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: SAS v DELTA FORCE
klrmcommando    10/15/2007 8:35:27 AM
This is more of a fair match.Again i think the sas,because you never here of any delta force ops happening.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4   NEXT
DropBear       10/15/2007 8:44:11 AM
 
There is a reason for that.
 
Doh! 
 
Quote    Reply

klrmcommando       10/15/2007 9:12:52 AM
YE want a fight dropbear,ya rat.
 
Quote    Reply

GOP       10/15/2007 11:00:21 AM
I vote for KSK. Anytime you can be in a tier 1 unit and get drunk, it becomes the best by default.
 
Quote    Reply

bob the brit       10/15/2007 12:54:21 PM

This is more of a fair match.Again i think the sas,because you never here of any delta force ops happening.
oh dear, i'm at a loss as to what to say. however, i have taken bravoss' advice to heart and will again try to educate you in a kind and friendly manner (whether or not you deserve it with some of your comments is a differnet matter entirely)
okay firstly i'll start by saying that the hush surrounding delta's ops is a good thing, a very good thing. if anything that point you just brought up puts them one up on the SAS. However, it is also important to mention that The Sun, The daily mail, the telegraph, et al, are not credible sources when it comes to SAS missions, and as popular as it may be, niether is the BBC a credible source. in fact the 'un-named' or 'SAS sergeant B' are also not credible sources. to borrow a term used by mough earlier, these people have a woody for special forces, and are simply walts... wannabees leading tabloids to believe they are the real deal (they aren't) in fact the tabloids could care less what london town drunk Fred Smith claims he is, because for them the story sells.
secondly, matching SAS and Delta, is NOT 'more of a fair match'. they are administered by different countries for different jobs with different politics and structures behind them. there are things the regiment is better suited to and there are things Delta is better suited to. although one was the brainchild of a man doing a term with the SAS, they are not mirror images of one another. i can assure you both units 'do' things you don't hear about in the media, and likely never will. i have done things no media person knows about, and again, never will.
final point, do not compare special forces in a "who's better" thread as no-one takes them seriously, nor can anything be concluded from them, nor do many people here enjoy silly pecker competitions (hence some, lime myself, decide to add humour to them to kill the thread)
you may compare SF's in a "which unit has which tasking" kind of thread or something like that where facts and evidence promote a reachable answer that can be agreed upon. however, starting a thread that aims to elevate one unit over another goes nowhere and only promotes silly bickering (similar to school girls arguing over whos daddy's better)
this is the only time i answer you in a polite "let me show you how it's done here" way.

 
Quote    Reply

GOP       10/15/2007 1:42:43 PM
Bob, since I know you have alot of experience in this area, what would you say CAG is more suited to, and what would you say the SAS is more suited to? You know I'm certainly not trying to do a "who's better" kind of thing, more less just trying to get your opinion on the differences in focus, command structure, etc and how that effects their effectiveness in certain areas. I know that the SAS seems to put a heavy focus on SR, whereas you typically hear that CAG puts a heavy focus on CQB (that may be totally false though).
 
Also, since you are here (ie: this is random ), have you ever performed an op with any CAG guys? Now, I absolutely do not want any specifics, OPSEC violations, PERSEC, etc, and if you can't answer I understand, but I'm just curious if you guys work together much on combat ops.
 
Quote    Reply

static       10/15/2007 1:54:52 PM
In all seriousness, my dad is way better.  Hands down.

Sorry, had to get that out of the way.  Anyway Bob in attempt to make Mr. Killer Commando look better I will try to ask a serious question, maybe you can shed some light on.  In your experience, what percentage of time to CAG and SAS/SBS (and DEVGRU if you have ever had any exposure to those guys) spend doing the high-speed ultra-ninja CT operations?  It seems (in the case of CAG anyway) that the unit was put together to handle high-profile CT/HR missions in non-permissive environments, but that the number of these actual incidents are occurring on a less frequent basis.  Has this resulted in a tasking more oriented towards support of the "big army" or is it just that what is happening in terms of HR missions is too low profile to make the news?  I know things are a little different with SOF on your side of the pond but just curious as to what your opinion was.

 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier       10/15/2007 3:45:41 PM

 In your experience, what percentage of time to CAG and SAS/SBS (and DEVGRU if you have ever had any exposure to those guys) spend doing the high-speed ultra-ninja CT operations?  It seems (in the case of CAG anyway) that the unit was put together to handle high-profile CT/HR missions in non-permissive environments, but that the number of these actual incidents are occurring on a less frequent basis. 
Don't you watch The Unit?  They're in a different country zapping bad guys every week

 
Quote    Reply

klrmcommando       10/15/2007 5:52:04 PM



This is more of a fair match.Again i think the sas,because you never here of any delta force ops happening.

oh dear, i'm at a loss as to what to say. however, i have taken bravoss' advice to heart and will again try to educate you in a kind and friendly manner (whether or not you deserve it with some of your comments is a differnet matter entirely)

okay firstly i'll start by saying that the hush surrounding delta's ops is a good thing, a very good thing. if anything that point you just brought up puts them one up on the SAS. However, it is also important to mention that The Sun, The daily mail, the telegraph, et al, are not credible sources when it comes to SAS missions, and as popular as it may be, niether is the BBC a credible source. in fact the 'un-named' or 'SAS sergeant B' are also not credible sources. to borrow a term used by mough earlier, these people have a woody for special forces, and are simply walts... wannabees leading tabloids to believe they are the real deal (they aren't) in fact the tabloids could care less what london town drunk Fred Smith claims he is, because for them the story sells.

secondly, matching SAS and Delta, is NOT 'more of a fair match'. they are administered by different countries for different jobs with different politics and structures behind them. there are things the regiment is better suited to and there are things Delta is better suited to. although one was the brainchild of a man doing a term with the SAS, they are not mirror images of one another. i can assure you both units 'do' things you don't hear about in the media, and likely never will. i have done things no media person knows about, and again, never will.

final point, do not compare special forces in a "who's better" thread as no-one takes them seriously, nor can anything be concluded from them, nor do many people here enjoy silly pecker competitions (hence some, lime myself, decide to add humour to them to kill the thread)

you may compare SF's in a "which unit has which tasking" kind of thread or something like that where facts and evidence promote a reachable answer that can be agreed upon. however, starting a thread that aims to elevate one unit over another goes nowhere and only promotes silly bickering (similar to school girls arguing over whos daddy's better)

this is the only time i answer you in a polite "let me show you how it's done here" way.


look you ya bastard,if your just gonna critizise me fuck off.I'll compare wit a wanty compare ya prick,noo either shut the fuck up and beetit,or answer ma question,capeesh.

 
Quote    Reply

mough       10/15/2007 6:12:41 PM
Now now son, if you want to play with the big boys your going to have to be a big boy, he politely explaned the problem with your thesis on comparisons of tier 1 SOF units, and you get aggressive....this is the internet, if you can't control yourself on here, how would anyone never mind the RM's be expected to trust you when the brown stuff hits the air recirculation unit?....now before you decide to play internet superman with me, 2 things, 1, I don't care so save yourself the bother, 2, look, read, understand, comprehend, and acknowlage what has been said to you, and you will be that little extra step on the road to your goal....have a great day
 
Quote    Reply

ArtyEngineer       10/15/2007 6:13:30 PM






This is more of a fair match.Again i think the sas,because you never here of any delta force ops happening.



oh dear, i'm at a loss as to what to say. however, i have taken bravoss' advice to heart and will again try to educate you in a kind and friendly manner (whether or not you deserve it with some of your comments is a differnet matter entirely)



okay firstly i'll start by saying that the hush surrounding delta's ops is a good thing, a very good thing. if anything that point you just brought up puts them one up on the SAS. However, it is also important to mention that The Sun, The daily mail, the telegraph, et al, are not credible sources when it comes to SAS missions, and as popular as it may be, niether is the BBC a credible source. in fact the 'un-named' or 'SAS sergeant B' are also not credible sources. to borrow a term used by mough earlier, these people have a woody for special forces, and are simply walts... wannabees leading tabloids to believe they are the real deal (they aren't) in fact the tabloids could care less what london town drunk Fred Smith claims he is, because for them the story sells.



secondly, matching SAS and Delta, is NOT 'more of a fair match'. they are administered by different countries for different jobs with different politics and structures behind them. there are things the regiment is better suited to and there are things Delta is better suited to. although one was the brainchild of a man doing a term with the SAS, they are not mirror images of one another. i can assure you both units 'do' things you don't hear about in the media, and likely never will. i have done things no media person knows about, and again, never will.



final point, do not compare special forces in a "who's better" thread as no-one takes them seriously, nor can anything be concluded from them, nor do many people here enjoy silly pecker competitions (hence some, lime myself, decide to add humour to them to kill the thread)



you may compare SF's in a "which unit has which tasking" kind of thread or something like that where facts and evidence promote a reachable answer that can be agreed upon. however, starting a thread that aims to elevate one unit over another goes nowhere and only promotes silly bickering (similar to school girls arguing over whos daddy's better)



this is the only time i answer you in a polite "let me show you how it's done here" way.




look you ya bastard,if your just gonna critizise me fuck off.I'll compare wit a wanty compare ya prick,noo either shut the fuck up and beetit,or answer ma question,capeesh.


Holy crap its Rab C Nesbitt!!!!  You US posters wont know know who that is.  But that statement is written phonetically as someone from Glasgow speaks. 

klrmcommando,

I believe you are a fake persona, have read a few of your other posts and no one is as uneducated as you appear to be.

Regards

Arty

 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics