SWAT vs GSG-9

[Kyler]

I am a bit of goof by watching "Deadliest Warrior." The show is broadcasted on America's SpikeTV, and pits different styles of warriors against one another with the use of 4 or 5 different weapons. The information is programmed in a computer simulation system and run 1,000 times. The show while pretty interesting does has it flaws and to me a glaring one occurred this week. The season 2 premiere they put together a fictional battle between American SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) against Germany's GSG-9 Counter Terrorism Unit.

It frankly pissed me off that the whole episode was setup to let SWAT win, and GSG-9 lose. I know this was done to make the American audience happy but in my opinion it is flat out lie. Don't get wrong there are some really great SWAT units in the US, including ones in New York City, Washington D.C., and LA. Though as particular unit of SWAT doesn't have near the training or experience of GSG-9. GSG-9 is considered by many one of the best counter terrorism units in the entire world, and probably the best trained & equipped police unit in the world. Only a few military special operation units I would consider better. SWAT while designed to and does a good job taking down violent attackers and individuals spends a good deal of its time busting drug dealers and helping authorities do breach searches. They don’t spend all their time training to rescue hostage and kill and take down large groups of terrorists. In addition GSG-9 members must be able to perform every function of the team just in case of a member being taken out, while many SWAT officers have either basic overall skills for their duties, or specialize in one particular area of the team. Those show bases much of info based on the weapons, which for a units like SWAT or GSG-9 they forgot to point out that it is often customary for each units operators to have different & customized weapons for each member.

I would post the link for the episode online, but they haven't put it up yet.

Why in the hell am I complaining about this on here, I am a member of a few gun forums as well, but alas since they are in the US most of the posters there think anything or anyone from the USA is better than something or someone from another country. Plus this forum has a bigger group of people from around the world who have so it has a lot of different perspectives.

You can watch the show or not, but in the real world I think GSG-9 would beat SWAT’s butt almost any day.

[Bgile]

I'm inclined to agree that GSG-9 is probably better at their job than a typical SWAT team is at the same task. For one thing, I believe GSG-9 is a national elite unit, whereas pretty much every city in the USA has a SWAT team and their competence and equipment probably varies a lot.

Having said that, I think pitting one against the other is a stupid idea and in any case there is no way to measure it objectively.

I have no intention of watching it.

[RF]

I agree with Bgile. SWAT I don't think was conceived of as taking on other countries counter-terrorism units was it?

[RF]

For ''Deadliest Warrior'' it might be more interesting for a US versus German combination for a Wehrmacht panzer division commanded by Guderian take on a US armoured division commanded by Patton, with no other arms, no air power involved on either side. Who would win?

[Karl Heidenreich]

RF:

For ''Deadliest Warrior'' it might be more interesting for a US versus German combination for a Wehrmacht panzer division commanded by Guderian take on a US armoured division commanded by Patton, with no other arms, no air power involved on either side. Who would win?

WWII German tactical proficiency dictates a German victory. However, in order to have that for sure, you must take not consider a Wehrmacht PZ but a Waffen SS PZ one.

[Herr Nilsson]

You can watch the show or not, but in the real world I think GSG-9 would beat SWAT’s butt almost any day.

Maybe, maybe not:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWAT_World_Challenge

[lwd]

I watched one of the shows (viking vs saumari). I found it interesting but seriously flawed. For instance they had the viking use a technique for throwing two spears at the same time. It might be useful if what you are trying to do is put a spear in an opponents shield but you loose both power and accuarcy doing so. Then there was the section where they were touting the offensive capabilities of the shield but completely neglected it's defencive uses!!!

[RF]

lwd, has the show considered the Vikings versus Zulus?

[yellowtail3]

SWAT? .. that's what many jurisdictions now use to serve warrants, when in the past they would knock on the door. Militarization of policing - 'wannabe commandos' - an unhappy effect of the War on (some) Drugs.

scoundrels. we need to repeal that 1934 Firearms Act...

[lwd]

lwd, has the show considered the Vikings versus Zulus?

I don't think so. It would be pretty one sided IMO if they did. Unless of course you allowed the Zulus rifles which depending on how they factored in might just make it one sided in the other direction.

[Kyler]

lwd, has the show considered the Vikings versus Zulus?

I don't think so. It would be pretty one sided IMO if they did. Unless of course you allowed the Zulus rifles which depending on how they factored in might just make it one sided in the other direction.

Tonights Episode pitts Attila the Hun vs Alexander the Great. Again this idea shows the flaw of the show by just putting the weapons each side used against one another. Both men were known for their military thinking and policitcal strategies besides being great warriors in combat.

I think Karl's idea of American Calvary Unit vs. German Panzer Unit would be very interesting.

I would pick as the weapons the Sherman v Panzer 4, K98 v Garand, Walther v 1911A1, MG42 v .30 Browning MG, Pineapple Gernade v Stick Gernade.

It is suprising they really haven't done much with WW2 in the show. Probably knowing they would get a flood of letter complaining about the result whatever it was.

[lwd]

...I would pick as the weapons the Sherman v Panzer 4, K98 v Garand, Walther v 1911A1, MG42 v .30 Browning MG, Pineapple Gernade v Stick Gernade.
...

This illustrates one of the problems with a show like this. In particular the "MG42 vs .30 Browning MG". The M2 mg was very prevalant in a US cavalry unit in WWII. Then there's the question of how relevant a pistol is to the quality of such a unit vs say submaching guns.

[Bgile]

...I would pick as the weapons the Sherman v Panzer 4, K98 v Garand, Walther v 1911A1, MG42 v .30 Browning MG, Pineapple Gernade v Stick Gernade.
...

This illustrates one of the problems with a show like this. In particular the "MG42 vs .30 Browning MG". The M2 mg was very prevalant in a US cavalry unit in WWII. Then there's the question of how relevant a pistol is to the quality of such a unit vs say submaching guns.

I got the impression he was just talking about comparing equivalent weapons from one side vs anothers, not the complete package.

[lwd]

...I would pick as the weapons the Sherman v Panzer 4, K98 v Garand, Walther v 1911A1, MG42 v .30 Browning MG, Pineapple Gernade v Stick Gernade.
...

This illustrates one of the problems with a show like this. In particular the "MG42 vs .30 Browning MG". The M2 mg was very prevalant in a US cavalry unit in WWII. Then there's the question of how relevant a pistol is to the quality of such a unit vs say submaching guns.

I got the impression he was just talking about comparing equivalent weapons from one side vs anothers, not the complete package.

What is an "equivalent weapon" though? If the Germans use the MG42 as their primary mg and the US uses a mix of 30 cal and 50 cal shouldn't that be what's evaluated? The show also tends to pick what they think are the most important weapons. I'd ague that smgs are more important than pistols especially late war when most US tanks had them.

[Bgile]

US dismounted Infantry didn't normally use .50 machineguns. They were normally mounted on vehicles and are fired in support when there was a vehicle present in the fight. I agree it isn't simple though, because the Germans used tripod mounted MG-42s in some situations where the USA would use a tripod mounted .50 cal MG.