Good point. You nailed me on that one.
But you can't ignore the fact that SEALs are generalists and the SAS are specialists.
In a matter of personal opinion, I come to the conclusion that being more versatile beats being more experienced in a narrow skill set. Quit lying to yourself, and aknowledge the fact that the US tends to be involved in more of the world's major affairs, requiring units such as the SEALs to be depended upon to delay or even stop conflicts dead in their tracks. I consider it an insult for anyone to underrate the SEALs, and that's just because of my haughty American ego, right?
Maybe it's something called pride and respect, you should learn what pride and respect are before you try to rebut my reasoning.
I understand what you're saying and it makes sense; what I'm telling you is that the SEALs are generalists, whereas the SAS is comprised of specialists. The SAS is extremely competent at what they do, no doubt about that. However, I am merely pointing out the fact that the SEALs are more versatile than the SAS; the SEALs may quite possibly be the most versatile military unit in the World. I admire versatility. Not to mention that the SEALs still manage to be very competent in almost everything they do. True, they have suffered drawbacks here and there, but you can't get better until you know how you're wrong. Generally speaking, the SEALs are the modern-day rennaissance men of warfare. It is a common saying that we try to become what we admire. That is why I am going to become a United States Navy SEAL sometime in the very near future. Therefore, my opinion is horribly bias, but very logical. I hope you can analyze the logic and reason behind my argument.
StrategyWorld.com© 1998 -