Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
britopinion
Immortal Guard
Joined: 06-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Special Forces Posted: 13-Aug-2009 at 15:16 |
""the brits are good but lacking in leadership""
They lack leadership ?, how do you work that out. British officers in general have a very high reputation, and British special forces officers even more so, they may not be better than all others but they're certainly as good and leadership isn't one of their problems.
""but always good they have the fire power and offence but if u would to charge in they would be sitting ducks it would take so many o the sas that it would be pointless thats why they also add some of the grunts like heavy machine gunners""
????, explain.
"" the brit sas is so few in numbers it would take about 20 to actully get a job done but i do have to give them credit for some of therer scouting missions and suprise attack ""
The regular British SAS (22 SAS) are around the same size as Australias SAS, in addition there are two full "Regiments" within the territorial (reserves) made up of SAS qualified soldiers (21 & 23 SAS). In all there are about 900 in total i believe, certainly not a huge number i agree but i'm not sure how you figure out that the british SAS are any more susceptible to casualties than any other special operations unit, all of which would suffere dis-proportionately if they suffered high casualties during an operation.
""but they failed so many times and let the enemy get the info with out care ""
Certainly there have been failures but i think compared to most spec op units that have been as busy as the British SAS their failures are far out numbered by their successes. In fact i'd be interested to hear you tell us about all the failures that you're refering too.
|
|
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Aug-2009 at 22:29 |
Shhhhhh, Delta doesn't exist, everyone knows that.
BTW- You left out one of the recruitment sources, Sapper/Combat Engineer.
|
|
kilgore_327
Immortal Guard
Joined: 12-Aug-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Aug-2009 at 19:40 |
The Delta Force... you cant even volunteer for that, they have to recruit you from the Navy Seals or Rangers, and even after being recruited you have a small small chance of making it
|
|
HOMERS HAND
Earl
Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Aug-2009 at 02:24 |
the brits are good but lacking in leadership but always good they have the fire power and offence but if u would to charge in they would be sitting ducks it would take so many o the sas that it would be pointless thats why they also add some of the grunts like heavy machine gunners the brit sas is so few in numbers it would take about 20 to actully get a job done but i do have to give them credit for some of therer scouting missions and suprise attack but they failed so many times and let the enemy get the info with out care
|
love is but one of the paths we cross
|
|
WolfHound85
Housecarl
Joined: 02-Sep-2008
Location: USA and Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-May-2009 at 20:43 |
Originally posted by Zaitsev
Why are the Australian SAS missing from that list?
|
The Australian SAS is a great force however they are not original and are copied from the British SAS therefore I think Britain gets credit for the best special forces. However Australian SAS have played vital roles in assisting commonwealth states in conflicts from WW2-Present day. Not to mention non-commonwealth conflicts like the Vietnam War and the Global War on Terror.
|
College Student
|
|
Cryptic
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-May-2009 at 13:31 |
The "secret" to creating world class special forces is well known and well copied so arguments as to who is "better" cannot be proven. The receipe was developed by the British (SAS) and then copied by everyone.
The basic receipe seems to be....
Mix professional NCOS with an well thought out training program that is very tough physically and academically. Let the unit develop its own skills and talents. Add quality officers. Maintain the unit over the years so that skills are constantly improved and passed to the next generation. Add alot of money for training, equipment and deployments.
The result is the same, or nearly the same Seals, SAS, Sarayet, DSK, etc etc.
Edited by Cryptic - 30-May-2009 at 13:32
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-May-2009 at 06:05 |
Why are the Australian SAS missing from that list?
|
|
WolfHound85
Housecarl
Joined: 02-Sep-2008
Location: USA and Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 36
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-May-2009 at 04:35 |
Originally posted by Husaria
No mention of GROM? they may not be the best but i would say they're up there.
|
GROM has gained some fame since the Iraq war. But overall the SAS is probably the best and started it all. Most elite forces are modeled after SAS. The Navy SEALS are great however they have a 20% pass rate where as the SAS has a 2% pass rate. The most comprable special forces of the US to the SAS would be Delta Force.
|
College Student
|
|
Sun Tzu
Consul
Joined: 31-Oct-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 362
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-May-2009 at 03:46 |
what is GROM??
oh and who are the Brandenburgers??
|
Sun Tzu
All warfare is based on deception - Sun Tzu
|
|
Husaria
Pretorian
Joined: 28-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 150
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30-May-2009 at 00:30 |
No mention of GROM? they may not be the best but i would say they're up there.
Edited by Husaria - 30-May-2009 at 03:43
|
"The best tank terrain is that without anti-tank weapons."
-Russian military doctrine.
|
|
Parnell
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Apr-2009 at 09:03 |
What about the Irish army rangers?
Just because we only 60 special force soldiers doesn't mean we wouldn't show the rest of you's how to do it...
|
|
Galahadlrrp
Knight
Joined: 11-Nov-2008
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 66
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Apr-2009 at 08:23 |
--This thread is kind of mixed up. It uses the term special forces repeatedly, when what is meant is special operations forces. There's a difference; lumping them together is like discussing apples and oranges and calling them both citrus fruits. The omnipresent SEALS and SAS are both special operations units; so are US Army Special Forces. But the mission of Special Forces is different from that of the SEALS and SAS.
--Unless something has changed since I went thru Training Group Special Forces, "The mission of Special Forces is to organize, equip, train and lead indigenous forces in the art of counter-insurgency warfare". IE.....they are specialists in guerilla warfare. Each A Team is set up to organize and run a 500 man battalion.
--That mission is rather different from units who are effectively commandos or super-commandos. It doesn't mean that SF can't perform the missions that Delta Force, or the Brandenburgers, or SAS perform, but such missions aren't their main function. Remember when the Afghanistan War began? Think about those bearded guys riding the horses while leading Afghanis.....they were SF men doing their job. And doing it pretty effectively, too.
--Anyway, you have several levels of SpecOps units, and though most can cross-mission if need be, due to the people involved and their training, most have a particular mission assigned.
--Units like the US Army 75th Ranger Regiment and the Royal Marine Commandos are, well, commandos.....elite light infantry trained for surprise assaults. SAS and Delta Force are elite SpecOps units trained to do all sorts of Sneaky Pete stuff; they're sort of military SWAT teams under the direct control of the national command authority.
--But don't forget that the term Sneaky Pete originated with Special Forces, who did a lot of sneaky ops. Such as running the Mobile Guerilla Force in Cambodia, and the Project Delta recons into Laos, Cambodia and North Vietnam, under MACV, and running the highly effective Montagnard counter-guerilla operations in the Vietnamese Central Highlands of II Corps, and the ops with the Nungs of the northern mountains of (as it was then) South Vietnam's I Corps area.
--Then you have guys like the Long Range Surveillance Units (LRSU) whose specialty is deep penetration observation and reconnaisance.
--Oddly enough, both they and the current Rangers evolved out of the Vietnam Long Range Reconnaisance Patrol provisional units, due to the latter's successes in recon, raids and ambushes.
--My old unit, LRRP/1st Bde/101st Airborne, for instance, was organized in September 1965 and disbanded in January 1968; during that period, operating in 6 man teams up to 60-70 klicks from our nearest ground support, we had 5 men KIA--and a confirmed body count of more than 500 armed enemy KIA. We wrote several of the chapters of the book on deep penetration ops.
--First the Lurps became Long Range Patrol units, then they became Ranger Companies, then after the war, the 75th was organized as a TO&E unit. Note how they morphed into commandos from a unit whose primary mission was recon.
--Which is the why of LRSU.....the Army needed to regain the capability it lost when Lurps became commandos.
--But in all cases, despite the different missions, each unit was Special Operations
--Some units get a lot of hype--can you say SEALS and SAS? I knew you could!--but that doesn't mean they are the best. The SF guys who pulled off the Son Tay Raid were every bit as good as any of today's SEALS, though they didn't have as many fancy toys to play with back then. That's not to say that SEALS or SAS types aren't good, either. But claiming they are the ultima sans peur is ridiculous.
--Anyone who has ever been in combat knows that war is like football.....on any given day any given unit can win or lose. Guys in SpecOps units are good or they'd not have gotten in.....but precious few are supermen, guaranteed to win anytime they go into combat, even if they think they will win.
--Luck plays a big part. So does command intelligence. Being superman doesn't do you much good if your CO sends you into a frontal assault against an entrenched position defended by machine guns firing kryptonite bullets--just as the enemy takes position for a practice live fire.
--The SEALS, for instance, lost 4 KIA and 8 WIA (out of 48 men) in a rather disastrous attack on Patilla Field airport during the 1989 invasion of Panama. And they lost to Panamanian National Guardsmen who weren't nearly as well-trained or well-equipped AND who were outnumbered by the SEALS.
--Why? Because of the luck factor. And because of the stupid plan a certain Commodore ordered.
--If you want to say one unit is better than another, go for it. But that's like saying one football team is better than another--yet until you play the entire season, and have matched each team with each other, you have no idea who's the best.
--In this case, most of the teams haven't even scrimmaged with each other, much less played a professional season. Quite a few still haven't played their first game.
--Heck, most of the pro teams weren't even put on the schedule for the thread's season!
--Still, if I had to pick the most highly trained unit, period--and the implication is that the thread means the best-trained, past or present--I'd pick the Vietnam era US Army Special Forces, for their proven track record. Of course, that's purely my opinion, based on knowing them and seeing them in action and seeing the results of their ops.
--As an example of being well-trained, take the Son Tay Raid, where 56 SF volunteers attacked the POW camp at Son Tay, 23 miles west of Hanoi and several hundred miles from their launch point. They didn't rescue any prisoners, because the intel failed to inform them the POWs had been moved. But in a 27 minute raid, at a cost of one WIA, they killed between 150 and 200 NVA and took complete control of the area. If POWs HAD been there, rescued they would have been. And remember.....their primary mission was guerilla/counter-guerilla warfare--not commando ops. Compare that to the SEAL op in Panama.
--If the thread maker means the present, I don't think anyone can effectively answer it. There are a lot of well-trained units around the world. We're back to apples and oranges; which is a matter of personal taste.
--One last comment and I'll end this dissertation. In his 17 April 2007 post, SearchAndDestroy comments that the SEALs "rescued" Jessica Lynch, captured Saddam Hussein and killed Saddam's sons. Shows how little he knows about the matters.
--The "rescue" wasn't much of a rescue, even though it was hyped to the gills--the only opponents were some Iraqi doctors and nurses who had been trying hard to return Pvt Lynch to US custody from the hospital she was in.
--The US forces involved in the Lynch "rescue" were mainly from the 75th Ranger Regiment, while the forces involved in capturing Saddam Hussein were from the Army's 1st Brigade/4th Infantry Division. And the unit involved in killing Saddam's sons was the Army's 101st Airborne Division.
--The dam SEALs have a better press corps than those of the US Marine Corps, Douglas MacArthur and Field Marshal Montgomery combined!
Edited by Galahadlrrp - 08-Apr-2009 at 09:03
|
|
Jonathan4290
Pretorian
Joined: 03-Mar-2008
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 185
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Sep-2008 at 17:15 |
No one mentioned JTF-2? They're so good that nobody even knows what they do or what they've accomplished :P They did recieve a unit citation from the Americans in Afghanistan though, only the second Canadian unit in history to do so.
|
Like great battles? How about when they're animated for easy viewing?
Visit my site, The Art of Battle: Animated Battle Maps at www.theartofbattle.com.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Sep-2008 at 01:14 |
Marine Coprs DASR(Direct Action Special Reconaissance) Operatives are in my oppinion the best. These operators who were formerly Force Recon Marines go through training while not as mentally tough is equally as tough physicaly if not more than SEAL training. before Marines can sign up they have to have been in the Corps for a few years as well have served in combat or on deployment(which for a Marine basically means combat). So basically they are molding elite commandos into even more elite special operators. On the other hand SEALs are fresh out of the Navy never have experiencing ground combat prior to joining. So when you look at it Marine DASR Operators are the most experienced as well as most professionally trained soldiers in the world possibly. I just didn't know why no one had brought them up yet.
|
|
Shawshank
Immortal Guard
Joined: 24-Feb-2008
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Feb-2008 at 02:20 |
Hi, In my opinion it's pretty obvious that if you're the one who creates something of such ingenious, then of course you will be the best at it. The British SAS/SBS/SFG/Pathfinders are the best you can get. The Aussie counterparts of the SAS are an extremely capable force as we trained them (and still train frequently to this day) first, fore mostly.
When you get up close to a Spetsnaz/GRU combatant you outta run.
And the Yanks aren't to shabby either, they are just too numerical in their selection.
|
Prior Planning and Preparation Prevents A P*** Poor Performance
(The 7 P'S)
|
|
pikeshot1600
Tsar
Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 16:48 |
Originally posted by ChrisBoonzaier
Hi,
Compagnies are specialised in various regiments, Amphibious, Mountain etc, most guys do one of the commando schools. The REP is of course para....
But special forces?
Like I said, small groups within.
The CRAP or GCP of the REP, Engineers have recon/Destructeur sub units... but these are all tiny units within the whole.
The REP itself is not SF, it is simply a Parachute regiment within the FAR. Some of the RPIMA boys are more schooled in the dark arts.
The unit that had some tie with the rainbow warrioir thing disapeared into the 11eme Choc (Which I think no longer exists).
2eme REI had its compagnies split into Mountain, Combat de Nuit/Commando, Amphibious, Airmobile and is a key regt iin the rapid action force. Also has a small recon element... but that is NOT special forces.
I left 13 years ago, things have changed... but there has been no major change to make all SF.
SAS, SBS, Selous Scouts, GCP etc are Special Forces... The Legion (Minus GCP), Rangers, Rhodesian Light infantry, Royal marines are hard hitting componants of rapid reaction type forces.
The legion has never encouraged Rambo style hotshots... try and be the clever one or the super commando and you will get a slap on the ear and get told to rejoin the pack. The very style of the legion (Spartan and as part of the pack) is not the breeding ground for the individual initiative that SF seeks.
Best Chris
|
Good info. Thanks. I suppose we do need to differentiate between small unit specialists, visible SF and the SF "ghost units" that are so deep in that nobody knows they exist.
US army rangers are organized for up to battalion size deployments. 75th Regiment; two battalions at this time I think, but the army has been augmented recently. The natures of Iraq and Afghanistan are rewriting the manuals on small unit and SF warfare, and differences have become somewhat blurred.
Edited by pikeshot1600 - 07-Jan-2008 at 16:49
|
|
Sun Tzu
Consul
Joined: 31-Oct-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 362
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 13:26 |
The only group that might last a few minutes against Chuck Norris would be the S.A.S
|
Sun Tzu
All warfare is based on deception - Sun Tzu
|
|
ChrisBoonzaier
Immortal Guard
Joined: 06-Jan-2008
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 08:37 |
Hi,
Compagnies are specialised in various regiments, Amphibious, Mountain etc, most guys do one of the commando schools. The REP is of course para....
But special forces?
Like I said, small groups within.
The CRAP or GCP of the REP, Engineers have recon/Destructeur sub units... but these are all tiny units within the whole.
The REP itself is not SF, it is simply a Parachute regiment within the FAR. Some of the RPIMA boys are more schooled in the dark arts.
The unit that had some tie with the rainbow warrioir thing disapeared into the 11eme Choc (Which I think no longer exists).
2eme REI had its compagnies split into Mountain, Combat de Nuit/Commando, Amphibious, Airmobile and is a key regt iin the rapid action force. Also has a small recon element... but that is NOT special forces.
I left 13 years ago, things have changed... but there has been no major change to make all SF.
SAS, SBS, Selous Scouts, GCP etc are Special Forces... The Legion (Minus GCP), Rangers, Rhodesian Light infantry, Royal marines are hard hitting componants of rapid reaction type forces.
The legion has never encouraged Rambo style hotshots... try and be the clever one or the super commando and you will get a slap on the ear and get told to rejoin the pack. The very style of the legion (Spartan and as part of the pack) is not the breeding ground for the individual initiative that SF seeks.
Best Chris
|
See "Whats new" at
http://www.kaiserscross.com/40020.html
|
|
pikeshot1600
Tsar
Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 02:00 |
I don't think you missed anything. If you were in Desert Storm, that was 17 years ago. Things have changed, that's all.
AFAIK, 2 REP has been categorized as a Spec Ops unit with various missions assigned to the component companies. It isn't like the entire LE is a commando brigade. Somewhere on the Web (and I can't say where), I saw this LE soldier emerging from a body of water looking like a heavily armed frog man. I am sure the navy has its own commandos, but the LE at least has been incorporated into that role.
What do you hear from other LE veterans?
|
|
ChrisBoonzaier
Immortal Guard
Joined: 06-Jan-2008
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 00:24 |
Thanks for the lesson.
I was five years in the Legion, I must have missed something.
I served in desrt storm (Operation Daguet), Operation Baumier, operation Epervier and in Bosnia. I think I can say that the Legions role is largely part of the rapid reaction force. The GCP (and only the GCP) of the REP are anywhere near the SF thing.
I think the Legion fits more in line with the Rangers or British Royal marines... largely a commando trained elite infantry. No cloak and dagger stuff.
The French have enough shadowy units to fill the SF and super sensitive roles.
All the best Chris
|
See "Whats new" at
http://www.kaiserscross.com/40020.html
|
|