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

green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#81
Report 7 years ago
#81
(Original post by Jack93o)
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, what do you mean by, ''the army didn't deem smart enough''?
What i mean is a new military uniform takes time and money to develop.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...t-tuck-in.html

They consider their uniform to be important for discipline and so on so you'd have to design something that looked right and is functional and then have consultations, test it out, make changes etc.. Its not ideal having them in camouflage but having them in tracksuits or g4s t-shirts wouldnt be right.

http://sports.ndtv.com/olympics-2012...ics-organisers

If people had thought of this sooner they couldve come up with a smart quintessentially british military guard (as opposed to combat) design that wouldve added something to the event. Its a shame.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#82
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#82
(Original post by green.tea)
What i mean is a new military uniform takes time and money to develop.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...t-tuck-in.html

They consider their uniform to be important for discipline and so on so you'd have to design something that looked right and is functional and then have consultations, test it out, make changes etc.. Its not ideal having them in camouflage but having them in tracksuits or g4s t-shirts wouldnt be right.

http://sports.ndtv.com/olympics-2012...ics-organisers

If people had thought of this sooner they couldve come up with a smart quintessentially british military guard (as opposed to combat) design that wouldve added something to the event. Its a shame.
I never argued for new military uniforms to be made, that would defeat the purpose of giving them a different uniform.

The soldiers will be doing security work, not fighting on the battlefields. A decent polo t-shirt/long sleeve with matching trousers/shorts would be fine for what their job during these games. I can see that having the G4S logo isn't right, which is why ideally I think a new batch of uniforms should be made a while back (or take the existing G4S stock and remove the logo) when it was first realised that G4S failed in their promise to provide enough workers.
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#83
Report 7 years ago
#83
(Original post by Jack93o)
I never argued for new military uniforms to be made, that would defeat the purpose of giving them a different uniform.
Well in my view whatever they wear should be proper military uniform. Ideally one suited to the role such as how the coldstream uniform is suited to their role which in that instance is securing the palace. It takes into account the tradition of that job and the smart way we expect the military to dress. Im not saying dress people like that for the olympics since its an altogether more modern affair but you can understand the militarys desire for the standard of smartness to be maintained. Personally id have thought a modern and functional uniform with influences from more traditional and recognisable british military guard uniforms would be the ideal thing. Britain is on show after all and kitting the military out poorly wouldnt look good and isnt something people would expect to see here.

The soldiers will be doing security work, not fighting on the battlefields. A decent polo t-shirt/long sleeve with matching trousers/shorts would be fine for what their job during these games. I can see that having the G4S logo isn't right, which is why ideally I think a new batch of uniforms should be made a while back (or take the existing G4S stock and remove the logo) when it was first realised that G4S failed in their promise to provide enough workers.
Yeah they should have been. I just think they should be at a standard that one expects to see from military clothing. Which lime green t-shirts with "im here to help" on and tracksuits really isnt.
0
reply
standreams
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#84
Report 7 years ago
#84
(Original post by Jack93o)
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.
Given that the games started yesterday (and were preceded by the opening ceremony rehearsals, which also required massive security), in what kind of bizarre alternative utopian reality do we have the time (not to mention money) to create an entirely new uniform for the thousands of troops who are currently working on this operation?
0
reply
cid
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#85
Report 7 years ago
#85
Okay I'm now convinced, definitely a troll pretending to be an idiot over the internet, well played sir 10/10, have some + rep.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#86
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#86
(Original post by standreams)
Given that the games started yesterday (and were preceded by the opening ceremony rehearsals, which also required massive security), in what kind of bizarre alternative utopian reality do we have the time (not to mention money) to create an entirely new uniform for the thousands of troops who are currently working on this operation?
Which is why I said in some of my previous posts that ideally I should've asked this a while back when the G4S mess was first realised. Obviously I accept that it can't now be done given we're only a day away from the opening ceremony. So I guess this question is more of a hypothetical one - should a change be made when it may have still been possible?
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#87
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#87
(Original post by cid)
Okay I'm now convinced, definitely a troll pretending to be an idiot over the internet, well played sir 10/10, have some + rep.
So if an opinion is different from yours, then its a troll?

Wow that is real grown up talk there , you keep at it buddy :lol:

Seriously, I've repeatedly given my explanation either because I was asked to by you or I was misrepresented. Funny that you try to be clever by making a point of me repeating myself and then proceed to ask me to do exactly that. Its not like I haven't backed up what I've said. Apart from the fact that it obviously is now not possible to get these new uniforms in a day's time (although I was more interested in the hypothetical side of things if this was started a while back), I haven't said anything outlandish and I've justified anything that was pointed out to me. Just be mature about it and move on if you still can't agree.
0
reply
standreams
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#88
Report 7 years ago
#88
(Original post by Jack93o)
Which is why I said in some of my previous posts that ideally I should've asked this a while back when the G4S mess was first realised. Obviously I accept that it can't now be done given we're only a day away from the opening ceremony. So I guess this question is more of a hypothetical one - should a change be made when it may have still been possible?
The G4S mess came to light at the beginning of July. The logistics (and cost) of designing, manufacturing, and distributing the necessary uniforms within a one-month timeframe would have been a nightmare.

If we are talking in purely hypothetical terms, then my answer is still 'no'- a change should not have been made even had implementing one been possible. I would not expect or want military personnel to wear any other uniform other than the one they are issued with. The uniform they wear for this task should reflect their rank and position, be practical and comfortable. Without weapons and wearing a bright pink London 2012 Lanyard, they are no more threatening than the average airport security worker.

I think the almost complete lack of support for your idea shows that your concerns are very much marginal.
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#89
Report 7 years ago
#89
(Original post by standreams)
The G4S mess came to light at the beginning of July. The logistics (and cost) of designing, manufacturing, and distributing the necessary uniforms within a one-month timeframe would have been a nightmare.

If we are talking in purely hypothetical terms, then my answer is still 'no'- a change should not have been made even had implementing one been possible. I would not expect or want military personnel to wear any other uniform other than the one they are issued with. The uniform they wear for this task should reflect their rank and position, be practical and comfortable. Without weapons and wearing a bright pink London 2012 Lanyard, they are no more threatening than the average airport security worker.

I think the almost complete lack of support for your idea shows that your concerns are very much marginal.
I disagree. You talk as tho the army is issued with one uniform that they must always wear just cos. Presumably you'd have them fighting in the desert wearing green? What theyre wearing is a uniform designed for combat. Theres no reason to be camouflaged so theres no reason to wear camouflage. Nobodys gonna attack them. It'd make more sense to camouflage the public. The army is issued with several uniforms each for something different and this is something different so ideally theyd have a uniform for it and wouldnt be wearing something designed for something else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...ate_mess_dress

How threatening they may or may not look is only part of the issue. You don't expect your bank clerk to be in his karate gear because it just doesnt fit with the setting. He could still do his job but the manager would be reasonable to ask him to change into something more appropriate for the setting simply because those clothes are designed for something other than what he's doing.
1
reply
standreams
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#90
Report 7 years ago
#90
(Original post by green.tea)
I disagree. You talk as tho the army is issued with one uniform that they must always wear just cos. Presumably you'd have them fighting in the desert wearing green? What theyre wearing is a uniform designed for combat. Theres no reason to be camouflaged so theres no reason to wear camouflage. Nobodys gonna attack them. It'd make more sense to camouflage the public. The army is issued with several uniforms each for something different and this is something different so ideally theyd have a uniform for it and wouldnt be wearing something designed for something else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...ate_mess_dress

How threatening they may or may not look is only part of the issue. You don't expect your bank clerk to be in his karate gear because it just doesnt fit with the setting. He could still do his job but the manager would be reasonable to ask him to change into something more appropriate for the setting simply because those clothes are designed for something other than what he's doing.
I am well aware that the Army are issued with multiple uniforms- please do not be so consdescending. The soldiers I saw at Olympic Park (have you been there? Have you seen them working?) were not in full combat gear.

Your second paragraph makes no sense. I wouldn't expert a bank manager to wear anything other than the uniform which they are required to wear (which may well be just a suit). Similarly, I wouldn't expect a soldier to wear anything other than one of the uniforms which they were issued.

To expect a soldier to wear civilian clothing while they are on duty and serving their country is the height of ignorance. You could perhaps make a case that they should wear another (pre-existing) uniform for public duties- but to suggest that an entirely new uniform should be created specifically for this purpose belies extreme naivety about the logistics of implementing such a change and the costs involved.

I can only presume that someone who advocates introducing such a thing is not a taxpayer.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#91
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#91
(Original post by standreams)
The G4S mess came to light at the beginning of July. The logistics (and cost) of designing, manufacturing, and distributing the necessary uniforms within a one-month timeframe would have been a nightmare.

If we are talking in purely hypothetical terms, then my answer is still 'no'- a change should not have been made even had implementing one been possible. I would not expect or want military personnel to wear any other uniform other than the one they are issued with. The uniform they wear for this task should reflect their rank and position, be practical and comfortable. Without weapons and wearing a bright pink London 2012 Lanyard, they are no more threatening than the average airport security worker.

I think the almost complete lack of support for your idea shows that your concerns are very much marginal.
Wait, who said they'd be wearing pink? and whats wrong with looking as non-threatening as airport security staff?

I'm not even sure the G4S guys have to wear a pink Lanyard either. This is irrelevant anyway to the discussion here given its such a small part of the overall uniform. I do like how you said the soldier's uniform at these games should be 'practical', because wearing camouflage in a family friendly environment is exactly whats needed isn't it?

Honestly I don't see what looking threatening has to do with things here. Sophisticated terrorist groups will not be put off by what clothes the security workers will be wearing. The Olympics has never had a serious issue with 'casual' troublemakers (i.e hooligans) unlike football for example, so this is not a problem at all. Those who will be affected by the presentation of olympic staff members are visitors and tourists, they'll make of London what they see, perception is as important as anything else when it comes to the reputation of a city/country.

The only major problem I see with my suggestion is like you said, a logistical one, if I had to take a guess I would still assume its possible to get these new uniforms in time even if the decision was taken just weeks ago, but I'm obviously not an expert on these things.
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#92
Report 7 years ago
#92
(Original post by standreams)
I am well aware that the Army are issued with multiple uniforms- please do not be so consdescending. The soldiers I saw at Olympic Park (have you been there? Have you seen them working?) were not wearing the same kit that you'd expect to see them wearing while on operations.

Your second paragraph makes no sense. I wouldn't expert a bank manager to wear anything other than the uniform which they are required to wear (which may well be just a suit). Similarly, I wouldn't expect a soldier to wear anything other than one of the uniforms which they were issued.

To expect a soldier to wear civilian clothing while they are on duty and serving their country is the height of ignorance.
Im not suggesting civilian clothing. I think that when the army is faced with a new task, such as fighting in the desert, they do do in a uniform designed for the task. Protecting the public from terrorist attacks at high profile events at home is a new element to their job which requires them to be in a new setting and they should have a uniform designed for the setting just as they would any other setting.
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#93
Report 7 years ago
#93
(Original post by standreams)
I can only presume that someone who advocates introducing such a thing is not a taxpayer.
As a taxpayer im in favor of at least pretending to the the world that britain can still afford to get new clothes even if we cant.
0
reply
Dizzy94
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#94
Report 7 years ago
#94
(Original post by Glow in the dark)
You can't please everyone, the games are in London after all.

People may feel uneasy when you pass though kings cross on a day to day basis and armed police officers are stood their in Military wear holding an assault rifle each. Safety first.

Besides, it just seems more appropriate to wear clothing which everyone knows, rather than kitting them out in clothing no one had seen before, I'd be put less at ease by this personally
Huh, i didnt know that theyre were armed police at kings cross...
0
reply
Clip
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#95
Report 7 years ago
#95
(Original post by green.tea)
I disagree. You talk as tho the army is issued with one uniform that they must always wear just cos. Presumably you'd have them fighting in the desert wearing green? What theyre wearing is a uniform designed for combat. Theres no reason to be camouflaged so theres no reason to wear camouflage. Nobodys gonna attack them. It'd make more sense to camouflage the public. The army is issued with several uniforms each for something different and this is something different so ideally theyd have a uniform for it and wouldnt be wearing something designed for something else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...ate_mess_dress

How threatening they may or may not look is only part of the issue. You don't expect your bank clerk to be in his karate gear because it just doesnt fit with the setting. He could still do his job but the manager would be reasonable to ask him to change into something more appropriate for the setting simply because those clothes are designed for something other than what he's doing.
Soldiers are generally issued only one type of clothing for every day use - this has been something that the Army has been moving toward for decades - apart from anything else, it's a lot cheaper.

At the moment, most (but not all) soldiers have the MTP kit as "working" dress - that is for almost everything, including operations. The other dress scales are not necessarily issued to everyone. Most soldiers will have a set of No2s somewhere, but they are certainly not for security duties, and require a lot of maintenance - which is a big imposition on the blokes to have to do a full shift, and then spend half their downtime cleaning and preparing their kit for going back on. Looking like a bag of rubbish might be acceptable for the G4s, but it will not be acceptable for a squad to turn out like that.

TL;DR - they only really have their combats to turn out in.
0
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#96
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#96
(Original post by green.tea)
Im not suggesting civilian clothing. I think that when the army is faced with a new task, such as fighting in the desert, they do do in a uniform designed for the task. Protecting the public from terrorist attacks at high profile events at home is a new element to their job which requires them to be in a new setting and they should have a uniform designed for the setting just as they would any other setting.
Well I'm not totally against the idea of having them in another set of military clothing, you know something more casual and appropiate for the job at hand. I wouldn't mind that, the issue I have is the camouflaged combat clothing.
0
reply
green.tea
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#97
Report 7 years ago
#97
(Original post by Clip)
Soldiers are generally issued only one type of clothing for every day use - this has been something that the Army has been moving toward for decades - apart from anything else, it's a lot cheaper.

At the moment, most (but not all) soldiers have the MTP kit as "working" dress - that is for almost everything, including operations. The other dress scales are not necessarily issued to everyone. Most soldiers will have a set of No2s somewhere, but they are certainly not for security duties, and require a lot of maintenance - which is a big imposition on the blokes to have to do a full shift, and then spend half their downtime cleaning and preparing their kit for going back on. Looking like a bag of rubbish might be acceptable for the G4s, but it will not be acceptable for a squad to turn out like that.

TL;DR - they only really have their combats to turn out in.
I say its not ideal, and deciding how the army should dress based on whats cheaper isnt really ideal either as far as i can see. I bet the money that went to g4s wouldve paid for a smart new uniform that everyone would be happy with.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#98
Report 7 years ago
#98
I don't really like the idea of troops on the streets in general, but they do not come across as aggressive or unfriendly, and they're not armed. I'd rather have them than the Met Police, frankly.
0
reply
Clip
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#99
Report 7 years ago
#99
(Original post by green.tea)
I say its not ideal, and deciding how the army should dress based on whats cheaper isnt really ideal either as far as i can see. I bet the money that went to g4s wouldve paid for a smart new uniform that everyone would be happy with.
Assuming that the Army would agree to introducing a special new casual dress scale just for the Olympics (for no tangible benefit), and that such clothing had been bought ahead of time in sufficient quantity to kit everyone out - for every person like yourself that thinks this is a good idea, I can guarantee that there will be 10 people banging on about what a waste of money it was, and how it could have been spent on hospitals and schools instead.
1
reply
Jack93o
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#100
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#100
(Original post by standreams)
I can only presume that someone who advocates introducing such a thing is not a taxpayer.
I've already posted a few times a while back that G4S can pay for them just like they're currently being made to pay for bringing in the troops and acccomodating them during this period. The extra cost of a new set of uniform would be tiny compared to that.
0
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

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (135)
62.79%
No I haven't decided yet (46)
21.4%
Yes but I might change my mind (34)
15.81%

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