Technically speaking, I was part of a “special Forces” unit.
What made us “special”? We were somewhat decent at dropping a nuclear payload (or conventional warhead) on the enemy’s head.
symbol of the SBS is this one:
I have always held the British special forces in the highest regard. The British are renowned for their ingenuity and British special forces are the embodiment of that ingenuity. In WW2, the SAS, commandos and the paratrooper Red Devils caused a lot of trouble for the Wehrmacht. Much respect for the skills, courage and tenacity of those fighting men.
So we were “special” and we were a “Force” (I am translating here, so stay with me) but that doesn’t mean we would have been effective at anything other than the specific task of delivering nuclear holocaust. The SBS has an amazing emblem. The motto is sound enough, but the heraldic image is just cocking a snook at the whole thing:
If anything ever said ‘These men don’t care about who thinks who is the best’, it’s this emblem.
Then there’s the story of the letter received by a frigate captain in Portland Harbour back in the 80s or 90s; it bore this emblem and was from the leader of an SBS team who’thanked the captain for his participation in their exercise - which he hadn’t known about.
They’d been operating underneath his frigate
The other thing that made us “special” (now that I recall) was that we were a mixed troop. A platoon of missile artillery and one of Infantry to protect us while we aimed and launched the missile.
Our infantry was so good that once my sergeant and I managed to steal an M113 (APC) and a Duece 1/2 truck in the dead of night and park them outside our perimeter. After which we woke up all the guards and inquired about the vehicles with the straightest face we could manage. At the times of the Lance Missile the Italian Army had just one special force, the 9° Col Moschin Regiment. Which most certainly didn’t handle any ballistic capability. In the US, the various Special Operations units often collaborate and cross train. There are about 3,500 Army Rangers (Airborne Infantry, Airfield Seizure, and Counter Terrorist (CT)), 12,000 SF (Special Forces, aka Green Berets), and 8,000 SEALs. Like Tanks, Airplanes, and Submarines, each has a different primary mission and skills training that goes along with it. They have overlap, when the SEALs come ashore, they are now operating on land, and hence overlap with the Ranger Mission, and when SF goes into DA (Direct Action) they also become Infantry and CT.
SF (The Green Berets) mission is to teach and train locals to form militia (half of this planet is still organized in a dictator/tribe type societies, and that’s the way they live and wha they need). If you live in the west, you are in a Nation State, either a Democracy or a Monarchy with a Parliament rather than a Dictator. This gives you a standard of living wherein you simply cannot understand the rest of the world lives.
More than 50% of the population this planet makes less than $5 a day. Green Berets train them, give them medical aid, speak their languages, and train and organize them into fighting forces (militia).
Navy SEALS are no doubt the best unit in the water. I’ve met few SEALS, and they are GOOD.
Rangers are the best at infantry operations, CT, and Airfield Seizure.
Tell a Ranger he’s taking all the other Spec Ops units on a 1,000 km road march and he’ll grumble and then grind everybody else into the dirt while doing it. In one rescue operation of a Navy Seal the Rangers were the ONLY Unit that was able to make the march in and out. All of the others failed along the way.
It is very hard to get into, and stay in, any of the above units. Although they specialize in different missions and skills, they are all top notch units and men.
After a man has been in one of these units for about 8–10 years, they may try out for DEVGRU (SEAL Team 6) or Delta Force. Even then, the failure rate is at least 50%.
What makes all these units so good is a combination of the selection of the best stock, and the intense training these units continuously go through. I would argue that a consistently high dropout rate and low force size aren't really necessarily good indicators of the quality of a unit. I have said the same thing about the SEALs, btw, so this isn't just pro-american jingoism.
Low force size, for example, may indicate a small budget and limited logistics, which would tend to indicate a unit that can't afford to have enough people, let alone training and equipment.
A high drop-rate may indicate poor screening, or a high injury rate. A high injury rate actually would tend to indicate a poorly developed curriculum, and poor supervision. Lots of purported “elite military training” around the world is also not all that useful in developing warfighters, and is really only good for weeding people out, or being able to brag about having a higher drop rate than the SEALs. Additionally, if your guys are being injured at such high rates, they will likely not have particularly good medical readiness numbers.
What good is it if those 26 elite warriors can only afford live-fire training once a year, and only for one string of fire? What if all of them have torn ligaments, chronic bronchitis, bad backs, and a history of heat-injuries? What if the only individual equipment they have to work with is crappy knock-off AK-47s, and cheap Wal-Mart camping gear?
Secondly, selection ≠ training. It is entirely possible for a unit to make people spend 18 months proving that they deserve to be there by undergoing gruelling conditions and hardship, and then after passing selection, just give them a uniform and a rifle, and tell them to go thataway, and kill enemies, all without ever having taught them how to shoot or anything.
I'm NOT saying that this is the case for any of the units you mentioned specifically, just that measuring “eliteness” by size and attrition is a flawed, if popular concept. Asking which Specops unit is better than another is like asking whether a .50 caliber sniper rifle is better than an M-4 carbine. It all depends on what mission you want to accomplish.
It may be easier to answer the question, "which unit is the most difficult to qualify for," but again, it depends on several factors, prominent among them being whether the greater emphasis is on training or selection. The new USMC (MARSOC) folks have only a moderately tough selection process. However, we should remember that all their applicants have already been through the initial USMC boot camp process successfully, and have been successful in other commands, often Force Recon, prior to applying. So MARSOC is more interested in the training element. For that reason, they do less "hazing" type stuff, since it's not the best way to train people. The SEALS or Rangers, on the other hand, are taking applicants from a less qualified pool, so they need to use a rougher selection process. The main reason for the selection phase is not so much to discover which applicants are physically and cognitively capable of being trained, but rather to identify those who want to become SEALS or Rangers enough to tolerate essentially anything to make it. There is a T-shirt that embodies this selection concept in the phrase, "It's not that I CAN and others can't; it's that I WILL, and others won't." Far more people CAN tolerate being frustrated, hypothermic, and in pain for weeks on end, than actually WILL. The SEAL selection process is designed to identify those who not only can, but WILL. Most MARSOC candidates on the other hand, are being drawn from a pool that has already demonstrated that they WILL. for this reason, issues like DOR rates for different Specops units also tend to be measuring apples and oranges. If you study the German Military - 21st Century German has essentially and very peaceful culture - joining the military is not a popular thing to do (still lingering WWII memories I suspect). So the german military honestly is understaffed, and gives big signing bonuses. They have more vehicles and weapons than the can staff. Honestly Germany has Ships, Submarines, Planes and Tanks that they want to use but don’t have enough people to staff them. Which is Ironic because in terms of Doctrine, sophistication and funding, Germany has one of the best Militaries on the planet. They just have big challenges with recruiting. Why take a pay cut to get shot at overseas when Germany has been at peace for a generation and has no clear enemies?Given that context, The German Special Forces have difficulty finding Quality Candidates.
That being Said - there are basically only 3 reasons for dropping out of any special forces training.
1 - You gave up.
2 - You got injured and were forced to drop out and try again after you heal.
3 - You did something that the instructors did not find desirable for a graduate of that program - varies by training on what the undesirable traits are, and what the process is to fail trainees. That could be test scores, attitude, fitness, really varies widely depending on the details.
So who is the best? Depends on what the mission is. Airplanes are best at flying, Submarines are best at stealth, and Tanks are the best at local Firepower. I dont think its accurate to compare units if you haven't served with them. We could compare units on the basis of toughness of training, but there are also other things to consider.
The KSK might have a 100% dropout rate, but to be fair, the German army is just 60,000 strong, has a yearly attrition rate of nearly 27% and is extremely political, with the suspension of commandos who might have right wing views. Also, nearly 75% of new German recruits and 60% of current serving personnel wouldn't be able to pass a standardized US Army PFT or UK PFT regimen. So the incentive to join the KSK or the Fallschirmjager is pretty limited and the pool of applicants isnt as impressive.
But that isnt to say that the training isn’t good.
The SEALS on the other hand have a huge pool of applicants. The pool is highly qualified and the US Navy tends to attract the best and brightest (their NCOs are some of the most highly qualified and educated in the world with most holding a college degree and some even having a Masters). There's also the consideration that the US Navy SEALs recruit from all branches of the military. There are plenty of examples of Marines who joined the SEALs. Also, ever since USSOCOM was set up, the requirements for all special operations forces have been standardized and the intra-forces training and famliarization is even better. So I guess, in terms of training, education, competitiveness, I doubt that there's a more qualified force in the world like the SEALs and other operating units of the USSOCOM. Yeah amigo, your guys mentioned are really good. With considerable pain and regret and now trying to look through the front window of life, the best are those working under the best virtues/charter under a vetted “good of the whole common cause of just war”. Unfortunately, that being said; loss of life must at times must be administered….for it is better that one must die than an entire people suffer. Even with a title of Liberty behind us, the aftermath challenge for those involved is not to die thousands of incomprehensible deaths of pain/regret. Therein, “Just war” and respecting the the sanctity of human life allows you to cope and live fruitfully thereafter. These guys below…get these values are truly the most measured, clearest thinking and some of the best!
Although seriuspicios to most people and not understood, in a serious situation under the title of Liberty this unit accomplishes critical missions everyday well below the radar:
The Special Activities Division in the CIA is comprised of only a few hundred highly trained and very carefully vetted people. For good reason - their main mission is complete "deniable" operations. If Rainbow Six is Black Operations, then SAD is the shadow cast by those operations.
If you put a Navy SEAL into a Ranger Mission, he will not be the better than a Ranger who’s been trained for it, nor will the Ranger be better than the SEAL in the water. Same with SF.
Who’s the best in the water? SEALS.
Who’s the best on land? Rangers. Who’s the best at unconventional warfare and training up militia’s? SF. Who’s the best at CT? Delta Force and SEAL Team 6.Just pick which one you want to get into and go get into it.
IF YOU CAN.
And considering you’re probably referring to the 3° Missile Group Volturno, dismantled in 2001, let’s say that, other than being an ordinary artillery unit (not a tier 1 special faroce), it’s a fair bit of time of time ago you’re talking about.
There are about 8,000 Navy SEALs out there and if you have a unit this size, then it’s simply impossible to have the same quality like smaller units, for example the British (one regiment) or the German “Kampfschwimmer” (their size is classified, but it is said to be less than a company).
German Maritime Combat Operations Forces “Kampfschwimmer”
One element to measure which unit is the “best” is the dropout rate during training and selection. Here the SEALs cannot compete: Dropout rate for German Kampfschwimmer is sometimes 100%, meaning that none of the candidates passes selection and training.
There was a time when the German Kampfschwimmerkompanie had only 26 soldiers, as soldiers retired and for two consecutive years nobody passed the selection. Some people in the German Navy proposed that they should lower the standards in training and selection so that more people could pass, but this idea was rejected. Luckily, in the coming years more people were successfully passing the training and the company slowly gained back its combat strength.
It is clear that with only a handful of Kampfschwimmer you can’t do what the SEALs are doing with thousands of Special Warfare Operators.
DEVGRU (the former SEAL Team Six) is said to be of equal quality to the Germans Kampfschwimmers while the Special Boat Service is close by.
In the end, it’s very difficult to compare units from different nations with different sizes and missions. There are so many Special Forces units around that it doesn’t make much sense to say that one of them is the best, while most of them are completely unknown to us.
The soldiers in these units do not care: They are busy with improving their skills and if they take a look at other units, it’s only out of curiosity, to see how these folks are working. When it comes to tactics, military units and especially Special Operations Forces often copy from each other.
There is no competition.
Picture Source Wikipedia
0 Comments