US Army Instructor in Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine

a reply to: 38181


6:40




He agrees with you.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

you are correct, they were called BDU's i while i was in, in the mid 2000 they changed. it's just habit to call them that.
now all branches now call them something different.

if i understand it correctly, the Army, Air Force. and Space Force wear ACU's
Navy wears several, NWU's, Seals and Seabess and a few other on shore MOS's still wear the M81 Pattern BDU's and DCU"S,
or the NWU Type III, or AOC pattern.

The Marine Corp wear the MCCUU Marpat Pattern and MARSOC still use the M81 pattern BDU's.

Coast Guard wear ODU's.

to me that's to much sugar for a dime, one design with patches and labels unless their a part of a SOG should suffice.

This is old news to some degree.

A French journalist reported that americans were running the show there a month or two ago.

I'm pretty sure Eisenhower put US "advisors" in Vietnam. That's how we roll.

originally posted by: Salander
This is old news to some degree.

A French journalist reported that americans were running the show there a month or two ago.

I'm pretty sure Eisenhower put US "advisors" in Vietnam. That's how we roll.

The 'French' 'journalist' that was outed as a russian sympathizer supporting putin's invasion soon after making such absurd claims with zero evidence?


russian's must be pretty bad at war if they haven't found a single shred of evidence that all the Americans are running the show after occupying a third of the country at one point.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

LOL, Zero Evidence is the basis of the entire western propaganda effort.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Oh I agree 100%, just reluctant to come right out and say so. It’s a ridiculous story about the General and it just made me laugh

a reply to: Grimpachi

no, really its not. The guy in question is not even military.


Covered here -

a reply to: Xcathdra

Why should I take his word for it?


Every time I read through the pro Azov channels on Telegram they fawn over that guy. Then they go on to talk about how the superior white race and the all the other inferior races using every derogatory term for them that is not allowed here.

originally posted by: 38181

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: 38181

They're not called 'fatigues' any more so far as I recall. They were already "BDUs" in my time, probably a new name by now. "Fatigues" went by the wayside with the OD uniform of the 1950s-1970s.

And yeah, that guy isn't in the U.S. Army. Don't blame him for wearing cammies, though.

Cheers

I was trying to be formal, they are called OCP’s the Army used call the grey asinine ones ACU’s. If you could zoom in on that patch, it doesn’t look like an Army unit I’ve ever seen. Round patches are not seen that often.

If I am not mistaken, the term 'fatigues' goes back to a style of uniform that was used for 'fatigue duty' -- that is, work details. The term harkens back to a different military era, when soldiers were at times used as laborers. Again IIRC that practice became much less common after the draft stopped in 1973 or thereabouts.

But yeah, I remember the fatigues. The post-Vietnam version was not so good because they lacked cargo pockets in the trousers and by requiring a shirt that was to be tucked in, two more pockets were lost as well. I would guess you were in a military at some point and remember how many items got stuffed into pockets. Cargo pockets are very nice in that way.

Cheers

As far as I'm concerned any American (military or not) currently in Ukraine fighting on either side should be tried for treason. They are dragging this country into a conflict the majority of Americans want nothing to do with.

originally posted by: JAY1980
As far as I'm concerned any American (military or not) currently in Ukraine fighting on either side should be tried for treason. They are dragging this country into a conflict the majority of Americans want nothing to do with.

So no free choice, no freedom of movement, you want big govt to punish..how patriotic

a reply to: Grimpachi

Because the guy hosting the video is military and he points out why the guy in question is not military. Like for instance the guy is wearing an air force uniform, wrong cap, etc.

originally posted by: JAY1980
As far as I'm concerned any American (military or not) currently in Ukraine fighting on either side should be tried for treason. They are dragging this country into a conflict the majority of Americans want nothing to do with.

That is not how Treason works. A person must be assisting a foreign government at war with the US. The treason must be witnessed by other people.

There is no law that stops US citizens (neither civilian nor former military) from assisting a foreign government at war. That is how a lot of Americans helped the allies during WW2 prior to US involvement in the war.

18 USC 2381 - Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

a reply to: Xcathdra

Because the guy hosting the video is military and he points out why the guy in question is not military. Like for instance the guy is wearing an air force uniform, wrong cap, etc.

Are you saying he is active military being fed info from government sources or just another veteran like millions of us?

The first would mean something the second doesn't mean squat when it comes to this.

And yes, I admit the guy is wearing an airforce uniform, not an Army one. That was my mistake and I didn't edit it in time.

The cap as some sort of evidence is BS. I have seen the airforce do weirder things. I have seen Army do weirder things. No telling what kind of SOP is being applied or what relaxations they have been granted.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Maybe you should watch the segment in the video I linked and see what is pointed out. He does a lot better job at explaining it than I do.

a reply to: Xcathdra

After that one video that he claimed was a hoax because it was on the border I don't think I can trust his opinion.

He never gave the source of the video. He just came by it and somehow geolocated it from one scene of a bridge or road in an entire country.

I have tried doing that with knowledge of the general area in a city and that took hours.


Too much stinks about him IMO and I don't trust him. So, I think I will pass.

You are free to explain what he said.

a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Yup, sometime you don’t want to pinpoint every detail, just like an investigation, you leave certain things out. That inaccurate subdued flag was a dead giveaway, just one thing most civilians that never served won’t catch. But since he pointed it out I’ll post it.

originally posted by: 38181
a reply to: PatriotGames4u

Yup, sometime you don’t want to pinpoint every detail, just like an investigation, you leave certain things out. That inaccurate subdued flag was a dead giveaway, just one thing most civilians that never served won’t catch. But since he pointed it out I’ll post it.

Same reason I let you guys point out the problems you saw with it instead of speculating myself.

a reply to: JAY1980


What possible law are they violating?

a reply to: Grimpachi


Have you ever been able to debunk even a single thing from his 80+ daily videos?

Even one?

Let us know when that happens.