I’ve just been watching this show on BBC 2, It is bloody fascinating stuff. I’ve seen it before but this particular one was about counter-terrorism and the Iranian Embassy siege (remember that dopers?)
I have always been a fan of the SAS so I probably enjoy this program a litttle more than the average person. One fact I found quite interesting about the Iranian embassy siege was that Heathrow traffic was ordered to fly lower and closer to the embassy in order to increase the ambient noise levels.
They showed sieges from around the world done by equivalents (things that went wrong) such as the siege at waco, and the Russian theatre thing. I wonder how those would have gone if the SAS were in charge.
There isn’t a main point to this thread, I just wanted to mention it and see if other dopers have any anecdotes, input, opinions.
SAS are very tough, i saw a special on the history channel a few months ago about how they were stuck behind enemy lines in gulf war I and trying to get to Syria. I remember them coming up with the idea of carjacking someone (which i thought was funny for some reason).
Hard bastards, the lot of 'em. I’ve always wanted to join them, except of the small problem of me not liking physical pain and gettign queesy seeing blood. And the glasses. And the hayfever. Etc.
Anyone watch Ultimate Force?
Apparently the NZ SAS squad is having a recruitment drive too. Shame about the 88% failure rate though…
Proof that a military operation is conducted entirely different than a law enforcement operation? Are you kidding me? You need proof of this? They are two completely different animals.
Proof? Personal experience.
Though I doubt one would actually have to go through a 20 week police academy, be a firearms instructor, and be a former SWAT tactics, equipment and weapons liason, AND ALSO be in the US ARMY and go through Special Forces (that’s with a capital “S” and “F”) training to include Operations in Urban Environments, Small Unit Tactics, Combat Patrolling…
Really, I’ve seen both sides of the pond. I doubt someone who really thinks about it would believe they do things the same way.
Was the programme you saw the one which also mentioned how the SAS used combined armed and unarmed techniques against the terrorists?
SAS man 1 would arm lock opponent whilst SAS man 2 fired their automatic into the terrorists body. They gave some statistics at the end of that programme, that of the thousands of rounds fired over 95% were recovered from terrorists bodies. (memory might be misstaken somewhat on that last one). Still they said that one terrorist managed to throw a grenade, but luckily he had forgot to pull out the pin.
Knew there had to be somebody besides me in this zoo who programs in SAS, or at least has heard of it. But it was beginning to look like no such person was going to show up in this thread. Thanks, herownself!
Not to sound like a militia member, but it took the FBI longer to take over the Branch Davidian Compound than it took the military to take over the country of Iraq.
Now we did leave some Iraqis alive and they are giving us a bit of trouble, but we are in control of the country.
Not to sound like a militia member, but it took the FBI longer to take over the Branch Davidian Compound than it took the military to take over the country of Iraq.
Now we did leave some Iraqis alive and they are giving us a bit of trouble, but we are in control of the country.
Totally different situations. In the case of Iranian Embassy they were against half-baked terrorists. There was almost no resistance from their part as soon as the SAS were inside the building.
In my opinion the Russian theater resolution was the best possible. I don’t think the SAS would do any better.
The methods of the SAS during the embassy siege did not reflect the competence of the terrorists. The SAS still operated at full ‘effectiveness’ regardless. That said, I still wonder how they would have handled things.
Some of the things they demonstrated during the program (and some of the others in the series) suggest that they might have used very different methods, so again, I would be interested to see how they’d do it.
But does SAS have enough flights in and out of Heathrow to make a difference? Wouldn’t it have been better to ask the other airlines to fly lower, too? And while I was raised to be afraid of big, blonde, Swedish women, is a bunch of flight attendants really the group you’d choose first to rescue hostages?
(I almost asked if Swedish flight attendants were the right people to mount an operation like this but I don’t like handing you guys straight lines.)
