Bravo two zero

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: Bravo two zero
GOP 8/26/2007 2:12:45 PM

Whatsup guys? What is the story on bravo two zero? I haven't read the book, but everything I read seems to be either hotly contested or unsure. I mean, the SAS Team Leader Mcnab seem to have either lied on numerous occasions, "stretched" the truth, gotten confused, or other members of the team are lying. Example: He claims to have covered 12km to get to a dry wadi, but other accounts say the team only went 2km. Also, it doesn't seem normal for a SOF team, especially of the SAS' caliber, to be captured. Did they surrender? I just can't see that. That would be a disgrace to the SAS wouldn't it? Now, don't take me as badmouthing the SAS Team, because I obviously am in no position to do that. I'm just a teenager, and those guys are obviously some of the best SOF guys on the planet, but something just doesn't add up to me. I don't really know or understand the story.

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

longrifle 8/26/2007 6:44:48 PM

Only their hairdressers know for sure.

In all seriousness though, there's been so much conflicting information about that patrol that it's probably impossible to establish the facts with certainty.

Team member Chris Ryan published a slightly different version of events in The One That Got Away than McNab did in Bravo Two Zero. And then there's The Real Bravo Two Zero by Michael Asher and Soldier 5 by Mike Coburn. Each book claims to be the real story. Each book differs one some details. I haven't read the latter two but that's the word of most Amazon reviewers.

I know from experience that when polarized versions of events are reported that the truth often lies somewhere in the middle.

Quote Reply

bob the brit 8/26/2007 8:19:22 PM

Whatsup guys? What is the story on bravo two zero? I haven't read the book, but everything I read seems to be either hotly contested or unsure. I mean, the SAS Team Leader Mcnab seem to have either lied on numerous occasions, "stretched" the truth, gotten confused, or other members of the team are lying. Example: He claims to have covered 12km to get to a dry wadi, but other accounts say the team only went 2km.

Also, it doesn't seem normal for a SOF team, especially of the SAS' caliber, to be captured. Did they surrender? I just can't see that. That would be a disgrace to the SAS wouldn't it?

Now, don't take me as badmouthing the SAS Team, because I obviously am in no position to do that. I'm just a teenager, and those guys are obviously some of the best SOF guys on the planet, but something just doesn't add up to me. I don't really know or understand the story.

Kid i wish i could spill some beans on this one but doing so would be compromising an unwritten code as it were.
all i will say is what "mcnab" wrote in his book ain't exactly in tune with what he said in the official deebee (debreif) and he's not welcome in the pub anymore. (also suprising that B20 the book preceeded his suddenly booming fiction career

longrifle mentioned some books on the matter

they all have their pros and cons

for example... m. asher's "real B20" is sort of an investigative write up (ie he goes and talks to the locals)

unfortunately the bloke never really comes to any conclusions but just present evidence he's dug up

also he goes on a bit too much about how vince p, really popped his cloggs. death cert says hypothermia/exposure extreme weather, but asher doesn't buy it cuz he thinks vince phillips was too fit to get hypothermia... however i have news for asher, i was just as fit as vinny and it got mild hypothermia, not once not twice but thrice

as for an SAS patrol getting caught... shit happens, you either shoot the shit and die or raise the french flag (white flag) and see where it gets you. there's no shame in being sub super human

Quote Reply

GOP 8/26/2007 8:56:28 PM

Whatsup guys? What is the story on bravo two zero? I haven't read the book, but everything I read seems to be either hotly contested or unsure. I mean, the SAS Team Leader Mcnab seem to have either lied on numerous occasions, "stretched" the truth, gotten confused, or other members of the team are lying. Example: He claims to have covered 12km to get to a dry wadi, but other accounts say the team only went 2km.

Also, it doesn't seem normal for a SOF team, especially of the SAS' caliber, to be captured. Did they surrender? I just can't see that. That would be a disgrace to the SAS wouldn't it?

Now, don't take me as badmouthing the SAS Team, because I obviously am in no position to do that. I'm just a teenager, and those guys are obviously some of the best SOF guys on the planet, but something just doesn't add up to me. I don't really know or understand the story.

longrifle mentioned some books on the matter

they all have their pros and cons

for example... m. asher's "real B20" is sort of an investigative write up (ie he goes and talks to the locals)

unfortunately the bloke never really comes to any conclusions but just present evidence he's dug up

as for an SAS patrol getting caught... shit happens, you either shoot the shit and die or raise the french flag (white flag) and see where it gets you. there's no shame in being sub super human

I completely understand about not telling any facts bob, definitely didn't want any OPSEC issues or anything like that.

So, without badmouthing the guy, is it likely that "Mcnab" isn't telling the entire truth and probably isn't a reliable source for info on what really happened?

I'll pick Ashers book up, excuse my ignorance but was he on the B20 team?

As far as Vince P, I don't know why Asher would make the claim that hypothermia is much harder for the extremely fit to get. It's common for BUD/S students to get hypothermia, alot of extremely fit mountain climbers/outdoorsmen get hypothermia, etc.

I understand somewhat about them surrendering, but I always thought the school of thought was to try to E&E or fight to the death rather than surrendering. Mainly out of tradition, honor, and the fact that you will probably be killed by your captors (and in the GWOT, probably have your head cut off and showed on Al-Jazeera, and give a HUGE morale boost to the terrorists who caught the "enemy Special forces troops")

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier 8/27/2007 1:18:09 PM

I will note that I have only read McNab's book (and that was years ago), so don't know if the other accounts of the mission contradict anything I mention from McNab's B20.

That said, there are definitely some dodgy issues in his book that always struck me as odd and off sounding. He discusses how his patrol was unable to get any suppressed weapons for the mission because other SAS teams had scarfed all of them up. This strikes me as unprofessional -- nothing wrong with every patrol out there striving to get what they can get, but leadership, especially senior NCO leadership, is pretty much there to make sure Unit A doesn't get reduced to semi-mission capable status because Unit B robbed the quartermaster/supply sergeant types blind.

Likewise, I guess it is conceivable the patrol could not make coms. It happens, but I was somewhat surprised that, since the whole mission largely went south (or at least went as far south as it did) because of commo failure that McNab did not go into more detail outlining their measures to prevent commo failure.

Now, I'm not saying the issue was the B20 patrol screwing up, as I think most of what happened was just a bad shuffle on the cards. But, I do think that what McNab's book has to say makes it a fairly suspect source to judge events from, at least in the details. (Good read, however.)

Also, it doesn't seem normal for a SOF team, especially of the SAS' caliber, to be captured. Did they surrender? I just can't see that. That would be a disgrace to the SAS wouldn't it?

They made a good effort to E&E, but their goal was to get to Syria, and that was several days (nights, really) hard slog through the desert even for guys in the kind of shape you'd expect SAS types to be in. Plus they had to run the gauntlet of local settlements and troop garrisons, and had a break in contact during a night movement that cut their patrol down into two smaller elements. The guys who got captured were (again, from McNab's book) in situations where the game was simply up. It happens sometimes, even with all the SERE training people can dream up.

Now, don't take me as badmouthing the SAS Team, because I obviously am in no position to do that. I'm just a teenager, and those guys are obviously some of the best SOF guys on the planet, but something just doesn't add up to me. I don't really know or understand the story.

To summarize, SAS patrol deploys to do a more or less static observation kind of SR mission. SAS patrol hits the ground and discovers that they can't make coms back to their higher headquarters or much of anyone else. SAS patrol then gets compromised in the usual way in that part of the world (local farmers and herders happen onto them, then call in the troops). The inability to make comms and arrange and extraction is what triggered the decision to E&E into Syria, which was probably the right thing in the situation but still was where things went from bad to worse and mission ending.

(At least that is my recollection of McNab's book. As stated, it has been a few years since I read it, and I might be running B20's story together with some of the other similar "compromised SOF unit" stories from the 91 Gulf War.)

Quote Reply

Cactus 8/27/2007 1:35:00 PM

but I always thought the school of thought was to try to E&E or fight to the death rather than surrendering. Mainly out of tradition, honor, and the fact that you will probably be killed by your captors (and in the GWOT, probably have your head cut off and showed on Al-Jazeera, and give a HUGE morale boost to the terrorists who caught the "enemy Special forces troops")

Without claiming any knowledge of special forces tradition, I can only disagree from my knowledge of English (language) and general military tradition: How can you E&E if you are not captured in the first place? Simple logic of events.

Some would even argue a difference between a surrender and a capture - capture being more involuntary and honorable. Its of course all very subjective, but the important thing is that many people do accept that difference and the difference has huge consequences in other matters. PoWs who believe they have been captured have much higher morale, cohesion and chances of survival than those who believe they have been forced to surrender (usually by superiors). Guards with some code of valor also accord significantly different treatment based on the same argument.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier 8/27/2007 4:49:14 PM

It's technically an incorrect usage of "Escape and Evade" (which, as you note, implies you have been captured, otherwise why the need to escape?), but "E&E" is commonly used when the speaker really just means "evade." So, as slang, you can "E&E" without being captured in the first place. "E&E" being three syllables is actually longer to say than simply "evade" but military English does love its acronyms.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 8/27/2007 7:45:42 PM

If you ask the question on AARSE you'll discover that McNab is considered to be a wanker. There are more ex (and probably current) operators on there than at a falklands reunion. I'd trawl through old posts, as you'll find a number of B2Z threads. They don't suffer fools in there though.

I always thought that Ashers book was quite clinical in dismembering him. OTOH, "McNab" did a good job on managing the firefight scenes in the movie Heat.

Still, the bottom line is that he served and got shot at - so deserves some respect. colouring the truth however is a bit rude.

Quote Reply

mough 8/27/2007 7:59:09 PM

I would take everything in all of those books with a pinch of of salt, Mcnabb's (I hate calling him that, but his real name will get me a visit from Mr Solicitor

....lets just call him SM)Book was as they say "sexed up" by the publishers, God knows why they felt the need, but they put in a huge body count out of a Rambo movie, ridiculous (the whole bit with the mental dentist for example), they obviously felt it would bore people to not have contacts every few pages, plus all the stuff about Vince Phillips have made him PNG at the Regiment, he does not seem to care though

Chris Ryans book, was less over the top, he really did E&E like he said, although there are bit's mildly sexed up, he also has a mutual dislike for SM.....less up his own arse then SM too

Micheal Asher...hmm he set out with 2 agendas, one noble one not so much, the noble one to find where Vince Phillips died ect, and build a small memorial for him, good stuff, the other was to disprove SM's book as much as possible, did he?, yes in some small parts, in others no, for instance his quaint love affair with Arab and Bedouin culture is good in of itself, but he gets carried away, ie in his Belief they won't lie, so he takes what they say as the truth, for all his time spent among them, he should at least know a Bedouin will lie if he believe he needs to...or if he wants too...what he was more convincing at was disproving the large distence SM said they traveled ect

you have to take these things for what they are, the recollections of different people in times of great stress and uncertainty...humans even highly trained expeirenced ones are not great recollectors of perfect information

about the capturesd/surrender thing...it happenes, highly trained dedicated does not equal suicidel for no reason

Quote Reply

mough 8/27/2007 8:04:17 PM

Oh yes SM is also pretty small, but if you say it to his face, he will kick your ass

....unless your very fast

Quote Reply

GOP 8/27/2007 9:46:32 PM

Yeah, I used E&E incorrectly I believe. I obviously meant evade, but I have heard "E&E" used many times to describe that kind of situation.

I would take everything in all of those books with a pinch of of salt, Mcnabb's (I hate calling him that, but his real name will get me a visit from Mr Solicitor

What does PNG mean?

What I can't understand is how none of the guys who wrote books seem to be able to give an honest to God, accurate account of what happened. It seems to me that an event that big would enable someone to remember what really happened, I mean it all seems like everyone is putting their own spin on things. And by spin, I mean their own agenda to make themselves look better then they were or a vendetta to make someone else look bad.

Yeah, please don't take what I said about the captured/surrender thing as a knock on them, I was just curious about that. I guess it all depends on the situation.There is no way I'd surrender to Al-Qaeda/Taliban/Insurgents, but a government military with some form of standards is different.

Quote Reply

1 2 3 4 5 NEXT