# Army - using the wrong Camouflage in Iraq? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 8, 2004, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530 "2004-01-08T23:53:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530/21 "2004-01-10T12:10:21Z")
I would figure the Airborne Brigade is a good deal. It can move from city to city to suppress civil unrest or coups. It can move outside the frontiers to support UN/AL mandates. Besides the Saudis no longer face a conventional heavy force. Of course that could change again. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530/22 "2004-01-10T12:19:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kmg365 \* > \*\*Interesting, but METT-T considerations in Europe are different than SW Asia. Try reading FM7-7 in the meantime. \*\* Rather than trying to blind me with jargon, perhaps you could explain what these abbreviations mean (I’m down with the “SW” one, by the way). ---
**Author:** ![kmg365](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ec9cab/32.png) [@kmg365](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kmg365)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530/23 "2004-01-10T12:31:30Z")
In the U.S. Army and USMC, a [METT-T](http://web.mit.edu/armyrotc/mett.htm) analysis is the cornerstone of any tactical planning. Troops don’t move an inch and plans aren’t made until proper consideration is given to all aspects of METT-T. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530/24 "2004-01-10T15:02:48Z")
That would be an analysis based on “METT-T” Mission, Equipment (?), Terrain Troops and Time available. This is meant to be a framework for figuring out what the heck to do next. This (it would seem) is outlined in (U.S. Army) Field Manual 7-7. By the way, the guys at the back guard post seem to be barbecuing dinner. I waved at them during my run. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@UncleBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBill)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2004, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530/25 "2004-01-10T16:03:50Z")
Some in the Saudi military provide security for the royal palaces, which are scattered in various parts of the peninsula. They don’t necessarily GUARD them like we have guards at embassies, they more are rapid reaction forces coming in from a garrison some distance away. If a palace were under siege, it may be a good idea to have some really mobile guys. Similarly, it was not ALL that long ago when the tensions between Saudi Arabia and Israel may have been a tad bit higher, and the thought of flying troops out a ways west was a viable alternative in some scenarios. And I have trained with Saudi Naval Infantry forces a few times, both stateside and in their own sandbox. Planning ahead is not their strongest suit. The “appearances sake” argument holds some water. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/army-using-the-wrong-camouflage-in-iraq/223530.md?page=1)