Seals vs Delta vs Devgru vs Recon vs Rangers

For the last few days I've been trolling pages which attempt to set the record straight regarding which one of our elite special operations forces is the best in the business. I've heard countless tales of hard charging Seals who did everything right put up against the meanest operators delta has to offer. All of this only ends in " well I can't really choose one because they might find me". That's about the lamest excuse I've ever heard.

If you are going to compare something, then fucking compare it. Don't act like you are actually going to make a statement and then all of a sudden back off. You're only proving you are full of shit.


From the get go I will tell you that I'm not comparing Delta and Devgru. I don't know shit about either, and anyone who has not served in either of those units is full of shit when they start listing which one does what better or more.

Having served in the military, I have first hand experience with Rangers and Navy Seals. I don't recall working with Recon folks, but I could be wrong. I've worked with CIA operatives on one occasion and it wasn't for a mission. I had to sit through a briefing and nobody in the room was allowed to ask any questions. So that's my CIA experience.

Whenever I hear about Special Ops, the first thing I hear is this god forsaken Tier Chart. If you're not familiar with this chart, I'll write it out here:

Tier 1: Delta, Devgru

Tier 2: Rangers, Seals, 160th Soar

Tier 3:Special Forces (Green Berets), Force Recon, Air Force Combat Controllers

People often look at this and immediately say that Tier 3 is where the shittiest of the spec ops fall. Or even better, that Tier 3 is where regular Marines and Army soldiers fall.

The one thing you should know is that this is not a list of who is most bad ass. This is a list of who get's what based on funding from the government. I don't know how the funding is broken down, but I do know that the outfits in Tier 3 are in that tier because they require very little to get going. Controllers land before anyone and line up landings, drop zones, and quite a few other things that make them pretty bad ass. Force Recon is a special unit of the Marines that identify land targets which will slow down a conventional force such as the Marines or the Army. They are in the middle of the worst of it trying to give advise. Special Forces often fall in on local militia's that just need guidance to attack enemies of the United States. They help locals revolt, among other things.

Tier 2 is an interesting group. Some folks like to call this "Grey Ops". Truth is, it's just a funding standpoint. Rangers will do their own missions often killing many enemies in the process. I've trained with these folks, and let's just say if they find you trying to shoot them they will be wildly disappointed when it's only you and not 500 more. Seals don't need an introduction. They have books written by multiple people which outline what they do. Launching from Naval ships, Subs, and Planes they obviously require quite a bit of money. Not included is the their wild training after indoctrination courses.
160th is a whole different animal. They have regular black hawks and chinooks just like any other Army aviation unit. Then they have the little birds, specially fitted long rang black hawks and after the killing of Bin Laden, it appears they are proud owners of a black hawk helicopter which is radar resistant. With all of that, and who know's what else, you can imagine the price of maintenance is higher than a regular unit. Aviation isn't cheap, and neither is the 160th.

Tier 1 I really don't know anything about. But one could imagine the price of covering up their non-public missions. That's a lot of money to keep expensive missions on the down low.


So where do these units stand and how do they stack up?

RANGERS:

Rangers vs. Seals: Well, this one doesn't make sense. Rangers tend to work in no less than platoon level organizations. Army platoons range from 24 soldiers on up. Seals work as low as 1. I'm not real sure how to compare 24 to 1.
When it comes to not being heard, both are incredibly good at hiding what they do. Rangers spend quite a large portion of their time providing security over watch for seals. So they work hand in hand. As outlined in "Lone Survivor", Operation Red Wings had 4 members on the ground. Still 20 less than an average Ranger platoon, so I don't know how to compare. I've heard though that Seals will work together in company formations. Rangers do this too. So in an equal setting, you are still comparing apples to oranges. When it comes to Rangers vs Seals, I'd take the Rangers over the Seals. But if it were a simple mission to get someone out, I'd take the seals. As I go on, you'll start to realize that these are all different units and they all have specialties that make them unique.

Rangers vs. Green Berets: Here is a good one. Rangers don't go into foreign countries to train local militia's. They go into foreign countries to kill. Green Berets will go in as small teams to blow shit up, but I've never heard of company level (100-200) going in together for a mission. Green Beret's form A teams which specialize in the exact mission at hand. Others follow for the additional tasks. From an administrative position, I'd take the Green Beret's. I don't see the benefit in dropping off 200 Rangers in a foreign land all by themselves. They would be found quickly and likely run out of ammo. Having locals revolt with their own ammunition, like the Green Beret's do, would be much more beneficial. Starting to add up a little more what rangers do......

Rangers vs Recon: Rangers generally don't do recon for the Army. The Army has scout's for that. The Marines do to, but the Marines are also about killing the enemy. I think Rangers vs Recon is the fairest playing field. Recon and Rangers both jump out of planes. Recon and Rangers both kill lot's of enemies. The thing is, you almost never hear about Recon missions. That's because most of them are special operations capable, not special operations full time. When it comes to this category you have to really pick what you want. If you are storming an airfield: Rangers. If you are lining up targets for a full invasion: Recon. If you want to pick which one is more reliable: I'd again go with the Rangers. Purely from a spec ops point of view. Otherwise their is no difference other than branch of service.

RECON:

Recon vs Seals: Most recon units, when running spec ops, will be in and out pretty quick. Seals run in the same sort of manner. Seals are better trained and have more access to higher grade weapons than recon. I'd take the Seals.

Recon vs Green Berets: If the Recon unit is a full fledged unit part of an assault team, and thus not in a spec ops role, I'd take Recon. If the Recon unit is in a spec ops role, I'd take the Green Berets. Army SF is fully aware of their surroundings. They train for certain area's of the world both in language and culture. Furthermore, they are stationed in places where they likely won't ever leave or transition to other bases. So they spend their entire time off duty studying what the area will look like on duty. As GI Joe would say: Knowing is half the battle. Snake Eaters!

Recon vs Rangers: See above

SEALS:

Seals vs Rangers: See above

Seals vs Recon: See above

Seals vs Green Berets: I ABSOLUTELY LOVE THIS ONE! Navy SEALS were born from UDT divers. At one time, UDT's wouldn't leave the water. They would clear everything for Navy ships to advance, troops to get to shore, or Marines to clear a beach. Once the water met the sand, they swam back the other way.
Green Beret's were designed to be the on land version of the UDT's. They would go on land and destroy everything. Not only in their own battles, but with locals as well. They were the perfect complement.
Seals were born to bring the Green Beret's ass kicking ability and the UDT's water skills together. As one, the SEALS are probably the best spec ops unit available. On land or sea, I'd take the Seals.

GREEN BERETS:
SF vs Rangers: See above

SF vs Recon: See above

SF vs Seals: See above

So in conclusion, outside of our tier 1 units, which one is the best: As most point out, these are apples and oranges situations. Not to mention, not a single one of these spec ops units can survive without their main counterparts. The seal's won't survive long without the Marines. The Rangers won't survive long without the rest of the Army and Recon certainly will need the support of the Marines to continue their mission.
I've laid out above what each unit can do and compared them. But in the end, it only makes sense that I'd pick one out. My choice would be the SEALS. Pound for pound, you don't get much better and kicking ass than a Navy Seal. While they all are capable of fully humiliating any enemy at home or abroad, Seals bring the water and land together which makes them so much more bad ass.