Who has the best Special Forces ?

Originally posted by cargo

Originally posted by Minime
When people say "SAS" they think about the British SAS force. They are the best special focrce in the world, Australia should come up with their own Special Force instead of copying off us Brits again.

I've noticed several posts of yours since you joined with a bitterness towards Australia. Jealous?

Why don't you say the same about the New Zealand SAS? I think you need to relax and have a nice warm beer in a nice warm pub on this chilly UK summer afternoon.

Sorry if I sound like a bitter old man, but everyone copies off this country.

Originally posted by AgentMulder320
Did any of you fellows happen to see that 80s film "Attack Force Z", those were Aussies, and it was WW2, so i guess they were Aussie SAS, anyways, good movie, you should see it.

Actually Z & M Special Units evolved into what became the 1st Commando Regiment (Australia)
The Australian SAS owe their origins to the 1st Commando Regiment.
poor buggers!, everybody forgets the 1st Commando Regiment!

Of all the units to serve in World War 11 one of the strangest and arguably the bravest was the very top secret, highly trained 'Z Special Unit'. More commonly but also incorrectly referred to as 'Z Force', in fact these were two entirely different units.

All of its missions were cloaked in ultimate secrecy and even though it's been over 50 years since the end of World War II very little is known of its 182 missions.

Z Special Unit recruited men from many branches of the Armed Forces and as well as being most secret it was probably the most 'multi-cultural'. Although most of its members were Australian, there were also British, New Zealanders, Dutch, French, Malays, Canadians, Americans, Indonesians and Chinese - All experts in various subjects to do with clandestine operations.

Z Force

The term Commando is derived from the South African Dutch word used by the Boers in identifying their various irregular sized raiding forces employed against the British during the South African wars.
In late 1940, the Australian Government accepted the offer of Great Britain to send a Military Mission to Australia to assist in the training of specialised Army Units. No 104 Military Mission initiated the task of organisation and training of the Independent Companies for guerilla warfare. A training school was established in February 1941 at Wilson's Promontory. By 1 October 1941, the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Independent (Commando) Companies had been formed and trained. Eventually 12 Independent Companies were raised and trained. They achieved an enviable record on active service with operations generally centred in the New Guinea Theatre. These men were recognised by the distinctive diamond colour patch they wore on their service dress.

Commando History
And finally what the Australian Government has to say about 1st Commando Regiment

After WW2, the Army disbanded the M and Z Force and the Independent Companies that made up Australia�s first Special Forces units. During the 1950�s it was found necessary to maintain the techniques and skills developed by these units. As a result two Reserve Commando companies were raised, 2 Commando Company (2 Cdo Coy) in February 1955 and 1 Commando Company (1 Cdo Coy) in June 1955. These companies operated independently, training reserve and regular commandos and maintaining the skill-set.
Several members of these companies went on to assist in and man the Special Air Service Regiment (SASR) when it was raised. In February 1981 it was decided to raise a headquarters to coordinate, command and control these companies and to provide the ability to round-out and augment staff at Special Operations Headquarters (SOHQ). 1 Cdo Regt provided training teams to assist in raising and training 4 RAR (Cdo) in commando skills.
In 1961, 301 Signal Squadron (301 Sig Sqn) was raised to provide specialist communications in support of 1 Cdo Regt. This role was then adopted by 126 Sig Sqn until June 2002 when 301 Sig Sqn was re-raised to carry out its previous role in support of the Regiment.

1st Commando Regiment

To the Complete shame of the Australian Government, Australia was offered a Ghurka Regiment & then later in desperation a battalion in 1996
Following the UK Government's decision to restructure their Army it was decided to reduce the Ghurka Regiments strengths in size from 8,000 to 3,500 by 1998. In 1994 the four Rifle Regiments disbanded and were reformed into a single large Regiment (this was the first attempt by a Ghurka Regiment to seek a new home)
The now reformed Royal Gurkha Rifles (RGR) initially consisted of three battalions,then RGR were further reduced to two battalions in November 1996, this was Australia's last chance to acquire a Full Ghurka Battalion at no cost.
Fearing disbandment of his battalion the Battalion Commander of 1st RGR came to Australia Begging for a new home for his troops, he argued that all they wanted was a plot of ground "up north" in which they would build their own Barrack/training facilities & indeed even forage for their own food, such was the desperation of the Ghurka Commander to save his troops from an uncertain future (namely falling under the command of the Chinese with the hand over of Hong Kong in '97), Australia said no, but calmer heads in the UK prevailed & it was decided to disband 3rd RGR (UK based) on the withdrawal of 1 RGR from Hong Kong to UK.

The shame of it is, Australia could have had a very substancial reinforcement of it's Armed Forces, deploying Ghurka Companies to Bouganville,East Timor, the Solomon Islands, Afganistan & Iraq without over extending & exhausting current units. look where we are now!

Unfortunately I cannot Substanciate any of this, simply because there is no online referrence to point one to, All this is just written from memory,seems that TPTB don't wish anyone to remember what a f**k up they perpetuated & what could have been!

Originally posted by Minime
Sorry if I sound like a bitter old man, but everyone copies off this country.

That's ridiculous. Australia is a British colony. Hell, we still have a Governor General who is the Queens representative in Australia (not that he means much but he's there). Australia is still under the monarchy for now. It is enevitable that we will become a republic in the future, so wait until then before you start crying about Australia copying Britain. This country is just over 200 years old, a baby. Think of it in terms of taking what has already been established and making it better. Such a young country now having the fastest growing economy in the western world is quite a feat imo. While the British Empire shrinks, we grow. And it won't be long before you are "rid" of this pain in the arse Australia.

This thread has only been focused on media advertised units. Delta boys agree that NEST is the best.

They handle wmd wherever. Also they have a complete KILL policy. They can kill whoever they want and get out of jail free. They actually have a card saying they cannot be arrested or detained. They are an ultimate seek and destroy team.

Also DELTA and DEVGRU (formerly known as SEAL 6) have never beaten the Secret Service at the sniper range.

You are talking about special forces like SBS, SAS, Spetsnaz, like they just do a job with their individual unit and they are 'better' than that named unit. The forces generally are mixed on operations with locals who are considered bad arse. Just like Mr. M had said you would actually have to break it down in certain events and grade who is better in what. I would select SBS to win at water operations.

Saying you believe that a unit is better than another unit is mere speculation. I know a Force recon tunnel runner who crawled through many a dark place, and most men no matter the unit would say F### that! It depends on the character and his will.

I do know that Spetsnaz are better h2h fighters than American units simply because they focus alot of attention on this. But in war time it's essentially useless - it's more geared towrds assassination and escape. Spetsnaz fighters are excellent escape fighters - superb. Their martial arts is quite superior to combat arts as taught to US SF units but again they focus on this alot. I have found myself looking up at the ceiling wondering what the F### just happened against spetsnaz fighters.

Ever want to get your arse kicked by one let me know.

Small unit tactics between SAS, SEAL's, PGK, Rangers, Force Recon, DELTA and everyone's small units would vary. They only thing you could do is throw em in a jungle and see who wins. Hell GEK Cobra could win you never know.

I think we can all agree that SF units the world over are highly trained and professional and if you were to engage a specific unit in an AO to win you would definitely have to follow the 7 P's.

Originally posted by Militiaman
Well a special Canadian sniper squad holds the world sniper record, if you want an assassination. Other than that I'd say each special forces team is superior in its own territory, since they're the only ones that train there. The Scottish also trained many of the allies for European warfare in WWII. The Green Berets have to be the best all around troops though.

Ah, see now that's very interesting........
When you say "world record" what do you mean by that?
For longest shot?
for most Kills?
Or both?

I won't argue the "longest shot" hey, if you got the gear that will go the distance why not!

You got some figures on Kills for your Canuck boys?

funny how ones memory is distorted when one wishes to 'prove' the greatness of ones country,must have something to do with the 'chest puffing' action one performs

psssst wanna hear of a real sniper's experiences? ok

Snipers of the Wehrmacht (3rd.Gebirgs division )
This is a summary of an interview with two of the "most successful" snipers within the Wehrmacht. To obtain a wide coverage of experiences a third also very good sniper joined.
The fact that those three soldiers had very good training and many experiences they are able to give exact and informative answers to the questions.
During the interview they will be named A, B and C. They were all in the 3rd.Gebirgsdivision during the war.
Short information about the interviewed.
A: Matthias H. from Tirol was from 1943 to end of war on the Eastern front, with 345 confirmed kills the most successfull sniper in the Wehrmacht.
B: Sepp A. from Salzburg was from December 1942 to the end of war on the eastern front, with 257 confirmed kills the second in the ranking.
C: Helmut W. from Styria was from September 1942 to the end of war on the eastern front, with 64 confirmed kills. (after he was wounded he was an instructor)
What equipment did you use?:
A: K 98 with 6x telescope, G 43 with 4x telescope
B: captured russian sniper rifle with telescope, K 98 with 6x
C: K 98 with 1 �x and 4x telescope, G 43 with 4x telescope.
What scopes did you use?
A: a 4x scope was usefull up to 400m, a 6x was good up to 1000m
B: had 2 years a russian sniper rifle and can�t remember the exact type of the scope and worked well. On the K 98 I used a 6x.
C: The 1 �x was not efficient and was replaced by the better working 6x.
What do you think about a high magnification?
A,B: 6x is enough, there was no need for a higher one and no experience with higher.
C: 4x is sufficient for the most missions.
Up to what distances you could hit the following targets easily?
Head: A,B,C: up to about 400m
Breast: A: up to 600m B,C: up to 400m
person standing: A: 700m to 800m B,C: about 600m
Are these distances valid for you personally, just the best or all snipers?
A,B: just for the best snipers
C: for me in person but also for most of the german snipers. Some cracks hit also at higher distances.
B: says additionally: a real 100% hit is just possible up to 600m.
What was the most far away target you shot at and what was it?
A: It was a standing soldier at about 1100m distant. At this distance it was unlikely to hit but we wanted to show the enemy that he was not safe at this distance. Also we wanted to prove our skill to the officers.
B: 400m to 700m
C: 600m, if there was a target further away I waited until it got in range because it was easier to hit and the confirmation was better to get. The G 43 had poor ballistics and so I fired just up to 500m with it.
How many second shots were necessary out of ten?
A: nearly no second shot ever needed.
B: 1 or 2. a second shot was very dangerous in situations with enemy snipers
C: . 1 or 2 at highest.
If you could choose. What rifle would you prefer?
a) multiloading rifle like K 98:
A: K98 because of the high long term precision.
B: K98
C: K98
b) self loading rifle like G43:
A: No G43 because just good up to 400m and not very good precision.
B: No G43, too heavy.
C: Yes, because it was reliable and no more worse than the K98.
If you could choose today between a self loading rifle with the same precision than the K98 and the K98 what would you choose?
A: I would choose the K98 because a sniper that is brought into action as a sniper does not need a self loading rifle.
B: If it has the same weight....self loader.
C: self loader could fire faster when attacked.
How were you attached to your units?
All of them belonged to the snipergroup of the Btl.; C was the commander of it. It was up to 22 men strong of which six were permanent with the Btl., the rest was attached to the companies. observation results, use of ammo and kills were reported daily to the Btl.HQ.
In the beginning the missions were ordered by the Btl. during the war when good snipers rarer they were sometimes ordered by the division HQ.
In every company there were some soldiers equiped with scopes but had no special training. They hit reliably up to 400m and did a very good job Those soldiers did their normal duty within the companies and were not able to get that high �kill-rate� than the real snipers.
Tactics and targets?
a) Attack:
A,B,C: always in teams of two men. One shoots the other observing. Most common missions: destroying enemy observers (hevy weapons), commanders. Sometimes targets like AT-positions, M.G.-positions and so on. The snipers followed the attacking forces and fought the hardest enemy positions. (guncrews and so on).
A: saya aditionally: I had to sneak through the enemy HKL prior to our attack to fight enemy commanders and guncrews during our own artillery preparation fire.
b) attack by night:
A,B,C: We did not fight during night because snipers were too precious.
c) attack in winter:
A: I went behind the attacking forces with a winter-camo-suite to fight against M.G. and A.T. positions that hold the attack.
B,C: Good camo-suite and warm clothing needed otherwise no longer observation possible.
d) defense
A,B,C: mostly free �hunting� in the company sector. The order was either to fight all targets or just �worth it� targets. When the enemy attacked their commanders were easily to identify because they had different equipment, camo-uniforms and so on. So we shot them at high distances and so the enemy attack was stopped. (On one day A remembers that he shot the commanding officers of eight attacks).
As soon as enemy snipers appear fight them until destroyed. These fights against enemy snipers caused many losses within our ranks.
Snipers go on their position before sunrise and stay there wih short breaks until sunset.
Sometimes if the way to the own position was exposed to the enemy two or three days in this position without supply.
e) defense by night
A,B,C: No snipers were used during night. They were not issued to guarding duties or something. Sometimes they built up a position during the night to be ready by day.
f) did you have a kill by moonlight?
A: Yes if the moonlight was strong enough and I used the 6x scope it was possible. Not with the backsight.
B,C: No
g) delaying fight:
A,C: mostly 4 to 6 snipers that shot at every enemy soldier that appeared. At these rear guards the machine-guns were not often used because one or two shots from a sniper delayed the enemy for a long time and the own positions were not so easily seen.
B: No experience. In this situation everybody shoots at everything.
With what tactic did you have the most success?
A: The success of a sniper was not measured by the men he killed but on the effect he caused to the enemy. For example if the enemy looses the commanding officers of the attack the attack must be stopped. The highest number of kills we had of course in defense positions when the enemy attacked several times a day.
B: in defense because the other kills were not confirmed.
C: biggest success at longer period static warfare due to good observation possibilities.
Percentage of kills for each distance:
up to 400m: A: 65% C: 80%
up to 600m: A: 30% C: 20%
up to 800m: rest
A: says aditionally: The 65% percent under 400m were not because of the shooting range but it was easier to see if it is a �worth-it� target or not. So I often waited until I could indentify the target.
B: cannot remember the percentage but most of the targets were under 600m.
C: did most shots under 400m because this was a secure distance and it was easy to see if it was a hit or not.
How many shots did you fire from one position?
a) attack:
A,B,C: as many as necessary
b) defense from built position:
A,B,C: 1 to 3 at highest.
c) enemy assault:
A,B,C: every �worth-it� target.
d) fight against enemy snipers:
A,B,C: 1 or 2
e) delaying fight
A,B,C: 1 or 2 were enough because the sniper was not alone.
B: says aditionally: on attack or enemy attack no kills were confirmed.
What else is important besides excellent shooting?
A: besides the normal skills of a sniper the cleverness always wins. The �small-tactic� of a man wins in in battle. To get a high kill rate it is also important that the sniper is not used for other duties besides sniping.
B: calmness, superiority, courage.
C: patience and endurance, excellent ability of observation.
Out of what persons snipers were recruited?
A: just born �single-fighters� like hunters, poachers and so on.
B: Can�t remember. I had 27 kills with my russian rifle before I was sent to sniper training.
C: just combat experienced soldiers with excellent shooting skills and two year duty were sent to sniper training.
What sniper-courses did you attend?
A,B,C: The sniper course on the T�pl Seetaleralpe.
C: I was there as an instructor then.
Was the binocular usefull and what magnification did it have?
A: It was a 6x30 but that was not enough for higher distances. Got a 10x50 lateron and this was good.
B: The binocular is as necessary as the scope on the rifle.
C: Each sniper had a binocular and that was necessary. Up to 500m the 6x30 was enough.
Would you prefer a periscope to observe out of a trench?
A: it was a good addition. we had a russain one.
B: No
C: if captured it was used.
Were there scissor-telescopes in use?
A,C: Yes sometimes we used it with the artillery observer.
B: No
What kind of camouflage did you use?
A,B,C: Camo-suites, painted face and hands, rifle camo in winter with blanket and paint.
B: says aditionally: I used a umbrella for two years. I painted it like the sorrounding. In the beginning I painted my hands and the face very carefully, at the end not any more.
Did you use other things to deceive the enemy?
A: Yes, for example puppets and so on.
B: Yes, for example fake positions with rifles fired by a wire construction.
C: No
Did you use some kind of shield?
A,B,C: No
What do you think about light cartridges (tracer rounds)?
A,B,C: should not be used in combat because the own position should not be shown.
They were used in training and to test the rifle. Also some were with every sniper to test the range.
Did you use so called observer cartridges, that means cartridges that explode when they hit the ground?
A,B,C: Yes, a small flame appears when it hits so you could see were you shot. We used them also to inflame wooden building to get the enemy out of it.
They were used up to a range of 600m.
How did you handle the sidewind?
A: feeling and experience, sometimes checked with light cartridges. The training on the Seetaleralpe was very good because there was very often wind.
B: feeling, if there was to heavy wind we did not shoot.
C: we didn�t shoot if there was wind.
Do you still remember the guidelines for firing on moving targets?
A,B,C: No, feeling, experience, fast targeting and fast shot.
Did you use AT-rifles?
A: Yes, knocked out some guncrews through their shield. It was possible to hit a target up to 300m because it was not so precise. Very heavy and not usefull for snipers. Did not use it against soft targets.
B,C: No
How did you get a kill confirmed?
A,B,C: Either through a officer or two soldiers that observed the kill.
So the number of confirmed kills is much lower than the real number of kills.

the link below is a pretty good read on Sniper action in Normandy


Snipers in Normandy

Originally posted by Munro_DreadGod

Originally posted by TopGun
Alright, you can nit pick over every little detail. SAS is the oldest (except Rangers)

The rangers as a special force where trained by the commandos which in time became sas so british commandos are oldest 'special forces' . The rangers are a great unit though

Actually they are not!
The German high command allowed Hippel to form a battalion of his "special soldiers" for the army, and give them the special training required for the proposed operations. These included, among other things, sabotage, capturing roadways and bridges, and securing strategic targets before they were demolished. This new unit was known as the Ebbinghaus Battalion, and first saw action in Poland, where it performed admirably. Strangely, the Ebbinghaus Battalion was disbanded shortly after the conquest of Poland. It had gained notice, however, and the Abwehr commander, Admiral Canaris, instructed Hippel to form a unit just like the Ebbinghaus Battalion, this time for the use of the Abwehr.
This unit was officially founded on 15 October 1939, and was made up mostly of Ebbinghaus volunteers. It was called the Lehr und Bau Kompagnie z.b.V. 800 (Special Duty Training and
Construction Company No. 800), although it was popularly known as the Brandenburg Commandos, after the city where the unit was formed.
Read the links for operational info
Ebbinghaus Battalion

Brandenburg Commandos

The British Commandos were first formed by the Army in June 1940 as a well-armed but unregimented raider force employing unconventional and irregular tactics to assault, disrupt and reconnoiter the enemy in mainland Europe and Scandinavia.
Initially raids were typically made by comparatively small numbers, of short duration and at night, Personnel with specialist skills were often reassigned from �parent units� for the duration of the Op with the units being disbanded at the conclusion of the operation & reformed with new personnel for new operations, however with a need to retain skills the units stabilized, later growing in complexity and size. The Royal Marine's infantry battalions were reorganized as Commandos from 1942 to join the Army Commandos. As the war progressed Commandos operated increasingly in the role of shock troops, sometimes up to brigade strength and sometimes in conjunction with infantry. In 1946 the Army Commandos were disbanded, leaving the Royal Marines to continue the Commando role (with supporting Army elements).


The concept of the SAS was thought up by of David Stirling, in 1941, while he was recovering from a parachute accident in hospital.
Stirling received permission to form the unit and took 100 men, most recruited from the Army Commando units, The newly formed unit known as "L Detachment" conducted it's first mission in November 1941, where due to a failure to understand the need for High mobility for troops dropped by parra behind enemy lines led to a disaster in which only 22 out of 66 soldiers survived, it wasn't until a rapid expansion of 390 personnel in 1942 that it became known as the 1st Special Air Service Regiment (1 SAS).

And what of other Specialist formations such as the WW1 Stosstruppen?
In addition to the new specialized equipment & small unit tactics, mainly infiltration & raiding Stosstruppen had different training and leadership. Emphasis was placed upon individual initiative, improvisation & self reliance at all levels, lower ranking officers and NCO's were given much more responsibility then normal. Discipline and relations between officers & men were also much more relaxed and informal then for other units of the German Army. The decentralized leadership and training employed troops with looser formations then regular infantry, thereby gaining more flexibility and room for improvisation.

In a nut shell, you could probably find SF units all the way back to Biblical times......

They need to have some sort of reality tv show "Whos the world best special forces team" a show like survivor or something.

Special Forces are basically guerillas. The earliest form of guerilla fighters I can think of were the Ninja in ancient Japan who would engage in reconnaissance, espionage and commando tactics. Basically guerilla attacks on enemy castles and encampments.

Therefore I'd say that the Ninja is perhaps the oldest organised Special Forces. Just take a look at todays Special Forces for even the slightest similarities such as balaclava and dark tactical uniform (at least for night use ie. CT). The strict use of silence (including weapons) and tools designed to blind and confuse such as flash grenades.

[edit on 2-10-2004 by cargo]

Originally posted by Die Trying
They need to have some sort of reality tv show "Whos the world best special forces team" a show like survivor or something.

In Britain we had a programme recently.Hosted by Chris Ryan former SAS from Gulf War 1.
The programme was based on differant operational areas and tasks.Chris was always on his own and had a team of American EX SF from delta,Seal,Green Berets.In all of the operations they were the Hunter team and on most occasions failed to catch Chris.They were equipped with helicoptor and intel of poss locations.Some tasks were escape and evasion others were assination,intel gathering.

If someone has the best SF it's surely not Russia. Why? We've already seen atr Dubrovka and in Beslan. They are insuccessful.

In terms of Iraq, The Australian SAS, for sure
Even though there numbers are much smaller, they havent lost a man and from what i have heard they have killed alot of insurgents, so that makes a pretty good kills:death ratio. I had also heard the Australian SAS was the best before the Iraq war. But British SAS and US Delta Force are close to the best too.

Ulster Troop British SAS Northern Ireland

Forget about the rest, said above ARE the best of the best.

Co Armagh Northern Ireland AKA "The SAS Playground"

Originally posted by cargo
Special Forces are basically guerillas. The earliest form of guerilla fighters I can think of were the Ninja in ancient Japan who would engage in reconnaissance, espionage and commando tactics. Basically guerilla attacks on enemy castles and encampments.

Therefore I'd say that the Ninja is perhaps the oldest organised Special Forces. Just take a look at todays Special Forces for even the slightest similarities such as balaclava and dark tactical uniform (at least for night use ie. CT). The strict use of silence (including weapons) and tools designed to blind and confuse such as flash grenades.

[edit on 2-10-2004 by cargo]

Nobody picked up on my "Biblical" comment!
First I'm not religious, nor do I believe in the account as it's written per say, the numbers are just too damn big!
But what I'm going to illustrate is the fact that Gideon or whoever conjured up the story over 2000 years ago knew their sh*t.

Gideon's 300
This dude raised an Army, the first thing he did to sort the goats from the sheep was to take them all down to the river (I'm guessing after a conciderable Route March) & let them drink,he observed, those that got down & drank straight from the river he rejected, those that knelt down & scooped the water up with their hands & drank while keeping an eye out, he took (you see what happened? these guys are switched on, they are naturals), now I'm guessing that after a period of training he took them out & attacked his enemies at night (which he did) I'm also betting that these night raids were probably conducted over a period of months until the enemy were either worn down through attritional losses or they were just plane fed up with chasing down an allusive 300 who refused to 'play by the rules' (Guerilla warfare) oh course my conjecture is pretty thin & there's no 'supporting' evidence from the 'bible' but what do you expect from a source that wants to attribute everything to 'miracles' or divine intervention from 'God'

I know, I know, but somebody over 2000 years ago had some nous, that's my point.

I dont know who i would think is the best, but if you're none SF and you run into the SF of esentially any nation you are most likely in for an butt kicking. And a severe one.

Originally posted by Militiaman
Well a special Canadian sniper squad holds the world sniper record, if you want an assassination.

I believe the longest sniper shot is held by an American from Vietnam, close to 2.5km.

Carlos Hathcock and his no.2 killed an entire company of NVA over an 8 hour period. The poor bastards were pinned down and as soon as they made a move they copped it. Hathcock even had the arty firinf illumination when it strated to get dark. He is also the only person to have bagged an NVA general in Vietnam an incredible feat as he had to infiltrate the enemy camp.

I think you got your metres and feet mixed up. The longest shot made by a military sniper in combat was "2,500 yards or about 2,250 meters, held by GySgt Carlos Hathcock, USMC, near Duc Pho, South Vietnam, January 1967, with a Browning .50 HMG mounting an 8-power Unertl telescopic sight".

If the Canadian sniper shot is validated (if it hasn't already), it will be a new record. Apparently a "2,400 meter kill (chest-shot) against the driver of an enemy resupply truck" in Afghanistan.

Originally posted by cargo
I think you got your metres and feet mixed up. The longest shot made by a military sniper in combat was "2,500 yards or about 2,250 meters, held by GySgt Carlos Hathcock, USMC, near Duc Pho, South Vietnam, January 1967, with a Browning .50 HMG mounting an 8-power Unertl telescopic sight".

That I do. What makes Hatchcocks kill even more incredible is the fact that he didn't have any match grade ammo. He's written a book about his career ' Marine Sniper ', I recommend it if you have an interst in extreme sniping.

If the Canadian sniper shot is validated (if it hasn't already), it will be a new record. Apparently a "2,400 meter kill (chest-shot) against the driver of an enemy resupply truck" in Afghanistan.

I doubt it was a shot aimed at the individual, more likely a missed shot at the engine block of the vehicle.

[edit on 7-10-2004 by mad scientist]

Im late to this thread, but here is my 2 cents worth

1) SAS (Tops most other SF are based ont heir model, and they have alot of real life experience. While maybe not as nasty as some of the radicals running around today, the IRA was not all warm and fuzzy)
2) US-- Seals/Delta/USAF Spec ops. Well trained, lavishly equiped, and good level of experience.
3) Spetznaz. Lots of experience in Afganistan and Chechnya.
4) AUS SAS. Good group as well


[edit on 10/7/04 by FredT]

Originally posted by FredT
3) Spetznaz. Lots of experience in Afganistan and Chechnya.

The Spetsnaz seem to be thought of very highly by many people, however to date they haven't carried out one successful hostage rescue. Also in Afghanistan they lost a whole battalion in a day to the Mujahideen, I'll try and find a link.

Cute!

The title here really shows the inner musings of armchair worriors.

My dad could kick your dad ass kind of stuff. Come on people where are we going with this?

The one line replies here like its the so and so really show the limited scope for debate. Its A.. no it's B... no reasoning for it, no data nothing just pure conjecture and speculation.