armyreal.com - Forums

Go Back   ArmyReal.com Forums > Military Discussions > Armies of the World
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

  #51  
Old 01-16-2006, 08:34 AM
Texas's Avatar
Texas Texas is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by metal_jacket
Yeh Yeh, we all know the SAS is good. But the best? Thats a rather bold statement. I believe that most western spec ops are of a similar standard. All soliders are selected from the 'cream of the crop' and undergo rigorous training. To say that one is better than the other, i believe, is an assumption. As for Zeus's comment about the British SAS's 'obvious superiority,' due to the fact that they have been around longer, and gave spawn to the Australian SASR; this is rubbish. How could u possibly base an argument on something as stupid as that? That's not to say that you're wrong in this belief, but the SASR has been around for many decades, and over those many years (most recently in the early stages of Iraq) have performed extremely well, and under tough circumstances, much like their british counterparts, earning a name for themselves around the world. So to get back to my original point, there's no definant way of proving that one sas is better than the other, especially considering both of their success's.
The training and the calibre of the men in these units is broadly speaking, the same . However, the British Army has been involved in more wars and conflicts than the Australian Army over the last 60 years .Consequently the British SAS see alot more combat than their Aussie equivalent . Which is why so many Aussie SAS during times of conflict can be found operating from or alongside our lads from Hereford .As you maybe aware there was quite a gap between Vietnam SASR operations and East Timor SASR ops with the exception of Somalia and Rwanda (United Nations).
__________________

Last edited by Texas; 01-17-2006 at 08:43 AM..
Reply With Quote

  #52  
Old 01-25-2006, 09:20 PM
ozzi-solja's Avatar
ozzi-solja ozzi-solja is offline
Command Sergeant Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 429
Default

hell of a gap yes, and as such British combat experience from 60 years ago is well worth learning and applying. Unfortunately for the Brits, you dont have a leg to stand on. We teach the same stuff to out boys, which is all but useless to us considering it was the European theatre.

Australian SAS has experience in long range recon extending beyond 70 day tactical deployments, originating in Vietnam. Im absolutely certain the British SAS is of similar calibre, if not better due to higher discipline. (**** lets face it, all us Aussies are apathetic blokes that are just looking for a good laugh).

But please, can any British forum member tell me, with reasonable facts to back them up, how in gods name the Australian SASR won the bid to provide the long range recon element of the Iraq campaign in the Wetsern Desert AO? Over the British?

Did the brits have more important work to do? sitting back at base for two days after the Australians had already moved in?

Perhaps the yanks remembered Alpha 2 Bravo?
__________________
Who Dares Wins
Reply With Quote

  #53  
Old 01-29-2006, 07:45 AM
Texas's Avatar
Texas Texas is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzi-solja

But please, can any British forum member tell me, with reasonable facts to back them up, how in gods name the Australian SASR won the bid to provide the long range recon element of the Iraq campaign in the Wetsern Desert AO? Over the British?

Did the brits have more important work to do? sitting back at base for two days after the Australians had already moved in?
I take it you are refering to the Australian deployment in western Iraq?
I would imagine there are areas in Australia that strongly resemble western Iraq ,for training etc ?
The SASR have a record for getting the job done .Doesn't matter whether its Vietnam or W. Iraq. The Australian government made them available to allied command and not being ones to look a gift horse in the mouth ,they have put them to good use .

Quote:
Perhaps the yanks remembered Alpha 2 Bravo?
I'm thinking you mean Bravo two zero ? Bravo 2 Zero was a foot patrol that was compromised . In the 1st gulf war there were various SAS missions behind the lines . To my knowledge they all used vehicles (with the exception of Bravo two zero and two other units ) and were extremely successful . I'll point you to some good reading if you are interested .

heres one
[url]http://bookshistorical.com/340.html[/url]
__________________

Last edited by Texas; 01-29-2006 at 12:03 PM..
Reply With Quote

  #54  
Old 01-29-2006, 07:43 PM
ozzi-solja's Avatar
ozzi-solja ozzi-solja is offline
Command Sergeant Major
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 429
Default

Thankyou texas, i realised my mistake when i checked it in my source, the Australian SAS book i sometimes refer to, but couldnt be buggered correcting myself.

As for the Australian resembelence to Iraq, you're quite right, however Australian deserts are generally dryer, as we dont have any rivers running through them, like the Euphrates and Tigris. Also, night temperatures in Australian deserts are generally hot, unlike Iraq where temperatures may drop to 5 celsius.

The Australian SAS also operates out of vehicles and ONLY out of vehicles, the modified LRPV i believe, a nice looking six wheeler with cargo space for about 250kg.

As i understand the SASR's entire capability is base on three squadrons based on about 40 vehicles each, and manned by a crew of six.

Add that up... the SASR has roughly 1920 active fighting men.
__________________
Who Dares Wins
Reply With Quote

  #55  
Old 03-10-2006, 10:21 AM
JonMan JonMan is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 30
Default

Why are we talking about special forces, to gauge an army's strength? No special forces are invincible, and in reality the strength is measured by the general strength of the overall military, not a group that mukes up a very small percentage. Australia has always brought excellent infantry into battle, but its armor and air doesn't measure up. They have less than 100 main battle tanks as of right now, and they've never really had the independancy of other larger forces. The SAS contribute to the strength, but they can't really be the determining factor to put above other nation's strength.
Reply With Quote

  #56  
Old 03-10-2006, 03:50 PM
Texas's Avatar
Texas Texas is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonMan
Why are we talking about special forces, to gauge an army's strength? .
The thread is called "The Australian army" not " to gauge an army's strength"
We're just boring each other about the SAS as we both have a regiment ,is that ok?
__________________
Reply With Quote

  #57  
Old 02-06-2009, 02:49 PM
Humble Pie Humble Pie is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aLLOssie View Post
We think logically in battle. For example in Vietnam, Yanki troops walked around blazing music, hoping to get the enemy to them. The aussies went around quietly and stealthly, hunting the vietcong. The SAS were easily head and shoulders the best special forces in the world. The US commanders told the Aussie commandos in Vietnam to do a job. Very shortly the aussies came back, saying they had done the job. The Yanks didn't believe them, so they said to go back and bring some evidence. They did, it was their enemies genitals.
Let me get his right. You're accusing Australian soldiers of war crimes? ie. mutilation of a corpse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aLLOssie View Post
Oh yah, this guy who lived up the road from my house was old and fought during ww2. He said that an oz soldier was given a higher rank to officer. He turned dog on him and his mates, so they threw a grenade in the tent while the officer was sleeping and killed him. The fact was this happened often. You turn dog on an aussie in battle and he will make you pay!
And murder?


Quote:
Originally Posted by aLLOssie View Post
Oh well, i've had my talk, what have you's got to say? (This is not just patriotic talk, this is fact)

You're obviously patriotic, no doubt about that, misguided though. Even if those stories were true, they're nothing to brag about, they're embarrasing actually. Professional soldiers (which I'm pretty sure Australians are) do not behave like that.

Here's a pearl that has served me very well throughout my life "Never believe anything you hear and only half of what you see".
Reply With Quote

  #58  
Old 02-07-2009, 02:54 PM
Exo1's Avatar
Exo1 Exo1 is offline
General of the Armies
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland (Ex Irish Army)
Posts: 10,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonMan View Post
Why are we talking about special forces, to gauge an army's strength? No special forces are invincible, and in reality the strength is measured by the general strength of the overall military, not a group that mukes up a very small percentage. Australia has always brought excellent infantry into battle, but its armor and air doesn't measure up. They have less than 100 main battle tanks as of right now, and they've never really had the independancy of other larger forces. The SAS contribute to the strength, but they can't really be the determining factor to put above other nation's strength.
Really??.... IN WW2, Paddy Mayne's squadren of SAS Troopers destroyed more Nazi aircraft on the ground in raids in 3 months then the whole RAF for that particular year, so wheres your strength now??.. Every Army worth its salt has an Special Forces Detachment of some sort.. Austrailia is no different, which should be reflective in Austrailias tactical strike ability beside Conventional Infantry Formations, Armour Formations, Airforce Formations, and Naval Formations...
__________________
"Barrel High, Powder Dry!"

"Illic est haud effrego ex Veneratio"
Reply With Quote

  #59  
Old 02-07-2009, 04:00 PM
Texas's Avatar
Texas Texas is offline
Major General
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exo1 View Post
Really??.... IN WW2, Paddy Mayne's squadren of SAS Troopers destroyed more Nazi aircraft on the ground in raids in 3 months then the whole RAF for that particular year, so wheres your strength now??.. Every Army worth its salt has an Special Forces Detachment of some sort.. Austrailia is no different, which should be reflective in Austrailias tactical strike ability beside Conventional Infantry Formations, Armour Formations, Airforce Formations, and Naval Formations...
Paddy Mayne! ......A soldiers soldier!
__________________
Reply With Quote

  #60  
Old 02-08-2009, 04:28 AM
Exo1's Avatar
Exo1 Exo1 is offline
General of the Armies
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland (Ex Irish Army)
Posts: 10,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas View Post
Paddy Mayne! ......A soldiers soldier!
Yep... he was some man for one man!!... Decking his CO was his starting point to his Entry into Sterlings SAS and wow what a career to its end.... Him and his men are now getting some adoration outside of the unit members they served with... however, I think there professionalism and heroism built the SAS, and I dont think they would give a rats *** if nobody knew what they did then for the British Citizan who lives free today... Thats the mark of a true Special Forces Professional in my opinion, and I just hope todays Cadre of SAS carry on such a proud and professional approach...
__________________
"Barrel High, Powder Dry!"

"Illic est haud effrego ex Veneratio"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:12 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    
·Contact Us   ·Legal   ·Privacy   ·Link To Us    ·Advertise With Us    ·About Us    ·Site Map     
     Copyright 2004-2019 Activv, LLC. All rights reserved. Armyreal.com is a service provided by Activv.
This website is not affiliated, endorsed, authorized, or associated in any way with any government, military or country.