"Obviously?"June 13 2008 at 10:35 PM
|Michael Dorosh |
Response to Re: motive
How can you tell where and when the jacket was ripped just by looking?
I always thought most military items were "surplus" because they were surplus to someone's need - i.e. no one actually used the thing.
I don't see any insignia on this denison - jump wings especially, or evidence of such, which would be a big draw indicating airborne use. I do realize snipers and scouts wore these during the Second World War without insignia, some with suitable modifications.
But to state categorically that this jacket saw field use during the war would not be possible based solely on pictures from the internet.
In fact, a jacket in such poor condition would have been turned in to QM for disposal and probably destroyed - not sold to the public or retained by the soldier. That leaves one to conclude that the damage was most likely done after the jacket left military service - either being retained by a soldier on discharge, or by being surplused off.
I am sure one of our friendly correspondents can correct me if I am wrong on that; but I have a hard time believing that a jacket reduced to tatters in war service would be permitted to exit the service that way; the soldier would turn it in for a new one and the army would fix or destroy the old one.
|This message has been edited by dorosh on Jun 13, 2008 10:41 PM|
- Smock - Gary Boegel on Jun 14, 2008, 6:38 AM
- Exactly - Ed Storey on Jun 14, 2008, 7:00 AM