we should just not wear anything and stay naked, brilliant xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2006-07-07 02:26:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by candypants 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well yes urban warfare may give the advantage to a non-uniformed combatant...but this is used only by three kinds of people: the gangster type (look in the more violent neighborhoods), the freedom fighter type and the Terrorist type. (due to the nature of the world the last two are hard to distinguish from each other). Besides no-uniforms works only for individual ambushers...but for a cohesive combat group (i know many have already pointed this out) identification will be necessary (wars are not really fought like in strategy games which have units wear certain distinguishing colors or are selectable with some mouse). And besides not all situations will be like the urban warfare scenario. There will still be field battles in deserts or farmlands and jungle warfare is just as bad if not worse than urban settings. Camoflauged uniforms will still be needed, and eventually even optical camo tech could also be applied (though that will still be a certain time away). And another thing, not all military time is used in combat...ranks and the maintenance of the conformal military culture is also considered in the use of uniforms.
2006-07-07 02:14:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by betterdeadthansorry 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
You need to distinct between serviceman and civilian. To dress as civilians is morally wrong. This would add severe confusion to the battlefield and also endanger civilians. Another point is if the military was in civilian dress on the battlefield, and some stranger approached them and gave them an order, In a war torn area, you don't want to hesitate and ensure that this person is a superior rank, or simply a civilian employed by the enemy to distract or lure into a trap. Uniforms help to stop that sort of thing happening. It's against the Geneva convention, also. I'm proud to wear a uniform. My professional mentality changes for the better when I put my uniform on.
2006-07-09 04:22:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by genghis41f 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Looking at it purely in the light of camouflage you do have a point. And indeed it shows that insurgents, guerilleros and resistance fighters (who do not wear uniforms) have a good rate of success.
However, there is more to warfare and the military than just that. Soldiers wear uniforms mainly for reasons of identification. When in uniform, they represent the legitimate and official force of their country. The uniform indentifies them to their own people as well as to the opponent or enemy, and it makes a proper field engagement - from small skirmishes to large pitched battles - possible. Without uniforms there would be anarchy on battlefield, and many more casualties of "friendly fire".
2006-07-07 07:32:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sean F 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If everyone looks the same, how do you know who's on your side? It's more complicated than you think... also, do some research as many of the camo uniforms are becoming obsolete and replaced by better ones. Also, the military is trying to develop an "invisible" type uniform, like the one the Predator used in the movies... It's not the same concept, but it's pretty close... look it up...
2006-07-07 01:52:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mexi Poff 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
A uniform does much more than hide someone. It shows who they represent. Also, the Geneva Convention ONLY applies to uniformed combatants. So, the question is have a uniform that may stand out, or don't have the Geneva Convention apply to you. As someone who was in the Air Force, I'd take the prior every time.
A uniform is also a great unifying force for the troops. Even though people will know who to target, they also know who to fear (hopefully only our enemies will fear our military).
Change to no uniforms? I very much doubt that will happen.
2006-07-07 01:52:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I guess with the recent Supreme Court ruling, the answer should be yea you are right. The reality is that we are not terrorist and we make our intentions known. We in the United States Military fight under a CODE, part of which is identifying with our country and that we are fighting for our country and we obey rules of international warfare. Check the Code of Conduct, that might help, not to mention the Geneva Conventions regarding the rules of warfare.
2006-07-07 01:58:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
At school it gives the children a sense of identity, and reduces the risk of competition about who has the most expensive or fashionable clothes/trainers etc. In hospitals, it is to make staff easily identifiable from families visiting patients, and apparently due to infection control purposes. How would you recognise a police officer without a uniform? Not very easily by my reckoning. In short it is to help identify different elements of the community and to recognise their roles/jobs within the community
2006-07-07 01:51:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by Eleanora 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's called guerilla warfare, and that's why the Rebels had an advantage over the Redcoats. The same could be said for the opposition in the Vietnam "conflict."
2006-07-07 01:54:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you serious? How the crap would you know who the enemy is and who isn't? Military casualities are high enough as it is, it would probably multiply 100 fold if soldiers quit wearing uniforms. Plus, if they started doing that, they would have to wear the appropriate clothes for whatever country they are deployed too or risk offending the hosting nation. Plus, you wouldn't know anyone's rank, name, branch they were from, the military would lose all structure.
2006-07-07 01:53:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by PinkBrain 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
When I put my Uniform on my whole attitude and stance change and I become a soldier I feel immense pride while wearing it. If I wore civy clothes I would feel scruffy. Also your uniform has lots of pockets to put all your bits and pieces in that you carry out in the field.
2006-07-07 04:00:47
·
answer #11
·
answered by simo9352 5
·
1⤊
0⤋