Tracy;

Hope you do not mind a comment from me about my father. My dad was a Marine and the last battle he was in was Okinawa. They had an "interesting" company commander who made the men purchase there own M1 ammunition “because he was not satisfied with the kill ratio”. I read that the Marines went in with little ammo or other supplies and stole from the Army at gunpoint.

By the way I love numbers. The number of shells expended by an
American service man during WWII to kill an enemy averaged 400, and for Vietnam 65,000. Could you see dad’s company commander in Nam? He would last 1 second.

We did manage to send back an E9 first shirt in a straight jacket because of his “interesting concepts” of how to treat people.

Tom


>While most of the U.S. military uniforms are adequate (not ideal certainly), most after 2 years in the military (and sometimes sooner) buy their own uniforms and boots that are much better quality. Most even purchase an extra set of TA-50 and save the issued stuff to turn-in when they depart their current post. The only things they cannot purchase on their own-which they need to because the quality of what is issued is insufficient-is chemical suits.
>
>>>At least you don't have to provide your own weapon, uniform, and horse anylonger!
>>
>>Not exactly true for the British army - the uniform they are issued with is totally inadequate for the desert & they are actually buying their own uniform (eg boots that dont melt after an hour in the sand) because the army will not supply it.
>>
>>The last desert excercises showed that much of the British weaponry is inadequate for desrt conditions too (sand tends to jamn the guns, tanks overheat due to air filters becoming clogged with sand, similarly with helicopter engines), it is probably only British laws that are stopping the soldiers buying their own weapons.