TexasCHLforum.com

tboesche wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:[

When I trained on missions involving locating and designating targets at night (30 years ago) I wore black denim pants (with pantyhose for warmth ), "commando" sweaters (the designation escapes me) and ski masks that started out rolled up like toboggans. We had light web gear, black with our gerber, monocular and side arm (in my case)...that's it. We did have dog tags, taped and concealed.

"Wolly Pully

Wooly Pully...thanks but there was a designation like "Sweater, Wool, Black, Reinforced, 1 Each". There was a specific nomenclature but I can't reach back the thirty years to recall it. I do remember the panty hose though, "Stockings, Nylon, pant-type, 1 pair"...I kid you not. The quartermaster didn't blink an eye.

tacticool wrote:It's as likely he was a ninja as "Spec-ops" imho.

I disagree, he was seen AND heard....definitely not ninja.

G26ster wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:CID, counter insurgency et al are all "special operations" that do not wear uniforms as a matter of course.

Yes, but CID investigates "within" the military, as police. I'm not familiar with counter insurgency forces within the US. Can you elaborate as to their role?

None I am aware of...just an example of non-uniformed military duty.

Added in edit: G26ster, eeeeaaasy there podner. I just got through the second page and just now got through your second post on this. IIRC there was a question about military personnel in general and special operations in particular operating in civilianized clothing. It's an aside and kind of moot in this case because this fellow was in uniform either legit or contrived.

Added in edit of my edit:

Ravens in Viet Nam, SF advisers and counter insurgency and target designation teams were and are special operations where civilianized clothing is used. Unmarked uniforms are also used regularly, SEALS, SF etc. The Geneva convention addresses uniforms as it pertains to POW's in Section 4. To be a POW a regular uniform, open carry of weapons and/or a command structure are necessary to be afforded the rights of POW. Also the Geneva convention is majorly concerning who may be engaged and what treatment is afforded those that have "laid down" arms, rules of occupation, etc.

Unlawful combatants are civilian, non-military and are not afforded protection under the Geneva Conventions. That said I can find no requirement that a military, lawful combatant must have a regular or any uniform. The danger level goes up exponentially in that capture by an opposing force (not to mention friendly fire) while in civilianized clothing may result in treatment as an unlawful combatant...but only those who are ascribed to the Geneva Conventions are likely to even consider this. Al Quaeda, the Taliban and associated cohorts can give one wit about the Geneva Conventions.

When I trained on missions involving locating and designating targets at night (30 years ago) I wore black denim pants (with pantyhose for warmth ), "commando" sweaters (the designation escapes me) and ski masks that started out rolled up like toboggans. We had light web gear, black with our gerber, monocular and side arm (in my case)...that's it. We did have dog tags, taped and concealed.

CID, counter insurgency et al are all "special operations" that do not wear uniforms as a matter of course.

I detached to 5th group and we never carried in garrison, much less off post. If we were deployed somewhere, then yeah a side arm or rifle would be with us at all times. I somehow don't think a school would be considered warm, much less hot.