Slaiv Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 Well, if there was no MAD [Mutually Assured Destruction], then Terrorists would win. Other than that, I would have to say Seals. What about the Green Beret or Rangers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojlnir Posted May 6, 2004 Share Posted May 6, 2004 The Discovery Channel recently (and repeatedly) ran a show about SEALs covering BUDs and all other aspects of their training. I know the SAS is really good, so I'm sure it would be a tie...but damn...BUD's is insane. Tying people up and throwing them in the water so that they can undo the bindings, swim down to the bottom of the pool, find goggles, pick something up and get up to the surface is retarded hard. Yeah, the SAS invented that head-first rapple from a chopper (very cool) but do they have to sit in freezing water for hours, lug rafts that weigh hundreds of pounds out of the water, back in again and then f---ing paddle out? Yeah, the Spetznaz used to be badass too, don't know about now though. Man its cool to talk like I know something after watching some TV. Any SEAL or SAS trooper could rip off my head and show my dead body to my still living head before I even knew what happened. Glad they work for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Laguna Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 What about the Green Beret or Rangers?SEALs and SAS specialize in precise surgical operations. Green Berets are similar but they are not as good. Rangers can't do anything withought leaving a burning path of destruction visible from space (last sentence paraphrased from a book about SEALs). I am not sure which would win between SEALs, and SAS. Terrorist would lose for sure. As for the other two: They both have snipers who are so good at camuflage you could be standing on top of them and not notice, though SAS snipers are better. I don't know about SAS, but the SEALs train generalists, not specialists (unlike, say, the Rangers), if the radioman is hit, any other team member can take the radio, repair it, and become the new radioman. BTW - somebody mentioned slitting throats. For any SpecOps operative trying to keep stealthy, slitting throats is a very bad idea, since a person whose throat has been slit will gurgle a lot and thrash around until his brain runs out of oxygen. The best way to kill somebody silently with a knife is to put it at the indent at the base of your enemy's skull (bone is thin there) and slam upwards at a 45-degree angle; the motor senses will be cut off immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suzerain Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 to quote one former SBS member I know... "when the US army needs something impossible done, they call in the special forces. When they want something something impossible done properly, they ask the UK to get the SAS and SBS to do it" says it all :) the SAS leaves the Seals looking like a bunch of ballet dancers who can't do a thing. which is scary given compared to anyone else the Seals are elites. Suz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akrid Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 , but the SEALs train generalists, not specialists (unlike, say, the Rangers), if the radioman is hit, any other team member can take the radio, repair it, and become the new radioman. This isn't WW2 wouldn't they all have radio's? "when the US army needs something impossible done, they call in the special forces. When they want something something impossible done properly, they ask the UK to get the SAS and SBS to do it" says it all the SAS leaves the Seals looking like a bunch of ballet dancers who can't do a thing. which is scary given compared to anyone else the Seals are elites. All that is is $&it talk, I'm not convinced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ember Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 Oh, blatantly the SAS in my opinion. They've got quite a reputation for simply being the hardest people on the face of the planet. I think they've got around a hundred members, and when they perform an operation, its clean and 99% of the time they won't lose a single man. White Wolf - Yeah, saw that documentary as well, it was a bit scary. I like the theory that people with absolutely no regard for their own life are most likely to survive in a firefight, based on that guy who got the Cross for single-handedly taking out 3 German bunkers with hand grenades. I think I'd probably curl up and cower in a corner as well! Ember. (Reluctantly heading back to dissertation duties...........) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Laguna Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 , but the SEALs train generalists, not specialists (unlike, say, the Rangers), if the radioman is hit, any other team member can take the radio, repair it, and become the new radioman. This isn't WW2 wouldn't they all have radio's? The all have local radios for communication between team members and other teams in the area. The long-range radio is bigger and so only one person carries it. Besides it was just an example, another one is: If the guy tasked with setting the explosives goes down, any other team member can take over his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darnoc Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 Terrorists definetly win. They have more immagination and they use rather unique methods... like a plane and some knives to capture it. But the other two groups always use the same methods and are therefore predictably, but terrorists have to learn to be unpredictable and that is why they will win in the end. And I also think in reality they will get the upper hand. You can not lead a war against such an enemy. They can not be destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chunky_Moose Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 I voted SAS but i think that it would be close. The terrorists are willing to die and don't care too much for anything but they lack training, technology and firepower----> they lose. The SEALs are damned good but compared to the SAS? ---> all the gear, no idea SAS maybe aren't as armed to the teeth as the SEALs but remember that they are all veterans of this and that and they are trained beyond belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 But the other two groups always use the same methods and are therefore predictably, but terrorists have to learn to be unpredictable and that is why they will win in the end. They always use the same methods because they are tried and true effective means of combating the enemy. The terrorists are unpredictable, but in open combat would you rather know exactly what you are doing, what you are going to do, and what the guy next to you is doing, or would you want to be unpredictable and make it up as you go along. Yes, SEALs and SAS may be predictable to an extent if you have studied thier methods. But by the time you process what you think their next move will be, your most likely dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.