House rebuffs Pentagon on defense spending

[BMT (RIP)]

http://www.fayobserver.com/military/...da050763a.html

BMT

[Pete]

The story delinked the President's threat of Veto from the cause.

He threatens to Veto if it messes with Gitmo way down later in the story. Since the house funded it then the bill should be good to go - well, depending on what the Senate does.

[Tree Potato]

...skyrocketing costs of Pentagon entitlement programs...

Somehow this has become accepted as gospel, but the numbers provided to prove it are debatable at best. The term "entitlement" has morphed into a connotation of expecting and taking what has not been earned, and describing benefits promised and earned through military service as entitlements ticks me off.

[Richard]

So...is this a necessary expenditure?

Richard

Army Selects New Camouflage Pattern
Mil.Com, 23 May 2014

The U.S. Army is quietly putting the word out to commands that it is replacing its current Universal Camouflage Pattern with a pattern the service has owned for more than a decade.

The Army's senior leadership has selected Scorpion, a pattern similar to MultiCam that was developed around 2002, according to a source with knowledge of the decision.

Sgt. Major of the Army Raymond Chandler III has been briefing senior sergeants major throughout the Army about the new pattern for the Army Combat Uniform, but details are still limited.

The Army was poised to announce the results of its multi-year camouflage improvement effort nearly a year ago, but congressional language in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2014 called on the Pentagon to put an end to the services branding their ranks with unique camouflage uniforms.

(Cont'd) http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...tml?ESRC=eb.nl

[Beef]

Originally Posted by Richard

So...is this a necessary expenditure?

Richard

Army Selects New Camouflage Pattern
Mil.Com, 23 May 2014

The U.S. Army is quietly putting the word out to commands that it is replacing its current Universal Camouflage Pattern with a pattern the service has owned for more than a decade.

The Army's senior leadership has selected Scorpion, a pattern similar to MultiCam that was developed around 2002, according to a source with knowledge of the decision.

Sgt. Major of the Army Raymond Chandler III has been briefing senior sergeants major throughout the Army about the new pattern for the Army Combat Uniform, but details are still limited.

The Army was poised to announce the results of its multi-year camouflage improvement effort nearly a year ago, but congressional language in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2014 called on the Pentagon to put an end to the services branding their ranks with unique camouflage uniforms.

(Cont'd) http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...tml?ESRC=eb.nl

Why of course its necessary, Richard. Its a more "Marine-like" pattern.

Is the SGM of the Army related to "The Maltese Falcon" guy of the same name? I know that you'll know.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

Yea. If you had ever worn ACU's in the woods you would agree. I am sure the military will spend too much time and money getting it done however. IMHO go back to woodlands or even OD greens for now. Anything but the glowing ACU's

Ah, the story talks about each service developing their own brand of cammo - which congress thinks is a waste of money.

Like in this case everybody knew the ACU pattern was crap, so they worked on multi cam as a replacement but are going retro to another pattern from 2002.

[sefryak]

Soldier Systems (http://soldiersystems.net/2014/05/23...flage-pattern/) has a lot of info pertaining to this debacle, well worth checking out to get the truth on just how abysmally the Army leadership screwed the pooch on this. They have decided to ignore the results of their own 2 year, comprehensive evaluation, which came out with Crye's patterns as the winner, in favor of a pattern that was out performed by all 4 finalists and which should have been adopted 10 years ago to begin with.

Utter shambles, but shouldn't be any surprise coming from the leadership that claims the troops are supportive of losing the benefits they've earned to pay for training.