Why don't they give the army something different to wear to the olympics? Watch

marky--mark
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#61
Report 7 years ago
#61
(Original post by Drewski)
The first sight visitors to the country have is of the armed British Transport Police at the airport they landed at. Compared to them, the soldiers look positively casual. The servicemen aren't wandering around with SA80s slung over their backs, they're in barrack dress. The RAF personnel I saw on tv were in number 2 uniform (short sleeved, light blue, formal shirt and grey/blue trousers) which isn't exactly foreboding - unless you've got a particularly weak heart. Have you actually watched any of the footage of the last 2 days in the Olympic Park?
These guys are manning gates, control of entry positions, not parading around in mass ranks, nor patrolling in Mastiffs and Challengers. Yes, those in camouflage uniform will stick out a bit, but that's the point of security.

Do you question/find yourself opposed to the servicemen and women who conduct a mixed security/stewarding role at Wimbledon every year, something they've been doing since 1946?
Hmm. Ironic.

However, I'm agreeing with you. I'd definitely prefer seeing the Army there in their regular uniform than a security guard's one. Aside from the fact that it looks more professional anyway, having a military presence disguised as a civillan one is far more likely to cause an international outcry than the current situation. And the RAF/Navy personnel aren't in their combat gear anyway.
2
reply
cl_steele
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#62
Report 7 years ago
#62
(Original post by Jack93o)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18966360

With more troops being deployed, the army will have a very large presence in and around the olympic park/venues. So why not give them something different to wear instead of their usual army camouflage attire?

That way, they'll blend right in to the olympics and they'll look alot more friendly to people. I was just hearing a while ago on the news that there were concerns that the olympic park will look too militarized because of these troops, so why not just dress them up to look exactly like the other G4S security staff? You'd barely be able to tell them apart. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Have you seen what us at G4S have to wear?! we look like sodding limes! The troops have been pulled off of their leave why should they be punished even more?!

On a more serious note though theres not really any reason too and i guess £££ comes into it...
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#63
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#63
(Original post by Drewski)
I'm asking because you've yet to give an actual reason for it. It's purely because you think having military uniforms there = unfriendliness.

Show me the news reports saying the Olympics is going to look like a DMZ and that it'll put people off.

And then tell me, which looks less friendly:
Image 1
Spoiler:
Show


or Image 2
Spoiler:
Show

?

They're in a uniform that gives them identity and also clearly identifies them to others. They would be hugely offended if asked to wear a uniform of another - inferior - organisation and, quite frankly, it's not remotely unfriendly.
That you think it is says more about you than it does anyone else.
I have given you a reason, you've just chosen not to acknowledge it. I think that military uniforms sticks out like a sore thumb in the backdrop of a supposedly friendly and welcoming atmosphere to foriegners given that the army is usually associated with wars and conflicts. Its quite a legitimate viewpoint, if you choose to ignore it (la la la I can't hear you, that sort of thing), then thats your problem.

Obviously I can't get you a clip of it, but I just remember hearing it on bbc news or channel 4 last week about concerns of the olympic park appearing 'over-militarized'. Like I said, I remember the same issue was raised in the media during Beijing olympics, so don't be too sensitive to think that this is some sort of wicked agenda against our lads.

As for which is more friendly or approachable, obviously the 2nd pic but whats your point? Having a small number of armed police are an essential part of security, theres no escaping that and we can't do anything about it. But just because of that, it doesn't mean we should neglect the presentation of the rest of the olympic workers. Thats just laziness.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#64
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#64
(Original post by cl_steele)
Have you seen what us at G4S have to wear?! we look like sodding limes! The troops have been pulled off of their leave why should they be punished even more?!

On a more serious note though theres not really any reason too and i guess £££ comes into it...
Something like this?



Looks alright to me :dontknow:, they're not asking you to dress up like a clown.

Anyway ideally what I'd prefer is for the army personnel to be given their own uniforms (or at least have the g4s mark removed out of the existing uniforms they prepared for workers who didn't turn up) and this would be done weeks ago when the news first broke about g4s's failure.
0
reply
cid
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#65
Report 7 years ago
#65
(Original post by Jack93o)
Something like this?



Looks alright to me :dontknow:, they're not asking you to dress up like a clown.

Anyway ideally what I'd prefer is for the army personnel to be given their own uniforms (or at least have the g4s mark removed out of the existing uniforms they prepared for workers who didn't turn up) and this would be done weeks ago when the news first broke about g4s's failure.

I don't get it, clothes wise whatever they are in, they are still military, if they are still identified as military they still carry all these alleged connotations you suggest. So swapping one uniform for another changes nothing because a visitor will still know they are military. Here i present a logical counter to your suggestion that the military will intimidate visitors, please respond with something other than, the military will intimidate visitors.


On a personal note, why should these men have to remove their uniforms? Remove their uniforms when working in the service of their country no less. A soldiers uniform is not like a G4S uniform given to you after you've sat through 6 days of power point. They've worked hard earn the right to wear that uniform, to wear the various badges denoting both skills and unit identity, the cap badge showing their arm/corps/service, their stable belts denoting the same, its a matter of pride, they've been taken off their summer leave for this, lads are missing holidays, honeymoons even weddings for this, but they do it, they do it well and with a reluctant smile because its about pride and not wanting to be the whiney **** that made his unit looks bad.

Its bad enough the poor buggers are sleeping under ponchos or in public waiting rooms, to then go and take they're uniforms from them so they look like civvys but are still treated like squaddies, its like a combination insult.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#66
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#66
(Original post by cid)
I don't get it, clothes wise whatever they are in, they are still military, if they are still identified as military they still carry all these alleged connotations you suggest. So swapping one uniform for another changes nothing because a visitor will still know they are military. Here i present a logical counter to your suggestion that the military will intimidate visitors, please respond with something other than, the military will intimidate visitors.

How?

If the soldiers aren't dressed in army attire, the visitors would just see them as regular security.

(Original post by cid)

On a personal note, why should these men have to remove their uniforms? Remove their uniforms when working in the service of their country no less. A soldiers uniform is not like a G4S uniform given to you after you've sat through 6 days of power point. They've worked hard earn the right to wear that uniform, to wear the various badges denoting both skills and unit identity, the cap badge showing their arm/corps/service, their stable belts denoting the same, its a matter of pride, they've been taken off their summer leave for this, lads are missing holidays, honeymoons even weddings for this, but they do it, they do it well and with a reluctant smile because its about pride and not wanting to be the whiney **** that made his unit looks bad.

Its bad enough the poor buggers are sleeping under ponchos or in public waiting rooms, to then go and take they're uniforms from them so they look like civvys but are still treated like squaddies, its like a combination insult.
Whats wrong with looking like civilians?

Like you said, they've finished their real job over at Afghanistan and they should really be in the middle of their holiday breaks. They're back here at home, not in some warzone, wearing army uniform isn't necessary nor is it appropriate for the task at hand during the olympics. I think they would even prefer wearing something more comfortable and casual, I doubt it feels nice wearing this in the 30 degrees heat outside:

0
reply
standreams
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#67
Report 7 years ago
#67
(Original post by Jack93o)
But the games haven't started yet now have they?

When they do start, they'll no doubt be more visible as they patrol the park and handle checks because thats when the mass load of spectators arrive each day.

I'm not disputing their attitudes, they probably are friendly chaps, but its the perception and the mere sight of their presence which is the issue because most people won't get to talk to them so obviously they won't get to know these lovely lads. They'll just see a load of army personnel, thats it. And this obviously doesn't blend well the with friendly and welcoming message of the olympics. Tourists may not feel as comfortable as you do about them, and I don't think its dishonest to give them new uniforms, its about whats appropriate, this isn't a military operation and they're not in a battle zone so theres no point to camouflage clothing.
The games start on Friday. On Monday, 62,000 people went to a rehearsal event at the Olympic Stadium. I was one of them.

Everyone who passes through security checks will talk to them, because they are the ones asking questions and conducting the checks. They are the ones asking if you have any liquids, if you packed your own bag, wishing you a nice day etc.

Frankly, you haven't been there so you are not best placed to judge what kind of impression they are giving off.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#68
Report 7 years ago
#68
(Original post by Jack93o)
How?

If the soldiers aren't dressed in army attire, the visitors would just see them as regular security.
Make your mind up... A few pages ago you were saying how the fact that the service personnel are being used is huge news around the world and everyone will know they're members of the military. Now you're saying that because they might wear a different tshirt that people will instantly forget that... Which is it?


Whats wrong with looking like civilians?

Like you said, they've finished their real job over at Afghanistan and they should really be in the middle of their holiday breaks. They're back here at home, not in some warzone, wearing army uniform isn't necessary nor is it appropriate for the task at hand during the olympics. I think they would even prefer wearing something more comfortable and casual, I doubt it feels nice wearing this in the 30 degrees heat outside:
What's wrong with it? They're there in an official capacity, doing a job.

And as for it not being comfortable, utter balls. If they have just come back from Afghanistan they would have been wearing the same uniform in 40 deg C+ of heat. An occasional blast of mid 20s to 30 deg heat will be fine in comparison.


And all of this is completely immaterial anyway, they're not going to wear G4S uniforms. And nor will they be asked to.
0
reply
MagicNMedicine
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#69
Report 7 years ago
#69
Who cares if they are wearing camouflage and you can tell they are soldiers?

This is the UK and its the British army, whats there to be scared of? If I see a British soldier around I'm not thinking oh nos he's gonna bust a cap in my ass. I would trust a squaddie to be able to deal with security issues more than some random bored G4S dude. At least if someone tries anything nefarious you know they are going to get dealt with.
0
reply
doverboy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#70
Report 7 years ago
#70
The army in uniform is fine ...After all for example at the Wimbledon Tennis its quite traditional for there to be uniformed personnel acting as stewards.
For spectators I suspect that their experience will be with communicating with Games Makers or contract staff with the troops in the background
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#71
Report 7 years ago
#71
I guess if everyones actually gonna meet them it might be quite a positive thing that'll improve the impression foreigners have of our military. Still think a proper uniform for when dealing with the public is the main job may be worth considering in the future tho and would i imagine be found preferable to a pink sash. Theyre likely to be required to do this sort of thing more often for as long as the terrorist threat persists and it'd simply be a case of a uniform to maximise effectiveness in a new role same as they'd get if they went into a new type of terrain. Particularly as new types of camouflage get more effective as the public might not be able to find them to alert them to suspicious goings on.
0
reply
Funky_Climber
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#72
Report 7 years ago
#72
Why should they wear the uniforms of the moron filled company that's cost them their leave?

These are highly trained military forces and they should be allowed to wear their uniforms. They look pretty sexy in uniform too (military, not the G4S)
0
reply
Hopple
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#73
Report 7 years ago
#73
I'd prefer army uniforms actually, it shows they know what they're doing having been trained properly. If the G4S lot could wear army uniforms I'd be cross though.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#74
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#74
(Original post by Drewski)
Make your mind up... A few pages ago you were saying how the fact that the service personnel are being used is huge news around the world and everyone will know they're members of the military. Now you're saying that because they might wear a different tshirt that people will instantly forget that... Which is it?

and now you've lowered yourself to lying? :facepalm2:

Please quote me on where I said that. Go on, I'd love to see what magical quote you've managed to come up with.

You know what? Don't bother, you won't find it because I've never even once remotely suggested that. All I've been saying is that when the visitors arrive in the park and see army uniforms, its not the most welcoming sight and that perhaps an alternative uniform should be used. This is what? the 10th time I've had to repeat myself to you. I'm not sure if you're just plain stupid and can't understand simple English, or that you're simply trying to ignore what is a legitimate viewpoint because you're too proud of yourself to see your opinion challenged and potentially lose face in the process.

(Original post by Drewski)

What's wrong with it? They're there in an official capacity, doing a job.

And as for it not being comfortable, utter balls. If they have just come back from Afghanistan they would have been wearing the same uniform in 40 deg C+ of heat. An occasional blast of mid 20s to 30 deg heat will be fine in comparison.


And all of this is completely immaterial anyway, they're not going to wear G4S uniforms. And nor will they be asked to.
Official capacity yes, but there should be adaptability no?

Many people turn up to work in formal wear, and when the time requires something more appropriate than this, their usual attire is rightly replaced with something else better suited for the occasion. Theres adaptability in every single field of employment.

As for your 'utter balls' comment, well they have been working in tough conditions for a very long period of time and no doubt the 30 degrees heat will seem much more relaxing. I'm not questioning whether they're capable of handling the British summer while wearing their usual clothing, I'm just suggesting that they may prefer something more comfortable, this is perfectly fine, I mean do you honestly expect our soldiers have gotten so used to being in the 40 degree heat in Afghanistan with their army gear, that they would not prefer to be in any other condition? Do you expect them to turn on their radiators at home during summer to replicate the Afghan heat?

Like I said in one of my previous post, ideally I should've asked this question a while back when the G4S failure were first found out, then it may still be possible to either manufacture the new uniforms altogether, or use the existing G4S stock with the design altered to remove the company's logo.
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#75
Report 7 years ago
#75
(Original post by Jack93o)
and now you've lowered yourself to lying? :facepalm2:

Please quote me on where I said that. Go on, I'd love to see what magical quote you've managed to come up with.

You know what? Don't bother, you won't find it because I've never even once remotely suggested that. All I've been saying is that when the visitors arrive in the park and see army uniforms, its not the most welcoming sight and that perhaps an alternative uniform should be used. This is what? the 10th time I've had to repeat myself to you. I'm not sure if you're just plain stupid and can't understand simple English, or that you're simply trying to ignore what is a legitimate viewpoint because you're too proud of yourself to see your opinion challenged and potentially lose face in the process.



Official capacity yes, but there should be adaptability no?

Many people turn up to work in formal wear, and when the time requires something more appropriate than this, their usual attire is rightly replaced with something else better suited for the occasion. Theres adaptability in every single field of employment.

As for your 'utter balls' comment, well they have been working in tough conditions for a very long period of time and no doubt the 30 degrees heat will seem much more relaxing. I'm not questioning whether they're capable of handling the British summer while wearing their usual clothing, I'm just suggesting that they may prefer something more comfortable, this is perfectly fine, I mean do you honestly expect our soldiers have gotten so used to being in the 40 degree heat in Afghanistan with their army gear, that they would not prefer to be in any other condition? Do you expect them to turn on their radiators at home during summer to replicate the Afghan heat?

Like I said in one of my previous post, ideally I should've asked this question a while back when the G4S failure were first found out, then it may still be possible to either manufacture the new uniforms altogether, or use the existing G4S stock with the design altered to remove the company's logo.
Thing is tho a new uniform would take time. Ive just been reading about a change that got made a while back that the army didnt deem smart enough so they had to change. So while in hindsight it'd have been a useful thing to have theres no way they couldve done it in the time. Given a choice between soldiers in what theyre used to wearing and soldiers pissed off at having to wear something thrown together at a moments notice its probably better that theyre happy.
0
reply
cid
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#76
Report 7 years ago
#76
(Original post by Jack93o)

All I've been saying is that when the visitors arrive in the park and see army uniforms, its not the most welcoming sight and that perhaps an alternative uniform should be used. This is what? the 10th time I've had to repeat myself to you. I'm not sure if you're just plain stupid and can't understand simple English, or that you're simply trying to ignore what is a legitimate viewpoint because you're too proud of yourself to see your opinion challenged and potentially lose face in the process.



Official capacity yes, but there should be adaptability no?

Many people turn up to work in formal wear, and when the time requires something more appropriate than this, their usual attire is rightly replaced with something else better suited for the occasion. Theres adaptability in every single field of employment.

As for your 'utter balls' comment, well they have been working in tough conditions for a very long period of time and no doubt the 30 degrees heat will seem much more relaxing. I'm not questioning whether they're capable of handling the British summer while wearing their usual clothing, I'm just suggesting that they may prefer something more comfortable, this is perfectly fine, I mean do you honestly expect our soldiers have gotten so used to being in the 40 degree heat in Afghanistan with their army gear, that they would not prefer to be in any other condition? Do you expect them to turn on their radiators at home during summer to replicate the Afghan heat?

I don't believe the military will intimidate visitors, you may think they will, however this is an opinion, one which doesn't appear to have much suppourt, an opinion which you just seem to be repeating which arguing about tidbits at the side, its like debating with a brick that has a different opinion to you etched on it, no matter what new argument, angle or questions are raised the argument etched on that brick won't change....

I don't even know what your on about with the uniform, its clothing ... just like clothing everyone else will be wearing, the MTP on it doesn't suddenly make it 25% more stifling than civilian attire. The uniform is perfectly comfortable, there is no issue of comfort for soldiers when it comes to their working dress.

Adaptability? Why? What is the requirement for adaptability? Why would something adapt if it was not required to? The MTP uniform is designed as a working dress, it is designed for exactly what the troops will be doing, if anything the RAF and Navy lads should also be decked out in MTP unless in some sort of office capacity

(Original post by Jack93o)
Like I said in one of my previous post, ideally I should've asked this question a while back when the G4S failure were first found out, then it may still be possible to either manufacture the new uniforms altogether, or use the existing G4S stock with the design altered to remove the company's logo.
This what i meant in my previous post, the uniform is different to the G4S team, so the military members are still identifiable, sure not as immediately but if i was visiting a foreign country and i knew military where all over the place where i was visiting i would rather know who and where they were than not have a clue.


I don't see the problem... i don't think many people see a problem really, of course I'm currently unemployed and waiting to start uni in September so I've got all the free time in the world to go around in circles with strangers over the internet
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#77
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#77
(Original post by cid)
I don't believe the military will intimidate visitors, you may think they will, however this is an opinion, one which doesn't appear to have much suppourt, an opinion which you just seem to be repeating which arguing about tidbits at the side, its like debating with a brick that has a different opinion to you etched on it, no matter what new argument, angle or questions are raised the argument etched on that brick won't change....

I don't even know what your on about with the uniform, its clothing ... just like clothing everyone else will be wearing, the MTP on it doesn't suddenly make it 25% more stifling than civilian attire. The uniform is perfectly comfortable, there is no issue of comfort for soldiers when it comes to their working dress.

Adaptability? Why? What is the requirement for adaptability? Why would something adapt if it was not required to? The MTP uniform is designed as a working dress, it is designed for exactly what the troops will be doing, if anything the RAF and Navy lads should also be decked out in MTP unless in some sort of office capacity


I'm having to repeat myself because I've been misrepresented time and time again, with Drewski being an obvious example of someone doing that, saying that I apparently said something, which I never did.

Is like debating with a brick wall? I don't know, you're always bound to have this scenario where both sides don't agree in a discussion, thats just politics.

I mentioned adaptability for the job on hand because I think that a non-army uniform would be more welcoming for visitors (comfort is not the real issue here, but I've just added it as an after thought) which I've said was raised in the media recently and also in the 2008 beijing olympics, thats my opinion, I've already given my explanation for it, and if its still not supported by people like yourself then fair enough, I can live with that.

This what i meant in my previous post, the uniform is different to the G4S team, so the military members are still identifiable, sure not as immediately but if i was visiting a foreign country and i knew military where all over the place where i was visiting i would rather know who and where they were than not have a clue.


I don't see the problem... i don't think many people see a problem really, of course I'm currently unemployed and waiting to start uni in September so I've got all the free time in the world to go around in circles with strangers over the internet
Well you're speaking from the perspective of a tourist. I'm arguing with only the interests of the olympic hosting country in mind.
0
reply
cid
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#78
Report 7 years ago
#78
(Original post by Jack93o)


Well you're speaking from the perspective of a tourist. I'm arguing with only the interests of the olympic hosting country in mind.

Okay, how is stripping soldiers of their uniform in the interest of the host country?
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#79
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#79
(Original post by green.tea)
Thing is tho a new uniform would take time. Ive just been reading about a change that got made a while back that the army didnt deem smart enough so they had to change. So while in hindsight it'd have been a useful thing to have theres no way they couldve done it in the time. Given a choice between soldiers in what theyre used to wearing and soldiers pissed off at having to wear something thrown together at a moments notice its probably better that theyre happy.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, what do you mean by, ''the army didn't deem smart enough''?
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#80
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#80
(Original post by cid)
Okay, how is stripping soldiers of their uniform in the interest of the host country?
I given my reason already, but fine I'll repeat myself again, I've probably done this 10 times already in this thread. I just find it funny how you made a point about me repeating myself in your last post, and now you're asking me to do exactly that.

Ok here it is, I'm arguing that its in the interest of the host country because I think that soldiers in army uniform won't be the most welcoming sign to visitors. The sight of thousands of men and women in camouflage clothing (which is associated with wars and conflict) makes the park appear over-militarized which is counter to the friendly atmosphere that we want to create. I remember hearing from the media about similar criticisms of the Beijing games, so I do believe that this is a valid concern.

Therefore I think we should give them an altertative uniform which is more suited to the actual job they'll be doing (security work, not fighting the taliban). As a result this would go towards (among other things) giving olympic visitors the best possible presentation of our country. This will help enhance our reputation around the world and obviously this is in our interest.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (11)
6.15%
They might tell the bully (18)
10.06%
I don't think they'd understand (30)
16.76%
It might lead to more bullying (69)
38.55%
There's nothing they could do (51)
28.49%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise