Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Commandos and Special Operations Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS
LJ813    7/1/2005 9:34:17 PM
I WILL GO FOR THE NAVY..
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Horsesoldier    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 2:24:32 PM
>>The reason SF is used so extensively is because the WOT is perfect for them...alot of crappy democratic (or at least, more democratic) countries involved in civil wars or insurgencies against Islamist...and also winning hearts and minds is extremely important...but as far as premiere, they aren't. There is no way to say who is best overall, they all perform different functions. If I wanted to take out Mullah Omar at his house (only an example here), then I would call either Delta or Devgru (or maybe both, depending on the JSOC team). If I wanted to train locals and win hearts and minds, I'd call SF.<< Short version of the story -- SF's relationship to hearts and minds is rather grossly overstated in the press and such. FID type missions are pretty hard to keep secret, tend to play well when publicized and reflect well on SOCOM/SF/the US in general. As do occasional photo ops of "green berets give orphans toys for Xmas" or whatever. But all of the above is rather like the wand in the magician's right hand that distracts you from seeing what the left hand is doing. In reality, SF may or may not worry about winning hearts and minds. It's situational. Lots of classic SF peacetime FID missions have absolutely zero to do with directly winning hearts and minds at all (i.e. training host nation commando/ranger sort of units has nothing to do with winning over the local populace directly, and represents most of your classic peacetime FID that SF does). Indirectly they may very well have much to do since respect for basic human rights and such is part of the syllabus the US pushes. Wartime SF missions may or may not have anything at all to do with hearts and minds -- but it is likely that they do not have anything to do with that issue directly, especially since you have plenty of other assets on the ground (CA, Pysops, PRTs, etc) from the US military worrying about making the locals feel appreciated. It is, again, situational, and anyone who suggests winning hearts and minds is job one is somewhere way off base. SF missions during wartime tend to be first and foremost about locating and destroying critical enemy centers of gravity, whatever and wherever they may be -- the strength of SF compared to most other SOF units is that SF is flexible enough to skin that cat however it needs skinning, and has enough assets beyond door kickers (and specialized skill sets within the door kicker community) under one roof to make it happen. Nobody else possesses that stand-alone depth and range of capabilities for dealing with COIN and low intensity conflict scenarios within SOCOM. The success of the SF approach in dealing with a range of scenarios and missions would tend to be readily apparent in the fact that SF is seeing about 33% increase in the number of battalions as well as a dramatic increase in support side assets. This is part of a general increase in USASOC numbers, but with five new battalions, etc., planned SF is also the big winner in that increase. Likewise, if you look at the new MARSOC regiment, it looks suspiciously like an SFG(A) in terms of overall capabilities, not like, say, a SEAL team. There's a reason for this that goes beyond splitting hairs about who can kick in the biggest door. >>If I wanted to take out a oil platform or ship, I'd call a SEAL Team. << I'd call the Marine MSPF. The SEALs kind of ducked out on this mission set in a real world sense and handed it over to Force Recon some time ago.
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 8:29:28 PM
Gop- I totally 100% understand now. I just was not sure on what you meant by more operational taskings. I do blieve that because of the number of US Army SF that they can specilaize by ODA in certain areas and because the SEALS are not a very big group (In Numbers) compared to SF they need to be more flexible. I understand now. This is all really stupid anyway because it is hard to compare an SF team that specializes in CQB to a NON-DEVGRU SEAL unit that also does. Like you said it all depends on training, men etc... The only reason I had to say something about the SF/Seal comparison in the first place is because like I said SF gets direcpected period as far as DA, CQB and spec ops period. When someone posts something like what was posted earlier in this thread (About SF not being Spec OPs, Not being elite and not being in the same category as SAS and regular non-DEVGRU Seals) then I'm sorry I want to know who the people on this thread are and how that is so? You seem to knowledgeable GOP how can someone say SF is not elite, not Spec Ops and not compared to Seals in some areas?
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 9:43:23 PM
>>>>If I wanted to take out a oil platform or ship, I'd call a SEAL Team. << I'd call the Marine MSPF. The SEALs kind of ducked out on this mission set in a real world sense and handed it over to Force Recon some time ago.<< Maybe so, but the SEALs did a great job on their OPLAT op at the start of OIF. Force recon would be OK, too.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 10:08:21 PM
>>Maybe so, but the SEALs did a great job on their OPLAT op at the start of OIF. Force recon would be OK, too.<< It's definitely a SEAL job, and one they do well when they are present -- I was referring to how they turned the mission over, in a contingency sense, to the MSPF (i.e. SEALs quit doing MAU/MEU(SOC) floats with the Marines some time ago, if I'm not mistaken, so they're not on the scene when there's a need, hence the MSPF).
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 11:48:26 PM
>>It's definitely a SEAL job, and one they do well when they are present -- I was referring to how they turned the mission over, in a contingency sense, to the MSPF (i.e. SEALs quit doing MAU/MEU(SOC) floats with the Marines some time ago, if I'm not mistaken, so they're not on the scene when there's a need, hence the MSPF).< I understand...so if the MEU needs to take a Oil Platform, the MSPF get's the call, but if it is more of a pre-emptive type of situation, then the SEALs get the job? On a side note, I tried your advice on applying duck tape to my Alice Pack (I literally put it on every strap/buckle/connection point of any kind), and it still snapped loose with only 40lbs of weight. It is going to the dumpster soon if I can't fix it (I'll save up for a Gregory). The thing that sucks is that I was planning on doing weighted sprints tomorrow up hills since I don't have a parachute or sled
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS - Ehran   5/15/2006 11:52:54 PM
GOP- No offense, but explain to me what you mean by "The SEALs have dedicated a full team to JSOC (Devgru), so they are involved in JSOC. Obviously all SEAL teams aren't in the JSOC. SF, on the other hand, has no role in the JSOC." No role in JSOC? Again isn't 1st Special Forces Detachment Delta mean a special group of Army SF? Key words, SPECIAL FORCES DETACHMENT. I realize that the Main Army SF and Delta are mostly seperate as far as training and missions, HQ etc..., but to say that " The SEALs have dedicated a full team to JSOC (Devgru), so they are involved in JSOC. Obviously all SEAL teams aren't in the JSOC. SF, on the other hand, has no role in the JSOC" is confusing when you can say that Army SF also dedicates a full team to Army Delta. Yes Delta maybe mostly volunteer and may have people like Rangers, 82nd, and cooks from the regular military but everyone knows that most Delta comes from regular Army SF. So you can say that Regular Army SF has a lot to do with Delta because they supply most of the talent to one of the very best spec ops units in the world. Also you say "I am not denying this...SEALs do not specialize in DA outside of Devgru. I will say that your average SEAL platoon is better than your average SF ODA at DA. They are constantly doing DA exercises...they are known to get more range time and they perform more DA exercises than SF." First off who says that Seals get more range time? I do not understand how that is valid?. Are you telling me that in Afghan, Iraq and Bragg that Seals definitely get more "Range Time" than SF? First off, SF and Seals don't usually even share the same training space. (BRAGG and CORONADO?, KENTUCKEY and VIRGINIA?)Yes they may train in joint ops but Since they mostly train independently I am sure neither of them have trouble getting "Range Time". As far as away own ops SF usually has their own small HQ in Afghan and Iraq that is seperate from the Seals so again I am sure that neither has a problem getting "Range Time" when on assignment.
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS - Ehran   5/16/2006 12:44:41 AM
>>No role in JSOC? Again isn't 1st Special Forces Detachment Delta mean a special group of Army SF? Key words, SPECIAL FORCES DETACHMENT. I realize that the Main Army SF and Delta are mostly seperate as far as training and missions, HQ etc..., but to say that " The SEALs have dedicated a full team to JSOC (Devgru), so they are involved in JSOC. Obviously all SEAL teams aren't in the JSOC. SF, on the other hand, has no role in the JSOC" is confusing when you can say that Army SF also dedicates a full team to Army Delta. Yes Delta maybe mostly volunteer and may have people like Rangers, 82nd, and cooks from the regular military but everyone knows that most Delta comes from regular Army SF. So you can say that Regular Army SF has a lot to do with Delta because they supply most of the talent to one of the very best spec ops units in the world. << SFOD-D is not part of regular Army SF. We all know what SFOD-D means, but they are completely different than Army SF. Whereas Devgru has a similar mission set as regular SEALs, but are made up of the best/finest SEALs on the Teams. >>am not denying this...SEALs do not specialize in DA outside of Devgru. I will say that your average SEAL platoon is better than your average SF ODA at DA. They are constantly doing DA exercises...they are known to get more range time and they perform more DA exercises than SF." First off who says that Seals get more range time? I do not understand how that is valid?. Are you telling me that in Afghan, Iraq and Bragg that Seals definitely get more "Range Time" than SF? First off, SF and Seals don't usually even share the same training space. (BRAGG and CORONADO?, KENTUCKEY and VIRGINIA?)Yes they may train in joint ops but Since they mostly train independently I am sure neither of them have trouble getting "Range Time". As far as away own ops SF usually has their own small HQ in Afghan and Iraq that is seperate from the Seals so again I am sure that neither has a problem getting "Range Time" when on assignment.<< I certainly didn't mean they have to share range time with each other, I simply mean't that the SEALs have superior shooting skills than most ODA's (probably outside of the DA ODA's)...because they spend more time outside/practicing on the range *ON AVERAGE*, but not always, though. By the way, we both share very strong opinions about both SF (you) and NSW (me)...so we might disagree on some things regarding the two units. By the way, are you training/preparing for SFAS?
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS - Ehran   5/17/2006 12:04:53 AM
GOP- I can see your point. I think you and I probably agree on more things in general about spec ops including SF and Seals than we disagree on. To answer your question No. My story is that my father was 7th SF group out of Bragg in the 60's. That is probably why I have strong sometimes bias feelings about SF. I grew up idolizing my father, SF and SEALS. I wanted to since I was 7 or 8 years old to go Airborne, Ranger then SF (To Get the Tower of Power) or SEALS, but instead I made the incredibly stupid decision to play college football in Pennsylvania after high school and kinda missed my ride. I played one year, and since then I have had two shoulder surgeries, and a knee surgery. I thought about going after I graduated college but by then I figured if you have the slightest injury to one joint let alone three then it would be 10 times worse during BUDS or Q-course. So I am now 29 and going back to school once again to be a phys. ed teacher and coach football. I just wish I would have taken that shot and served my country in spec ops or any unit. That is why I envy any person who serves or has served in our armed forces. Since I couldn't serve I do my part to support the troops and I ahve a huge interest in Spec Ops. I have been doing research and reading about all Spec Ops for years. I belive I am somewhat knowledgeable for an average person but there is a lot I do not know. That is why I like to get on these forums, not really to argue (Well I like to disagree a little) but really just to learn more. I have huge interest about the Seals and have all mthe respect in the world for them. I just think it is ignorant when people do not give Army SF the respect they rightfully deserve (Like when peolple comment about how they are not elite, spec ops, good at da blah, blah, blah. This just is not true and I refuse to let people comment and put false info. out there about such a fine unit like SF. So again It would have been an honor to get a chance at BUDS whether I would have made it? It would have been an honor to try. If anyone wants to make false statements or just plain idiotic statements about Army SF then get off this Forum and go to PROFESSIONALSOLDIER.com (This is an Army SF forum) and state your claim. Those guys may have a differnt opinion. Anyway I hope to stay in touch, I like to chat with you and also Horsesoldier. You and him seem like a no B.S., knowledgeable people strong opinions. I have one more question. I know the difference between SF SCUBA and Seals is that SF SCUBA uses Scuba to get to there destination and AEALS can do that and do whole missions in the water but do you know what sort of ops Army SF Scuba teams have gone on or would go on? This is to either you or HORSE SOLDIER.
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS - Ehran   5/17/2006 1:44:15 AM
Hey GOP! I just read some past messages you posted and I guess you are sixteen? Well I understand your enthusiasm for SEALS and spec ops. I was and still am like you. Except you have a chance to actually do it. So do not, I repeat do not let anything keep you from following your dream of being a SEAL. That said Delta is a detachment of Army SF period. You act like Army SF is not good enough to be in the same sentence as Army Delta but like I said most Delta is breed from Army SF. If your sixteen? then In your whole sixteen years of wisdom how do you know that SEALS are better "shooters" than SF? Who is blowing smoke up your ass? Just tell me where you are getting this info.? I am not saying that I don't think your knowledgeable but how do you know that SEALS are better shooters? Go on militaryphotos.net. Go to spec ops and go to Army Sf training pictures. Also there are pictures of SF, SEALS CIA SAG, and others. You will see pictures of SF doing CQB just like SEALS. I will say that SEALS are some of the best shooters in the world. At your age you probably think SEAL, SF etc.. is awesome and you will be a stud that can blow up and do direct action missions all day and night but in reality many Spec Ops units train for these but are doing unconventional warfare and foreign internal defense (yes even the Seals). The military spends a lot of money (millions)to train these warriors. They are not going to have them train 24/7 for DA missions and they are not always on call like in Navy Seals the movie. All the units including SEALS are training other countries military (Unconventional Warfare and Foreign internal defense) when they are not training themselves or doing missions. What this means is that Seals, Army SF and other groups have to spend months at a time in what we would consider less that acceptable conditions training and fighting along side people that we may or may not particularly agree with or like. SEALS do this, SF does this and it is a huge benefit for the US that they do. They are do joint training operations with other armies including, SAS, Polish SF and other Spec Ops units. The govt. spends too much for them to just sit around. Yes some units are on call a lot like Delta and DEVGRU but most are doing other things that to you may not seem so glorious. Direct Action makes up very little of what all the spec ops units do. Most of the time they are doing recon. It is like the spec ops community always says they are in there and out of there before the enemy even knows they were there. That is not DA, that is being sneaky and gathering intel. etc... Here is an article found on an Army SF site that talks about SF doing more CIA style ops. Why? because of the whole UW missions they do so well. SEALS are doing them too. Like I said in an earlier posts when you go into an area and hook up with the locals and either fight with them or train them then fight with them you make connection and connections are the US govts. best assets. Do not believe everything you read in the books. As far as the CIA most spies are not even spies that are trained at "The Farm" (Which I do not even think ever existed or if it did does not anymore. Do you really think that the US govt. would let everyone in the world know via a movie "The Recruit" about the very place we train our spies? Besides a farm? Yeah right! They are trained somewher but not at some stupid ass farm). Most are foreign asstes paid off by our govt. Most spies are shown as white James Bond looking dudes. Yeah right they would fit in great in the Middle East. Not! I do not care how much makeup you put on them they are going stand out. By SEALS and SF doing the UW missions and living and fighting with locals they make connections and assets and again these people make great "Spies" or informants. I have all the respect in the world for SEALS and think they are great at DA, Recon etc... but that does not mean they are the best at CQB, DA and everything else that is adrenaline pumping. Yes I do agree they are probably more generalist than SF and AF are more specialist as far as special teams of SF but I have heard that every SEAL can do everybody elses job on the team and SF cannot. I don't know if that is completely true. SF memebers are also crosstrained to do everyones elses job. Do not gbelive every thing you hear. I try not to. They are all good. Remember it isn't always glorious. It is hell on marriages and family. I still want to know where you get that SEALS are the best shooters and the best DA people?
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/17/2006 1:08:25 PM
>>On a side note, I tried your advice on applying duck tape to my Alice Pack (I literally put it on every strap/buckle/connection point of any kind), and it still snapped loose with only 40lbs of weight. It is going to the dumpster soon if I can't fix it (I'll save up for a Gregory). The thing that sucks is that I was planning on doing weighted sprints tomorrow up hills since I don't have a parachute or sled << Something's definitely not right on that. Which straps, specifically, are not holding together? Without seeing it, it is a bit of a trick, but I'm guessing that between myself and the other guys on here with experience with them, we may be able to trouble shoot the issue(s). An ALICE pack, properly put together, should have no problems with a 40 pound load.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics