Greatest SpecOP of all time

[Kitsune]

If You had to name the most impressive Special Operation of all time... what would it be?

[Nelson]

They are all amazing just because they have made it that far. But I would say U.S. Special Forces are top of the line.

[JiJoMacLE45]

While the end result did not merit what it was supposed too, I think the Son Tay raid has to rank up there. The mission went off just the way it was planned out, save for not finding any POWs. Everybody that went in went home.

Entebbe would probably get my vote for number one however.

[OzMan]

Operation Nimrod: London, 1980. SAS CRW raid on the Iranian Embassy. SAS suffered no losses, losing 1 hostage out of 20. World's first live hostage rescue operation, first public use of HK MP5. Brilliant operation and classic example of the SAS motto: He Who Dares, Wins.

[...]

Entebbe.

[sometimesoon]

Though they are not considered Special anymore, the 100plus German Airborne Pioneers who took out Eben Emael. That was also the intro of the Shape charge. They took over a thousand prisoners.
As far as more modern, I would also say Son Tay. Perfect except the final OBJ. They killed over 200 NVA.

[rangerone]

Operation Nimrod: London, 1980. SAS CRW raid on the Iranian Embassy.

DOes anyone know where to find the vid of this. Supposedly a SAS guy gets wounded in the arm, so he walks up to a desk, grabs a stapler, fixes his arm and continues fighting! I just wanted to know if it is true.

[budanski]

Supposedly a SAS guy gets wounded in the arm, so he walks up to a desk, grabs a stapler, fixes his arm and continues fighting! I just wanted to know if it is true.

He then looked to the other and said..."i'll be back" ;)

[Apogee]

The greatest ops are the ones that never leave the need to know group

[front]

rangerone wrote:

Supposedly a SAS guy gets wounded in the arm, so he walks up to a desk, grabs a stapler, fixes his arm and continues fighting! I just wanted to know if it is true.

"I aint got time to BLEED!" he snarled. :-)

What "video" are you referring to? A video filmed by the SAS crew as they ran to the building? A documentary recreating events? Or a fictional account?

cheers

front

[rangerone]

I think it is a news broadcast.

[front]

Try this link for a broadcast of the SAS op from outside...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2000/iranian_embassy_siege/intro.stm

Two films there... one shows the live action, the other is a 40 minute BBC news analysis of the siege and rescue (worth watching).

cheers

front

[Sir Nob]

Definately op. Nimrod. Havn't heard about the trooper stapling his arm, good stuff though. One of the terrorists bodies was found with 74 bullet holes in though, bad day for him.

[Chops]

The stuff about the stapler is absolute BS. Never even heard that one. Interestingly enough though, I've heard from several folks that there is film of interior aspects of the op. One colleague whom I respect and certainly has done what he claims to have recalls seeing parts of it during his continuation training with 14 Int. I have also been told by a former RMP CPO that he saw it during CQB training with 22 in the late eighties.

Thus I think it does exist. Allegedly taken as a training aid, it shows the hostages being brought down the main stairs, hostage recption and some parts of the initial entry. As far as I recall, it doesn't show any of the contacts or results thereof.

Anyway thats all I know so take from it what you will.

Rgds

Chops

[Minjin]

I am going to go with the London Embassy. And also with USMA Scuba's assertion that the best ops are the ones that don't leave the "need to know" category.

And Eagle 1-1 it is just "Who Dares Wins" not "He Who Dares Wins"

[Kitsune]

Operation Nimrod?
Is that the one with the SAS soldier prematurely smashing the window with his boot? The one in which one was dangling from his rope as he tried to abseil himself? The one in which three terrorists were shot AFTER they had surrendered?
Well, mistakes can happen, sure. But Nimrod the greatest Special OP?
Hmmmmm...

[Chops]

Shooting opposition after they surrendered? Big boys games, big boys rules fellas. The only reason the last bad guy survived was the intervention of Met officers in the hostage reception area. He was being dragged back into the target building by a couple of Regiment guys at the time!

This happens a lot more regularly than you might imagine...

On CT jobs, these guys are not there to bring back EPWs unless they are specifically tasked to. Thus I personally wouldnt consider this element of Nimrod to be a "mistake". The only "mistake" was missing the last bad guy...

Rgds

Chops

[Trigger]

I'm with Chops on this one. Nimrod was the best to date in my opinion.

Kitsune are you playing devil's advocate or are you serious?

Yeah, the one where the SAS trooper was seriously burned - but kept going. The only thing those terrorists surrendered was the right to keep breathing. They got just what they earned.

get over it.

[Kitsune]

The devils advocate? Yeah hehe... p-)
I like that role...

But in this I am serious... I do not think Nimrod is such a great example. SAS had not much time to train for this (always a problem in HR situations) and in fact there were a lot of mistakes made. As for shooting terrorists who have surrendered that is plainly illegal ! I can understand that one shoots when in doubt... but in this.. after what i have heard the three bad guys in room number 10 had thrown their weapons away and were yelling "we surrender!" and if thats true its not right to shoot them. And besides its not professional.
I did not know that there was a terrorists corpse with 74 bullet holes in it. Now, if thats also true that's another one... Come on, one bullet to kill and one to be sure, that is the way. I realize that this it not always possible but seventy four bullets? What the hell...? This is SAS not some serbian paramilitary unit. They shouldn't need 74 bullets to kill one bad guy. That has no style (and besides is a waste of ammo).
And don't forget: the terrorists had plenty of time to shoot all hostages. Lucky for the SAS that it didn't turn out that way.

Now... in the end Nimrod can be called a success okok. But the greatest (meaning most sucessful, most astonishing, most impressive , "you do not believe they did it"- that kind of stuff) special operation of all time (known to the public alright, one cannot discuss the ones not known, of course) ???
I do not think so.

But hey: You were asking me wether i am really serious. I am (think so). That is my opinion and i just told You why.
I respect Your opinion. So if You say thats the best in Your opinion then that is that.

Opinions are all that this threat asked for... Keep on going...
p-)

[Chops]

Kitsune

Where do I start??? ;)

Killing the opposition is what these guys are there for. They are not police. You do not take chances when there is potential for hidden weapons and/or detonators. All units do this- not just 22. Witness the OMOM/Alfa/Spetsnaz takedown of the Moscow theatre last year. Chechen "terrorists" were plainly executed left, right and centre. Some had explosives strapped to their bodies, others did not.

This is actually the "professional" thing to do. It was recognised for many years that 22 were used in euphemistic 'hard arrests' in NI- this meant any PIRA discovered were going home in a bag. The Israeli Sayaret Matkal have the same mindset likewise GIGN. Doubtless CAG and DEVGRU are the same.

To emphasise; 1. you simply cannot take the chance when hostages are involved and 2. these are military specwar teams, they are not deployed to arrest anyone. To put it bluntly, they are there to kill every bad guy in the target area. Otherwise, leave the operation to the police. Of course, 'executing' terrorists is illegal but such legal niceties rarely make an appearance in real world military CT.

As for the seventy four rounds- I honestly cant remember the exact count but it was two mags worth from a pair of MP5s so I'm guessing around sixty. I'll have to look it up. The circumstances were: terrorist hidden amongst hostages coming down main stairwell; trooper spots grenade in his hand; thumps him with stock of his 5 as he has no clear LOF; terrorist tumbles to bottom of stairs where two guys dispatch him with a coupla mags. Now yes this may have been a little OTT in the cold light of day but remember these guys were pumped up, in contact, and reacted instinctively to the situation. To put it brutally, they were simply making sure.

The myth of the double tap- your "Come on, one bullet to kill and one to be sure, that is the way"- is a complete fallacy. 22 (and Australian SASR TAG and I'm sure CAG etc) train to keep firing until the target is no longer moving. If the bad guy is on the ground, he will still be fired upon until he stops moving. Yes some crews often fire in 'pairs' but it will be followed by as many of these 'pairs' as necessary until the guy no longer has the capability to pose a threat. It's the only way to be sure. The 'double tap' has it's place in police situations ie- fire two, examine reaction, fire two, examine reaction etc and yes it's a lot more accurate but it has no place in high risk military takedowns.

Your reference to "style" plays no part in specwar ops- whatever works is adopted. Likewise the "waste of ammo" bit- do you realise how many rounds these guys go through per day when on CT rotation? Hundreds.

Anyway, enough of a rant from cranky old Chops. He needs to take his pill and go to bed :lol:

No offence intended Kitsune- just putting in my tuppence

Kindest rgds

Chops

[Vance]

Eagle Claw would have been the best - too bad things didnt go exactly to plan.

[StarvingStudent47]

I put in a second vote for Entebbe.

[Kitsune]

Chops...

Not that i want an argument but i have to answer.

Ok... First: The style and "waste of ammo" thing was a joke. I think there is something like elegance and style... even in SpecOps... but I realize very well that when it stays in the way of EFFICIENCY it goes out of the window, INSTANTLY.

Concerning killing opponents:
Sorry chops i disagree. SpecOps units do not have the licence to kill when they want. They are used instead of police not because one needs executioners but mainly because they are better trained to cope with the situation and thats it. If someone surrenders and does not pose a threat anymore, then it is simply illegal to kill him, and even SAS is not above that rule, sorry but thats true. Even soldiers on a battlefield are obliged to take prisoners if are surrendering ! (The problem is of course if one still shoots... often no one cares and he gets away with it... but that does not make it ok.) I realize also that one does not want to take chances (i would not either) but in room number 10... from what i have heard...the baddies had thrown away their weapons, were screaming "we surrender", and no device to ignite explosives was there. And if the unit is trained in HR they can demobilize any person in a matter of seconds... without killing him !
Concerning the Moscow thing:
1) total different situation
2) Sorry but... the Russians are different... their state is a democracy only in name... they do things different. E.G. what the russian army does in Chechenia...HOW they do it... would be unimaginable for any army of western europe including Great Britain. To justify something with regard to how the russians do it... seems not ok to me.
Concerning N. Ireland: This is one of the darkest chapters in SAS history... nothing to be proud of. But it was a serious mistake of Britain to use this great unit their in the first place. Should be a lesson to the guys in charge worldwide...

And last (but not least), how to shoot somebody.
Shoot till the guy does not move anymore? Hmmm... that can take some time... And than he starts twitching...
But this is news to me I must confess...
But think for yourself: You are a Delta guy (CAG? I like the Delta name more!). You and your friends step in to a room with hostages and baddies. How do you do it? If it is a normal door You must go after another(and imagine the door opening problem is solved already. Lets say You are first. You got to be FAST! In an instant You check which half of the room is more dangerous (meaning more terrorists)...left or right. For instance You see three baddies in the left half. So You turn left. The guy dierectly after You will then turn right (in that way he does not have to check for himself... he depends on Your decision. And normally the guy after him will again go left) Now... as said three baddies... they must be neutralized. How do You do it? Well You shoot the First and You keep shooting until he does not move anymore. Then You calmy change mags and... You got a problem? Yeah bet You have, the other two baddies are riddling You by now. The mistake: You used the chop method! But You should have used the kitsune method: two bullets, preferably to the head for the first guy...then the next one (OK I got to admit it wasn't invented by me... it isn't even called kitsunes method but they do still use it). That's the way U do it. Problems hitting with only two bullets? Yeah ok...but thats the reason You are not in the SAS... practice some!!!

Didn't want to ridicule You chops... Couldn't resist... You are allowed to do it to me anytime p-) !

But this two shot thing... They really use it... believe me, even the american CAG (The aussies do not? What do they know? Their problem).
It works.




And it has style, too! ;)

[Adam Wilhelm]

Malaya 1950-58,
and
Operation Storm, Dhofar 1970-77.

[Sirpad]

Entebbe - first and foremost!

common' guys - flying 3,000 miles in the middle of the night, through tropical rainstorms and utter darkness (no GPS back then, too...), landing in TOTAL surprise, releasing dozens of hostages with only 3 cassualties (one was the unit CO, which was a great loss), supressing nearly all ressistance, destroying the oposion's entire airforce fighter wing (for safe extract), and returning home without any material loss (out of 4 C-130s and 2 dozen vehicles) - this can't be second to none!.

Nimrod was undertaken in friendly, non-resistant theater with all backup and support right around the corner. So did the moscow incident and many pther great ops.

Few other things:
The israely approach is mostly the "if can't arrest - kill" approach. In the BBC movie about Egoz and Golani recon units, that was specificaly said in the briefing (and not just for the camera).

Also, the shoot-until-dead is true and called in israel "kill assurance" (or the more Politicaly-correct "neutralization verifying"), and done only on specific types of engagement (non-MOUT ambushes, CT raids, and few others).

The myths about sayeret matkal's throat-cutting techniques are WAY over-mistified! As all other units, sometimes this method is used (when no suppressed firearms present) - but the idea that it is done to an already-dead body, just as a trademark, sounds somewhat psychotic...

[front]

Chops wrote:

"It was recognised for many years that 22 were used in euphemistic 'hard arrests' in NI- this meant any PIRA discovered were going home in a bag."

Any PIRA discovered? By law in Britain and Ireland membership of the Provisional Irish Republican Army needs to be proved in a court of law. The rule of law is applied whenever and wherever possible in both of those countries.

What do you mean by "discovered"?

cheers

front

[...]

You also have to remember what all these terrorists during the 80's were demanding: the release of thier comrades. If there were terrorists in jail other operations would be undertaken to free them. Bader- Meinhoff(sp?) leaders commiting "suicide" in prison...yeah right. Right or wrong sometimes people just have to be taken care of. I guess goverments would rather be accused of killing known terrorists than of letting innocents die.

[Minjin]

I have also heard of this "neutralization assurance" or whatever you want to call it. From what I can tell, it is only used in certain circumstances of A) very high risk gunmen (i.e. more likely to shoot hostages first and ask questions later) and B) known numbers of baddies through surveillance (numbers and positions known to fully plan, allowing reloading under "safe" conditions)

I am far from an expert, but I have read a few books on the subject of CT ops.

[Kitsune]

...
Its Baader-Meinhof (after Andreas Baader and Ulrike Meinhof, main founders of the "Rote Armee Fraktion" meaning Red Army Fraction or RAF... do not confound with Royal Air Force lol).

And they really committed suicide and not in question-marks. The RAF sympathizers just claimed that they were murdered to make their deaths seem more "heroic".

[Kitsune]

And it's quotation-marks, DAMMIT

[Chops]

Front

Read about the experience of the Regiment in NI (recommend read- 'Big Boys Rules' by Mark Urban) and then make a judgement on all of the legal niceties. What I was refering to by 'discovered' terrorists were terrorists the Regiment came across in the course of an operation or indeed the targets of the op. 22, SBS, 14Int and FRU predominately did not operate within the rule of rule in NI. Personally I'm okay with that, you may not be and that's fine. Different strokes.

Kind rgds

Chops

[Chops]

Kitsune my old mate

The Chops Method? I am indeed flattered, nay honoured, that a CQB shooting method has been named after me. I'm sure that will come as somewhat of a surprise to 22 SAS, 1SBS, SASR, CAG (or Delta as you emininately prefer), GIGN, GEOS, DEVGRU etc etc etc. Still, I am sincerely honoured.

Taking your post in order:

1. The 'style' and 'waste of ammo' thing. Fair enough if it was a joke but your comment about "elegance and style" shows a tendency on your part toward 'Hollywoodism'. Actually a term used by US SF to denote folks who try to look cool rather than aim for operational effectiveness.

2. Correct, specwar units do not have a "licence to kill when they want". Yes it is illegal to kill someone who is clearly surrendering. Agreed. Does this mean it happens in the real world? Of course not. These units are trained to eliminate the threat. Read some less 'Hollywood' books or even better talk to someone who has been there, either in training or actual contacts. That's the first and last word really. All other questions are about individual morality which I don't want to get into here.

3. Military specwar units are not brought into situations solely because of their usually superior training. In CT situations where control is handed from the police to a military team there has always been the tacit, and sometimes stated, understanding that none of the terrorists are coming out on two feet. Nimrod, which we were originally discussing, is an excellent case in point. The Regiment guys were fairly specifically briefed that it would be advantageous if none of the bad guys came back out of the building. Flavius in Gibralter is another excellent case in point. As is Loughall and many other CT ops in NI. In my opinion, you cannot expect soldiers to act as policemen. Once again, this becomes a question of individual morality.

4. "And if the unit is trained in HR they can demobilize any person in a matter of seconds... without killing him!" What sort of ninja Hollywood BS is this? Suddenly CT guys are ninjas? Yes they are trained in unarmed combat or 'Jap Slapping' as the UK term has it, which has always made me smile, however they are not masters in some exotic martial art. Most of the 'moves' are takedowns, blocks and non lethal methods of clearing dazed noncombatants from your arc. I know the SEALs for instance tend to spend more time on this than most units but the Brits and the Australians, as the examples I know best, train in basic foolproof techniques not ninja moves. Once again I raise the professionalism argument in relation to killing armed or unarmed opponents. If the target is identified as a bad guy, he goes down. You don't screw around with some kind of 'kung fu' move.

5. Moscow. How is it a totally different situation? The same conditions existed in both Nimrod and Moscow. Namely: a permissive, urban, environment; armed terrorists holding numerous hostages; explosives believed to be present; hostages already executed before the CT unit commenced their DA etc etc. I don't see the difference.

Yes I agree that the Russian SF elements are not generally in the same league as certain Western SF. So? What has CIS conventional ops in Chechnya have to do with the Moscow CT op? Personally I think the Moscow siege was a very difficult situation which would have been equally as difficult to resolve for even the likes of 22, CAG, GIGN, GSG9, SASR etc. I can fault the Russians on a few points but not many. A tough call.

6. 22SAS in NI. Why is it "one of the darkest chapters in SAS history... nothing to be proud of"? Lots of successful operations, deaths of civillians prevented and numerous dead terrorists. Sounds good to me. Why was it a mistake to use one of the world's premier CT units in a major CT environment? Intriguing logic to say the least. The Regiment certainly don't perceive their ops in NI as a "serious mistake". From your comments you perceive NI as some kind of dirty little war. Well here's a surprise- they all are. Even the conventional ones. Death and killing is not a pleasant or glorious business. It is a dirty, ****ty, disgusting business.

7. 'Double Taps'. Firstly it does not take more time to shoot someone until they are no longer operational. An MP5 empties it's mag in a few seconds. 22 shooters can empty, accurately, their P226s in a little under three seconds. Where's the perceived 'time lag'? It takes a lot longer and is a lot more dangerous to fire off a pair and then examine whether the bad guy is still a threat. As I've said, this may be reasonable for police officers as they are generally operating in a very different environment, but not for military CT.

Your 'scenario' is flawed from the start and shows no understanding of even basic CT entry and room clearing techniques. You don't enter a room alone. You are normally going in with at least three others. It is a very delicate, almost ballet like, action. Individual shooters are assigned individual arcs of fire. Thus when an element enters a room, each shooter looks after his individual arc, dropping any targets within that arc. This is a very simplified version of often very intricate tactics but gets the point across. As for your comment on mag changes. If there are multiple targets within your arc you will engage until they drop and then swing onto the next. If you need to carry out a mag change or a transition to a secondary weapon, you do so. CT units train extensively in rapid mag changes and transitions. What they don't do is leave wounded terrorists standing around whilst they engage others. Read Leroy Thompson's Hostage Rescue Tactics- simplified but not a bad primer.

And yes, well spotted, I am not a member of 22SAS. I am but a humble table dancer... ;) I do not claim to be an specwar operator and never have. I am but a 'interested observer'... :lol:

And finally, how do you know that CAG use double taps? Are you an operator? No, let me guess, your best friend's uncle's best mate was. Right? And a quick slag at Australian SASR? "What do they know? Their problem" Very insightful. That's obviously why CENTCOM were so disappointed when the Australian government decided to withdraw the third rotation of the SASR SFTG from Afghanistan. In Franks' words; "the SFTG provided a unique capability not shared by US units". Hmmm, yes they do sound like a bunch of amateurs don't they? Or that SASR had the highest kill ratio of any SF unit in Vietnam? Hmmm, check your facts my friend.

Anyway, I'm tired, my fingers hurt. Game over.

Regards

Chops

[Kitsune]

Not bad chops!!!

I am not sure wether you really read what i wrote... and if you did you obviously did not understand some of the irony in it (and it is said that germans are the ones who got no sense of humor) but ok. You can be assured I read not only the hollywood stuff if you believe it or not.
Only some things that come to my mind (without any order or structure):

How to immobilize somebody? Ninja kicks lol (who is reading the hollywood crap). When there are three baddies without weapons with hands in the air and as many policeman (here even SAS) you normally use handcuffs. (There are some plastic bands...not very comfortable but fast to use for the good guy) and no ignition device is pressed. That is how it works. So You needn't to shoot 'em!

Style? A personal tick of mine. As we were discussing the greatest SpecOP of all time... I do NOT mean to give points for "artistic valuable execution"! But one still can admire technical perfection ok?

You do not enter a room alone? In my example you are not alone as I recall! Just to illustrate how You are using things... If I would do this also I would now have to make some remarks about "that they do not dance a ballet" or something... completely misinterpreting what You said.

A MP5 empties its magazine in 3 seconds? No it doesn't. Because SpecOps Units often use the single-shot mode. Some Mp5 versions even have an additional 3 shot burst mode available. Thats also often used. Shooting full auto THAT is hollywoodism. Why they do it? Because waste of ammo IS a problem. When You shoot someone on full auto (completely overdoing it) the guy is dead, sure. But Your mag is empty! And You are helpless now. Another enemy can appear now, and then? Oh, You got a buddy covering You? Fine! But You would not need this if You used the ammo sparingly. Thats why.

You do not see a difference between Nimrod and the Moscow situation? In London 6 terrorists took 24 hostages. As far as I recall in Moscow there were around 40 terrorists taking something like 400 hostages.
Do You NOW see the difference?

N.Ireland a string of successful operations? Hmmm... The SAS is quite hated over there now. And nothing was resolved mind You. It was something of a Partisan - War. And they are the most dirtiest imaginable. In the end even SAS committed acts of needless cruelty... and sometimes against the wrong persons. That is what happens to many soldiers fighting against partisans. French in Algeria, Americans in Vietnam, Russians in Chechenia, Israelis in Palestine... always the same story. They do it because one often cannot distiguish civilians from partisans. And it IS different from being in a HR operation or in a more regular wars like the one in the Falklands and Iraq. Sorry Chops... but it is really true that many Brits think that the SAS name got a stain on it after N. Ireland.

The moral thing? Enough said about that one.

Well Chops. I do not want an argument with You (to late I fear). So don't be mad at me ok? Do not forget... I even named a shooting method after You, so be good ! And let us be friends ! ;)

[Trigger]

Kitsune, I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but as far as a successful CT operation goes, the only things that count are that the terrorists are eliminated as quickly as possible and hostages (if any) are unharmed. Waste of ammo is not an issue. From entry to 'all clear' should take a matter of seconds. Hmmm...about as long as it takes to empty an MP5 mag. There are now no enemies to appear and render you 'helpless'. Read 'Inside Delta Force' by Eric Haney. He describes in detail the entry techniques they practiced. There is never any worry about waste of ammo or compassion towards the opposition. Combine the adrenaline of a dramatic entry with all the other aspects of a hostage rescue and then try to control your rate of fire as you scan for targets/friendlies. Good luck. There is no 'overdoing it' there is only success or failure. By the time a CT unit enters, negotiations and the time for a peaceful resolution are past. No quarter should be or will be given. And that, like it or not is the way it should be. As soon as we start believing otherwise we begin to lose.

Respectfully,
Trigger

[Apogee]

OK, here is the reason you don't fire full auto on an MP4 or an M-4 or whatever it is in a CQB situation. The muzzle of the weapon will end up pointing at the ceiling. On full auto you lose all accuracy. Instead, we fire in controled pairs. You can lay down sufficent fire, while still maintaining accuracy, something which is very important when there are non-combatants around.

And on the whole empty mag deal. You always worry about what happens after you've killed everyone in that one room. You're assuming that there aren't adjoining rooms, or that you are going to have to flow out into the hallway. Empty mags can get you killed in a CQB situation.

[Kitsune]

You do trash a dead horse trigger!

1) I have read Hanleys book...among others. And where have i said anything against it? The room-entering technics i described are consistent to what he describes... only that i described it only partially (very partially yeah ok)... and that seems to have lead to some misunderstanding here... perhaps my fault. But note that Delta uses also the "double tap" technic (yeah you find it in Hanleys book) as does everyone else in fact.
2) The whole thing here started when I said something against opearion Nimrod (my fault again). Well in my opinion it is definitley not that great BECAUSE it was not over in a matter of seconds! It was a rather prolonged firefight.
3) Concerning the ammo thing: DAMMIT trigger i have stated why you should try to preserve ammo. READ IT. But ok again: While a prolonged firefight should be prevented it CAN happen. And it will happen if the assaulters are slow in the starting phase. In fact there are not even seconds to waste. BUT YOU WASTE TIME IF YOU ARE PUMPING THE TERRORISTS ON FULL AUTO!!! You then waste ammo, need time to change mags. And your buddie needs to cover you then... also loosing time. Yeah of yourse... if there is only ONE terrorist that's not important... Three SAS riddle him through and that's it. But if there are half a dozen terrorists? In different locations? Like in Nimrod? Believe me its not a good tactic to empty your weapons in the first you meet and than loose time changing mags, covering and so on.
So now i am really fed up with this!!!! In fact I really do not know what your or chops problem is. Double Tap is one can say, the default shooting technique that is used. Its not a "complete fallacy" as chops stated. Read more books or something!!
4) And concerning prisoners: As part of a HR team you have to function. You have to be in control of your emotions. You do feel anger, fear, aggresion. But you have to control your emotions. AND THAT IS WHY YOU DO TAKE PRISONERS. You are part of the executive forces of an democratic state. You have only limited rights. You can not simply do what you want. You are NOT an executioner. And that includes if someone poses a threat (to the hostages or to you or your buddies) you may neutralize that threat by shooting him.And in fact that is the only reason why anybody is shot in HR-operations. If he does not not pose a threat YOU MUST NOT SHOOT HIM !!!. If you still do and get away with it it was still illegal. Of course you can for example lie in the aft-report. But you did not behave like a true professional. It does not make it right. If you feel hate that you can't control, if you feel bloodthirst, if you just want to "kill those pigs, 'cause they deserve it", you have got no place in the HR-team in the first place. And that emotion - thing is why selection and training are so tough in those units.
And that is what I meant from the start: If in Nimrod three surrendering guys are shot it certainly does not make Nimrod great operation. It was a wrong assessment of the situation (or could be even a crime, but as far as i know, no one was punished, so ok) because there was no necessity to shoot them. One SAS soldier covers them... the next puts handbands on the first and lies him on his belly and then the next... three times over all in all. Policemen do this all the time. And no one must die. But the SAS soldiers shot them. Now this can happen, no one is perfect. And I DO NOT say that i would have done better... I just said Nimrod is in my opinion not that SUPER operation because of things like this. SAS can do better. That is all.
Period.

So that is my last statement to this problem. I have said everything (yeah and to much I think... me and my ****ing big mouth :roll:) I had to say about this.
Period (again).

[Trigger]

Kitsune:
Peace

USMA_SCUBA:

The muzzle of the weapon will end up pointing at the ceiling.

Maybe for a rookie shooter.
You gotta be %&^%) kidding!
Do you have any idea how many rounds these guys fire daily? Even a novice can manage 3-5 round bursts with the weapon on full auto. I wasn't suggesting 'spraying and praying'. In most modern scenarios we know exactly where and how many of the opposition there are before we even think of making an entry. The sudden appearance of 'more bad guys, oh **** we gotta reload' is, in my opinion, a fantasy.

[Kitsune]

Ok Trigger !

:D

[Chops]

Nothing more from me- we are indeed flogging a dead horse. I'm going back to my primary occupation (breaking out into lapdancing too if y'all are interested ;) ) whilst I practise the "Chops Method" <tm> of illegally punching way too many holes into surrendering bad guys...

Kind rgds

Chops :roll:

[Kitsune]

Yeah it is better that way.
Live long and prosper Chops !!!

:hug:

[Chops]

Gents

Couldn't resist this quote which I happened to come across tonight. From Barry Davies' 'The Complete Encyclopedia of the SAS' (Davies is ex 22, 18 years service in the Regiment including being part of the GSG9 assault on the Lufthansa flight at Mogadishu in '77 and the formation and development of the SP (CRW/CT) teams):

"Double Tap. A technique by which two shots are fired in quick succession. This used to be considered, particularly for counter terrorist or hostage rescue scenarios, the most effective way to kill a hostile. It has since been recognised, however, that two shots are not always enough to stop an attacker, particularly if he has access to a remore detonation device. Current techniques advocate the use of sustained and accurate firepower from a high power handgun, which can discharge 13 rounds in less than three seconds- more than enough to stop a terrorist getting close to a weapon or detonating device."

But then again, what would 22SAS know...? :)

Rgds

Chops

[Kitsune]

Right you are Chops. They know nothing. Nimrod clearly proves it.

:lol:

[Chops]

I really do hope you are joking my friend...

Rgds

Chops

[Kitsune]

Sure.
Did you really doubt it ?

:lol: