Ok, a fun question. If you had to pick one group of special forces,domestic or foreign, to preform a mission (hostage rescue, search and destroy etc..) who would it be SAS, GS, Navy Seals, Delta... and why. Also who do you think gets the most diversified training?

Delta.  These are the guys that right after they got back from the 15 hr firefight in the Mog in 1993, immediately rearmed and got ready to go right back out again.  The Rangers basically got the fight knocked out of them.

You need to be more specific. What do you want to really do? Also what do you consider a special force?  I would probably pick the Marine Corps if they qualify for I have seen them listed as a Special Forces in some foreign stuff before.  So that way I would get the most diverse group to choose from and sh!t there are a lot of them!  

If you do not truly consider the Marines Special Forces (I fall into this category) then I would take the Rangers because again they come in large numbers and you cannot go wrong with numbers.  

Of course if you were more specific it would help to decide which I would choose.  They are pretty much all designed to do different tasks with some cross over.

To be frank with you I would not pick myself as the guy to even choose the force.  I would let the people who know them best decide.

-Velveeta

Marine Expiditionary Unit -Special Operations Capable "MEU-SOC".

I would choose the one most qualified to accomplish the mission.  (All other things being equal.)

I agree that the question is a little slack, and I must also admit to predujice, however:

If you're looking for effectiveness, from the seige of the Libyan embassy in London, to taking out BGs right on the streets of Gibralter, it's got to be SAS. The originals!

Yup, SAS have TONS of experience.

I personally know a few Force Recon guys. Totally squarred away. One was only one of less than 200 to ever graduate from the combat dive school. Those of you who are in the know, know this is no joke.

I've had the pleasure of working with guys from all branches of the miltary, SEALs, Delta, SF, Rangers, Force, CCTs, etc. All were top notch. Most are somewhat mission specific though.



Seal team six is not known by that moniker anymore. Try DEV-GRP

Virginia M4... I think what you said about the Rangers getting the fight knocked out of them is a pretty dumb thing to say.  Those guys fought like lions man.   They were in a city surrounded by thousands 0f attackers and less than 20 of them were killed.  Come on...

And what is your service record?  Why do you feel that you can cast judgment on Rangers???  You better be a Delta Operator or some shit like that... my bet is that you were just a pogue if anything...

It entirely depends on the specific mission. They are trained and equiped for different jobs. Thats why we need all of them.Edited to say, If it were a hostage situation, and I was a hostage, I would be more than happy to see the Israelies come through the door.

The Rangers were 19 and green.  They'd just been through their first fight, and it wasn't an easy one at that. Go easy on them and remember that they are not really special forces, but they are where SF recruits its people.

From what I know about these different teams I'd have to say, in general terms, I'd go with Delta Force or the SAS.

I realize that the question is broad, but in my opinion the caliber of people associated with either of the above mentioned teams could be trained to do anything all the others specialize in.

Then again, what do I know?

Okay, I was going to sit this one out, but now I feel I must get out my soapbox and preach.

There is only ONE "Special Forces" and that is the US Army Special Forces.

The others are "Special Operations Forces."

This brief will not cover any classified special mission units.

US Special Operations Command has an Army, Navy, and Air Force service component. The USMC is not part of USSOCOM and maintains essentially, that all Marines are Special Operations Capable, with sufficient training.

Ground special operations forces conduct five basic missions.  The only unit that conducts all of them is SF.  PSYOP and Civil Affairs are also Special Operations missions.  The missions are:

Direct Action (DA) Attacking and killing bad guys in combat.

Special Reconnaisance (SR)  Snooping and pooping on the sly, DEEP behind lines.

Unconventional Warfare (UW)  Largely guerrilla operations, includes intel, sabotage, etc. Helps anti-government forces overthrow gov't.

Foreign Internal Defense (FID)  Trains and assists government forces in stabilization ops against g's.

Counter Terrorism (CT) Not addressed here.

AFSOC (Air Force) - Fire support and infil/exfil of ground operators.  Very limited FID capability.  Super operators in PJs and CCT attached to Army units to assist with air support.  Some PSYOP dissemination capability.

Navy (NAVSPECWARCOM) - PCs, SEALs and Special Boat Units (may have changed recently) Waterborne infil/exfil by PCs and SBUs.  No SO aviation component.  SEALS perform DA, SR, and some FID. Excellent waterborne infil capability.

Army (USASOC) - Largest component consisting of:
Special Operations Aviation Regiment - Infil/exfil and fire support by rotary wing platforms.

Ranger Regiment - Elite airborne light infantry force - DA, limited SR

Special Operations Support Command - Special Operations sustainment support and commo units.

Civil Affairs - Conducts Civil Affairs

PSYOP - Prepares and disseminates psychological operations material.

Special Forces - Specially trained, area oriented, culturally aware, language trained special operations forces organized and equipped to conduct DA, SR, UW, and FID anywhere in the world. Majority of peacetime engagement by SOF.

Each of the services and elements provides a unique capability.  Like the carpenter with several saws for different jobs, USSOCOM forces provide the DoD with many options.

The NCA gets to select the best force for the job.  Who did they pick for the ground mission in Afghanistan?  Who did they pick in Somalia?  Who will they pick next time?  Who knows?

It depends on the mission, access, terrain, timing, requirements, enemy forces, etc.

It is nice to know all of the forces that are available to get the job done, whoever gets the call.  Rant off.
[soapbox]

SF,

I am by no means clear about what you are saying.

If you are restricting your comments to the numerous, specialized, U.S. foces then fine – I have no insight and litle of anything to offer.

However, if you are saying the ONLY the U.S. has such capability then it would beg to differ, There are, in fact about 20 distinct outfits; each with its own degree of ability.

I respectfully(?) suggeat  that youy keep your own jingosistic wishfull think contained withi the confines of your cave.

After 21+ years with the USMC, 10 in the infantry, and, having served with both the 1st Recon Battalion and been an I&I with the 4th Recon Battalion, I would pick the Marine Force Reconnaisance units. JarheadGunner.

I am by no means clear about what you are saying in your last paragraph, either.  What dialect is that?

I was restricting my comments to US forces.  But since you "respectfully(?) suggeat  that youy keep your own jingosistic wishfull think contained withi the confines of your cave", permit me to elaborate, old chap.

Since I have spent 18 years in Special Forces, the majority outside the United States, I doubt that I am particularly "jingosistic".  I will admit to being jolly well nationalistic and ethnocentric, if you insist.

My expertise is primarily in US forces, so that is where I confined my commentary.  The media has collectively called every soldier in Afghanistan "Special Forces," on either side it seems, as well as a veritable parade of alleged "retired SF" personnel.  I'm waiting for Geraldo to be former special forces as well.  This is incorrect and creates a false impression which slanders my service.

I would wager that your estimate of 20 is a bit low.  I can name 20 such units in Latin America alone which would claim some "special operations capability."  Virtually every country has at least one.  I would choose less than 5 to attempt to recover me, if I were captured as opposed to remaining with the captors.

No offense intended, and this is based upon my limited experience outside my area of operations.  Globally, I can think of few outside the SAS, GSG-9, or the Israelis that I would really want to have to rely on in a pinch, as you so pithily indicated, "each with its own degree of ability".

Feel free, old man, to drop by my "cave" for a spot of tea, some time.  I'll certainly try to keep my knuckle dragging, trigger pulling, Continental arse out of your way whilst you attempt to educate this poor ignorant savage.

SF,

I am completely rewriting this post – I feel that as a veteran of 18 SF years experience, you deserve no less. My own two year involvement with what I call "los desperados", pales in comparison with your own experience.

My original comments referred to what I erroniously perceived to be your lack of appreciation of any forces other than those of the U.S.

I now see that I was pesumptuous and clearly mistaken. I offer you my unreserved apologies.

As I stated it is fun question, Just wanted to see what you all thought of the different Special Ops Units. I was thinking more of small unit operations like the SAS Scud Hunters in desert Storm who were in teams of 8, Hostage Rescue as in the GS-9. and snatch and Grab as the Delta teams preformed in Somalia. Sorry about the not enough info thing.

stcyr,

Try getting some Hooked on Phonics or something.  SF clearly stated that there is only 1 "Special Forces" in the world, all the others are "Special Operations Units".  Special Forces refers specifically to the US Army Special Forces, aka the Green Berets.  

Referring to other special operations units as Special Forces is like referring to other combat diving units as SEALs.  There can be only one.

And I'd have to disagree with your statement that there are many other units that perform the mission of Special Forces.  There are VERY few military units with their mission.

stcyr:

We seem to be having a failure to communicate.  I guess I need to work on my cross cultural communications this week.  If it is this difficult in English, my Spanish must really be suffering.

Are you clearing up your previous post, or asking the same questions after reading my response to your post.

If my previous was unclear:

I was restricting my comments in my initial post to the unclassified US special operations units.  That would seem to end this discussion.

I never stated that Spec Ops units are exclusive to the US.  In my second post, I tried to be clear about that, and stated "I would wager that your estimate of 20 is a bit low. I can name 20 such units in Latin America alone which would claim some "special operations capability."  Virtually every country has at least one."  I mistakenly believed that indicated almost all nations claim a Spec Ops capability.  I even stated that I felt the actual number of SO capable nations far exceeded your estimate.  Obviously, I failed to be sufficiently clear.

If you are claiming that there is a list of the 20 nations who are the sole claimants of this capability, please cite a source and further define "Ist / 2nd Class. national distinct outfits."  

Are you stating that the other 140+ nations on this planet have no legitimate claim to a SOF capable unit?

I will take your respectful suggestion under advisement and respectfully request that you likewise acknowledge:

1) I was only referring to US SOF in my initial post, therefore, you "have no insight and litle of anything to offer."

2) I have attested yet again that virtually every nation on the planet claims to have a SOF unit of varying levels of competency.  Some actually do.

If you are merely clearing up your last paragraph, and understand my response, no jingoism here.  I like living in the Colonies.

Hoplophile,

I apprecitae the clarification. I must admit hat the acronymns and nomentclacture used so readily on this forum, often leave me guessing.

However, if you in any doubt regarding my original post about SAS, I would like to assure you that I am all but unshakeable on that point.

How about we simplify this discussion and just pick the single most bad ass MFer. As in just one guy.

You'd all be fools to vote for anyone other than me. I'm a SOCOM Delta Team 6 guerrilla warfare/counter terrorism/recon/SBU SAS/Spec-Ops/Mil-Spec instructor/operator. I've tossed Special Forces guys around like rag dolls and made chopped liver out of a group of 5 GSG-9 fellas once in Dusseldorf(a little too much beer got their mouths writing checks their bodies couldn't cash). Been in battle in 437 global "conflicts other than war" and have since retired to become a VERY lucrative merc for between $100,000-$1,000,000 per assignment.

Once, in a bar in Rhodesia, I single handedly kicked the living crap out of 82 Rhodesian Security Force Auxiliary(S.F.A.) personel. Though they were only lightly armed with several dozen FAL's and various side arms, I still chalk it up as a decent fight. Hell of a bar tab though, THE OWNER WAS PISSED! When all was said and done, I scewered them on a flag pole I sharpened with my teeth and simultaniously achieved the worlds record for the largest shishkobab on record.

My personal body count is a 5 figure number(stopped counting after Bosnia).

Anyone wanna arm wrestle? Didn't think so.[X]

GAG ME WITH A SPOON HELP ME

Did I mention that I'm fully Mil-Spec? The U.S. Gov assigned me my own personal NSN #.

Don't ask.....I'm a 5 star [img]www.caribecatalog.com/images/products/manufacturelogos/badasslogo.gif[/img]

With all that dementia, and the multiple personalities....... He may not know where he is, but at least he's not alone. [;)]

When I was military I was M-60, M-151, M-880, gp medium, and p-38 qualified..........

With a sissy ass Cali-comment like that I should kick your ass.......except I'm affraid I'd hurt the gerbil.

Hey, can one of you SF guys tell me how to fix a scratch on my AR-15? I can see the silver metal, and that kinda sucks. Can I just use a black marker if I'm real careful not to draw a big mark? And will it last through a hardcore shoot with my Friday night Entry Team? TIA.

My previous post was for humor purposes only.

Just thought I'd add a disclaimer before someones panties get all bunched up.

SF,

Let me admit at the outset that a lot of the specific U.S. terminology and acronymns leave me puzzled.

Let me also try to make clear that I misinterpreted your first post to be 'international' in its scope and not, as you later clarified, restricted to a specific segment of the U.S, armed services.

Consequently, let me try this again, by point form (for my benefit more than your own). I would further try make clear that I am referring to a very small unit, task specific of 5 to 10 max. It is to those units and scenarios that I was originally, and am I now, directing my comments:

1. I believe that SAS is the most effective, most efficient, most experienced "task specific" outfit on earth.

2. I believe that there are other outfits, especially those within the U.S. miltary, who are the best at what they do – albeit on a generally larger scale than SAS.

3. Furthermore, I know that there are countless other special units that exist throughout the globe,  tasked with anything from SAS level objectives or batallion strength goals. Their level of abilities 'vary' – the Egyptian equivalent being a prime example. I know there are hundreds of them, but perhaps only a score worth mentionig.

If there are further problems in  communication, then I fear I have exhausted my abilities and I suggest we leave it at that.

However there is lingering point I need to address: I wrote to you earlier suggesting that you remain in your "cave" – or some such nonsense. My comments were rude, unwarranted, supercilious and completely uncalled for. A fact that your subsequent response underscored.

I again feel obliged to offer my sincere apologizes regarding my earlier comments.

i had the pleasure once of shooting a CQB course of fire with people of various services. some Rangers, 3 guys from a NG SF unit, force recon, a S/S and myself and few lowly grunt buddies. competition was fierce and there was a lot of good natured trash talk...till the afternoon session. a few Delta guys in civies with scumbag haircuts put on a CLINIC and damn near embarrassed the rest of us. if anyone can shed some light (first hand) on their marksmanship training id love to hear it. it was impressive to say the least.

p.s. i was just an 03 but i got to go because the S/S was my cousin

As often as this topic has come up, I would have to say this has been the most interesting thread yet.


My 2 cents:

M4 definitely gets my vote. Although - M4: Think back to that night in Rwanda when that skinny white guy bitch-slapped you while you were busy collecting skulls to add to the collection of the local tribe you were working for - that was me, just giving you a chance to know how close you'd come to buying it. In reality I could have offed you without you ever having seen me. I would have used only my left thumb. I know you probably have blocked that scenario out in your mind - thought you must have been seeing things. No, my friend - the truth is you aren't as good as you think. Watch your back and don't get too cocky. [:D]

STYCR: I still don't understand the confusion with SFs "US specific terminology and acronyms" - every acronym was preceded by a solid explanation - the best post of seen yet to define what exactly "special operations" might consist of, and probably did a very good job at opening eyes of many civilians here as to how stupid the age old thread question as to "who is the best" sounds to a lot of us.

Thanks for letting me add my input (the response to M4 is a JOKE, BTW)


ADAM H. WHITE
CPT, Poque
Commanding

1) SAS- They wrote the book.

2) SOG- performed the most dangerous missions in Southeast Asia.

stcyr:

I think we are largely in agreement, which was confounding me on the earlier posts.  Apologies accepted.

Of all of the US SOF units, SF works with other countries the most, which caused me to get a bit caustic in my response as well.  My apologies as well.  We probably owe each other a round of beers or three if we ever meet in person.  

BTW, I had a veteran of the RSAS and Selous Scouts in my old company.  I had a Major from the Zimbabwean Army in my Armed Forces Staff College Insurgency class in Norfolk three years ago and we studied the Rhodesian Insurgency as a case study together.  I have truly heard some interesting stories from there.

I understand that many consider the SAS to be the "ne plus ultra " of SOF units.  I would not debate that David Sterling laid a lot of the ground work for SOF units today, particularly with regards to DA and SR work during his LRDG days.  Some of our own units are modeled on the SAS.  The personnel of the SAS Regiment are outstanding Special Operations soldiers.

Having said that, I will now proceed to open a new can of worms, which I hope you can address.

It is my experience that CT is one of the most difficult SO skill sets to gain and maintain proficiency on.  Yet as I understand it, the SAS periodically rotates this requirement throughout the units within the Regiment.  Clearly, this would also require an equivalent sized unit prepping for the mission, and one recovering from the mission.  Roughly a squadron all in all, I would guess.

How can a unit which conducts this mission on a rotating basis maintain the required proficiency level of a unit which does nothing but this mission?  Not in any way an attack or slight of some very professional soldiers and comrades in arms, just curious to get some other perspectives.

ibedick:

SAS Scud Hunters in desert Storm = SR/DA
Hostage Rescue as in the GS-9 = CT. BTW, GSG-9.
Grab as the Delta teams preformed in Somalia = DA

All great units for the job.

Hoplophile:

Thanks for the support and kind words.

Parochial as my opinion may be, I'd have to generally agree with your statement about saying that "there are VERY few military units with their mission."  I would just add that there are very few units with ALL of SF's capabilities.  Many can do the DA, some can do the SR, a few do better CT, some claim to do FID (but without the language and teaching skills, where does that lead?), but I do not believe that anyone else does UW, with the possible exceptions of Soviet era Spetsnaz, and possibly the SAS (language capability?)  

For those who would argue this point (and if you have examples, please do, I need the education), what other nation/unit in the world has a language qualified, area oriented, culturally attuned force capable of deploying on short notice to recruit, organize, and train indigenous forces for combat, anywhere in the world?  UW and to a lesser degree FID, is actually our unique mission capability.  The operation in Afghanistan was UW, with a bit of DA and SR rolled in.  It will now become FID, as we support the new government.

We lose several dozen Hooaah troops each year because they claim they are not getting enough "action".  For those looking to apply who think SF is about nothing but fighting and killing, you are probably going to be disappointed.  Our main mission is to help others to do that, frequently by teaching.  Yes, you have to know how to do it yourself, in order to teach it, and we do.  

All in all, a 12 man ODA is not a tremendous amount of combat power.  When we use it to leverage a well trained indigenous battalion into combat, with the employment of US support and combat systems, it becomes much more than 12 guys with small arms.

The SF teams in Afghanistan assessed, equipped (frequently by airdrop), trained, and assisted (with air strikes for fire support) indigenous forces.  In doing so, they gained access to leadership of the various factions, information, ground truth, targeting, and other data.  A few dozen SF teams (along with allied forces) and aviation assets were able to assist the resistance forces (who were initially assessed as in an untenable position and outnumbered as much as 10 to 1) in the defeat of an existing government force with access to large quantities of arms.  The cost to the US was a lot of expensive ordnance and less than a dozen lives (still tragic).

I'd say that SF (especially with the air support) was a pretty good force multiplier.

As a general statement I am and have been a proponent of "proxy wars" (hell, I'll even support "war by proxy.")  To further my general statement I favor most any solution where the mission is accomplished and American lives are saved.

The unit described above seems to be just the type unit capable of  managing war-by-proxy.  (Heck, I'll go way out on a limb and opine that's why they were invented in the first place !)

Depending on how much we consult with Mack Avellie most (if not all) of our smaller wars should be fought by proxy.

Now, SF, do we have the "SF" troop strength to manage multiple proxy wars ??
(I know that my use of "multiple" is not nearly specific enough but I don't enough to be  specifically specific.)

SF,

I don't know if your own experience is the same, but, it seems to me that the military embraces  fads as often as my wife embraces the latest fashion. It was one such fad (the need for innovative thinking and inventive solutions – or some such) that led me, a young artillery lieutenant, to become virtually coerced into the ranks of those who dare. Suffice it to say that it was a complete accident!

My experience was brief and involved only one overseas operation. I learned shortly after, that the mission had been a complete sham and based purely on political (in fact, P.R.) motives. Although none of us were unaware of it at the time, we were definitely cast as the role of the bad guys. When I discovered this, I resigned thus ending my family's long, long history with the military – and that all took place more than 30 years ago.

I left the country a few years later and have not been back in over 20 years. I have had no contact with the Regiment apart from a chat with one individual whom I met in a bar in Guadalajara two years ago. He told me that the fads have done a complete 360 – having gone from innovation to Rambo and back again. Other than this, I can provide none of the answers you seek. But I can say this, my regard for the military was at one stage pretty low. I know the politicos pull the strings but the brass should show some balls once in a while. However, since then my respect for the Regiment has only increased – that Libyan Embassy affair in London made me feel very proud.

I would have to go with the original shooters of Red Cell. Marcinko's men and himself trained longer, harder, and continously under more circumstances than any other special forces unit in history.....and they said goodbye to vacations when they opted to take marcinko's invitation to be part of the original SEAL Team 6. Long live Richard Marcinko!

That Libyan Embassy affair also made me proud. Finally someone had something and that something was done well.  Exceptionally well.

[beer]

Different Special Forces Groups (Foreign and Domestic) are better at Different Missions and in different Terrain.

But if I had to pick ONLY ONE group. I would choose Britain's SBS (Secret Boat Service).

Runner Up: is the SAS

3rd Place: Delta Force

4th place: SEALS

5th: Green Berets

6th: Gurkas tied with Marine Recon

7th: British Marines tied with Foriegn Legion

8th: Army's Rangers

Note: They are all very good. And this is strictly my own opinion.

There was a post saying rangers were not part of SF now if i can replay this in the defence of
the rangers now ive read somewere where there were a navy seal or two went through ranger's training, and plus even ive heard of a few marine force reacon guys went through the ranger training! why? don't know! and yes the ranger's are part of SOCOMM COMMAND. my vote does go to the SAS has for experience! but each
unit has there own mission capabilities.

I am by no means an expert (but I hope to be one day) but if I had to choose only one of these great units, then I would have to choose us army special forces. my reasoning fo this for one is that they already conduct every type of sof mission I can think of with every thing under their belts from halo to amphibious and sniper capabilities. the other two reasons why I say this is because of there multi- regional spciality, and multi task specialities ( 18-a, 18-b, 18-c, etc). if I had to force all these tasks on one unit they would be my choice.

As for me I would pick Marine Force Recon. But SF has it right. Depends on the mission and assets to see who really gets the mission.  so be it but seems like I was always first in with eyeballs on the target before anyone else. Gunny A

Foreign Legion over the Rangers? Shit, if that's true, I need to do a little more homework. Whodathunk it?

Well goddammit I'm sold....


M4 for president!  So M4, what will your platform be?

5subslr5:

In the case of US SF, at least, the units were created in the early '50s along the lines of the OSS to infiltrate Eastern Europe during time of war and conduct UW.

We have five active duty SFGs, each oriented toward a different area (CENTCOM, SOUTHCOM, EUCOM, PACOM and Africa) 2 NG SFGs prepared to back up the AC guys and one training Group.

Thus, we could fight multiple wars in multiple theaters, but the actual implementation would be subject to the usual METT-T restrictions.  Vietnam sucked up the better part of two SFGs.  Panama better than one.  Desert Storm two, and more than one for Haiti.  The real issue gets to be how long X number of teams are in the box.  Anything more than about 30 days and you really need 3x the number of teams launched, because of trainup, in country, and stand down requirements. I suspect any major contingency would suck up 2 SFGAs quickly, and heavy losses would require robbing the remaining Groups.

stcyr:

No problem, just idle professional curiosity.  Sorry you got a raw deal.  If you humped the Brecon Beacons and got to the Regiment, that should be satsifaction for anyone to last a lifetime.

The Princess Gate Op was indeed a classic.  A decent movie was made about it, I believe the title was "The Final Option", or something like that.  Loved the part where they blasted through the wall as they chopped the power and double tapped the Tangos.

Bostonterrier97:

"Different Special Forces Groups (Foreign and Domestic) are better at Different Missions and in different Terrain."  

Your list is not Special Forces Groups, they are Special Operations Forces (SOF).  You rinitial premise is correct in that different SF Groups and SOF have different missions and area specialization.  Your opinion is your own.

Profet_Mohammed:
"There was a post saying rangers were not part of SF."  

That is correct, they are not.  They are Army SOF, part of USASOC or USSOCOM.  

"a navy seal or two went through ranger's training, and plus even ive heard of a few marine force reacon guys went through the ranger training!

True.  All US airborne forces, be they SEALs or Force Recon get Basic Airborne Training at the Army Airborne school, almost all services send some personnel to Army Ranger school, SF has proponency for Military Freefall (MFF) training, and SOF medical training, etc.  The Navy has proponency for underwater operations (UWO).

ah1z:

Thanks for the feedback.  

All SOF have specific mission specialties.  It is up to the commander to select the right tool for the mission at hand.  

It seems that this thread is focussed on relatively recent times.

And, while it would  be rash to challenge the fanatical determination of Paul's Brownie Troop and their undisputed top-billing, perhaps Col Skorzeny's group of homeboys, deserve at least an honourable mention. The daring and spectacular hostage release of Mussolini in 1943 by his group of SS paras occurred almost 60 years ago!

Skorzeny is a great one, but I was not aware the SS had fallschirmjaegers.  Master of the dust initiator implosion technique, though.

How about Roger's Rangers or Francis Marion?  Or for that matter, John Singleton Mosby?

Locate, Close with, Destroy

'nuff said

I see someone finally read my post on page one of this thread. The rest of you have made "The List". Again, don't ask........and sleep with one eye open.

Of those you referenced, both Mosby and Skorzeny both joined-up as privates and wound-up with the rank of colonel.

This list could abviously be extended ad infinitum from the Royal Marine Commandos – whom Hilter thought so dangerous that he ordered that, even if capturred, they be shot – to the Monty Python's "suicide squads".

I'm content to yield to the Brownies!