I think it would be a great idea but only if they kept the standards the same.
Navy Seals manage with 2000, theres no reason why us brits cant do it.
Share This Page:
Growth
-
sneaky beaky
- Member
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Mon 09 Sep, 2002 8:09 pm
- Location: 19th hole
DipZ
Navy Seals 2000 strong!!? They wish! I think 200 is probably nearer the mark! Maybe a little more than that.
The problem with SF is not under manning - but the fact that the powers that be would like to have SF doing all operations. Both in Afghanistan and Iraq, SF were used in operations that could well have been done just as well, if not better by RM Commando units or Parachute Regiments.
They should stick to doing real Special Forces ops. And stick to operating in small numbers. In Iraq, I hear that both SAS and SBS went into the field with numbers like 50?! That is ridiculous!! That is RM/Para territory.
Just my opinion!
S.B.
Navy Seals 2000 strong!!? They wish! I think 200 is probably nearer the mark! Maybe a little more than that.
The problem with SF is not under manning - but the fact that the powers that be would like to have SF doing all operations. Both in Afghanistan and Iraq, SF were used in operations that could well have been done just as well, if not better by RM Commando units or Parachute Regiments.
They should stick to doing real Special Forces ops. And stick to operating in small numbers. In Iraq, I hear that both SAS and SBS went into the field with numbers like 50?! That is ridiculous!! That is RM/Para territory.
Just my opinion!
S.B.
Former RM of 23 years.
