More Special Units, Less Conventional Infantry?




 
--
 
March 27th, 2010  
Crioche
 
 

Topic: More Special Units, Less Conventional Infantry?


There is a school of thought being explored in the British Army that we have too many 'ordinary' Infantry Battalions at a time when we are involved in 'extraordinary' operations against Insurgents, Terrorists and the like (aka The Taleban).

People in the UK have been exploring the idea of creating more 'Commando' type units that are more highly geared up for butt kicking of the highest magnitude.

Any thoughts?

Since the commencement of the big push against Al Qaeda 'post-9/11'; the UK Special Forces have expanded big time to bring greater numbers of non-Special Forces soldiers under the collective SF umbrella. The 1st Battalion, The Parachute Regiment, a Royal Marines Commando company and a Royal Air Force Regiment Squadron were all pulled together to provide support to 22 SAS & the SBS - even called the Special Forces Support Group (SFSG).

The thinking behind it was that the SAS & SBS should be kept for the tasks they are designed for, and the Paras provide support for them whether in a cordon role or in offensive action where a target needs to be simply destroyed.

I agree with the methodology behind this, because there are a lot of tasks that have been handed to the SAS that could have been achieved by a highly trained Infantry Company. Examples that come to mind are the assault of Taleban bases in Afghanistan, where an SAS Squadron has assaulted them in a 'set-piece' assault. Now I'm sure the SAS gave that target a damned good kicking, but they often observed that this was not what they were created for. These assaults are 'tactical' and Special Forces are 'strategic'.

Our Austrailian colleagues have a large number of their units that are specialised or commando designated. I believe in the US Military they have coined a 'Tier' structure to identify them, with JSOC units as 'Tier 1', SEALs and SF as Tier 2 and Rangers at Tier 3 - representing their escalating skill levels I imagine.

It appears the UK are beginning to think in a similar manner, with SAS & SBS at Tier 1 and SFSG Tier 2. Perhaps the Parachute Regiment and Royal Marines Commando represent the UK's Tier 3 troops? There are a lot of Infantry Battalions that may be appropriate to be enhanced to become Tier 3 units, which may contribute to giving people such as the Taleban an awfully unpleasant time!

Your thoughts please...
March 27th, 2010  
Wallabies
 
Quote:
Our Austrailian colleagues have a large number of their units that are specialised or commando designated.
We only have SASR, 2CDO and 1CDO who are reserves. Probably about 1000 blokes.
March 28th, 2010  
RayManKiller3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crioche
I believe in the US Military they have coined a 'Tier' structure to identify them, with JSOC units as 'Tier 1', SEALs and SF as Tier 2 and Rangers at Tier 3 - representing their escalating skill levels I imagine.

I don't think the Tier system was made in mind of who has more "skills". I believe it was made to determine what specific job they were created to do.

I could be wrong though. There is a good amount of debates I heard about the significance of the Tier system of the US Special Operation Forces.
--
 


Similar Topics
Marine Special Operations Command
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE INFANTRY, THE ARTILLERY AND THE A
Battlefield 2: Special Forces expansion pack
History of State Militias
U.S. Army Infantry