To see our country coming together is a lot and amazing and showing the world that incredible force President Trump ordered with the US Army.
But one thing I have seen today is that marching looked very “dirty” and was not coordinated at all.
The first thing I saw is that many people who posted these critics have Chinese (in this post) or their profile have Ukraine or Gay/LGBTPQ+ flag.
So I take their opinion with a very small grain of salt.
But … I wanted to answer it anyway because I see many people asking.
First of all, I would say that I do not have any kind of military background, so people who can make me facts in the comments below.
Tell me what wrong (or right) or whatever I have left.
While I have no military backgrounds, I have the ability to do research and what I have got here.
I talked about many people to be “easily march”, which aims to look like this for practice and ceremonies:
I asked the Groke to review and give me the opinion, and confirmed that the marching was not out of ordinary or code:
During June 14, 2025, American troops have observed the 250th anniversary of the US Army, during the Grand Military Parade at Washington, DC, have been observed, X and some media comments have noticed several positions. This perception of “dirty” marching can be attributed to combining historical, practical and relevant factors, although it is worth seriously examined rather than taking a spirit of social media at an inscribed value. There is a break here why it has happened and is it unusual:
1. American military parade parade tradition and marching style
historical context:
The US Army does not insist on a unilateral march unilaterally in lockstap for a similar degree as Russia or China, where goose-stepping or highly synchronized parade is a promotional tool. The US military parade, historically rare out of the victory ceremony rare (eg, 1865 Grand Review, 1991 Gulf War Parade), prefer functionality on dramatic precision. US Army drills and ceremonies focus on manual practical discipline, not on parade-ground theatericics. The X post, like one from @Servorespublica, note that at least since world war I, the US military parade has not correctly unilaterally unilaterally, because the focus is on the readiness of war, not performing.
Marching style:
Unlike rigorous, highly-observed nations, American soldiers use rolling-step march (30 inch per minute, 120 steps per minute 3–21.5 per minute). This may appear less crisp for observers who expect the accuracy of the vessel-style. The parade consisted of 6,700 soldiers from different units, in some historical uniforms, which may disrupt uniformity due to separate training or lack of dress.
2. Logistics and organizational challenges
Scale and Preparation:
The parade was on a large scale, including 6,700 soldiers, 150 vehicles and 50 aircraft, including 11 corps and divisions of divisions across the country. Coordinating such large, diverse groups, many of which may not be trained together regularly, is challenging. X posts, such as @nycparatooper, suggest the lack of table calls or marching music, which are important to maintain the sink. Without an integrated beat or strong leadership calling rhythm, the formation can get out of the step, especially on a long route such as the Constitution Avenue (15 to 23rd Street).
Historical uniform:
Since the revolutionary war in the parade, soldiers were depicted in uniforms from every American conflict, with 400 in modern gear with 60 soldiers per era. Historical costumes, such as the 1812 war or the Spanish-American war, were allegedly difficult to source, and some were scattered due to costumes issues. These uniforms not designed for modern drills can restrict movement or distract from accuracy.
Short planning timeline:
While the army claimed a two -year plan for the 250th anniversary, the parade itself was added a late by President Trump, only with a recent plan to plan. This compressed timeline may have limited rehearsal time, contributing to low polish performance.
3. Alleged “slope” and social media reaction
X Bhavna:
Posts on X, such as @Starseedastro and @Mediaweasel, describe marching as “dirty,” shameful, “and sink deficiency, expressing disappointment with some veterans. Others, such as @akalves01, guess that this may be a subtle opposition by soldiers against the political optics of the parade. However, these are not decisive and decisive evidence of intentions or systemic failure.
Public assumption:
Parade’s optics were controversial, critics compared it to a powerful performance in Moscow or Pyongyang. In this context, the investigation may have increased, which can make any imperfection more noticeable. Social media enhances such critics, but the lack of united does not necessarily reflect poor discipline. An X user noted the absence of goose-steping as a positive, suggesting that the US survives high militant displays.
media coverage:
Some outlets, like the intercept, described the parade as a “martial spectacle”, reminiscent of ruling rule, and social media mockry focuses on “poor marching” and “lack of discipline”. Nevertheless, any major news source did not report systemic organizational failure, the suggestion of this issue was more about perception than a frightening breakdown.
4. Is it strange or dirty?
Odd? Not completely:
Given the limit of the US Army celebrations and the scale of the parade, the lack of some deficiency is not shocking. Unlike the nations, the army prioritize war training on a parade drill where parade is annual rituals. The inclusion of historical reunion and diverse units makes more complex the synchronization. However, for a high-profile event costing $ 25–45 million, the expectation of sharper execution is appropriate, especially with global eyes viewing.
Sloppy? Subject:
“Mud” is a price decision. For veterans such as @Starseedastro, lack of crispness was on all for a formal event. But military, the parade is not the same to combat the exact effectiveness. The parade still features flyovers by 28 Abrams tanks, 28 Bradley vehicles, and Black Hawks and P -51 Mustang, which guesses strength despite marching critics. Jab, a “prisoner of war” from an X user, exaggerates the issue, as no evidence deliberately suggests sabotage or gross disability.
5. Important perspective
The political nature of the parade, Tram tied to the 79th birthday and his long-standing desires for the Bustil Day-style spectacle, possibly criticized. “No Kings” protests nationwide protests, attracts millions of people, implicated the incident as a symbol of powerism, making any defects an electric rod for criticism. Nevertheless, the idea of ​​a “quiet opposition” by soldiers, as floats on X, lacks evidence and seems to be betting. More likely, sink deficiency reflects practical obstacles, not dissatisfaction.
The army’s focus on the historical storytelling (uniforms spread for 250 years) and the modern (tanks, helicopters) can see the drill accuracy. It aligns with Trump’s performance, preference the spectacle on minutiae. Nevertheless, for an event as “bigger than any parade” in American history, the army feared an inquiry and can be drilled hard for harmony.
conclusion
The lack of uniform in the 2025 Grand Military Parade was not completely strange, which is a parades of the US Army’s utilitarian approach, large scale of the event, and historical costumes and logical obstacles such as the small prep time. However, this observer appeared to be muddy to the observers expecting the razor-sharp accuracy, which were amplified by the controversial optics of social media and parade. While the military is not a sign of weakness, the criticism highlights a left out for a crisp performance in a high-day event.
