TYR Tactical

Strike Hold! Talks UCP on Fox

Watch it and tell us what you think…



16 Responses to “Strike Hold! Talks UCP on Fox”

  1. CAVstrong says:

    Well, the StrikeHold guy certainly did a great job. He clearly knew what he was talking about and when given the opportunity he effectively communicated his knowledge.

    The anchorwoman however, as usual, was an idiot.

  2. BK says:

    lessons in journalism…’how to lead an interview as opposed to conducting an interview’. tomorrow…how to hide a story that contradicts ‘the narrative’. this has been ‘lessons in journalism’. back to you…

  3. majrod says:

    Pretty good job by Strike and Hold. Did a really good job of blowing up the $5bil talking point. The press is salivating over that one after the GAO’s trip to Las Vegas! Way to go Holsworth! (Unfortunately he won’t be invited back)

    Besides dinging the Army general (who he wouldn’t name) for borrowing the most popular colrs to create “universal” camo I wish he had discussed the copyrighting of MARPAT and how that has led to EVERY service now having its own “unique” camo. A first in the last 60 years.

  4. Ross says:

    Typical to see Fox news floundering when they’ve realised that they’ve brought on a competent commentator like Holsworth, who’s more interested in disseminating actual information instead of towing some cooked up punchy narrative…

  5. Paul says:

    What a bitch. Clearly shows how dumb America is when it comes to something as simple as the Army creating an improved camouflage pattern.

  6. Strike-Hold! says:

    Hey guys – thanks for all the comments. It was certainly an interesting experience. When I talked to them in advance I outlined exactly what the real story behind the “5$B” issue – by the way, did anyone notice the side panel that popped later in the piece, with the headline “5$ camo debacle”? LOL.

    I reiterated that point to them the second time I talked to them, and also about the how the real story is what the Army’s doing now to find a better solution, but also that there is still no clearly stated objective of when, how or IF all the UCP kit and clothing will be replaced – that’s what they should be poking there noses into, if anything!

    I also pointed out to them that we already have an interim replacement solution in Afghanistan – but also no publicly stated position on what happens when that ends and we have all of that kit left in the supply chain.

    I was also ready to point out and discuss the issue of the Air Force and Navy having compounded the issue even further with their we-wanna-look-cool-too digital-camo rebranding exercises.

    She could have had all of that – she could have scooped everybody else out there with a deeper, richer, much better story than what’s been put out so far – but, no, she had to ignore all that and go for the inflammatory headline and opening statement.

    I felt like saying, “You know, everybody has seen these uniforms on news reports, in newspaper and magazine articles, in commercials, TV shows, movies, recruiting ads, and soldiers in transit and on parade. And NONE of you stopped and went – hey, that pattern doesn;t look like camouflage, what’s up with that?”

    So instead, here we are 8 years later when its old news that’s been killed to death by the professional media, the Army is in the midst of a program to find a replacement, and suddenly its a storm in a teacup becuase some dumb-asses are quoting facts and people out of context and/or incorrectly…

    No wonder the average schmuck would rather watch The Kardashians or Jersey Shore – no thinking is required.

    • majrod says:

      Way to go dude! You were AWESOME!

      Great job on not being part of the typical journalist effort to sensationalize! Well done!

    • Greg says:

      Well put on that one 🙂

    • B. Elmore says:

      The reason they went the way they did is because their main objective is ratings, but they misunderstand what people want. Sure, lots of people just want to watch arguing – and those people watch Jerry and MSDNC. But what Fox doesn’t realize is that that formula doesn’t apply to much of their audience. Their audience wants to be well-informed, and so they ought to have more intelligent programming.

  7. MattF says:

    Strike-Hold, BZ on the interview!



  8. Marcos says:


    I think she was trying to get you to talk about Multicam being issued in Afghanistan in lieu of UCP…

    • Strike-Hold! says:

      I was waiting to get that point in, but she seemed hung up on other stuff.

  9. Paralus says:

    “The anchorwoman however, as usual, was an idiot.” Amen, she was fishing for sound-bites and outrage among brain-dead FOX viewers so they can sell air-time.

    Strike-Hold, you did a great job sticking to the facts.

  10. fyrfyter3 says:

    This entire issue would have been avoided if the powers that be woulda recognized the superiority of multicam to any camo pattern out there back when they got away from the 3 color woodland. From what I’ve seen and read the Army considered going with the Crye Precision combat uniform but typical they wanted to tweak the design and Crye wouldn’t sign off on that because as anyone who has worn the Crye Combat Uniform can attest it doesn’t need to be tweaked so that was a deciding factor in going with the garbage ACU they have now.

    Here we are today after years of SF Operators useing MC in the field and now its the latest and greatest for the regular Army to wear MC. Its sad knowing that the higher ups who make the decisions on issues such as these can’t pull their heads outa their asses for five seconds to see the obvious answer staring at them and the soldiers have to suffer because of it.