Post by: longeyes on September 01, 2007, 07:20:01 AM
To the Marines convinced they weren't violating a real reg even while getting chewed out for keeping their hands in their pockets or wearing a cell phone on their belt - listen up.
The Corps released 36 new regulations this month officially banning both practices, as well as many others, in its first revision to grooming standards in more than a decade. Mary Boyt, the Marine Corps Uniform Board's program manager, said the service wanted to provide clear rules instead of leaving certain unofficial standards up to interpretation. The update was needed to stem an onslaught of calls the board has received on topics ranging from female buzz cuts to what bags can be worn while in uniform.
The 36 regulations - which provide guidance on old standards and spell out new ones - went through a nearly yearlong gauntlet of review boards and surveys. Commandant Gen. James Conway signed off on the new regs July 11, making them effective from that date, although they weren't announced until Aug. 1.
Cell phones aren't the only thing Marines can no longer wear on their uniforms. The Corps added "tobacco pouches/canisters, visible barrettes [except in physical training situations], and keychains/lanyards/security badges [except as required by the command in the work environment]" to its list of banned items. That means you can't tuck your can of chewing tobacco between your goggle strap and helmet, or use the watertight pouches often attached on the front of body armor.
However, cell phones can be stored in pockets instead of worn on belts, Boyt said. "This was important because a lot of people go outside to get a signal on their phone," she said.
But walking and talking on your phone is forbidden, according to the new
regs, even if you're using an earpiece. "If it's that important, Marines
will have to stop and talk while standing still," Boyt said. Marines also officially can no longer drink or keep their hands in their pockets while walking in uniform. In the field, Boyt said the rules can change, and if a Marine doesn't have his gloves, he should use common sense and use his pockets. But doing so is not authorized in garrison. The same regulation states Marines may not use electronic devices such as iPods while walking or running in uniform unless the local commander allows
it.
Unlike Army and Air Force policies, the Corps prohibited wearing nonissued bags while in uniform. Marines may carry computer bags or gym bags in their hands but are not authorized to wear them over their shoulders or on their backs, even if they match the color of their uniform, Boyt said.
Hair and jewelry: Several of the new regs deal with what's under your cover. Hairstyles such as the teardrop, horseshoe and Mohawk were officially banned for male Marines. Many Marines already considered haircuts such as the Mohawk forbidden, but senior noncommissioned officers wanted it in writing, Boyt said. Women's hairstyles are also covered. In response to a number of female Marines shaving their heads in Iraq, the board decided to define how short a woman's hair can be, Boyt said.
During the review process, the board received feedback from male officers
who wanted women to maintain feminine hairdos to ensure "they could tell the difference between their male and female Marines," Boyt said. The new
regulation states women must have hair longer than a quarter-inch from the
scalp. Women with long hair also received guidance; hair in buns may not extend more than three inches from the scalp and can be no wider than the woman's head.
"Realistically, everyone needs to put that helmet on and go," Boyt said. The Corps nixed the trend of wearing class rings or "door knockers" alongside a wedding band. Marines may wear only one ring per hand and no rings on their thumbs. However, an engagement ring and wedding band count as one, Boyt said.
The Corps already banned male Marines from wearing earrings in uniform but has now officially forbidden wearing them in civvies. Previously, it was
just assumed the ban in uniform would carry over, but it was never officially addressed, Boyt said. The reg also specifies that female Marines
may wear only one earring per ear in both uniform and civvies. Women's fingernails are now limited to a quarter-inch past the fingertip, though French manicures are allowed. The regs also clarify what nail polish and makeup colors are acceptable.
The board broke up the regulations between the two genders, with an extra
emphasis on ensuring female standards were well-defined, Boyt said. She said she had received multiple complaints from Marines saying the old female regulations were too vague. To bolster this new initiative, the Corps added more women to the review boards.
Civilian attire: The uniform board struggled with how to define what a Marine may wear in his off hours without going back to the days of mandating khakis and a colored shirt, Boyt said. But the new regulations tried to eradicate the "gangsta" look, she added. When wearing trousers with belt loops, Marines must wear a belt, according to the new regs. Trousers are defined as any pants or shorts, including jeans, Boyt said. Any civilian clothing revealing the "midriff," "buttocks" or "excessive
amounts of chest/cleavage" was also banned.
Decorative orthodenture is also covered under the regs. Marines with "platinum grills" or any other platinum or gold dental caps used for "purposes of ornamentation" must be removed. Waivers may be issued by commanders to Marines who received permanent gold or platinum caps before
Oct. 1 of this year, according to the regulation.
Source: Michael Hoffman - Staff writer, MarineCorpsTimes.com
Tuesday Aug 14, 2007 19:02:51 EDT MarineCorpsTimes
referred by Seamus Garahay's "All Hands" email network
Post by: Fly320s on September 01, 2007, 09:43:11 AM
I don't think it is nanny-ism. Just clearing-up the regs.
Post by: longeyes on September 01, 2007, 10:17:05 AM
Or could it?
The Clintons had their way with the armed forces for a long time. Let's hope they don't again.
I think there may be some people at the USMC with a little too much time on their hands.
Post by: Thor on September 01, 2007, 01:27:08 PM
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 01, 2007, 01:58:29 PM
That's why they're called uniforms.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 01, 2007, 03:11:02 PM
No, it couldn't happen there.
Or could it?
The Clintons had their way with the armed forces for a long time. Let's hope they don't again.
I think there may be some people at the USMC with a little too much time on their hands.
Or could it?
The Clintons had their way with the armed forces for a long time. Let's hope they don't again.
I think there may be some people at the USMC with a little too much time on their hands.
What do you mean? This is really nothing new, and nothing Clinton-esque, just a clarifying of pre-existing guidelines. We had the same stuff in the Army a few years back. I don't know if they were written anywhere, but they were enforced.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 01, 2007, 03:23:03 PM
Young people will push the boundaries, it's up to their leadership to restrain them as necessary. They are in the Marine Corps, not smoking and joking back on the block.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 01, 2007, 03:25:18 PM
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 01, 2007, 06:26:50 PM
The ones that really don't always agree with are the ones that are supposed to dictate what you can do when not in uniform.
Post by: ilbob on September 01, 2007, 06:34:12 PM
Off duty, you would not think it matters much, but it is hard to be a control freak and not have some of that kind of spill over. Just part of the deal when you sign up.
Post by: Thor on September 01, 2007, 07:18:38 PM
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 01, 2007, 07:46:22 PM
I was wearing an earring while in civilian clothes as we headed off-base to do some shopping.
Big no-no under PACAF rules.
Post by: RevDisk on September 01, 2007, 08:29:32 PM
The ones that really don't always agree with are the ones that are supposed to dictate what you can do when not in uniform.
Seconded. Some of my CO's tried doing the No-No's in civvies. That got old real quick. The one star on my first deployment I swear spent more time cracking down on us than he did focusing on the mission. We came up with a t-shirt listing the new 'Ten Commandments'. No eating on the economy, no shopping on the economy, no war trophies, no relations with the locals, no complaining (no, I'm not kidding), no fraternization, no gambling (BWAHAHA), no pornography (BWAHAHAHAAHA), no alcohol, and no R&R leave.
We had them printed by allies back in CONUS and mailed to us hidden in a shipping container. We had an inflitrator in the mail personnel who smuggled it past the inspectors. We had better OPSEC on the distribution than most of our intel operations. Said one star ALWAYS caught the Saturday 2130 movie at the 'theater'. We posted sentries, lookouts and infiltration specialists anyways with our best communication net. We filled in the first three rows and had everyone slouched down so the back was not visible. When the national anthem started up, we all stood up in unison. He probably would have had us all thrown in the stockade, except for the fact that we distributed said shirts to 20% of the task force on the first shipment. We specifically got 50 to 60 percent of the MP's. Many officers commented that it was the best planned and executed mission of the entire deployment.
Post by: K Frame on September 01, 2007, 08:34:42 PM
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 02, 2007, 03:08:35 AM
If you don't like rules, don't join the military.
Amen.
I don't see anything that seems out of place, and if I were still an NCO I'd probably stick a boot in someone's ass for doing half the things listed that are now banned. Its actually sad they had to clarify some of that nasty, undisciplined behavior.
Post by: Phantom Warrior on September 02, 2007, 04:15:33 AM
However, I have no patience w/ off duty regulations regarding clothing. I personally can't stand the gangsta look, but it is no business of the military what you wear off duty. What, you represent the military by what you wear off duty? That's crap. How come no one holds McDonalds or Walmart or any other organization responsible for what their employees wear off duty? Make no mistake, the military is not some mythic order of warriors. It's a corporation, an organization, a business, just like everything else. Yeah, our job is to go fight wars, but there is still the same mess of rules, politics, and bullshit that you find in any large organzation. RevDisk's story about their BG and his endless oversight is a perfect example. The CSM of the brigade we are attached to down here is a perfect example of that. For that matter, our battalion CSM is the same way.
Post by: RevDisk on September 02, 2007, 04:33:18 AM
If you don't like rules, don't join the military.
Uh. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the military. Complaining and grousing is normal. Not quite encouraged, but very much tolerated within parameters. My first NCO taught me, "Do first, THEN question the intelligence, lineage and moral character of the bonehead who issued the orders."
You only need to worry when soldiers STOP complaining. There is no clearer sign that the execrement is about to hit the fan than quiet, glaring soldiers.
My issue isn't as much the 'rules' as it is certain folks, and not all of them officers either, that care more about their careers or mindless obedience to 'rules' moreso than their REAL mission. I don't mind the real regs and such, but there's plenty of chicken execrement mixed in.
Post by: K Frame on September 02, 2007, 05:58:46 AM
It's always been that way, and it always has been.
Virtually everything I'm seeing in this thread, though, could be construed to be of legitimate military necessity to maintain discipline and order.
Yes, there's some chicken excrement in there. Don't complain? You're right, that's a laugh. But I think it's also pretty true that the average enlisted would consider a lot more things to be chicken excrement than would officers or even civilians.
If you don't like chicken excrement, don't join the military.
Post by: Thor on September 02, 2007, 07:26:50 AM
However, I have no patience w/ off duty regulations regarding clothing. I personally can't stand the gangsta look, but it is no business of the military what you wear off duty. What, you represent the military by what you wear off duty? That's crap. How come no one holds McDonalds or Walmart or any other organization responsible for what their employees wear off duty?
McDonald's and WalMart employees don't stick out like a sore thumb when they're not working. With the military, mainly the men, moreso than the women, the haircuts, mustaches, demeanor, etc are a dead giveaway.
Of course, the military COULD go back to requiring their members to wear their uniform, even while on liberty/ off duty.
Post by: Firethorn on September 02, 2007, 08:37:04 AM
Seconded. Some of my CO's tried doing the No-No's in civvies. That got old real quick. The one star on my first deployment I swear spent more time cracking down on us than he did focusing on the mission. We came up with a t-shirt listing the new 'Ten Commandments'. No eating on the economy, no shopping on the economy, no war trophies, no relations with the locals, no complaining (no, I'm not kidding), no fraternization, no gambling (BWAHAHA), no pornography (BWAHAHAHAAHA), no alcohol, and no R&R leave.
At least in my branch; such action would result in a visit from the commander's commander, and he'd bring a but-chewing with him.
Keeping troops in-line is one thing, going so far that they pull this sort of stuff indicates the beginning of a morale problem.
Post by: HankB on September 02, 2007, 01:10:44 PM
If you didn't know there would be a lot of senseless BS before you joined, you're not real bright . . .
Post by: Matthew Carberry on September 02, 2007, 01:21:31 PM
Quote
McDonald's and WalMart employees don't stick out like a sore thumb when they're not working. With the military, mainly the men, moreso than the women, the haircuts, mustaches, demeanor, etc are a dead giveaway.
Of course, the military COULD go back to requiring their members to wear their uniform, even while on liberty/ off duty.
Of course, the military COULD go back to requiring their members to wear their uniform, even while on liberty/ off duty.
My first liberty weekend at MCT they held our personel clothing in storage and required us to wear our Charlies out the gate.
Why? Some idiots in the prior class had gone on liberty in torn up jeans, untucked t-shirts and sideways ballcaps. Apparently in front of the base commander (Pendleton).
So I had to go buy a new set of civvies in San Diego (the order didn't forbid that). That was in '91 and the order for liberty attire was collared shirts and belts if the pants had belt loops. I have no problem with going back to that.
Post by: Al Norris on September 02, 2007, 01:37:04 PM
I'm just surprised that my old Corps had relaxed things so much!
Post by: French G. on September 02, 2007, 03:32:41 PM
The idea we are all supposed to look the same in uniform is the tired old view of tired old NCOs. Like me...
Post by: Moondoggie on September 02, 2007, 03:46:54 PM
Back in the "Old Corps" we had this device known as a "Liberty Card" that was issued by your Company Commander. The liberty cards were kept in a file box in the duty NCO's office.
After liberty call had been sounded and you had been secured by your work section, you could present yourself to the duty NCO and request your liberty card. The duty NCO would ensure that you were in appropriate civilian attire prior to signing your liberty card out. Appropriate civilian attire included clean, presentable clothing; trousers (women wear pants) with beltloops and belt, shirt with a collar and buttons, socks, etc. "Free spirits" were not encouraged nor tolerated. A few hours of shining a 35 gal shitcan with brasso would reinforce the concept of conformity. The Marine Corps owned you 24/7. You could do all of the free spirit crap you wanted while you were on leave, as long as you didn't get caught.
BTW, you had to show your liberty card to the MP's to get off base, as well.
Sometimes, if you had whizzed in the Cheerios of someone above you in the chain of command your liberty card would be "pulled". When you presented yourself to the duty NCO, there simply wouldn't be a liberty card with your name on it in the file..they didn't necessarily have to tell you beforehand.
What's happening in the story about the uniform regs is clarifications to deal with changing customs/technology in the civilian world that bleed over into the Service.
I recognize that some of you don't understand the culture of the Marine Corps. What you really don't understand is how completely we don't care if you approve of it or not.
Phantomwarrior...you're in the Army. Stay there. You would not find happiness in the Marine Corps.
Kindly direct your attention to this youtube video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=za2jp_tfifs&mode=related&search
Then take you opinion of how the Marine Corps does business and jam it where the sun doesn't shine.....sideways.
Semper Fi!
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 02, 2007, 04:08:18 PM
Quote
recognize that some of you don't understand the culture of the Marine Corps. What you really don't understand is how completely we don't care if you approve of it or not.
Phantomwarrior...you're in the Army. Stay there. You would not find happiness in the Marine Corps.
Phantomwarrior...you're in the Army. Stay there. You would not find happiness in the Marine Corps.
Oooorrraaahhhh!
Post by: Balog on September 02, 2007, 04:43:21 PM
Post by: Moondoggie on September 02, 2007, 05:12:54 PM
I've known plenty of Marine vets who were missing body parts that still considered themselves a part of that culture, and deeply felt it's influence throughout their lives.
I'm sorry you don't feel that way, Balog. Maybe someday things will change.
Semper Fi!
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 02, 2007, 06:39:19 PM
Quote
I recognize that some of you don't understand the culture of the Marine Corps.
Thankfully, my IQ is too high to understand it. And I like girls.
But anyway, good on the Devil-Dogs for having at least some standards.
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 02, 2007, 08:10:12 PM
I have the upmost respect for all my brothers and sisters in whatever branch of the service they choose.
But it is like sibling rivalry. We can pick on each other but don't let an outsider step in or they are going to get it
from both ends.
Post by: Balog on September 02, 2007, 09:16:39 PM
I'm sorry you don't feel that way, Balog. Maybe someday things will change.
Semper Fi!
Semper Fi!
With all due respect, I truly hope not. My experience may have been an anomaly, but a lot of the "culture" involved great devotion to rules that often made it more difficult to accomplish the mission. Combine that with people trying to score brownie points with their superiors even if a few lance criminals get killed and I can't help but feel I'm better off without it.
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 03, 2007, 04:08:57 AM
The Marine Corps most definately is not a religion. It is, however, a culture of distinct customs and traditions.
I've known plenty of Marine vets who were missing body parts that still considered themselves a part of that culture, and deeply felt it's influence throughout their lives.
I'm sorry you don't feel that way, Balog. Maybe someday things will change.
Semper Fi!
I've known plenty of Marine vets who were missing body parts that still considered themselves a part of that culture, and deeply felt it's influence throughout their lives.
I'm sorry you don't feel that way, Balog. Maybe someday things will change.
Semper Fi!
My experiences mimic Moondoggies.
I grew up in the Corps. My father retired just after Gulf War I. 21 years enlisted. I served 5 enlisted. My FIL is retired USMC, 23 years enlisted.
No, its not a religion. It is a series of unique experiences that change the lives of those who serve, and set them apart from everyone else.
I've known all kinds of vets. Grunts. Airwing. Pilots. Supply clerks. Combat vets. Wounded vets. Vets of multiple conflicts. A good family friend growing up was wounded in Korea and Vietnam. He was a retired USMC Light bird.
Not a one of them would have traded thier experiences or life for a nice, cushy window office on Wall Street.
Post by: RocketMan on September 03, 2007, 04:59:07 AM
Quote
JamisJockey said:
Not a one of them would have traded thier experiences or life for a nice, cushy window office on Wall Street.
Amen to that. Five years total enlisted here. Despite the usual bitching and moaning at the time, I would not trade the experience for anything. Like most, I suspect, I would do it again if I had to live life over again. It was a good choice.
Not a one of them would have traded thier experiences or life for a nice, cushy window office on Wall Street.
Post by: Moondoggie on September 03, 2007, 06:00:35 AM
Listen to the words...
"Traditions of an elite Corps handed down and preserved from generation to generation." Changing our standards to mimic popular culture is not part of the Marine Corps Tradition. That is one of the primary things that define the Marine Corps..."We didn't promise you a rose garden".
I'm not slamming Balog, or the younger folks who served an enlistment or two, but you really have to experience the culture for a decade or three to fully understand and appreciate why we are so strict about preserving the traditions and heritage. Without them we might as well be the Army, Navy, or Air Force...but we're not. We have elements of all three within our Service, but we're still unique...and uniquely successful. You can argue against that point 'til the cows come home, but you can't argue against it successfully.
Marine Corps = "Nanny State"...that's a hoot!
PS: WATCH THE VIDEO!!!
Semper Fi!
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 03, 2007, 06:19:22 AM
Quote
Without them we might as well be the Army, Navy, or Air Force...but we're not. We have elements of all three within our Service, but we're still unique...
Well they are known as
Uncle
Sam's
Misguided
Children
for a reason.
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 03, 2007, 07:47:59 AM
Quote
Without them we might as well be the Army, Navy, or Air Force...but we're not.
Yeah, because the above services never experience combat, esprit de corps, cameraderie, or fall under the UCMJ rules, either.
We may not be as disposable as the Marines, but it doesn't mean we don't fight when called.
Wanna see my combat medals?
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 03, 2007, 08:14:18 AM
WTF?
Yeah, because the above services never experience combat, esprit de corps, cameraderie, or fall under the UCMJ rules, either.
We may not be as disposable as the Marines, but it doesn't mean we don't fight when called.
Wanna see my combat medals?
Quote
Without them we might as well be the Army, Navy, or Air Force...but we're not.
Yeah, because the above services never experience combat, esprit de corps, cameraderie, or fall under the UCMJ rules, either.
We may not be as disposable as the Marines, but it doesn't mean we don't fight when called.
Wanna see my combat medals?
Not to start a this service is better than yours....
Disposable is a laughable term. The Marines are often placed into situations that might be considered sticky for one reason: Results. Throughout history, when it has to be done, and its going to be messy, there is a reason the Marines are often the first to fight: Results. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
I'll never dispute that the other services don't fight, and dont fight well. The Army fought well with the Marines in Fallujah, for example.
But the "every man is a rifleman" mentality of the Marine Corps sets us apart from them. The training is tougher, longer, and more detailed than any other service.
Post by: Moondoggie on September 03, 2007, 08:15:54 AM
The Marine Corps has a "fire brigade" mentality. That's demonstrated/reinforced by our having battalions on float, just ghosting off the coasts of potential trouble spots ready for immediate deployment. By immediate, I mean on the ground with a self-sustaining combat team the same day. That level of preparedness is supported by an uncommon ethos. When we go ashore, our backup is a long way off.
I never said that the other services aren't part of the sword. What I did imply is that the Marines are the tip of the sword, and we put ourselves there on purpose.
BTW, what the Marines do is accomplished with a disproportionately small portion of the defense budget relative to the amount of combat forces provided. Less than half of the per capita costs of the other services.
Post by: Moondoggie on September 03, 2007, 08:20:54 AM
We provide something like 6% of total DOD capabilities for 3% of the DOD budget last time I checked. It's always been that way.
Post by: Gewehr98 on September 03, 2007, 10:31:14 AM
Inter-service rivalry is indeed alive and well. You can toot your USMC horn all you want, but have the decency not to denigrate other branches of service in the process, ok? It's only fair. Likewise, slow promotions never happen in other branches of service. That's why I punched out after 20 years instead of going 30. Reindeer games are reindeer games, regardless of service. Brown-nosing is very much equal-opportunity in that respect.
Now, I'm well aware that the Marines are usually the first in to harm's way, and expect to suffer the highest casualties when things get messy. They have a job to do, and that's why they're Marines. What the Marines cannot do, the SEALS and other SpecOps folks take care of in the hierarchy of force. That's well and good, since the USMC is administratively assigned under the Department of the Navy - amphibious warfare just wouldn't look right being administered by the Army.
I'm also under no misconceptions that combat and its effects on the human psyche are exclusive to the USMC, as much as some Gyrenes like to think.
By way of exposure, my wife was a Marine. So was her ex-husband. Her dad is a retired one-legged Marine GySgt who's on those films taken during the Evacuation of Saigon, and he's got no problems thwacking somebody with his prosthetic leg - the proverbial one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest, personified. There's more Devil Dog paraphernalia in this house than USAF, save for my office. My wife looks at my framed B-52H and WC-135W pictures and grunts, "Airplane!"
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2007, 01:25:12 PM
I'm not slamming Balog, or the younger folks who served an enlistment or two, but you really have to experience the culture for a decade or three to fully understand and appreciate why we are so strict about preserving the traditions and heritage. Without them we might as well be the Army, Navy, or Air Force...but we're not. We have elements of all three within our Service, but we're still unique...and uniquely successful. You can argue against that point 'til the cows come home, but you can't argue against it successfully.
I think most of the issues dealt with in the new regs were similar to what I was used to in the Army a few years ago. The big exception would be that the only rule I can recall about what was worn off-duty, would be mens' ear rings. Sounds oxymoronic, I know.
Even then, I think that only mattered on-post. In the last few months of my active-duty tour, I roomed with a brand new supply clerk. I couldn't believe they had girls in their basic training company.
His "boot camp" sounded a whole lot nicer than my time at the Infantry Training Brigade. The point is, I think the difference between the Marine Corps and the combat arms of the Army might be a lot shorter than the difference between the Corps and the Army in General. Of course, the Air Force is a whole different story.
Post by: Al Norris on September 03, 2007, 03:42:09 PM
Heck, we had to show our Liberty Card in order to get into the EM-Club, out at Onslow Beach!
Post by: mattw on September 03, 2007, 06:39:24 PM
But maybe I just left some brain-cells on the PT field at OCS this summer...
KILL!
Post by: Chris on September 04, 2007, 05:38:04 AM
As an Army puke, I respect the Jarheads, and their warrior ethic that is instilled in each of them. You don't get the same in the other service branches. Just don't insult me and mine because we wear a different uniform. We'd kill for this country, same as you.
Post by: Sergeant Bob on September 04, 2007, 07:05:49 AM
Every service has their own important place in the big picture. Its just that those gung ho jarheads are usually in the front, or the first to the top of the hill. That doesn't take anything away from anyone else.
I used to know a few Marines from Pendelton who used to come up top Norton AFB, for R & R, (that should tell ya something right there) who I used to go out drinking with. Anyone who had a problem with me, had a problem with them too. Thats just the way it is.
Anyway, I just have a whole lot of respect for our devildogs, God love em.
Post by: Thor on September 04, 2007, 12:42:44 PM
Post by: K Frame on September 04, 2007, 12:53:40 PM
Wow. The Marines are getting better at teaching their people that they're not "metal birds that drop explosive eggs."
My current job is working on a logistics software program for the Air Force. We have any number of former Zoomies around here.
Interestingly enough we also have quite a few former Marine Corps officers on staff here, and one or two Navy people.
Want to know what causes the MOST friction in the office, by far?
Yankess vs. Red Sox, closely followed by Green Bay vs. Redskins.
Being a Phillies/Eagles fan gets me more pity than anything else...
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 04, 2007, 01:06:46 PM
I guess I should have been a Marine.
Post by: RevDisk on September 04, 2007, 01:37:36 PM
"My wife looks at my framed B-52H and WC-135W pictures and grunts, "Airplane!"
Wow. The Marines are getting better at teaching their people that they're not "metal birds that drop explosive eggs."
Wow. The Marines are getting better at teaching their people that they're not "metal birds that drop explosive eggs."
My old roommate was a Marine. He not very vigorously denied that the Corps calls grenades "boom rocks".
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 05, 2007, 03:12:24 AM
"My wife looks at my framed B-52H and WC-135W pictures and grunts, "Airplane!"
Wow. The Marines are getting better at teaching their people that they're not "metal birds that drop explosive eggs."
Wow. The Marines are getting better at teaching their people that they're not "metal birds that drop explosive eggs."
My old roommate was a Marine. He not very vigorously denied that the Corps calls grenades "boom rocks".
Funny!
They actually made us call flashlights "moonbeams" and pens "ink sticks" in boot camp. I think the grunts tended to still call them that.