Article

2009-04-15 Home Front: Politix

Sikhs Want U.S. Army To Waive Dress And Appearance Regulations

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Lftbhndagn 2009-04-15 14:20|| || Front Page|| [10 views ] Top

#1 Ease up on them hammers, Tex. For many years, Sikhs served in the US military with honor and distinction. They wore OD turbans and had beards and were not inclined to leave before retirement as senior NCOs.

I might add that it was far more likely to see them branched combat arms than anything else. The Special Forces had a bunch of them, as did the Rangers.

The reason is that they are a militant, pro-military and nationalist religion. They dominate the Indian Army officer corps, and serve loyally in any army they are allowed to enlist. If they screw up, they are not just in trouble with their military leaders, but with their religious leaders as well.

They were only pushed out in the 1980s because they couldn't wear protective masks against chemical weapons. And there were a LOT of soldiers who were sad to see them go.

Hell, we "discovered" Sikhs in WWII, and the Japanese were scared half to death of them. There was one instance where on a Pacific island, four Sikhs so terrified a Japanese battalion that they surrendered without firing a shot or anybody getting hurt.

Posted by Anonymoose 2009-04-15 17:24|| 2009-04-15 17:24|| Front Page Top

#2 Turbans, beards, and hair down to your a** walking around in the rear, or on a parade field might look interesting or distinctive to some, but it makes pulling on a protective mask, helmet, HALO or SCUBA gear a bit of a challenge. Last time I checked this was still the United States Army.

Posted by Besoeker 2009-04-15 17:38|| 2009-04-15 17:38|| Front Page Top

#3 I understand that there have been advances in making CBN protective clothing that can accomodate beards.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-04-15 17:38|| 2009-04-15 17:38|| Front Page Top

#4 Its a tough situation because in a combat medic, combat lifesaver situation, or forward operation lives are at stake for the lifesaver who has to run, walk, and carry victims off the battefield in a chemical environment.

I know I had trouble getting a seal on my mask in seconds at times as a female combatant with only a shoulder length head of hair back in a bun. True story, I ended up bobbing my hair shorter.

As for the regs here, it kind of dilatory of the Army to begin deliberations on these fellows cases now. They've already given a lot of service, perhaps a deal can be struck. But to be combat ready, a soldier has to be able to wear a mask, or else they'd be best off serving in strictly non-field situations. But its not like its a big deal, we had plenty of asthmatic soldiers who couldnt don a mask, who were put in job areas they could do. Its doable.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 17:56|| 2009-04-15 17:56|| Front Page Top

#5 If they want to have their own dress code and not be combat ready, I'm fine with that so long as their pay reflects reflects that fact and we have a qouta on how many non-combat ready personnel we have. Neither of those will happen as they are discriminatory. Therefore I have no choice but to be against allowing them a waiver on dress code.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-04-15 18:05|| 2009-04-15 18:05|| Front Page Top

#6 True, being in the Army entails sacrifice. Why should they be treated any different? And yes, if you can fully do a combat job, rank and pay should be in full effect, if not, then take the dock in pay and quit bitching.

I'd wanted to wear a large cross dangling outside my uniform, have my long hair flowing in the breeze and have long fingernails, but all were prohibited, and were cut off or removed. I made my sacrifice to serve in the Army, so should anyone else. You change to be fit for the Army, the Army doesn't change to fit you.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 18:17|| 2009-04-15 18:17|| Front Page Top

#7 Ultimately this has nothing to do with the Sikhs, particularly, and everything to do with the Muslim demands to come. If they don't want to assimilate and do things the Army way, then they should be released to civilian life. That would be too bad, but less bad than what would follow.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-04-15 18:25|| 2009-04-15 18:25|| Front Page Top

#8 You change to be fit for the Army, the Army doesn't change to fit you.

Hooah GT! Lastly, try beards and long hair for a while in 115f-130f desert heat, blowing sand and dust. You'll be making tracks to the Haji barber, or initiating a do-it-yoself trim job pretty damn fast.

Posted by Besoeker 2009-04-15 18:45|| 2009-04-15 18:45|| Front Page Top

#9 GT: I'm a lung doctor. You mean asthmatics can serve? I had always been told that asthma was an automatic medical discharge.

Posted by Steve White 2009-04-15 19:29|| 2009-04-15 19:29|| Front Page Top

#10 Sometimes soldiers "develop" asthma or breathing disorders after theyre already in. I saw accomodations being made for folks with inhalers. I dont know if they were eventually med boarded or not. I think in many cases no, due to needing bodies.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 19:34|| 2009-04-15 19:34|| Front Page Top

#11 oops, and meant to mention like a third of soldiers smoke packs and packs of cigarettes, so it might be possible cause.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 19:38|| 2009-04-15 19:38|| Front Page Top

#12 These "needs of the Army" arguments are silly. From 1943 or so until the 1980s, Sikhs were fighting with the best of us. They are hardcore warriors and were some damn fine soldiers. If things were harder on them because of their turban and beard, you wouldn't hear them bitch about it.

"The Sikh Regiment is one of the highest decorated regiment of the Indian Army, with 73 Battle Honours, 14 Victoria Crosses, 21 first class Indian Order of Merit (equivalent to the Victoria Cross), 15 Theatre Honours...and 1596 other gallantry awards."

Geez. Like dismissing the 82nd Airborne Division because their berets were the "wrong" color.

Posted by Anonymoose 2009-04-15 20:18|| 2009-04-15 20:18|| Front Page Top

#13 " If things were harder on them because of their turban and beard, you wouldn't hear them bitch about it"

Im sure thats true they are fierce and wouldn't bitch about it.

Trivial as it seems, still, meeting boilerplate requirements is part of being a soldier. It is a shame such fine soldiers are dispensable due to wear of the uniform. Could their religion give them some slack in the hair and beard areas?

Back to my point, being in the Army regardless of Military Occupational Specialization boils down to meeting boiler plate requirements.

At present (im not the definitive judge if these are the guage of a good soldier or not) the first req. is knowing your Military Specialization. The second is qualifying on your assigned weapon a minimum of every six months. The third is passing your run, sit-ups, and push ups. And the fourth is not being Red (for no-go) for things like your gear, or pro-mask. Lastly, you have to be up to date on vaccinations... Not to mention you have to pay all your bills on time and abide by all regulations. Dont have one of those elements, your status is not fully combat ready.

When not fully combat ready, its not okay to be in a war-zone because you endanger your own life and the life of others. Its nothing personal or categorical against Sikhs, who no doubt sound very formidable.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 21:11|| 2009-04-15 21:11|| Front Page Top

#14 If they cannot don CW gear in a deployable unit I cannot see their use except as an "undeployable". You might note that most were formerly used in situations that did not require the ability to deal with Chem-Bio-Nuc Warfare. Times have changed and they have not or will not. That narrows their options but the Military should not relent in this case. The regs are there for a good reason. And I agree with #7, NS. Too bad, so sad. Deal with it.

Posted by tipover 2009-04-15 21:27|| 2009-04-15 21:27|| Front Page Top

#15 Yea, if they want to keep a beard and do their own wardrobe things, they'd have to go SF, but still that leaves the CF question. A little late for that, I suppose.

Where does SF even fit in with dentistry and/or physicians commisions, IDK? I give up, would these men just realize they joined the Army, man up, and shave or whatever.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 22:03|| 2009-04-15 22:03|| Front Page Top

#16 This guy turned 90 today.

The only living Indian 5 star general - Marshal of the Indian Air Force, Arjan Singh.

He strafed Pashtun tribals in the NWFP, flew against the Japanese in the Arakan, was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross in 1944, commanded the IAF during the 1965 and 1971 wars. Has flown over 60 different types of aircraft from Pre-WW-2 era Biplanes to Jet fighters.

Posted by john frum 2009-04-15 22:16|| 2009-04-15 22:16|| Front Page Top

#17 In the Indian Army, Sikhs wear ballistic patkas, which can accomodate the cloth patka which wraps the hair (normally worn over the Pagadi turban)

Posted by john frum 2009-04-15 22:38|| 2009-04-15 22:38|| Front Page Top

#18 There is a condition sycosis barbae whereby man doesnt need to shave by doctors orders if the man gets sycosis barbae from shaving.

In these certain cases a soldier doesnt have to shave but must trim beard. As for the long hair and turban, I cant shed any light of ideas or solutions on that one, because of the need to wear Kevlar helmets.

May the United States Army solve its problems, and hope for the best for our best.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 22:43|| 2009-04-15 22:43|| Front Page Top

#19 trouble is - you start accomodating one, you accodate all. The military has succeeding by grinding down personal affectations in the interests of uniformity as an American soldier/sailor/marine/etc.

You become a member of a team, not an individual. Welcome Sikhs, conform or leave

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2009-04-15 22:43|| 2009-04-15 22:43|| Front Page Top

#20 No problem in Canada...

Sikh soldier returns
By CARY CASTAGNA -- Edmonton Sun

Taliban fighters aren't the only ones clad in turbans in Afghanistan.

Maj. Harjit Sajjan, who finished a nine-month tour of duty in September and received his Canadian Forces service medal at Rexall Place yesterday, says he never doffed his turban in the Middle East.

"I can wear a helmet. I can wear a gas mask. There's nothing that my turban or my beard can prevent me from doing in the military at all," said the 36-year-old Sikh from Vancouver.

"To put a helmet on, you have to have an inner liner. My turban acts like an inner liner, so I just wear the kevlar shell over top."

Interestingly, these Sikh Soldiers have been wearing gas masks for a while

Sikh soldiers using gasmasks while defending Ieper, Belgium in April, 1915.

Posted by john frum 2009-04-15 22:45|| 2009-04-15 22:45|| Front Page Top

#21 accodate? or accomodate....long day...mea culpa

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2009-04-15 22:45|| 2009-04-15 22:45|| Front Page Top

#22 That should be "under" rather than "over".
The cloth patka covers the hair. The big turban covers that and is normally removed.

Regulations state that beards must be trimmed or pulled back so as not to interfere with masks etc.

Posted by john frum 2009-04-15 22:53|| 2009-04-15 22:53|| Front Page Top

#23 Thanks John Frum, you just answered that last unanswered question about the hair and kevlar logistics. It is up to the Pentagon. I hope they do include Sikhs, but its not up to me.

The thing not covered much here is the intangibles of being a soldier. Part of the invisible inculcation process is being stripped of your bodily individuality and being one of the team, mentally as well as through the uniform.

Feeling you have control over your own body and the clothes on your own back is a privelege you HAD until you enter the U.S. Army.

Once youre in they tell you when to go to the bathroom, how to stand, eat, sit, shower, everything.

How well would Sikhs do at being controlled absolutely by the United States Army if they cannot let go of religious tangibles?

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 22:57|| 2009-04-15 22:57|| Front Page Top

#24 The military has succeeding by grinding down personal affectations in the interests of uniformity

Indeed, it helps if you have a lot of them

Posted by john frum 2009-04-15 22:59|| 2009-04-15 22:59|| Front Page Top

#25 Its a great sight, but it still doesnt tell me how they would take to being controlled absolutely and how would they be received by other soldiers in their unit who might be small minded or bigoted against them for their "otherness" Plus, Officers have the double problem of being regarded as impractical, pompous and uppity. Add to that a demand for accomodation, and now we're talking real differences.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 23:08|| 2009-04-15 23:08|| Front Page Top

#26

Posted by john frum 2009-04-15 23:24|| 2009-04-15 23:24|| Front Page Top

#27
The Armed Forces desperately seems to need more manly men such as in these photos, not more homosexuals and women. I hope they do get some solution to allow Sikhs, a picture is worth a thousand words, and these seem like ultra capable Men.

Posted by GirlThursday 2009-04-15 23:41|| 2009-04-15 23:41|| Front Page Top

23:52 JohnQC
23:50 JohnQC
23:45 JohnQC
23:41 GirlThursday
23:38 JohnQC
23:37 Tom
23:32 AzCat
23:28 Cornsilk Blondie
23:24 john frum
23:08 GirlThursday
22:59 john frum
22:58 Glenmore
22:57 GirlThursday
22:53 john frum
22:45 Frank G
22:45 john frum
22:43 Frank G
22:43 GirlThursday
22:39 JosephMendiola
22:38 john frum
22:35 JosephMendiola
22:26 JosephMendiola
22:26 Glenmore
22:16 john frum