I found out that it wasn`t an thread here about one of the oldest and most combat proven special forces in the world, the unit that started it all in 1941.

this unit has fought all over the world and many other countrys had their units trained by them like Rhodesia , Thailand, Norway, and many more.

They are the text book of what an SOF unit should be like and they are definetly trained hard.

After 14 years in the military I think the difference between Special Forces units is pretty blurred.

It all boils down to a few things.

1 Amount of money spent on training
2 Amount of time spent on training
3 Specialization verusus General knowledge ( I.E. is the group capable of not getting killed in 20 seconds in a high altitude mountain attack, a city under siege, capable of underwater demolition, HALO, HAHO, and RAST insertions, sniping, counter-sniping, as well as CQB, what about H2H?
4 and of course Combat experience

The British SAS is a superb group of combat warriors. There are lots of good combat units out there that are similar. Some are very specialized like the US Army SF and US Airforce Combat Controllers, some are very generalized like Seals and US Recon Marines.

To put a point on say that the SAS is the best, is kind of a my dog can beat up your dog argument.

Spec warriors are dying everyday all over the world. Both good, great, and superb. I think it is important to recognize that it takes a special person with incredible personal tenacity to complete the training.

I say Semper Fortis to all of those secret warriors out there. Weather they be American, British, Polish, Norwegian, or Juan Pozzi!

It's too bad your health has kept your from serving your Nation, Pere I am sure you would have made a great military man.

Well i`m in the Nasional guard over here, going on maneuver in a month, but tobad i hadnt the good health before when i was a buck private in the regualr army so i could have tried out for HJK , the Paratroppers that we have, but that is what happend, health is a value you dont realize what is until you loose it.

My grandfather was in the Company Linge during the war and trained in England so many has been here and there before.

Well back to topic.

Much of the tactics and gear that was pioneered some 50-60 years ago hasnt changed at all, just technoly has made it to a new level of proficency , or is the new technology a potential liability hazard?

I suppose any argument here would break down and revert quickly to the semantics of description of 'firsts' but I would have to vote for the French Foreign Legion. Created in 1831, le Légion étrangère beats out the SAS by 110 years! The Legion was comprised of foreign nationals, primarily used to protect and expand the French colonial empire during the 19th century, but it also fought in all French wars including the Franco-Prussian War and both World Wars. And don't leave out Indo-Chine and Dien Bien Phu as well as many modern day search and rescue ops.

I can find no way to condemn them as a fighting unit as they too have pretty well covered the globe with exploits of legend, many I am sure that will remain untold forever.
"Viva le France, Vive le Légion étrangère!"

FFL are not a Special Forces unit any more than the USMC is, although today both organisations have smaller sub units which do carry out SF roles...

I suspect the first true SF units similar in specialisation to their modern counterparts may have been created in the American Army to fight the Indian Wars, or perhaps by either side during the Boer War??

D99 i was never in SF only in a scout unit ,but i trained a lot mostly in rifle shooting as im a ministry of defense shooting instructor with members of the GOE -special operators from the air force-and 601 company one of our 2ARMY SF companys .In this matter i agreed totally with you ,furthermore there are units specialized in mountain,bush etc so i believe there isnt a best SF ,on respect of the french foreign legion ,i have some friends who served there only the 2nd rep can be considered SF.Ibelieve that in the 70s the south african recces were one of the best bush figthers and with more combat experience ,but can we say the same now ...after years not figthing .As a curiosity do you know that our SF used weatherbys 300wby magnum in sniper role in the falklands war .Juan

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4Yf0weAgHJY

About the Rhodesian SAS.

Well Juan that makes two of us. I am not SF anything either. Regular aviation Navy. Lots of wierd assigments none have been SF. Lots of tim in the rear with the gear but still have 5 campaign medals showing I was there.

Okay how about Rogers Rangers???

Rogers' Rangers was an independent company of rangers attached to the British Army during the French and Indian War. The unit was informally trained by Major Robert Rogers as a rapidly deployable light infantry force tasked with reconnaissance and conducting special operations against distant targets. Their military tactics were so bold and effective that the unit became the chief scouting unit of British Crown forces in the late 1750s. Later, several members of Rogers' Rangers became influential leaders in the American Revolutionary War and a large number of ex-rangers were present as patriot militiamen at the Battle of Concord Bridge.

They go back to at least ancient Greece and Persia. Probably much farther.