SAS: Rogue Warriors

In WW2 the SAS destroyed more aircraft on the ground than the RAF did in the air

The amazing thing that comes across from the first set of videos is the rivalry and how people within the military wanted the SAS regiment gone. Why ? nothing more than it made others look bad

And they were disbanded after WW2 only to get put back together a couple of years later.
 
Last edited:
Double Edge said:
The amazing thing that comes across from the first set of videos is the rivalry and how people within the military wanted the SAS regiment gone. Why ? nothing more than it made them look bad

And they were disbanded after WW2 only to get put back together a couple of years later.
Click to expand...
Maybe they were reluctant to acknowledge that warfare is Dirty and ungentlemanly and yet they were quite happy to send thousands into bullets at the Somme..I call them callous Basterds..I'm sure you have words to..
 
Toby said:
Maybe they were reluctant to acknowledge that warfare is Dirty and ungentlemanly and yet they were quite happy to send thousands into bullets at the Somme..I call them callous Basterds..I'm sure you have words to..
Click to expand...

Hypocritical and callous
 
When i watch these videos i think about attacks in my country on army bases or 26/11. The tactics are the same.

Send in a bunch of highly motivated individuals to cause havoc using the element of surprise. Except these guys won't be coming back.

Very difficult to defend against, costs little and has good PR. Drove Hitler round the bend
 
Double Edge said:
When i watch these videos i think about attacks in my country on army bases or 26/11. The tactics are the same.

Send in a bunch of highly motivated individuals to cause havoc using the element of surprise. Except these guys won't be coming back.

Very difficult to defend against, costs little and has good PR. Drove Hitler round the bend
Click to expand...
I take it you are referring to the Islamic terrorist trend of tying a bomb around your torso and detonating it to kill innocent and military indiscriminately?
 
Toby said:
I take it you are referring to the Islamic terrorist trend of tying a bomb around your torso and detonating it to kill innocent and military indiscriminately?
Click to expand...

No, i mean the commando style attacks, thats the kind of suicide attackers we get here. Did lose a PM that way but to another outfit

They don't strap bomb to themselves here iianm, not the islamic ones anyway. Maybe if cornered but not as the first action. The bombers would plant them in public places and then remotely detonate them

The other thing is there is no muslim feel to it at all, just a Pak feel
 
Last edited:
Double Edge said:
No, i mean the commando style attacks, thats the kind of suicide attackers we get here. Did lose a PM that way but to another outfit

They don't strap bomb to themselves here iianm, not the islamic ones anyway. Maybe if cornered but not as the first action. The bombers would plant them in public places and then remotely detonate them
Click to expand...

Ah apologies I misunderstood, the Glenmorangie was too good last night...

1991! Can't believe Rajiv Gandhi was killed so long ago..

Trying to get around to finishing a book on Paddy Mayne, I think I post the title in the Book section. Very telling how the SAS were used in Italy in conjunction with the regular army units. Mayne basically redefined their role to suite the Armies requirement ...they were operating like bandits / Forward Reconnaissance. Taking on far larger German units, Unsettling them into believing they were being opposed by strong forward elements of the main army. When in fact in many cases they were completely independent. I find it fascinating how it evolved and how effective it was
 
Last edited:
Proof of the pudding is everybody tried to copy them. So that's got to be good

He was talking about how many lost in the Falklands, 22 was it. This is considered a high figure

It reminded me of a similar figure put out by the CIA, for Afghanistan, 18 which is higher than the total lost in Vietnam

Those figures seem so low yet are still considered significant
 
Double Edge said:
The amazing thing that comes across from the first set of videos is the rivalry and how people within the military wanted the SAS regiment gone. Why ? nothing more than it made others look bad
Click to expand...
This happens in all armies. The SF takes the best of the best and that means that for the line regiments, they loose their best people to these regts. The regts spend years cultivating leaders, only to lose them to the spec ops. The only way to keep them in the line regts is to offer these people faster promotion and more perks. However, sometimes, that is just not possible as the slots are already filled with capable people.

The SF are also first in line at budget time.

However, because of their nature, SF regts are not up for regular deployments while the line regts do most of that work. From the line regts POV, the SF gets the most money, gets to play most of the time, steals the best people, and don't do most of the work.

Any wonder why there is such animosity?
 
WABs_OOE said:
This happens in all armies. The SF takes the best of the best and that means that for the line regiments, they loose their best people to these regts. The regts spend years cultivating leaders, only to lose them to the spec ops. The only way to keep them in the line regts is to offer these people faster promotion and more perks. However, sometimes, that is just not possible as the slots are already filled with capable people.
Click to expand...
In the latest talk, this soldier mentioned he managed to get a warrant officer's pay only because he was in the sas despite holding a rank no higher than a staff seargent

it was all confusing but he had one rank in the army and a shadow rank with the sas and the better pay followed the latter

However, because of their nature, SF regts are not up for regular deployments while the line regts do most of that work. From the line regts POV, the SF gets the most money, gets to play most of the time, steals the best people, and don't do most of the work.

Any wonder why there is such animosity?
Click to expand...
Proper bunch of scoundrels, lol

We never get to find out about their exploits until half a century later
 
Last edited:
WABs_OOE said:
This happens in all armies. The SF takes the best of the best and that means that for the line regiments, they loose their best people to these regts. The regts spend years cultivating leaders, only to lose them to the spec ops. The only way to keep them in the line regts is to offer these people faster promotion and more perks. However, sometimes, that is just not possible as the slots are already filled with capable people.

The SF are also first in line at budget time.

However, because of their nature, SF regts are not up for regular deployments while the line regts do most of that work. From the line regts POV, the SF gets the most money, gets to play most of the time, steals the best people, and don't do most of the work.

Any wonder why there is such animosity?
Click to expand...

Hmm not sure that tallies with my reading. For instance the British Army including SF is always put into theatre with the bare minimum, then commences to play catch up and its been this way ever since I can remember. I've read countless personal accounts of not enough gear and I'm talking the basics..like ammunition, food, body armour, quality boots to suite terrain etc I think the British army prides its self in not having enough of anything...the last complete fiasco was putting Snatch landrovers into Afghanistan and then not providing adequate helicopters to ferry troops causing countless needless casualties due to IED's..Turns out they'd(MOD) only procured the wrong spec of Chinook and left them in a hanger doing nothing because they weren't fit for purpose. Then when the bodies started to pile up, some slightly less retarded person decided maybe it a good idea to fix those Chinooks in that hanger that are doin nothing...if it wasn't so serious it would be funny
 
Double Edge said:
Proof of the pudding is everybody tried to copy them. So that's got to be good

He was talking about how many lost in the Falklands, 22 was it. This is considered a high figure

It reminded me of a similar figure put out by the CIA, for Afghanistan, 18 which is higher than the total lost in Vietnam

Those figures seem so low yet are still considered significant
Click to expand...
Not sure which figure you are referring to But these are official deaths to my knowledge.... 649 Argentine military personnel, 255 British military personnel, and three Falkland Islanders died during the hostilities

Ok I understand your point yes 21 in total but 20 in a cross deck transfer (heli).....from what I have heard elsewhere suicidal weather, no sane person would attempt it and unfortunately they hit a bird which took the heli engine out..More or less I think it was most of D Squadron
 
Last edited:
Double Edge said:
In WW2 the SAS destroyed more aircraft on the ground than the RAF did in the air

The amazing thing that comes across from the first set of videos is the rivalry and how people within the military wanted the SAS regiment gone. Why ? nothing more than it made others look bad

And they were disbanded after WW2 only to get put back together a couple of years later.
Click to expand...
Once Sterling had figured out that it was better to go in behind the lines using the LRDG..everything else fell into place

Not just the SAS but the Commando's as a whole were opposed by the established order....Which if you think about it you can relate to other things in life. Desperate times require radical solutions!
 
Toby said:
I've read countless personal accounts of not enough gear and I'm talking the basics..like ammunition, food, body armour, quality boots to suite terrain etc I think the British army prides its self in not having enough of anything......if it wasn't so serious it would be funny
Click to expand...
You're talking abut the British army ? because it sounded as if you were talking about the Indian army, lol

OOE informed us a while back that every army says the same thing. Not enough resources
 
Double Edge said:
You're talking abut the British army ? because it sounded as if you were talking about the Indian army, lol
Click to expand...
You guys learnt all our good traits, give em FA and they fight harder. Give them everything and you end up with the US army...enough said!

OOE informed us a while back that every army says the same thing. Not enough resources
Click to expand...
Not wrong! I'd still seriously kick a few chairs plus occupant over at the MOD though....
 
Toby said:
Hmm not sure that tallies with my reading. For instance the British Army including SF is always put into theatre with the bare minimum, then commences to play catch up and its been this way ever since I can remember. I've read countless personal accounts of not enough gear and I'm talking the basics..like ammunition, food, body armour, quality boots to suite terrain etc I think the British army prides its self in not having enough of anything...the last complete fiasco was putting Snatch landrovers into Afghanistan and then not providing adequate helicopters to ferry troops causing countless needless casualties due to IED's..Turns out they'd(MOD) only procured the wrong spec of Chinook and left them in a hanger doing nothing because they weren't fit for purpose. Then when the bodies started to pile up, some slightly less retarded person decided maybe it a good idea to fix those Chinooks in that hanger that are doin nothing...if it wasn't so serious it would be funny
Click to expand...
There can never be enough of anything. You just make do. However, the road picture was a command decision. Helo transport was reserved for RRF. The roads, however, cannot be surrendered. You don't traverse it and show your presence, you give freedom of movement to the Taliban. To deny them that movement, you have to risk IED exposure.
 
WABs_OOE said:
There can never be enough of anything. You just make do. However, the road picture was a command decision. Helo transport was reserved for RRF. The roads, however, cannot be surrendered. You don't traverse it and show your presence, you give freedom of movement to the Taliban. To deny them that movement, you have to risk IED exposure.
Click to expand...
Sounded kinda Donald Rumsfeld for a moment there.. ;-) I would only listen with respect to the strategy, which makes sense. thank you for speaking in plain terms. My beef is with the quartermasters allowance and where that allowance is allocated...You live long enough and you see the same mistakes repeated again and again...and people/Soldiers are lost as a consequence of neglect by politicians covering their own arses...
 
This is the Modification carried out on the 8 Chinooks procured wrongly and then mothballed. Basically the mod entails replacing the flight system. Which clearly is not a simple job.

 
Toby said:
My beef is with the quartermasters allowance and where that allowance is allocated...You live long enough and you see the same mistakes repeated again and again...and people/Soldiers are lost as a consequence of neglect by politicians covering their own arses...
Click to expand...

Never believe them when they say you will "get it in-country." Biggest lie ever. Bring what you need or expect to do without.
 
JCT said:
Never believe them when they say you will "get it in-country." Biggest lie ever. Bring what you need or expect to do without.
Click to expand...
Watching the deployment of British troops in Afghanistan without adequate armour to transport them was avoidable. It all boils down to money and where a government's priorities lie. Clearly its ok for a few hundred of our lads to get their limbs blown off to protect excessive waste at the MOD. The way we are going, there will be more staff at the MOD than in the army. Its bollocks and it makes my blood boil that they care more about their pensions and workers rights than they do about Soldiers put in the firing line. How they managed to hold their own initially is purely down to training and professionalism, all credit to them and Shame on the MOD!
 
Double Edge said:
Proof of the pudding is everybody tried to copy them. So that's got to be good

He was talking about how many lost in the Falklands, 22 was it. This is considered a high figure

It reminded me of a similar figure put out by the CIA, for Afghanistan, 18 which is higher than the total lost in Vietnam

Those figures seem so low yet are still considered significant
Click to expand...

They were copying Australians in Tobruk and they even used an Australian in the British army to do it.. pretty crappy show rogue heroes, John Lewes was very Australian with A very Australian accent , but they portray him as Welsh. What else they bullshiting about? So many think this show is a true story lol.

What was the Australian SAS Kia in Vietnam over 1200 missions? 1?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top