Also I’m confused by your last paragraph there. If you’re not saying that these kind of tattoos never get by the military sometimes then how is it definitely false what the other guys claiming? So which is it do they sometimes get through like he claims or they never get through like you were suggesting and now have suggested once again they are with that sentence? Can’t be both.

You're becoming hoisted by your own control-the-conversation.

It is fine for a person with this tattoo to be in the military, because it's not a Nazi tattoo any more than the Iron Cross is a Nazi tattoo. That is an obvious conclusion that can be drawn just from the pure fact that this guy was in the military. It's only confusing if you are accepting the premise that it's an overtly and exclusively Nazi tattoo (to the same extent as having an SS lightning bolt or a swastika or something).

The objective fact of this guy being allowed to be in the military with this tattoo is a problem for the people who are pretending it's a Nazi tattoo, so one commenter tried to explain away that discrepancy by pretending that the US military is just lax and inconsistent about tattoo enforcement. I can actually believe that idea in some circumstances and depending on the details, but the person didn't know what they're talking about, so they doubled down about some weird aspects of what they were claiming in ways that revealed that they were definitely lying. They didn't know enough about the subject matter to make a well-constructed lie (which also betrays the fact that they were making up stuff they were talking about, which is it own whole type of interesting and important).

Hope that clears up your confusion.