Originally posted by: AndrewR
And those bases might be unprepared or hasty creations such as what happened in Iraq. Or, the base might be subject to ground attack since they are large, sitting targets with considerable combat power.
Certainly, there are plenty of people who will never be in a position to need camouflage, but that doesn't mean that you preclude the possibility of it being beneficial by making it blue.
Personally, I hate the "new" uniform. What galls me most is that the leadership never bothered to ask for ANY input from its people before putting it into wear testing. The Army, by contrast, created several different designs and solicited opinions from its folks regarding features and which design they preferred. The Marine Corps, as I understand it, did something similar before bringing out their uniform change. I think that both services actually set up webpages and solicited comments online. The Air Force? It's kept under a Special Access Program with a Pentagon spokesperson actually saying about one month ago that they didn't have a specific color in mind yet.
Apparently, we're supposed to be stupid enough to believe that.
The premise that it'll help those working on aircraft is fine -- so make it a maintenance uniform. What about the security forces guarding the base, or the security force augmentees activated during contingencies who will ALSO be guarding the base? What happens if we have to leave our workcenter to take cover in bunkers or in the woods because of an attack? "Look for blue and shoot, Comrade." Are they expecting people to hit the ground on attack and lie on asphalt for the duration, protected from observation by their blue uniforms? Idiocy, since there's plenty of green areas on flightlines which have actual depressions in them that provide more cover and concealment than flat pieces of concrete.
I hope that someone has some common sense and kills this moronic idea. Otherwise, I might just have to stock up on the current ones and try to wear them through retirement.