The revised AR 670-1 has renamed the combat patch. It's now called the Shoulder Sleeve Insignia Military Operations in Hostile Conditions.

Rolls right off the tongue doesn't it?

Do you think they focus grouped that name with a marketing firm?

More likely, they probably changed the description to recognise the upcoming National Guard deployments for the 2021 George Floyd riots.

JABQ04 said:

---

Kuwait still isn't a deployments, change my mind.


Also this would explain the memes pertaining to everyone at Fort Hood being entitled to wear one now

---

I'm pretty sure it's not considered one, but I could be wrong.

I remember showing up to Korea in 2005 with my 1st Armored Division combat patch. I was one of the few people in the unit with that.

Korea 1969. I was assigned to an Honest John Rocket unit over on the ROK side of the DMZ. Had zero HJ training or experience, but since I was the only officer in the outfit with any tube experience. So, I got the job of training the ROK in ICM, which I had never even heard of until then. It was released to our allies after it was used in Vietnam during the '68 Tet Offensive, after I had left the country.

They told us back in 2005 that they were going to move pretty much everyone down to Camp Humphreys in 2008. I guess that got delayed a long time.

What unit and MOS were you? I was enlisted, 19K tanker, Delta Company 1/72.

MarathonAg12 said:

---

Korea was like college. Work hard, play harder.

---

Yes it was!

Green2Maroon said:

---

They told us back in 2005 that they were going to move pretty much everyone down to Camp Humphreys in 2008. I guess that got delayed a long time.

What unit and MOS were you? I was enlisted, 19K tanker, Delta Company 1/72.

---

I was there in December 11- December 12 as a 13B in 1/15. We were hearing the same thing about Humphreys. But I guess the brigade rotations changed everything. I was still a PCS move when I went

They're still trying to figure that out. They rotate BDEs through now and half go to Casey/Hovey, half for to Humphrey's. I was on hovey during 18

What used to catch you by surprise was seeing U.S. Marine Corps Division patches on U.S Army uniforms after Desert Storm. I think it was 2nd Armor/1st Brigade from Fort Hood that was attached to the Marines during the assault into Kuwait.

Rabid Cougar said:

---

What used to catch you by surprise was seeing U.S. Marine Corps Division patches on U.S Army uniforms after Desert Storm. I think it was 2nd Armor/1st Brigade from Fort Hood that was attached to the Marines during the assault into Kuwait.

---

According to DA Pam 670-1, only one unit is authorized to wear a marine patch, and that is certain units from 3ID from the start of the second Gulf War who were attached to them for a very short period, I think about 1 month or so were the inclusive dates in early 2002.

I broke alot of hearts making Soldiers remove their marine patches when I found out they were not in 3ID during the inclusive dates.

My guard unit is littered with 1st Marine division combat patches. Most went to OIF with the Marines, got out, and got back in as Army national guardsmen.

Bogdonovich said:

---

My guard unit is littered with 1st Marine division combat patches. Most went to OIF with the Marines, got out, and got back in as Army national guardsmen.

---

Those are unauthorized for wear. You had to be IN the 3ID and attached to the marines to wear it.

What about personnel who have letters from division command authorizing wear? I meet some guys who had been assigned to 1st MAR DIV in Iraq as route security and had letters from Gen. Mattis authorizing wear of the patch.

That is addressed in AR 670-1, para 21-18, b(2) and it is authorized. Soldiers must have written approval from the DCS, G-1 or a designated representative.

Edited to correct citation to updated 670-1

CT'97 said:

---

What about personnel who have letters from division command authorizing wear? I meet some guys who had been assigned to 1st MAR DIV in Iraq as route security and had letters from Gen. Mattis authorizing wear of the patch.

---

Division Commanders do not have the authority to circumvent DA Pam 670-1 or AR 670-1. I dont give a damn how many letters they pen, it does not make it authorized.

Someone explain how a marine general has the authority to authorize Army Soldiers to wear a certain article of clothing? That is absolutely laughable. Hell, the patch isnt even authorized for marines to wear.

I better hop off my soap box, I can feel my blood pressure rapidly rising.

EDIT: AR 670-1, para 21-18, c(14)- Soldiers who served with the 1st Marine Division between 19 March 2003 and 21 April 2003 during combat operations in support of OIF are authorized to wear the 1st Marine Division SSI as their SSIMOHC.

clarythedrill said:

---

CT'97 said:

---

What about personnel who have letters from division command authorizing wear? I meet some guys who had been assigned to 1st MAR DIV in Iraq as route security and had letters from Gen. Mattis authorizing wear of the patch.

---

Division Commanders do not have the authority to circumvent DA Pam 670-1 or AR 670-1. I dont give a damn how many letters they pen, it does not make it authorized.

Someone explain how a marine general has the authority to authorize Army Soldiers to wear a certain article of clothing? That is absolutely laughable. Hell, the patch isnt even authorized for marines to wear.

I better hop off my soap box, I can feel my blood pressure rapidly rising.

EDIT: AR 670-1, para 21-18, c(14)- Soldiers who served with the 1st Marine Division between 19 March 2003 and 21 April 2003 during combat operations in support of OIF are authorized to wear the 1st Marine Division SSI as their SSIMOHC.

---

You are not necessarily correct. AR 670-1, para 21-18, b(2) states " 2) Unless otherwise approved by this regulation, Soldiers attached or under operational control(OPCON) to other services are not authorized to wear their patches as their SSIMOHC without written approval from DCS, G1 or a
designated representative."

It is pretty clear that wear of another service's patch can be worn, as long as written approval is granted from someone with the proper authority.

Whether Mattis had the authority to author that memo can be up for debate, but wear of the patch can certainly be authorized at other times and for units other than those explicitly stated in AR 670-1.

ETA: a little more research shows that starting in 2004, Lt. Gen. Franklin Hagenbeck, the then-G-1, approved their wear at a request from the Army Chief of Staff. This was continued until it was rescinded by ALARACT 178/2010, dated 11 JUN 2010, which states that the exception would no longer be granted to units attached at the Co level or higher, but that it would still be granted to individual augmentees to USMC HQ.

So In conclusion, Mattis probably was well within his authority to authorize wear of the patch, as long as it was done between 2004 and mid-2010.

maverick2076 said:

---

clarythedrill said:

---

CT'97 said:

---

What about personnel who have letters from division command authorizing wear? I meet some guys who had been assigned to 1st MAR DIV in Iraq as route security and had letters from Gen. Mattis authorizing wear of the patch.

---

Division Commanders do not have the authority to circumvent DA Pam 670-1 or AR 670-1. I dont give a damn how many letters they pen, it does not make it authorized.

Someone explain how a marine general has the authority to authorize Army Soldiers to wear a certain article of clothing? That is absolutely laughable. Hell, the patch isnt even authorized for marines to wear.

I better hop off my soap box, I can feel my blood pressure rapidly rising.

EDIT: AR 670-1, para 21-18, c(14)- Soldiers who served with the 1st Marine Division between 19 March 2003 and 21 April 2003 during combat operations in support of OIF are authorized to wear the 1st Marine Division SSI as their SSIMOHC.

---

You are not necessarily correct. AR 670-1, para 21-18, b(2) states " 2) Unless otherwise approved by this regulation, Soldiers attached or under operational control(OPCON) to other services are not authorized to wear their patches as their SSIMOHC without written approval from DCS, G1 or a
designated representative."

It is pretty clear that wear of another service's patch can be worn, as long as written approval is granted from someone with the proper authority.

Whether Mattis had the authority to author that memo can be up for debate, but wear of the patch can certainly be authorized at other times and for units other than those explicitly stated in AR 670-1.

ETA: a little more research shows that starting in 2004, Lt. Gen. Franklin Hagenbeck, the then-G-1, approved their wear at a request from the Army Chief of Staff. This was continued until it was rescinded by ALARACT 178/2010, dated 11 JUN 2010, which states that the exception would no longer be granted to units attached at the Co level or higher, but that it would still be granted to individual augmentees to USMC HQ.

So In conclusion, Mattis probably was well within his authority to authorize wear of the patch, as long as it was done between 2004 and mid-2010.

---

First saw them 2007 at the DFac at Camp Bucca. Convoy Security.

Rabid Cougar said:

---

maverick2076 said:

---

clarythedrill said:

---

CT'97 said:

---

What about personnel who have letters from division command authorizing wear? I meet some guys who had been assigned to 1st MAR DIV in Iraq as route security and had letters from Gen. Mattis authorizing wear of the patch.

---

Division Commanders do not have the authority to circumvent DA Pam 670-1 or AR 670-1. I dont give a damn how many letters they pen, it does not make it authorized.

Someone explain how a marine general has the authority to authorize Army Soldiers to wear a certain article of clothing? That is absolutely laughable. Hell, the patch isnt even authorized for marines to wear.

I better hop off my soap box, I can feel my blood pressure rapidly rising.

EDIT: AR 670-1, para 21-18, c(14)- Soldiers who served with the 1st Marine Division between 19 March 2003 and 21 April 2003 during combat operations in support of OIF are authorized to wear the 1st Marine Division SSI as their SSIMOHC.

---

You are not necessarily correct. AR 670-1, para 21-18, b(2) states " 2) Unless otherwise approved by this regulation, Soldiers attached or under operational control(OPCON) to other services are not authorized to wear their patches as their SSIMOHC without written approval from DCS, G1 or a
designated representative."

It is pretty clear that wear of another service's patch can be worn, as long as written approval is granted from someone with the proper authority.

Whether Mattis had the authority to author that memo can be up for debate, but wear of the patch can certainly be authorized at other times and for units other than those explicitly stated in AR 670-1.

ETA: a little more research shows that starting in 2004, Lt. Gen. Franklin Hagenbeck, the then-G-1, approved their wear at a request from the Army Chief of Staff. This was continued until it was rescinded by ALARACT 178/2010, dated 11 JUN 2010, which states that the exception would no longer be granted to units attached at the Co level or higher, but that it would still be granted to individual augmentees to USMC HQ.

So In conclusion, Mattis probably was well within his authority to authorize wear of the patch, as long as it was done between 2004 and mid-2010.

---

First saw them 2007 at the DFac at Camp Bucca. Convoy Security.

---

If other Soldiers were truly authorized to wear any other marine patch, it would have been codified in any one of the many AR/DA Pam 670-1 revisions, yet it isnt. So, again, only those in the above excerpt are authorized to wear a marine patch. The approval to wear any patch comes from Army, not another branch or general within that branch, as they will never be the DCS or G1. If they were assigned as a designated representative, Army would put out the order to make it legal, not rely on mush mouth matttis to make it legal.

You are not reading the regulation correctly. If the only exception was the one specifically noted about 3ID, there would be no reason for the citation in 21-18(b)2. It specifically provides allowance for the wear of other service's patches as a combat patch, with the proper approval. This approval was given from 2004-2010, until it was rescinded by the ALARACT I referenced above.

maverick2076 said:

---

You are not reading the regulation correctly. If the only exception was the one specifically noted about 3ID, there would be no reason for the citation in 21-18(b)2. It specifically provides allowance for the wear of other service's patches as a combat patch, with the proper approval. This approval was given from 2004-2010, until it was rescinded by the ALARACT I referenced above.

---

Then I would expect the verbiage on the memo to note that the patch is authorized to wear under the authority of the DCS, G-1 or whomever. If the memo simply states you can wear it, I question its authority.

Can anyone produce a copy of said memo? Every time I asked to see one, it could not be produced by the wearer, as all seemingly seemed to be "lost".

I'd have to do some digging to try to find out if there were any specific constraints put into LT. Gen. Hagenback's authorization of 2004, but I doubt he drilled down into specifics like that. Personally, I would accept a memo from the O-6 level of the USMC unit under which they were OPCON'd, as long as it was during the relevant period of 2004-2010. Anything after that would have to be from the DCS, G-1, or someone with that explicit authority. If were an individual augmentee to USMC HQ, as stated in the ALARACT referenced above, they would also still be authorized beyond the effective date of the ALARACT.

maverick2076 said:

---

I'd have to do some digging to try to find out if there were any specific constraints put into LT. Gen. Hagenback's authorization of 2004, but I doubt he drilled down into specifics like that. Personally, I would accept a memo from the O-6 level of the USMC unit under which they were OPCON'd, as long as it was during the relevant period of 2004-2010. Anything after that would have to be from the DCS, G-1, or someone with that explicit authority. If were an individual augmentee to USMC HQ, as stated in the ALARACT referenced above, they would also still be authorized beyond the effective date of the ALARACT.

---

I would not, as there is too much assumption that the criteria was met with not way to verify it.

Again, a general from another branch of service does not have the authority to permanently authorize anything for a Soldier.

Also, why was one group singled out for inclusion in the AR when all others are allowed to get by with a questionable piece of paper? I am retired, so not my battle anymore, but when I was in, I slept well at night making those remove the patch who were not in 3ID during the listed dates in the AR.

Hagenbeck was the Army G-1, and he issued the exception at the request of the Army CoS. I think the reason that the 3ID authorization is spelled out is that the timeframe is before the exception was issued in 2004, so it wasn't otherwise covered.

maverick2076 said:

---

Hagenbeck was the Army G-1, and he issued the exception at the request of the Army CoS. I think the reason that the 3ID authorization is spelled out is that the timeframe is before the exception was issued in 2004, so it wasn't otherwise covered.

---

I can buy that as long as the memo lists who in the Army gave the authority for the memo to be considered legal.

However, those who were prior service marines can not wear the patch if they have not been deployed and earned it while in the Army. That I believe is not in question.

Great debate for sure.

Hagenbeck was the Army G-1. His authority is explicitly given in 670-1.

As for prior service Marines wearing their patch, you are correct.

maverick2076 said:

---

Hagenbeck was the Army G-1. His authority is explicitly given in 670-1.

As for prior service Marines wearing their patch, you are correct.

---

I do know there were several prior service Marines in the Mass National Guard - A Company, 1st Battalion, 181st Inf. 26th Inf. Div. that I was running around the Kunar with in 2009. They had the "YD" patch and the 101st.Combat patch. No Marine Division patches.

Attached to 1st Mar Div for a very specific time frame...19 March 2003 and 21 April 2003


SUBJECT: ALARACT 140/2007
TEXT: UNCLASSIFIED//

THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN SENT BY THE PENTAGON TELECOMMUNICATIONS CENTER ON BEHALF OF: DA WASHINGTON DC//DAPE-HRI//
SUBJECT: AR 670-1, 3 FEB 05, WEAR AND APPEARANCE OF ARMY UNIFORMS AND INSIGNIA
1. THIS MESSAGE SERVES AS IMPLEMENTING INSTRUCTIONS FOR CHANGES TO THE WEAR POLICY OUTLINED IN AR 670-1 AND MESSAGES OUTLINING THE WEAR POLICY FOR THE ARMY COMBAT UNIFORM (ACU).

8. NON-SUBDUED SSI (S) ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO BE WORN ON UTILITY UNIFORMS AS A SSI OR SSI-FWTS. LEADERS WILL ENSURE SOLDIERS COMPLY IMMEDIATELY. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO POLICY CURRENTLY APPROVED AUTHORIZING WEAR OF ANY NON-SUBDUED SSI ON UTILITY UNIFORMS.


24. POC FOR UNIFORM POLICY IS SGM K. EASLEY, DSN 225-5287; COMM. [login to see] . E-MAIL IS [login to see] .MIL.
25. THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE DCS, G-1.
26. THIS AUTHORITY IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
27. EXPIRATION. THIS MESSAGE WILL EXPIRE UPON NEXT PUBLICATION OF AR 670-1.

AR670-1 (KEY WORD SOLDIERS) not MARINES
(14) Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF): between 19 March 2003 to 31 August 2010, for Soldiers assigned to units
participating in OIF. Soldiers must have been deployed in the CENTCOM area of operations, or participated in OIF while deployed in Turkey, Israel, or on Aegis cruisers. Soldiers who served with the 1st Marine Division between 19 March 2003 and 21 April 2003 during combat operations in support of OIF are authorized to wear the 1st Marine Division SSI as their SSIFWTS. Soldiers who were deployed in the area of operations on training exercises or in support of operations other than OIF not authorized the SSI-FWTS, unless those exercises or operations became combat or support missions to OIF.