Quote Originally Posted by wm View Post
Properly controlled and administered, it probably has value--post-Cardwell reforms versions anyway. But I do not think that we want to try to develop it along the lines of geographic recruitment and home base staging areas used by the Brits (and French for that matter). BTW, I thought we went through this whole exercise back in the late 80s-early 90s--I seem to remember wearing regimental crests on the right pocket or some other location depending on which variant of shirt/sweater/jacket/blouse you chose to wear, honorary colonels, and all that other mumbo-jumbo. I guess it was an idea whose time had not yet come, eh?
Maybe we just didn't have catchy enough names, like John Wayne's Own Rifles (sort of like the Queen's Own Hussars) and such.
The US Army never used home basing as a concept for its regiments. It was kicked around a few times in the 1880s or so but never took root. The Army has tried reviving regimental traditions from time to time, an effort that has been somewhat successful in cavalry units (partly because of their organization and partly from the cav mystique) and less so in other units. I'd hazard a guess that part of the reason for that is the reflagging and such that usually accompanies such "efforts," making them counter-productive. Our rotation/personnel 'development' programs (even in peacetime) also don't lend themselves to stable units.