Upgrading Pakistan’s Special Operations Forces in a cost effective way.

[Metal 0-1]

Actually I was asking about the Extended Rails on the Carbines
and the non-magnified red dot sight( I think it is the same model as Pak SF) and the other non-expensive gear etc.
I think we really need extended rails for C-Clamp

If they acquire extended rails and Low powered variable optics or magnifiers they will be huge force multipliers.

 

[Sayfullah]

Nagorno Karabagh

SSG fought for Azerbaijan in the recent Armenia Azerbaijan war?
I thought this was just Indian propaganda?

 

[Metal 0-1]

I thought this was just Indian propaganda?

Propaganda

 

[Reichmarshal]

SSG fought for Azerbaijan in the recent Armenia Azerbaijan war?
I thought this was just Indian propaganda?

Who said that.
Plz go through the thread again for better understanding of the subject

 

[TigerOfMysore]

Top Tier SOF examples: CAG (Delta), SAS, Seals (slightly overhyped - and not all Seal teams are equal), (certain units) of Spetnatz.
I will take a stab at my thoughts and I am likely to get a lot of hate mail. Hoping not.

Comparing SSG to Regular Infantry is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are unique and both's efficacy is a function of not only their gear and training, but most importantly their application. You put an SSG outfit in a combined arms big unit area operation and they'll be average at best. You put an infantry unit into a house breach and they are likely to loose many or kill more than they need to. So that is my thoughts on when people compare these outfits. When we compare we speak to our own limited knowledge of warfare and how units are applied in warfare. Pakistan has had some glaring failures in both these areas that speaks to this very point. Poor application of units in task not meant for their training and skill.

Now in terms of SSG and its level of skill in comparison to other top tier operators. This is where I am likely to get hate mail. SSG is at best average in comparison to other top tier SOF in the world. When you measure capabilities in SOF, you look at 4 critical areas: 1-Training, 2-Tools, 3-Planning, 4-Measure of Unit.

So lets look at #4 : SSG operators are not grunts. Top tier SOFs look for highly capable, highly functioning, and smart operators, who can innovate and iterate, given the dynamic nature of the environment they operate in. Given the independence such units work best in small groups not larger formations. This is the element we call Measure of Man. Our SSG men are average in this department in comparison to top tier SOFs. Yes they are a better crop from our infantry pool, but from level of education, critical thinking, problem solving, they are average at best (when comparing to top tier SOFs).

#3: Planning is a function or tactical and strategic. Operators and their efficacy is defined by how strong and weak plans are. Intelligence is critical in this space. Though we may have strong HumInt, SigInt and Cyber remains weak. So going into a planning process we are already behind the 8-ball. Part of planning is practicing (again and again), and here too we are weaker than some of the top Tier SOFs. So here too I would consider SSG as average when comparing to other top Tier SOFs.

#4: Tools are also not top tier. Western SOFs have a major leg on this.

And lastly training. I have some knowledge of training in this space. What I can tell from my limited view is that SSG training is physically draining. In fact it is brutal. But that is just one side of the coin. The other side of the training has to do with tactics and tools (and this is the trade secret most outfits don't share with each other). It is here SSG again is slightly above avg (but not top tier) when compared to top tier SOFs. I wont get into details but tactics and utilization of advanced tools is intrinsically tied to Measure of Unit and Planning. But training is where I would say they do a reasonable job, but again not at the top.

So in comparison to regional SOFs, SSG can hold its own, no doubt in that. But in comparison to top tier SOFs, SSG is average if not slightly below average. Now we love their quick march, we love their passion, and we love their service. But we do a dis-service to these men when we send them to battle with platitudes and vocal reverberations and the glory of Shahadat, but short-change on the areas that really define whether they will be successful and return to their loved ones.

Sorry for being a downer, and this is my informed and speculated view. Till one truly understands at depth or views it first hand the different SOFs, our analysis will always be subject to scrutiny.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Top Tier SOF examples: Delta, SAS, Seals (slightly overhyped - and not all Seal teams are equal), (certain units) of Spetnatz.
I will take a stab at my thoughts and I am likely to get a lot of hate mail. Hoping not.

Comparing SSG to Regular Infantry is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are unique and both's efficacy is a function of not only their gear and training, but most importantly their application. You put an SSG outfit in a combined arms big unit area operation and they'll be average at best. You put an infantry unit into a house breach and they are likely to loose many or kill more than they need to. So that is my thoughts on when people compare these outfits. When we compare we speak to our own limited knowledge of warfare and how units are applied in warfare. Pakistan has had some glaring failures in both these areas that speaks to this very point. Poor application of units in task not meant for their training and skill.

Now in terms of SSG and its level of skill in comparison to other top tier operators. This is where I am likely to get hate mail. SSG is at best average in comparison to other top tier SOF in the world. When you measure capabilities in SOF, you look at 4 critical areas: 1-Training, 2-Tools, 3-Planning, 4-Measure of Unit.

So lets look at #4 : SSG operators are not grunts. Top tier SOFs look for highly capable, highly functioning, and smart operators, who can innovate and iterate, given the dynamic nature of the environment they operate in. Given the independence such units work best in small groups not larger formations. This is the element we call Measure of Man. Our SSG men are average in this department in comparison to top tier SOFs. Yes they are a better crop from our infantry pool, but from level of education, critical thinking, problem solving, they are average at best (when comparing to top tier SOFs).

#3: Planning is a function or tactical and strategic. Operators and their efficacy is defined by how strong and weak plans are. Intelligence is critical in this space. Though we may have strong HumInt, SigInt and Cyber remains weak. So going into a planning process we are already behind the 8-ball. Part of planning is practicing (again and again), and here too we are weaker than some of the top Tier SOFs. So here too I would consider SSG as average when comparing to other top Tier SOFs.

#4: Tools are also not top tier. Western SOFs have a major leg on this.

And lastly training. I have some good knowledge of training in this space. What I can tell from my limited view is that SSG training is physically draining. In fact it is brutal. But that is just one side of the coin. The other side of the training has to do with tactics and tools (and this is the trade secret most outfits don't share with each other). It is here SSG again is slightly above avg (but not top tier) when compared to top tier SOFs. I wont get into details but tactics and utilization of advanced tools is intrinsically tied to Measure of Unit and Planning. But training is where I would say they do a reasonable job, but again not at the top.

So in comparison to regional SOFs, SSG can hold its own, no doubt in that. But in comparison to top tier SOFs, SSG is average if not slightly below average. Now we love their quick march, we love their passion, and we love their service. But we do a dis-service to these men when we send them to battle with platitudes and vocal reverberations and the glory of Shahadat, but short-change on the areas that really define whether they will be successful and return to their loved ones.

Sorry for being a downer, and this is my informed and speculated view. Till one truly understands at depth or views it first hand the different SOFs, our analysis will always be subject to scrutiny.

I don't know about the SSG, but given that we are a 3rd world country, none of this would surprise me.

Thanks for the frank assessment.

 

[salarsikander]

ou guys think special forces is some sort of a fashion show that the best dressed and equipped will win.

one thing he hated was to use SSG for cosmetics show like parachuting and vip guarding duites as wrll

 

[Reichmarshal]

Top Tier SOF examples: Delta, SAS, Seals (slightly overhyped - and not all Seal teams are equal), (certain units) of Spetnatz.
I will take a stab at my thoughts and I am likely to get a lot of hate mail. Hoping not.

Comparing SSG to Regular Infantry is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are unique and both's efficacy is a function of not only their gear and training, but most importantly their application. You put an SSG outfit in a combined arms big unit area operation and they'll be average at best. You put an infantry unit into a house breach and they are likely to loose many or kill more than they need to. So that is my thoughts on when people compare these outfits. When we compare we speak to our own limited knowledge of warfare and how units are applied in warfare. Pakistan has had some glaring failures in both these areas that speaks to this very point. Poor application of units in task not meant for their training and skill.

Now in terms of SSG and its level of skill in comparison to other top tier operators. This is where I am likely to get hate mail. SSG is at best average in comparison to other top tier SOF in the world. When you measure capabilities in SOF, you look at 4 critical areas: 1-Training, 2-Tools, 3-Planning, 4-Measure of Unit.

So lets look at #4 : SSG operators are not grunts. Top tier SOFs look for highly capable, highly functioning, and smart operators, who can innovate and iterate, given the dynamic nature of the environment they operate in. Given the independence such units work best in small groups not larger formations. This is the element we call Measure of Man. Our SSG men are average in this department in comparison to top tier SOFs. Yes they are a better crop from our infantry pool, but from level of education, critical thinking, problem solving, they are average at best (when comparing to top tier SOFs).

#3: Planning is a function or tactical and strategic. Operators and their efficacy is defined by how strong and weak plans are. Intelligence is critical in this space. Though we may have strong HumInt, SigInt and Cyber remains weak. So going into a planning process we are already behind the 8-ball. Part of planning is practicing (again and again), and here too we are weaker than some of the top Tier SOFs. So here too I would consider SSG as average when comparing to other top Tier SOFs.

#4: Tools are also not top tier. Western SOFs have a major leg on this.

And lastly training. I have some good knowledge of training in this space. What I can tell from my limited view is that SSG training is physically draining. In fact it is brutal. But that is just one side of the coin. The other side of the training has to do with tactics and tools (and this is the trade secret most outfits don't share with each other). It is here SSG again is slightly above avg (but not top tier) when compared to top tier SOFs. I wont get into details but tactics and utilization of advanced tools is intrinsically tied to Measure of Unit and Planning. But training is where I would say they do a reasonable job, but again not at the top.

So in comparison to regional SOFs, SSG can hold its own, no doubt in that. But in comparison to top tier SOFs, SSG is average if not slightly below average. Now we love their quick march, we love their passion, and we love their service. But we do a dis-service to these men when we send them to battle with platitudes and vocal reverberations and the glory of Shahadat, but short-change on the areas that really define whether they will be successful and return to their loved ones.

Sorry for being a downer, and this is my informed and speculated view. Till one truly understands at depth or views it first hand the different SOFs, our analysis will always be subject to scrutiny.

Don't know wt ur on brother but u certainly have been seeing too many English Rambo styled movies.
While in ur assessment ssg might not count for much but going as far back as the afghan soviet war, quite a few attacks against the Soviets were led by ssg operatives.
Ssg operatives trained and led sri Lankans to beat the tamils where they served officially as advisors.
This whole wot faught on our soil they have been the tip of the spear, infantry has mostly been used in a holding role. Their dominance on the battle field was so total that in the end the terrorists would run away once they found out it was ssg.
So ssg might not be much but its the only force to succefully won counter insurgency in two countries.
N not to forget now every body wants to train n learn from them "dumb soldiers".
Your delta n rangers n sas threw every thing at thr taliban except the nuclear bomb n the kitchen sink n look at the results they have achieved, running away with their tails tucked between their legs.
In short bro take ur head out of where the sun don't shine n smell the coffee

 

[TigerOfMysore]

Don't know wt ur on brother but u certainly have been seeing too many English Rambo styled movies.
While in ur assessment ssg might not count for much but going as far back as the afghan soviet war, quite a few attacks against the Soviets were led by ssg operatives.
Ssg operatives trained and led sri Lankans to beat the tamils where they served officially as advisors.
This whole wot faught on our soil they have been the tip of the spear, infantry has mostly been used in a holding role. Their dominance on the battle field was so total that in the end the terrorists would run away once they found out it was ssg.
So ssg might not be much but its the only force to succefully won counter insurgency in two countries.
N not to forget now every body wants to train n learn from them "dumb soldiers".
Your delta n rangers n sas threw every thing at thr taliban except the nuclear bomb n the kitchen sink n look at the results they have achieved, running away with their tails tucked between their legs.
In short bro take ur head out of where the sun don't shine n smell the coffee

If you want to measure our top SOFs with untrained mountain men/rebels/smugglers so be it. In terms of action against Russians in Afghan war, that was a guerrilla action (and the mujahideen were just as effective if not more - the Mujahideen were not SOFs in any sense) and I am sure both did fine, as they dominated heights, land and people. Not much an invading force can do in such scenarios, no matter who they are. Also it speaks more about Russian tactics than it speaks about our capabilities. But to somehow extend from that a view that SSG walks on water, that is your prerogative to have. With respect to Sri Lankan action SSG was not actively participating in a major/direct way (in fact I would argue that the PAF had more to do with SL victory than SSG). That war was won the old fashioned way. The Sinhalese SL Army took away the operating space for the Tamil rebels in the North (Jaffna P), while shutting off and effectively squeezing the Palk and Mannar straits (India's supply line for the rebels). It was not some daring landing on the Eagles Nest (ala SSG) that won them the day, but a long drawn out grueling operation where regular infantry, air and armor had more to do with the eventual success. I am sure SSG provided some training, perhaps even did some effective blocking actions (though I doubt it), but again to take that one point and paint a broad stroke attributing the entire war to SSG support, is, sorry to say a very simple, binary and basic analysis. God even average officers in Pakistan's (C) Staff College will laugh at the over sized view of SSG some have. Usually this over sized view is found within the SSG or people totally disconnected with war fighting. Serious people who have used the SSG arm, know the limits very well.

I don't buy happy talk, and Pakistanis have a tendency of doing too much of that. I have seen too much in life and experienced too much reality to buy such fantasies. If you read my post above again, you'll notice I specifically stated that from a regional perspective they can hold their own, but to somehow compare our SSG to top tier SOFs is foolhardy. Furthermore you also are comparing our SOF operations, that happen on our soil, or near our borders/logistics that are often little more than either SWAT actions or are combined military clearing operations. Also the so called FATA, Dir and Sawat operations were full operations not just SSG. In Sawat SSG was primarily used to hold on to some mountain peaks. Most of the clearing and operations were done by regular armor backed infantry. In FATA again FC and Regular troops backed by armor and air cav was used. The irony is FATA operations were not major kinetic events in the sense of direct action. There was some but it was mostly hit and run and IEDs. FATA TTP guys seldom maintained long term contact with our units. They were clearing operations where entire swaths of areas were deemed kill zones. It was hardly an SOF type of action. So again taking those acts and extending them to some SSG folklore is not accurate.

SSG applied in its limited role (reconnaissance, sabotage, assassination, blocking actions), meant for the units, and their particular training can be an effective support arm of an overall military operation. SSG cannot and has never singularly turned the tide of any of the operations you mentioned in your post, not even the Sindh anti-dacoit operation where almost the entire SSG was seconded to the DG Mehran force (included Sindh Rangers, SSG and regular army and air cav). Dir, Sawat, North and South Waziristan, Sri Lanka, nor Afghanistan. None of them. If you think otherwise what can I say.

Try applying our SOFs in any scale in a war-zone that is thousands of miles away, with ingress/egress and core mission execution. They you'll realize the dimension of how top tier operators work. It is a whole different ball game that operates at a level few truly have a sense of. You want to continue believing fantasies be my guest, but such rigor of thought does no justice to the serious business of war fighting and a forum for serious military analysis.

I will stick with my 4 point argument - it is about training, tools, planning and the measure of unit.
Lastly not sure why you feel so compelled to get personal. Speaks more about you than the merit of your argument. On the whole I have found you to be a reasonable person, but was disappointed in your approach on this topic.

I am also thinking it is just not worth providing any in depth view or analysis, given some members become so emotional and personal. I guess it might be better to stay quiet and just watch from the sidelines. But then again thanks to those members who took by views (agreeing or disagreeing) and read it dispassionately in order to perhaps glean some lessons or at the minimum get their minds engaged.

@Reichmarshal Apologies from before if I said anything that was distasteful or personal. Tried my best not to

 

[Falcon26]

Top Tier SOF examples: CAG (Delta), SAS, Seals (slightly overhyped - and not all Seal teams are equal), (certain units) of Spetnatz.
I will take a stab at my thoughts and I am likely to get a lot of hate mail. Hoping not.

Comparing SSG to Regular Infantry is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are unique and both's efficacy is a function of not only their gear and training, but most importantly their application. You put an SSG outfit in a combined arms big unit area operation and they'll be average at best. You put an infantry unit into a house breach and they are likely to loose many or kill more than they need to. So that is my thoughts on when people compare these outfits. When we compare we speak to our own limited knowledge of warfare and how units are applied in warfare. Pakistan has had some glaring failures in both these areas that speaks to this very point. Poor application of units in task not meant for their training and skill.

Now in terms of SSG and its level of skill in comparison to other top tier operators. This is where I am likely to get hate mail. SSG is at best average in comparison to other top tier SOF in the world. When you measure capabilities in SOF, you look at 4 critical areas: 1-Training, 2-Tools, 3-Planning, 4-Measure of Unit.

So lets look at #4 : SSG operators are not grunts. Top tier SOFs look for highly capable, highly functioning, and smart operators, who can innovate and iterate, given the dynamic nature of the environment they operate in. Given the independence such units work best in small groups not larger formations. This is the element we call Measure of Man. Our SSG men are average in this department in comparison to top tier SOFs. Yes they are a better crop from our infantry pool, but from level of education, critical thinking, problem solving, they are average at best (when comparing to top tier SOFs).

#3: Planning is a function or tactical and strategic. Operators and their efficacy is defined by how strong and weak plans are. Intelligence is critical in this space. Though we may have strong HumInt, SigInt and Cyber remains weak. So going into a planning process we are already behind the 8-ball. Part of planning is practicing (again and again), and here too we are weaker than some of the top Tier SOFs. So here too I would consider SSG as average when comparing to other top Tier SOFs.

#4: Tools are also not top tier. Western SOFs have a major leg on this.

And lastly training. I have some knowledge of training in this space. What I can tell from my limited view is that SSG training is physically draining. In fact it is brutal. But that is just one side of the coin. The other side of the training has to do with tactics and tools (and this is the trade secret most outfits don't share with each other). It is here SSG again is slightly above avg (but not top tier) when compared to top tier SOFs. I wont get into details but tactics and utilization of advanced tools is intrinsically tied to Measure of Unit and Planning. But training is where I would say they do a reasonable job, but again not at the top.

So in comparison to regional SOFs, SSG can hold its own, no doubt in that. But in comparison to top tier SOFs, SSG is average if not slightly below average. Now we love their quick march, we love their passion, and we love their service. But we do a dis-service to these men when we send them to battle with platitudes and vocal reverberations and the glory of Shahadat, but short-change on the areas that really define whether they will be successful and return to their loved ones.

Sorry for being a downer, and this is my informed and speculated view. Till one truly understands at depth or views it first hand the different SOFs, our analysis will always be subject to scrutiny.

objective analysis. SSG are good by Pakistani and maybe south Asian standards, but to compare them to top tier special forces is pretty unfair. They are at best average or slightly below average, as you said.

 

[Adecypher]

Try applying our SOFs in any scale in a war-zone that is thousands of miles away, with ingress/egress and core mission execution. They you'll realize the dimension of how top tier operators work. It is a whole different ball game that operates at a level few truly have a sense of.

I really commend your knowledge on the subject matter and if you have time I want to know examples (if any) where ANY SOF deployed against a formidable enemy where the surrounding area is NOT already secured before hand and there is NO air support to be available for a long long time.

Thanks in Advance.

 

[Metal 0-1]

I really commend your knowledge on the subject matter and if you have time I want to know examples (if any) where ANY SOF deployed against a formidable enemy where the surrounding area is NOT already secured before hand and their is NO air support to be available for a long long time.

Thanks in Advance.

 

[TigerOfMysore]

I really commend your knowledge on the subject matter and if you have time I want to know examples (if any) where ANY SOF deployed against a formidable enemy where the surrounding area is NOT already secured before hand and their is NO air support to be available for a long long time.

Thanks in Advance.

@Adecypher That is an excellent question. And by that question I can begin to see you are getting to the meat of it. When people talk about SOF they often conflate many types of units which is a shame. You have specialized mountain units, you have ranger or recon type units, you have anti-terror unit (many different flavors), all clumped into one. That is a big shame, because these units are so diverse and so specific to their tasks and training.

When I think about our SSG I think of comparing them to US Army Rangers or to Marine Recon units at best. Zarrar has some specialization in anti-hijacking and hostage type scenarios. Rest are generally Ranger or Recon type units. SSGN brings in some port and water based training, so there is some SEAL type training overlap but limited.

Another thing people often don't realize that even in the top tier there is a pecking order. CAG and Seal (some units), as well as some JSOC special units operate at a totally different level to even their counterparts in Spetnaz or SAS. Some of the JSOC units I stated above operate in a quasi brute force kinetic operations that are rare for SOFs. SOFs are generally clandestine in their operations, but given US's spectrum control over air and space, it allows for far greater latitude in how these SOF units are utilized, which historically has been a big no no in SOF application. US can get away with it and pushes the application of its SOF units, and this gives them greater latitude of SOF application, which other countries don't have. But US only does this in an environment where ingress and egress can be clean. However here too there is no guarantee.

Now this brings me to your primary question. Cold war and post cold war we have seen few wars where adversaries of equal heft went at it. Read up on SAS operations during WW2 - those were truly daring ops in many cases well behind enemy lines. There was some SOF type operation in Korea as well, but not much to write about. Then there was Army Ranger and some SR units in Vietnam that operated in thick jungles in hunter-killer actions on VC/NV. In 1965 our boys (SSG) were air dropped behind enemy lines in Pathankot, Halwara, Adampur. Unfortunately that turned out horribly, and most were captured or killed. So yes there have been a number of operations where SOFs were deployed behind enemy lines with little to no ground or air support. Many did not turn out well, in fact I would argue as stand alone efforts they seldom amounted to little from a military perspective unless they were simple assassinations or snatch and grabs or recon. I am sure there are many examples and applications of SOF in areas where there is limited ground and air support, for example I would not be surprised SOFs operating in Africa and Philippines. There are a bunch of ops during ME ops, but I will not state those because those operated within the domain of full spectrum control by allied forces. But very difficult to talk or write about these (contemporary examples) as most will remain out of public domain, till these ops get declassified. BTW there is often too much hype around some of these ops, and their efficacy is often over blown and over stated. That factors into psy-ops which is another one of the core elements of SOFs.

 

[FuturePAF]

Comparing Pakistan’s SOF units with countries and organizations facing similar challenges as our own would probably be a more productive comparison. Countries in similar situations to our own, and studying how they managed, with limited budgets, to deal with their challenges, would yield innovative methods.

Eastern European Countries or some of the NATO countries facing Russia, Soviet-Allied Nations (like the East Germans) facing NATO, countries in the Middle East facing each other (such as the story of Eli Cohen), and Non-state organizations/rebels facing nation states, such as in Latin America.

Our adversary is also not a top tier force. Information/network dominance and a great strategy, planning, and training are what will allow Pakistan to stay one step ahead.

 

[Adecypher]

I think in the very first video you posted narrates at starting around 2;44 mins and I quote "On there arrival (i.e. SAS Arrival) to the objective phase II was to begin 4 US F-18 Hornets and 2 F-14 Tomcat conducted a preliminary bombing run on a Target .... ) and it also says that because of the a very limited time window of availability of the fighter jets the SAS agreed to that time table by the US ... may I misinterpret ...

I tried very hard but did NOT find a "formidable enemy" ...