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
longrifle    Off topic-olive greens   5/14/2006 7:16:35 PM
The 82nd Infantry Division aquired the nickname "The All American Division" in WWI, supposedly because they had men from every state and no one state predominated. Most other divisions were manned from a single state, or mostly so. The 29th from Virginia for example.
 
Quote    Reply

olive greens    RE:Off topic-olive greens   5/14/2006 8:26:09 PM
The 82nd Infantry Division aquired the nickname "The All American Division" in WWI, supposedly because they had men from every state and no one state predominated. Most other divisions were manned from a single state, or mostly so. The 29th from Virginia for example. Thought so, but wasnt sure (given the same title given to many collegite athletes, and possibly their presence in the unit).
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS - Horsesoldier   5/14/2006 9:02:04 PM
What are 10%'ers? You mean the bottom 10% trouble makers types?
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/14/2006 10:09:11 PM
GOP- Sorry I was away for the weekend and did not get a chance to respond. First Delta is an extension of regular Army SF (1st Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta). They mostly recruit from regular SF. Although there are Rangers, 82nd and I am sure in some cases cooks who could be in, recruited by, or even given a chance at Delta. If they recruit from SF then SF must doing something right. Delta, DEVGRU are just extensions of their parent units that specialize in something and are the best at It,(CQB, Being the best shooters, etc...). They are a unit that basically practices Counter terorism day in and day out. That should make them the best and it does, but as you would say isn't it ignorant to say that DELTA DEVGRU etc.. are the best if they themselves also have a specialty? Sure they are the best at what I said earlier (CQB etc...) but it is still hard to say the best. They are all really good. overall,I would have to agree with you though that JSOC is the best overall special ops groups. They should be though theh get the best training and are the cream of the crop. Army SF is part of it too. They graduate there very best to Delta for further intense and specialized training. I also agree with you that it does depend on the individuals. I mean just say a regular group of Army Sf or Seals are a team that specilaizes in CQB and hostage rescue and they are excellent because of the caliber men they have and their training, they could be better than some delta operators or DEVGRU or small groups of teams at CQB, etc...In some cases it may not be likely but it could be. The point is that it really is about the men and the training, I agree. I also meant that in my opinion, overall within the general Spec ops community not counting any JSOC that Army SF is the premier spec ops unit, meaning they are used very extensively now in the war on terror because of their exceptional unconventional warfare capabilities. I am not trying to rip on SEALS and I agree with you almost 100% on what your saying above. I probably should have been more clear on my earlier post on some things. I agree that to compare SF to Seals is hard but I am sick of people direspecting SF. Everyone including military and the general public acts like all SF does is trains people and they don't count when mentioning Spec ops or are not good enough to be in the same category as Seals or Rangers etc.. in the categories of CQB, DA etc.. I am sorry they are dead wrong. That is bull and if you think that, which it sounds like you know what your taliking about and know better, then your ignorant. The reason why I responded in the first place is because I am sick of the media and the general public when they are talking about Spec Ops hyping up the Rangers and SEALS training so much when they have no clue. Yeah SEAL training along with SF Scuba school is probably the hardest overall because of the cold water and enviroment but does that mean SF is as hard or harder? Anytime anyone brings up SpecOps they give Army SF no respect but what kills me is that the US military and civilian leaders use SF because of their size and how good they are at what they do for everything. They are so involved in all of the primary missions other Spec ops units perform including CQB and DA. My original post is because some jackass posted this: "I don't think the US Rangers or Green Berets are quite on the same level as any of the above. They are more similar to the UK Paras and Royal Marine Commandos. They are neither conventional or specaial forces. Although I think the British Royal Marine Commandos and US Green Berets are pretty much top notch and come close to being special forces in some aspects of their training, and they both wear Green Berets!" I mean what the F__K?" I also saw someone post that they do not consider Army SF spec Ops. Again they have NO F__KING IDEA. And to the guy who posted right after me. I do have a ton of respect for The Brit SAS and think it is an honor that the US and SAS are compared to each other. As I said earlier the SAS kicks ass but it is hard to say who is best. The book, "BRAVO TWO ZERO" proves that. Also it doesn't seem like anyone is responding to the rest of my post like the fact that the SEALS are Attention whores. By the way GOP I have no idea what you meant by "although the average SEAL has more operational taskings than the average SF operator". Please, Elaborate on this one. Because if you mean that SEALS have more reponsiblity than SF, then obviously your freaking clueless. It seems to me that the SF teams can go and operate in other counties for longer periods of time without support and little authority. They are trained and trusted by there superiors to call there own shots much of the time like whether to go on a big , bad DA mission that only the Rangers and SEALS can do and do the best. For instance say a regular old SF team is operating in Columbia, South America helping train the Columbian government dru
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/14/2006 10:26:08 PM
I have a ton of respect for the SAS. I would say that it is hard to directly compare US spec Ops to SAS because if I am not mistaken the BRIT SAS is like our spec ops and CIA rolled into one. You would probably have to compare the individual US units with the specialty units fo the Brits. But please don't be y and say that brits are better, blah. blah. blah, than the US. Who has the most powerful military in the world? Believe me tbis world including Iran, and China and any other country who has the balls to even think of pissing with the US and its people has absolutely no F__kinG idea of the power and fury we can unleash. Remember, we usually have to worry about civilian casualuties unlike our enemies. If we didn't have to worry, I don't even want to imagine. If you were on the opposite side it would be like you were in hell. I have got one word and a sentence, M.O.A.B and "Shoot to kill Anything and everything". Believe me any country better pray they do not hear those words. One of these days we are going to get fed up with being so nice to everyone and when that happens please do not be in our way or we can and will unleash hell on earth. Anyway, American soldiers have a ton of respect for the Brits because they are our only true European allies except Italy. I think US Army SF and Brit SAS can be honored to be compared to each other.
 
Quote    Reply

Boondocks    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS - Ehran   5/14/2006 10:34:07 PM
Hello Horse soldier! It is that Boondocks guy who has a lot of heart fely sentiments that are derived from Cable T.V. Please do not F__king disrespect me. I did disrepect you did I? Anyway are you? And why can't I have an opinion on SF units?
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:GOP   5/15/2006 10:58:56 AM
you want to take anything in a marcinko book with a whole salt shaker. the guy's writing just reeks of bs.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 11:09:45 AM
I would say that it is hard to directly compare US spec Ops to SAS because if I am not mistaken the BRIT SAS is like our spec ops and CIA rolled into one. the sas have worked in the past with intel agencies and even had men attached to an intel group in northern ireland for instance but they are by no means in the intel business in the way the cia is. it's just another hat in their haberdasher shop of capabilities.
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS   5/15/2006 11:54:23 AM
Boondocks, >>overall within the general Spec ops community not counting any JSOC that Army SF is the premier spec ops unit, meaning they are used very extensively now in the war on terror because of their exceptional unconventional warfare capabilities.<< 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. If I wanted to take out a oil platform or ship, I'd call a SEAL Team. >>By the way GOP I have no idea what you meant by "although the average SEAL has more operational taskings than the average SF operator". Please, Elaborate on this one. Because if you mean that SEALS have more reponsiblity than SF, then obviously your freaking clueless.<< Sorry if it isn't what you want to hear, but it is the truth. SF ODA's usually specialize, because of their sheer number they have the ability to do that. One ODA may be HALO, another may be SR, another may be SCUBA, another may be DA, etc...whereas a SEAL has to be capable of performing all of those mission extremely well. On top of that, SF Groups(A) are all responsible for a certain area (makes alot of since, given their mission), whereas SEALs have to be able to operate in any and all enviroments (of course, some SF Groups where borrowed from certain commands during OEF and OIF). No specialization whatsoever for the SEALs.
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:GOP   5/15/2006 11:56:09 AM
>>you want to take anything in a marcinko book with a whole salt shaker. the guy's writing just reeks of bs.<< I believe his accounts are true, however I think his writing style isn't very professional and sometimes comes across as BS. Also, I think his entire attitude (as a SEAL) was immature and ridiculous at best.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics