Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!veritas!amdcad!amdcad!military From: wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL (Will Martin) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: CINC Schwarzkopf Message-ID: <1991Mar26.031516.2379@amd.com> Date: 26 Mar 91 03:15:16 GMT Sender: military@amd.com Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Lines: 64 Approved: military@amd.com From: Will Martin Resubmission: my original seems to have been lost in the mail and never appeared in the Digest: From: tighe@hydra.convex.com (Mike Tighe) >I think you missed the source of the question. Like Mr. May, I saw (on TV) >Schwarzkoff being guarded by people that were dressed in civilian attire, >and carrying AR15/M16's. I think this was most evident during the 60 >Minutes interview. >So, to repeat the question, were these people civilians? If not, why were >they wearing civilian clothes? I hope the people on this list saw the Barbara Walters interview with GEN Schwartzkopf on 20/20 on Friday, 15 March. They not only showed the bodyguards but spoke of them (unfortunately briefly, and in no detail). There are American-looking (whatever that may mean... :-) guards in mufti (civilian attire) and Saudi guards in uniform. Each seemed to have his counterpart, so when they paired off, there'd be one uniformed and one civilian. The Saudis carried some form of SMG, while the others carried either M16s or AR15s (no detail shown so couldn't tell). There were four of them walking down the corridor in the underground HQ, with Walters & Schwartzkopf. When the party arrived at the "War Room" at the end of the corridor, a pair broke off and about-faced to cover the corridor, while the other two accompanied the General and Ms. Walters (plus, of course, the TV crew you didn't see) into the room. The General stated they were with him day and night, constantly, and referred quite admiringly and approvingly to their performance and ability and value. While the reason the ones in mufti are not in uniform wasn't stated explicitly, another poster did refer to there being at least one reason. If they are CID, they are sort of like "plainclothes" detectives. It makes their job easier if they stand apaprt from the military rank structure, and are not immediately categorized as an inferior or superior. As to these particular bodyguards, remember their job would involve denying passage to high-ranking officers of various nationalities (including royal-family Coalition officers), and, if they wore their real rank (they may be non-coms, or lieutenants, for example) that would be much harder. It would be a loss of face and perhaps an insult for a Saudi Colonel, for example, to be seen obeying a US Sergeant. It would be hard for a US Major General to take an instruction from a Lieutenant, and so forth. Putting these guards into civilian attire removes their obvious rank, and sets them apart from everyone else in the environment, all of whom were wearing uniforms. They are immediately obvious as being "special cases" and can do their job without the saluting, traditional military courtesy, etc., that would interfere with their efficiency. (I'm sure they are respectful, refer to everyone as "Sir" or "Ma'am", but are nonetheless firm and adamant about letting past only those authorized, and have no qualms about using force.) I wonder about the Saudi uniformed counterparts. I can understand the political reasoning that puts them there, but they did not appear to have the same "distance" from the surrounding officers that the civilian-attired guards do. I suppose that is one reason for their being paired with the US guys; if some high-ranking Saudi braced them and ordered them to let him by, the other guy was there to enforce the rules. But I wouldn't want to be the Saudi guy after the war, after the Americans leave, if such an incident occured! :-) Regards, Will wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil