It’s about missions, not wings
In response to: “Flight suit was best for wings” (letter, Oct. 6): Despite the writer’s perception, I don’t think it was the Army’s mission to destroy the esprit de corps by retiring an old aviation uniform, but perhaps it did ruin his hope of landing a date at the local bar back home. Last time I checked the Army doesn’t care about a soldier’s dating life, pilot or otherwise.
I am ashamed to be in the same branch as someone who has such an egotistical way of viewing an Army uniform. To say “pilots are the most dedicated individuals in the Army” and that they deserve to be singled out because of their elite class is saying the very soldiers we are there to support are not as dedicated individuals as aviators.
Unlike the writer, I’m not going to try to speak for the rest of my fellow army aviators. I know the aviation branch is a combat-support branch with the mission of supporting any soldier, whether in or out of combat, no matter what uniform we put on that day. If the writer needs his basic aviator wings that badly to do his job with a high morale, maybe he should consider getting his wings tattooed on his forehead so they are always with him and everyone can see that he is a pilot.
It’s not the uniform or special skill badges that make a soldier. It’s what the soldier does with those skills when it’s time to execute the mission, regardless of what uniform he wears.
My unit believes it is an honor to wear the same uniform as all soldiers who fight — and, unfortunately, die — serving in support of all current operations. If the writer likes the “flight suits” so much, he could always transfer to the Air Force, Navy or Coast Guard to get his back; maybe that would better “suit” his ego.
Chief Warrant Officer 4 James LandryUdairi, Kuwait