Navy SEALS vs SAS vs SBS vs.....
Discussion
dirkgently said:
WreckedGecko said:
My money would be on SBS, very very tough, nasty people.
The ones that I have met have all been very pleasant and polite, but I wouldnt like to be on the wrong end of them when they are at work.
thouse" marines but you'd have to be a mentalist to start any trouble with them.Interesting yet daft question, pointless at having a stab / educated guess at.. Its a bit like lambo vs ferrari thing isnt it - subjective. All do different things, trained slightly differently.
heres my 2p though - been a fair few sas failures over the last couple of decades that you'd not hear about for other special forces unit.. Not a real measure of performance when youve not go the figures for the other forces though.
heres my 2p though - been a fair few sas failures over the last couple of decades that you'd not hear about for other special forces unit.. Not a real measure of performance when youve not go the figures for the other forces though.
My OP wasn't trolling, but it was intended to entice a discussion on the various forces and to see if anyone had any reasonable info or cold, hard facts on any of these elite units. I knew there was a likelihood of a pissing contest or two, but this is PH and it's almost entirely unavoidable these days.
Jasandjules said:
The best for what?
These units are alleged to be the best at everything and anything... but I was meaning who are the best for any general situation. If you're recruiting small numbers of people from already elite military groups, there's a fair chance you want them to be adaptable.Lost soul said:
You allow Steven Segal to infulence your opinion of real life 
You great nobber
Steven Segal influences everything everyone does.... you just don't know it! You great nobber ge0rge said:
Interesting yet daft question, pointless at having a stab / educated guess at.. Its a bit like lambo vs ferrari thing isnt it - subjective. All do different things, trained slightly differently.
heres my 2p though - been a fair few sas failures over the last couple of decades that you'd not hear about for other special forces unit.. Not a real measure of performance when youve not go the figures for the other forces though.
There is an interesting discussion to be had though with respect to the SAS. Were they more effective as a regiment that no one had heard of, i.e. did their secrecy aid their ability to do their job, or are they a more effective tool because of their reputation and high public profile because they act as a deterrent?heres my 2p though - been a fair few sas failures over the last couple of decades that you'd not hear about for other special forces unit.. Not a real measure of performance when youve not go the figures for the other forces though.
There is a great book by Ken Conner on the history of the SAS - which pre-dates 9/11 - and his conclusion is that the SAS (at the time of writing) had become irrelevant and should be disbanded as they'd become a victim of their own success. It would be interesting to hear his views post Iraq / Afghanistan.
130R said:
ame here. My friends brother was in the SBS and we went out drinking with him and some of his friends (who were also in the SBS). They don't look like your typical "build like a brick sthouse" marines but you'd have to be a mentalist to start any trouble with them.
I have a friend who's ex-Foreign Legion. He's exactly the same. Quite a slim build, looks more like a marathon runner...but he can put you on the floor in a blink. thouse" marines but you'd have to be a mentalist to start any trouble with them.
VIXPY!!Lost soul said:
WreckedGecko said:
My money would be on SBS, very very tough, nasty people.
And you have met many have you 
As to which is best, each force/team has a particular job to do, so its job dependant, even within the same force.
rhinochopig said:
There is an interesting discussion to be had though with respect to the SAS. Were they more effective as a regiment that no one had heard of, i.e. did their secrecy aid their ability to do their job, or are they a more effective tool because of their reputation and high public profile because they act as a deterrent?
There is a great book by Ken Conner on the history of the SAS - which pre-dates 9/11 - and his conclusion is that the SAS (at the time of writing) had become irrelevant and should be disbanded as they'd become a victim of their own success. It would be interesting to hear his views post Iraq / Afghanistan.
You could be onto something there - not sure if its a pattern but wasnt their raise to fame in the irainian embassy lark in the 80's where their rep for getting the job done was fixed in the minds. Their reputation took a fall after the 'b20' debunkle in the first iraqi conflict.. theres been a handful of other mess ups since - again i dont know enough about it to yay or neigh these guys. I suspect what you say is true though, the unknown is a lot harder to deal with than things that have a measure.. There is a great book by Ken Conner on the history of the SAS - which pre-dates 9/11 - and his conclusion is that the SAS (at the time of writing) had become irrelevant and should be disbanded as they'd become a victim of their own success. It would be interesting to hear his views post Iraq / Afghanistan.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff