Quote Originally Posted by arrogcow
Ok, I concede that there are places that a kilt isn't the best choice (jungle, forrest environments - I actually just thought about natural wild life in such areas - snakes, bugs, leeches etc. - and decided that pants may be a little more in order).

But I still stand by my thought that kilts are better in urban, and desert areas. As for pants protecting you from chemical weapons better - if it is on your pants (or your leg) it is already in your NBC suit so no protection.

Though as someone else mentioned, I would have to actually try an assult course to test all of this out.

Adam
You know, with all my reading, I can't recall where a soldier has spoken negatively about a kilt in combat. There have been official statements and medical statements. Has anybody come across letters or articles by ground troops, especially those in WW2, that covers this subject? (I say WW2 knowing that Dunkirk was the only official action kilted, really looking for more mobile action than static/trench.)