Navy seals vs SAS/SBS?

Question

Come on, its the question a lot of blokes in a pub ask.

Note to the yanks:The SAS didn't really come into the public eye until some terrorits took over the Iranian embassy in london. After days of negotiations the TV crews suddenly saw these guys in black abseil down the side of the building and in straight through the windows. Our lads then did a spot of redecorating. They kicked ****. Must of made great TV!

Answer 1

The seals and sbs are basicly the same, they have the same mission.

the sas would be compared to delta force, which delta was based on.

Answer 2

O.K its a US/British question and of course we all think we have the best of the best as it where.

Well lets go on results because they tell the true story and are of course the best indicator of the training/effectiveness of these elite units.

Delta force is a farce. Basically these guys are wanabees and the Royal Marines would take these apart in a New York minute.
Delta force was responsible for the Helo crash that removed the capability for the Americans to overcome the kidnap of its embassy Staff in Iran during the Fall of the Shah.

SAS/SBS are world renown for their skills in staying unobserved and making effective decisions under fire. Thats why they are relatively unknown outside thier units. The Regiment defends its ability by secrecy and subterfuge. Not by awarding medals and bragging in a bar.

SEAL's are effective warriors whos training is intense and demanding. However they are not a stealth force but a weapons free Killing machine. Sometimes its best to obtain intelligence before obliterating the target.

Oh and for clarity, the SAS/SBS training is the basis for the other units. They all train to some extent together and share new ideas.

The SAS developed the "Flashbang". A device like a grenade that renders an assailant momentarily immobile and confused. Thats the device used in London in 1982 during the Iranian Embassy siege. Very nice.

Answer 3

Hard question. The Americans have more then the SEALs such as the 'green berets', 'marines' and 'delta force'. All special and elite force and special forces. The Brits (me) have 'SAS', 'SBS', 'royal marines' and paratroopers.
British: To join the SAS/SBS you must of been in the army for 3 years and 6 months. Both forces have joined selection courses until a certain point when the SAS and SBS do separate selection courses. SAS doing jungle training and survival training while SBS do diving and boat training. Mainly paratroopers are selected for SAS. Royal marine commandos are selected for SBS.
Americans: Any one can sign up for the SEALs. You can come straight from civilian to special forces. To join delta force (made after the discovery of the SAS), you are picked from the army, mainly from the rangers.
Both special forces are good in different ways. SAS/SBS and delta force are for counter terrorism. SAS and is mainly for jungle. SEALs are trained for more urban environment.

Answer 4

OK i would go with UKSF (sbs/sas) over US SF (seals aren’t the best the US has by the way - they have other units regarded more highly)

seals are very good in there specified role, (maritime sneaky stuff, subs, diving etc..) however in other roles they aren’t generally as well rounded. although they are still a highly respected force - and rightly so.

Ref slug_nasty67 answer - the seals training/selection comparatively isn’t as hard or long as UKSF, however while UKSF selection/ training is hard - bear in mind other agencies - such as Russia's Spetznaz, South Africa’s Task Force - are generally regarded as significantly more grueling.
Also - UKSF do not primarily operate in urban areas - and if they do so that is due to were the actual op is, the greatest strength of the Brits to be honest is the high level they operate at - in any role. I’m afraid your arguments are bit **** over tit!

Brits SF - unfortunately johnstrangey - SBS training has changed since the 70s it used to be VERY hard, it is now joint run with SAS - although the continuation training is longer for SBS. also a lot of operations credited to SAS in the media - is actually down to SBS. But undoubtedly 2 great units, and they are human, but obviously gritty and resourceful individuals - they cant (generally) kill you with one judo chop to the gizzard either.

The Aussie SAS is also a great unit - highly respected.

If UKSF is better than Spetznaz etc.. it is due to training and equipment, being a it more up to date with things.

the single biggest reason Brits SF are better then American SF, attitude, unfortunately Americans have a little to much gung ho ness, a bit too macho, this part of there mentality is probably what lets them down the most, judgment calls, interacting with locals etc....

however - no training or selection is so complete - that no dickheads get through - and if you perceive them to be superhuman - it is more to do with what they can endure (wet, cold etc...) as opposed to being able to kick in 10 blokes at once, (obviously some can.)

Answer 5

you answerd you own question by pointing out that the SAS didnt come into the public till the emmbassy seige which show they were better at keeping a low key also the SAS/SBS helped in the formation of the seals and deta for that matter. and still train them today although the UKSF (SAS/SBS) have less numbers they are far better trainned so it UKSF all the way and if id have to pick 1 it would be the SBS as you have to have passed the commando course to even apply and a few SAS blokes failed it in the 70s and the standerd of training has not changed since

Answer 6

The Iranian Embassy seige, live on TV, was absolutely enthralling. My Dad knew about the SAS from Army service in the 60's and 70's, but those guys were outstanding. For sheer guts, the SAS, except for the Bravo 20 muck up, how did it happen? Now Andy McNab or whoever he is , some kind of hero and author! Give me SAS every time.

Answer 7

The SAS would win, and I know you'll find this hard to believe, but when I was in school, my 4th and 5th year chemistry teacher was a former explosives expert from the SAS, and he did training with the Americvans, and he told us that although they were good, they were nowhere near as good as the SAS. Besides, the SAS has been around since 1941, the Navy S.E.A.L.S hasn't been around that long, so we British have more experience, plus we've fought more wars than anyone else, so we are (in the eyes of the world) considered the experts when fighting a war!

Answer 8

The sas and sbs were black ops that why they weren't in the public eye till then but were formed in the desert of the second world war and kicked butt ever since British armed service's best in the world

Answer 9

well there are different parts for both? are we talking about over all operational success? I would say the SAS because they do not have their hands tied as much as the SEALs do. SAS can do more with our the public reviewing it. Training, about the same, since they trade a lot of training knowledge. I would say there is a draw in over all specialist skills. The US just has more money and bodies to pour into the unit when needed.

Answer 10

Honestly, the SAS and SEALS can't be compared.

Why you ask? Well, simply put...

It's the fact they are fighting both, for Freedom, and 2 of the most powerful f-ing countries in the world.

Hooyah!

Answer 11

Its the SAS/SBS. All you incredulous Yanks, who I have nothing but respect for as a nation and as a military power, need to know that these guys are the best in the world, the training is so tough they're barely human by the end of it.

Also, they trained the elites of other nations, many of whom are based on them themselves. This includes Delta Force and the SEALS. I'm not saying they are not good at what they do, but the SAS and SBS are able to do more and are simply better at it too.