Defining SFs

[etlamatey]

I found that special forces have been described in various places as either "highly trained, mobile, HEAVILY armed...troops" or "highly-trained, mobile, LIGHTLY armed....troops".

From what I know, SFs carry a wider assortment of arms, but some of what they carry is modified for mobile purposes and is lighter (eg, carbines versus rifles). So they are both heavily and lightly armed.

Technically speaking, supposing you were to write a dictionary entry or something, what would be the "correct" way to describe SFs - lightly armed or heavily armed?

Regards.

[Yosy]

I would define them defenelty as light troops that are very flexible - sometimes heavily armed sometimes lightly armed.

[Beppo]

Semantics...

How about simply, "highly-trained"?

[Vandervahn]

"Highly trained" is not an objective measure.

(Military) Special Forces are "special" because their task is to perform anything but regular infantry duties, which namely are: direct confrontation of opposing forces (obvious), guard and semi-LE duty (at home or in occupied territory), Interaction with other military branches ("combined troops").

SF could perform any of the above, but what makes them special is the capability to perform tasks beyond these (largely self-sufficient engagement, high-risk insertions, sabotage, operating behind enemy lines and the like)

[ibstolidude]

uhh..call me crazy, or Suzy, but I'd gp more along the lines of UW.

[baboon6]

Adrian Weale in his book "Secret Warfare" defines special operations as follows

1.Information Reporting
- strategic reconnaissance, intelligence-gathering eg. SAS patrols in Borneo
2.Offensive Action
- raids, such as attacking airfields, blowing up bridges, destroying industrial plant
3.Training and Advice
- usually to foreign forces, often irregulars eg. helping Partisans in Yugoslavia in WW2. Lawrence's mission to the Arabs was probably the first example of this.
4.Psychological Operations
- "winning hearts and minds"
5.Counter-Terrorism
- sureveillance of terrorists and terrorist groups, interdiction and arrest of terrorists, rescue of terrorist hostages from various environments

It follows that "special forces" are the units formed primarily to carry out special operations.

[baboon6]

I would define them defenelty as light troops that are very flexible - sometimes heavily armed sometimes lightly armed.

Special forces are lightly armed in comparison to conventional troops, they do not usually have armoured vehicles or artillery, they rely mainly on hand-held small arms, sometimes using infantry support weapons such as mortars, rocket/missile launchers and heavy machine guns

Highly-trained? Anyone in any branch of the military can be highly trained to do their job, that does not make them special forces.

[TacoDelRio]

uhh..call me crazy, or Suzy, but I'd gp more along the lines of UW.

Underwater? WTF?

;)

[Field_Gunner]

the thing with me is....I've always considered the ranger regt's as light infantry and so do allot of my friends yet most americans say that they are special forces if so why do they organize in the fasion of a normal infantry unit. I would call them commandos in the same sence as the royal marines and the former canadian airborne. and if they are "special" what are Delta and all the SFG's considered?

and what is with the whole SF capable stuff? my regt has 4 foo/fed/whatever teams that are capable to move out on there own find the enemy and destroy it with overwhelming firepower.....am I special forces capable?

[Lanton]

You can't really define what 'special forces units are', per se, only because special forces are trained to carry such out a wide variety of information-collection, guerilla-training, defensive and offensive missisons.

For example, NATO special forces units operating behind Soviet lines (in a theoretical third world war) would've either been tasked with gathering intel on enemy operations (and so would've been lightly armed), tasked with carrying out offensive operations (and so would've been carrying a greater variety of weapons and more ammunition) or tasked with carrying out unique operations like planting and setting-off tactical nukes against Soviet units (and so would've been going into battle with the bare minimum of self-defence equipment).

[bigjeff]

I'd say Sfs are the people who are specialli trained for doing a special task.Every sfs has their own special technique and strength through...and that's why they r special.

Also,i think they are both heavily and armed soldiers as they'd always carryin the minimum weight of weapon which can give out maximum destruction.

Correct me if i m wrong.

[Sabre]

Troops that are able to operate beyond the range and capability of regular units.

Training is based on regular infantry principles, but the nature of the training and men allow the unit undertake tasks that are outside of the regular army's remit.

[Vandervahn]

I'd say Sfs are the people who are specialli trained for doing a special task.Every sfs has their own special technique and strength through...and that's why they r special.

According to that definition even the Music Corps and the armourer would be SOF ;)

[etlamatey]

Lol. I repeat my question...what do you guys think about the 'heavily armed' versus 'lightly armed'?

[California Joe]

Really case specific isn't it. Heavily armed with what a man can carry is different than Heavily armed as in Bradleys.

In stolis case "special" means "rides the short bus"

[baboon6]

You can't really define what 'special forces units are', per se, only because special forces are trained to carry such out a wide variety of information-collection, guerilla-training, defensive and offensive missisons.

For example, NATO special forces units operating behind Soviet lines (in a theoretical third world war) would've either been tasked with gathering intel on enemy operations (and so would've been lightly armed), tasked with carrying out offensive operations (and so would've been carrying a greater variety of weapons and more ammunition) or tasked with carrying out unique operations like planting and setting-off tactical nukes against Soviet units (and so would've been going into battle with the bare minimum of self-defence equipment).

All these operations would fit under the five broad definitions of special forces missions I wrote above. I don't think having slightly more or less firepower in one case or another (and it is slight compared to conventional forces) makes a difference in the definition of a unit.

[bigjeff]

According to that definition even the Music Corps and the armourer would be SOF ;)

sorri
my fault man.
then how should we define them?special military task?

[Yosy]

Adrian Weale in his book "Secret Warfare" defines special operations as follows

1.Information Reporting
- strategic reconnaissance, intelligence-gathering eg. SAS patrols in Borneo
2.Offensive Action
- raids, such as attacking airfields, blowing up bridges, destroying industrial plant
3.Training and Advice
- usually to foreign forces, often irregulars eg. helping Partisans in Yugoslavia in WW2. Lawrence's mission to the Arabs was probably the first example of this.
4.Psychological Operations
- "winning hearts and minds"
5.Counter-Terrorism
- sureveillance of terrorists and terrorist groups, interdiction and arrest of terrorists, rescue of terrorist hostages from various environments

It follows that "special forces" are the units formed primarily to carry out special operations.


A good definition right here.