U.S. Campaign Tartans

[beerbecue]

That said, because there is no way of getting around the connection between the tartans and the medals, it is right and proper that the same rules about wearing the tartan be applied, lest the bearer disrespect/belittle the sacrifice of those that were there.

Hmmm.. the military is not commissioning the tartan, the tartan is not part of military dress, the tartan wasn't earned by service - the medal was....

Don't wear/buy the tartan for your own reasons, wear/buy the tartan for your own reasons...

Call me improper in this case (as opposed to right and proper), but one should always represent/wear any tartan with respect and dignity, that being said, if you have a connection/reason, I don't see why there should be any problems

flame on!

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Hmmm.. the military is not commissioning the tartan, the tartan is not part of military dress, the tartan wasn't earned by service - the <b>medal</b> was....

Don't wear/buy the tartan for your own reasons, wear/buy the tartan for your own reasons...

Call me improper in this case (as opposed to right and proper), but one should always represent/wear any tartan with respect and dignity, that being said, if you have a connection/reason, I don't see why there should be any problems

flame on!

I think the objections are based on the "presumed entitlement" of those who didn't earn the medal having the affrontery to wear the "colours".

By law, in both the United States and in all commonwealth countries, the wearing of military medals is limited strictly to those who received the medal.

Creating "military campaign tartans" side steps this issue, and lets the "wannabe's" and "outright frauds", pose as veterans.

I don't think many people realise just how offensive it is to most veterans when they see someone wearing campaign medals, or decorations received for valor, as "costume jewelry"-- items of "personal adornment"-- call it what you will-- because no matter what justification may be offered, it cheapens the sacrifice of real soldiers.

[beerbecue]

Of course the wearing of campaign medals and other honors is an affront to those who served and earned these distinctions!

We are talking about a kilt, in a tartan, loosely based on the colors in a service medal. If our military issued kilts as standard dress, in specific tartans, I would have the same opinion as stated above.

However, here we have an individual who is designing a tartan based on a service medal. As far as I can tell, this is neither endorsed nor commissioned by the powers that be.

As the item is not the medal itself, how can someone possibly be a 'poser' or a 'fraud'? If they were wearing a dress kit and had medals on, well, that is a different matter.

I guess my point is, there are very, very few tartans that are actually restricted to a certain group or profession. Even the existing tartans based on or designed in honor of US military units can be worn, and are worn, by anyone and everyone. So if someone wears the leatherneck tartan and claims they were a marine and weren't, well, they aren't breaking any laws... Are they distasteful, disrespectful and disingenuous, well, yes.. and I do not excuse them for that....

However, if someone were to wear the leatherneck tartan in honor of a loved one who served, and represents the purpose and themselves as such, I do not find that disrespectful and distasteful in the least.

I like the later comments toward a memorial tartan - that opens the door for everyone who wants to commemorate and honor the members of our armed forces who have served - and avoids these arguments and issues of 'entitlement' and 'rights' - and may just bring in some dollars for those who deserve our gratitude, thanks, and endless support

[wyldathart]

Could anybody wear one of these campaign tartans, or just those eligible for the campaign medal? Or taking this a step further, how about decoration tartans? Silver Star tartan, or Distinguished Flying Cross tartan, or Purple Heart tartan-- could just anybody wear them, or only recipients?

I suppose generic "service tartans" are okay-- even if they do attract some wannabes, because they are ultimately fashion tartans without any solid military basis or foundation. But tartans based on the ribbons awarded for specific military campaigns?

No, I don't think so. People bled and died in these campaigns, and to demean their sacrifice by turning the ribbon of their campaign medal into a fashion tartan seems incredibly disrespectful of their service.

I'm sure others, less sensitive, will disagree.

I agree with Macmillan, The folks these tartans are for shed tears, lots of sweat and blood for the medals. I would just hate to think some wannabe could purchase it and ride the wave the honorable Men and Women created.
I love the idea though, sounds like it could be a fun undertaking

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I, too, think it is a wonderful idea. Anything that honours the sacrifices of the military goes to the top of the page in my book.

But the world is full of people who would steal that honour because they have none of their own.

Case in point:

Last year I attended four Highland games in the USA: Glasgow, Kentucky; Greenville, SC; Richmond, Va; The Virgina Highland Games, also in Virgina.

At each of these games I saw a man wearing either medals or ribbons to which he obviously wasn't entitled. That's four games and four different men posing as decorated veterans. For all I know there could have been a lot more of them, although I hope not. Now there were other men there with ribbons or medals, and every time I saw one of them I asked myself, "Is that guy another fraud?" Which is wrong. I shouldn't let the "Scottish Games Commandos" make me suspicious of those men and women who did serve, but that's what happens.

The phonies bring into question everyone who has nobly served their country. Their reprehensible actions and blatant theft of a serviceman's hard earned honour is despicable. If campaign medal tartans could somehow be restricted to those who had earned the right to wear it, I'd be the first to shout "go for it." But that isn't possible.

If you doubt me, go ask the 30-year old guy at the Richmond games who was wearing a combat infantry badge above his Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Star, and Navy Efficiency Ribbon. He's easy to spot. He's wearing a Zulu wars pith helmet and a Leatherneck tartan kilt.

[timseh]

So if someone wears the leatherneck tartan and claims they were a marine and weren't, well, they aren't breaking any laws...

I have to chime in here as a Marine. I chose the Leatherneck Tartan as my own. Not to say that I'll never wear another, in fact I bought an "Irish Saffron" at the same time which I'll wear with pride tomorrow...

But to the point. As for the statement above, regardless of what one is wearing, there are places in this country, though it's not a federal law yet where claiming to be a Marine, or member or former member of any service when one was not, IS in fact, a crime. As it should be.

[SteveB]

Unfortunately, there are too many opportunities to convey a fraudulent position.
If the tartan is designed not as the medal but as a tartan for all who served in the conflict, I could almost like it. There are many veterans who served during the Vietnam conflict that did not get in combat time. They are the many that kept the birds ready to fly and the vessels ready to move, the supplies to keep the forces on the move, and the rest of the support, including the massive deforestation (AKA paperwork) that keeps our military running. Each of them served as part of the military and ready to go to the front on a moments notice. They also are veterans worthy of honour.
The problem with much of this is the opportunity to misuse the symbolism. The designer camo clothing that is a part of the urban look that is obviously not military to those who have been there, but not obvious to those who were not.
As a veteran, I cast my vote against the idea, as it would be out of control very quickly as much as I really do like it.

As far as the claim to service, when one has or is not serving, the federal courts have been real good about locking up some of these for impersonating a federal official. Unfortunately, it is only for five years.

my 0.02 USD.
Cheers