them as well?

I’m very proud of my accomplishments and, like many of my fellow soldiers, I don’t mind spending the extra funds to look my best.

- Sgt. 1st Class Angel Moreno, Tulsa, Okla.