Talk:Delta Force/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1
| Archive 2 →


Contents

What's in a name?

Delta Force is a nickname not an official name, and should be listed as such on the article page. The term Delta Force refers to a Chuck Norris movie by that title. This name is frowned upon in the actual community and if used at all should be listed under nicknames. All instances of Delta Force should be changed to Delta. --SFjarhead 13:28, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Its common name among the general populace of the world is Delta Force and therefore the article title should be kept as Delta Force. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). -- Necrothesp 10:12, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

-- Good argument Necrothesp. Using that logic let's label the article on the French "Garlic-Smelling Surrender-Monkeys", change the title of Judaism to "'dem conspirin' jewz", George Bush's wiki to "Dubbya" or perhaps just "dumbass" and the articles on God to the "man upstairs" or Allah. You know, the general populace of the world and all. Friggin' computer-geek civilians. --EdTadk—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.110.245.176 (talk • contribs) 03:47, 11 November 2005.

I agree, it is the common nickname for this unit. The article should remain the same; Delta Force title should be under the heading of nicknames.--SFjarhead 01:55, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

How about the official title of the page be 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment - Delta and have Delta Force as a disambiguation page for links to this page, the game, and the movie? --BenWoodruff 21:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, one of the linked PDFs states that DELTA recruits from all branches of service, yet the body of the article states that DELTA recruits only from the Army.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 169.253.4.21 (talk • contribs) 08:18, 22 September 2005.

delta is an army organization, but members of the military from any branch may try out for the force. additionally, some recruiting is done from other forces, but on an informal basis. usually such prospective recruits have special operations experience, such as marines from a MEU-SOC. Avriette 00:38, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

No Marine, Force Recon or otherwise, would even dream of going through selection for Delta. They draw 99% from the Army. Any transfers are likely to be Air Force Combat Controllers, which, from what I've seen, are better soldiers than anything the Army has to offer anyway. Just what I hear. Take it or leave it. Ooh Rah! - Dave—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.225.14.46 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 28 October 2005.

The make-up is 100% Army, no Air Force Combat Controllers from what I know from my time at Bragg. To say the AF Combat Controllers are "better soldiers than the Army" is pretty funny. I've yet to see a Combat Controller with anywhere near the leadership experience of an 82d squad leader or the tactical expertise for that matter. I seriously doubt they're capable of leading the tactical movement of a platoon size element and the few I knew certainly weren't friggin' disciplined enough to put up with some of the stuff an average 11B has to deal with. Virgil61 01:36, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


I dont understand, if Delta is 100% Army, as stated above...why bother with the June, 2002 recruitment trip to Okinawa(USMC)?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.130.100.17 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 13 March 2006.


The June 2002 Recruitment trip is because there are Army Units (including One Battalion of the 1st Special Forces Group) on Okinawa at Torii Station. (This is -or was- all easily accessible Public knowledge). SFOD-Delta draws 100% from the Army, but their selection is open to every male soldier SPC and above (Branch Qualified Officers in the grade of O-3 or O-4), regardless of SF, Ranger or Airborne affiliation -- provided that they've completed most of their first enlistment (They will be sent to Airborne school prior to operator training if they pass the assessment phase -- Just like Special Forces). That means that SPC Joe the Cook can try out for it and --provided he's in the physical and mental shape and has the character to pass Selection and Assessment-- can become an operator. Additionally, Marines, Sailors and Airmen can service-transfer to the Army (that is, reenlist into, Ala Blue to Green) and then try out for Delta, but they have to transfer to the Army first and may not transfer back if they fail selection (At least until the end of their enlistment. The same is true of those in the Army who transfer into the Navy to become SEALs) -- Just like SAS, this open-selection was the intent of the unit in the first place in order to draw on the potential of all soldiers, not just those in Special Ops. That is, according both to Charlie Beckwith's book "Delta Force" and to the annual Perscom/HRC SFOD-D briefing announcements. SFOD-D briefings are held at least once a year on every major base in every major US ARMY command in the world. SFOD-D Briefing announcements with all of this information used to be available on the Perscom website prior to 2001. They have since been removed. -- A guy who actually pays attention.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.53.104 (talk • contribs) 12:46, 24 April 2006.

Delta force remain

delta force should remain the way it is.in every special forces guide or encyclopedia etc they are refered to as delta force not just delta.plus it is more recognizable as delta force also personally it sounds better.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.248.202.119 (talk • contribs) 09:50, 10 August 2005.

Delta Force is such a clicheed, overused term. It is, indeed, cringed at by actual operators. Within the Army Delta Force is known as Delta, D-Boys, or just D. Members of the unit are referred to as 'Operators'. Rumor within military circles has it that the unit has been renamed to Combat Applications Group or CAG. Delta Force is just being thrown around too much, it seems. By comparison, look at the former Seal Team Six, which, due to the brazen blabbermouth Richard Marcinko, had to redesignate itself 'Naval Special Warfare Development Group', or DEVGRU. As secrecy in both the SEALS and Delta intensifies as the war on terror continues, there may come a time when special operators in either unit carry no designation whatsoever. Most direct ops are conducted as part of a Task Force anyway, e.g. Task Force 11 or 22 in Afghanistan, which is an amalgam of operators from all branches of the military. The point is, if the public overuses unit designations they are likely to be changed. Anon—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.225.14.46 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 28 October 2005.

No, administratively they will always have some unit identifier, even if working under another unit commanding a taskforce. It's just the way the military is. Combat Applications Group does indeed refer to Delta, but is a very loose umbrella term. Gibson Cowboy 16:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

That's a good point about overuse. "Delta Force" is an amateurish handle used by civilians. I never heard it refered except as "Delta" while at USASOC. It really should reflect the actual name rather than silly-sounding popular convention. Virgil61 01:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, requiring the average person to type in Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta every time is rediculous. I understand the annoyance the special forces community has at the term "delta force," but that is the common name the public has for it. And unfortunately, most civilians don't have to deal with typical military designations so it's better to keep this simple. Gibson Cowboy 16:35, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Revelations 04:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC) "Deltoids" is a term that I have DF members use when they are referring to others of their rank.


If Charlie Beckwith referred to it as Delta Force (Delta Force at Amazon.com), then I think that Civvies and Wikipedia can get away with it, too.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.53.104 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 24 April 2006.


         What about Delta's association with the British S.A.S rumor has it that they train together, looking at the qualifitcation list on the main page it seems like a lot of things are the same. The 40 mile hump the psychological testing all that good stuff....seeing that Delta is so secretive it seems that they are a lot like the S.A.S being so tied down yet given so many personnal freedoms.

Delta Force - disambiguation

There is a Delta Force series of movies. Two of the movies The Delta Force and Delta Force 2 already have Wiki pages. There is also a Delta Force video game which has a wiki. Why don't we make a Delta Force disambiguation page? We can give a link to the above and include Delta (US Special Operations Force) as one of the options. This would allow Wiki to have the correct name and allow for the uneducated masses to find the appropriate article. --BenWoodruff 16:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree Mathmo 13:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

CIA "DAO" group?

I tried to substantiate the recent diff with a cursory google search, and subsequently found nothing but a bunch of garbage by counterintelligence fanboys. I realize these things are hard to substantiate, but surely somebody can find something? Avriette 17:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

The only thing from that diff I've found that is accurate is the mention that delta recruits from any component (active, guard, reserve) etc. I'm inclined to believe that article is wrong because Delta's training program consists of extreme amounts of practice in MOUT tactics and weapons training (evidenced by Col. Beckwith's book about the creation of delta), and that their training program is very similar to both SFQC/SFAS, and SAS selection. I've never heard anything about any DAO group, but then again if it really existed that wouldn't surprise me. Swatjester 21:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Existence of the "Funny Platoon"

Diccussion transferred from Navy Seals because Delta Force is meant. (MARK S. 14:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC))

Yes, Women cannot become Navy SEALs. The only SOF women can become, is Delta Force. This is only a rumour though! It's said there is a platoon within Delta Force called "Funny Platoon" made up of female personnel. Again, this may just be a rumour.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steven89 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 22 January 2006.

Incorrect. Women are not allowed to hold combat arms positions in the Army, and any member of Delta Force is a member of 1st Special Forces Group, and still holds an 18 series MOS identifier, which is restricted to males only.Swatjester 21:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Unfortunetly You are incorrect!

Deltas are -NOT- members of 1st SFGroup, but of the "Combat Applicatins Group", formerly known as "1st SFODetachment (Airborne) Delta", which was a separate unit with an ASF-Unit-Name for secrecy reasons. By the way, there are diffrent special forces web-sides where the existence of the "FUNNY PLATOON" IS CONSIDERD AS A MATTER OF FACT(!) (MARK S. 19:26, 6 March 2006 (UTC))


Unfortunately, no I'm not. "funny platoon" has never been anything more than a rumor. The clear and verifiable fact is that ALL members of Delta ARE technically co-existant members of 1st SFG. They STILL hold an 18 series MOS, and the position is STILL restricted to women. Remember: women in the army are NOT allowed in direct fire combat arms positions. Stop telling me I'm wrong, stop making uncivil comments on this talk page, and instead, try citing your sources. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 19:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


You're a complete idiot if you think women don't hold combat arms positions in the US Army. Having lived for 3 years on an Army base as the spouse of a soldier I can tell you with 100% certainty that women do indeed hold combat arms positions. You've obviously never been to an army base or been to Iraq. If you were in Iraq you would see women manning machine guns on the gun line, going on raids, defending convoys, ect.....Irreguardless of what you think the MOS says women are 100% certainly serving in direct fire combat arms positions in Iraq and Afganistan as we speak. I would point out that a huge number of soldiers operate outside their MOS - daily. It's certainly sad to see an 74A or a 54B cleaning floors and cutting lawns on a daily basis.

It would seem rather stupid to not have female members of Delta. Delta isn't just about guns and muscle it's about being able to slip in and out of places without being noticed. I hate to break it to you but women would often be less noticed than big muscled men.

QB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.150.19 (talk • contribs)

I hate to break it to you, but "irreguardless" is neither a word, nor would it be spelled correctly if it were one. As for women in combat positions, yes, they are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there is a major difference between non-combat soldiers being caught in an ambush and those specifically trained to go kick in doors, which women are not. Parsecboy 10:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


A google search of [1] comes up with only 320 hits for "funny platoon", all of which are either from unsourced fansites, or refer to it as speculative, with no information to confirm or deny its existance. Everything is "believed to be" or "allegedly" or "supposedly". Out of all those links, the only ones with any little bit of credence are the stars and stripes links (all of which quantify it with "allegedly or believed to be, or supposedly"). I'm sorry but conjecture on blogs, forums, etc. does not equal verifiable facts that Funny platoon actually does exist and employs women. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 19:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Hallo!

Verifiing actual matters officially classified can obviously not be substantiated by hard(official) sources (as everybody knows). Therefore all the sources I found are inofficial:

  • 1) "The TO (Table of Order) for Delta consists of three operational squadrons, a support squadron, a signal squadron, an aviation platoon, and what is termed the "Funny Platoon". This funny platoon is reported to be the only JSOC unit including female operators."-http://www.specwarnet.com/americas/delta.htm
  • 2) "The Funny Platoon": This is the in-house Intelligence arm of Delta. They grew out of a long-running dispute/rivalry with ISA. They will infiltrate a country ahead of a Delta intervention to gather intelligence. They are the only US Special Operation Force to employ woman in a combat role (the only other SOF that has employed women at all has been Army Special Forces, and then, only in a training role)."- http://www.delta-green.com/opensource/textbook/socom.html
  • 3) " There is also the Funny Platoon, an intel group that uses female operatives."-http://www.comebackalive.com/df/dngrjobs.htm
  • 4) "Under its umbrella, Delta is said to consist of three operational — direct action shooting — squadrons, a support squadron, a signal squadron, an aviation platoon, and what is often referred to as the Funny Platoon, believed to be one of the few special operations units allowing female operators among the trigger pullers."-http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?

Possibly these sources do not meet scientific demands but they are an indication for the "Funny Platoon's existence. (MARK S. 14:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC))


Sorry Mark, but I'm afraid Swatjester's right on the money with this.
Prior to my separation in 2004, I was stationed at Ft. Bragg, assigned to the 313th MI. Now, the problem is that while Delta has a training compound at Bragg, they pretty much keep strictly to themselves, so noone really knew how much of the rumors were truth and what was just speculation. Yes, there were rumors floating around about the "funny platoon" (along with much discussion on the nature of the women assigned), but it was the standard shooting the BS "I know a guy who heard from a guy, who overheard a ..." type of rumor.
The problem with females in Delta is exactly the problem Swatjester pointed out. See, NOONE enlists directly into Delta (that I've ever heard of, anyway). Delta likes to recruit from the 18 series sorts after they've gotten some time under their belts. And women are explicitly barred from selecting an 18 MOS.
As for the links you provided, I certainly don't think I'd call them "an indication for the Funny Platoon's existence". The sites are strictly speculative/fan/fringe sites, to be taken with a large grain of salt. By the same token, I can dig up several sites that are adamant that the 11B's are fighting with railguns and laser weaponry as standard issue. :) Of course, that doesn't make it true.
What the bottom line comes down to is that if Delta's fabled "funny platoon" does exist, the women in it aren't coming from the ranks of the US Army. We don't have a qualified pool for them to draw from. I suppose it's within the realm of possibility that they could be seconded women from DIA/CIA, but that's pure unfounded speculation on my part. It'd take far more convincing documentation to suggest that "funny platoon" is anything more than wistful fantasy. JEJoyce 13:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

It's been on every major news channel in the US over the past 5 years that all branches of special forces in the US - Delta, Rangers, Seals, ect.. are now actively recruiting outside of the military. They are looking for the best possible people and it seems that they've finally figured out that the military isn't necessarily the best place to find them. They aren't just looking for people to pull triggers anymore. Why exactly wouldn't a women with a much higher IQ than the average enlisted soldier or trained savant fighter be just as good of choice as a guy who got a GED and spent 4 years as a medical clerk, mechanic or cook? Most nations outside the "Western" world use women as covert special ops. Women can be just as brutal and intelligent as any man. If they are good enough for the CIA and the NSA to use in similar positions why not Delta or Rangers?

As the wife of a soldier I have the greatest respect for our men and women in uniform. However, I can honestly say that not all of the soldiers in our military are not what anyone would consider top of the line or professional soldiers. When you're trying to select the "best of the best" from a pool that consists of less than 1% of the population you have to be realistic and know that your best isn't really anywhere near what the "best" could or should be. I can't count on my fingers how many soldiers I've seen who couldn't even grasp the English language well enough to take basic orders from there command or soldiers who didn't know how to preform basic math. Does it really take a genius to figure out why they finally started looking for outside placements or why women in a "Funny Platoon" would be preforming intelligence gathering?

QB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.150.19 (talk • contribs)

It's pretty rich that you're ripping on soldiers who "couldn't even grasp the English language", while you make one spelling and grammatical mistake after another. There, their, and they're are all different words, with different meanings. One does not "preform", one "performs" a task. Parsecboy 10:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Your MOS does not change when you enter Delta Force, nor does Delta Force recruit strictly from the 18 series MOS. SFOD-D is considered a Special Mission Unit (SMU), not a Branch. According to Douglas Waller's extensively researched 1993 book "The Commandos" an idea that involved Female operators was experimented with briefly in the 1980s but dropped almost immediately as unworkable (but not until after some women had gone through a modified selection and assessment course). Waller provides his Sources in the appendix of the book, including JSOC staff and Delta Operators, so I'm inclined to take him at his word. However -- according to the same sources the "Funny Platoon" does currently exist. It is a Military Intelligence platoon attached to SFOD-D. Women can hold nearly any MI position (exceptions being the S2 in Infantry and Armor battalions -- though they can serve as S2 in Engineer and Aviation BNs as well as at the Brigade level), so I see no reason to dismiss the idea out of hand, especially since women can serve in SOCOM in CA and PsyOp capacities.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.53.104 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 24 April 2006.

the previous comment is correct. females can hold any position in a support unit, such as special forces support or ranger support. the same would hold true for a support unit for delta. Parsecboy 21:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


I saw on the discovery channel(maybe discovery times channel?) SF women in the feild in Afghanistan to search the women there ect... is that considered a "support role"? They caried the same combat gear as the males. Sorry i can't provide a link. -Stowic Stowic 01:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

"Women are not allowed to hold combat arms positions in the Army" : I think there is nevertheless a way to get an exemption about this for some special units, because the ISA included some women, at least in the early 1980s (according to "Killer Elite", by M. Smith). So Delta also may have (or have had) female operators. And specwarnet page is wrong to say that Delta is the only JSOC unit having female operators. Unfortuneatly "Killer Elite" doesn't quote the "funny platoon", nor do any other reference as far as I know. What is known about the ISA seems to make improbable that Delta has ever had set up such an intel platoon, because the ISA remained active and his performances impressed Delta/DEVGRU operators along the 80s. And the ISA had "dispute" with the INSCOM (because INSCOM was not familiar with special ops and covert ops), not directly with Delta. On my own mind, I suppose that the "funny platoon" rumour might in fact come from ISA female operators seen at Bragg during a joint Delta-ISA exercise. Rob1bureau 16:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't consider specwarnet a particularly reliable source based on what it says about units I do understand well, fwiw it's UK information is complete bollocks. Notwithstanding that I think your conclusion is reasonably valid. Delta need not have female operatives because it works in close co-operation with other units which will have female personnel.ALR 17:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Delta and Escobar

A show on TV (history channel?) on capturing Pablo Escobar (cocaine kingpin in Columbia in the 1990s) said the Delta force was heavily involved in Columbia as part of that effort (as part of the US response to the President of Columbia's request for help). 4.250.138.184 18:03, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that too. As a result I inserted a line about that.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by TomStar81 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 22 October 2005.

This should be expanded ; Killing Pablo gives more details about Delta implication, and is more reliable about the role of Delta advisers for the Search bloc. Rob1bureau 13:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


I agree, on the History Channel Special "Killing Pablo" they go into good detail about the involvment of Delta Force ans Sentra (sp?) Spike. They had a huge role in the killing of pablo and it should be added to there missions. 69.129.67.253 15:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC) PS Im at work so I cant sign in but Im Gundam94.

Involved in Peruvian Operation?

I believe there is some speculation that Delta was involved in the raid that ended the Japanese embassy hostage crisis in Lima, Peru a few years back. Anyone have any vis on this? I also remember seeing a video that was shot right after the incident where the raid force all gathered in a courtyard and were supposed to be singing the Peruvian national anthem and there were obviously some very European looking individuals who had no idea what the words to the song were. They were just moving their lips to make it look like they were singing. Am I way off on this or is there anything official that may warrant mentioning it in the article?

I heard the rumor too, but nothing to substantiate it. ⇒ SWATJester eady Aim Fire! 06:26, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, found on GlobalSecurity.org : A small advance team was sent to Lima, Peru immediately following the takeover of the Japanese Ambassador's residence in January 1997 along with six members of the British SAS.. Delta can frequently operate "observators" and/or support teams, as it is said for Brigadier General James L. Dozier kidnapping.

Told to me by an Operator himself: a group of Delta were actually in flight on their way to Peru, but they were diverted back state side when the Peruvians conducted their own successful mission. = That is fact.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.33.88.211 (talk • contribs)

Recruitment and training?

In recruitment it says that Delta is only for Army green berets and Rangers who want to try out for it(or are asked I guess). However, links under Background show a recruitment ad for all military personel to come to a 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta orientation. It lists a bunch of requirements that someone must first have but it specifically states that Delta is open to people from other services.

Which one is right? Is delta open to all branches or not? It's a little unclear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docbrown777 (talk • contribs)

Err, in that context, branches means "branches of service" i.e. Army, Navy, etc. For the past couple of years, Delta has been open to any member of the US army who wants to apply, however, they must in the process pass all the requirements for the US Army Special Forces. Therefore, all members of Delta are a priori members of US Army Special Forces....they just got there from different places. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 06:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Delta is open to all Branches of the US ARMY, not Branches of Service. Members of other services must transfer to the Army to apply. Delta has always (since its inception) been open to members from all Branches, as patterned after the British SAS. Delta Selection and Assessment is similar in concept to SF Selection and Assessment, but the training itself is not. The only "SF" standards that Delta operators must meet are the Physical Training standards, which are essentially the same PT Standards as Airborne requirements (70% in all categories at the 17-21 level). Any male in the Army who wants to try can submit a packet. When their packet is reviewed, they may be invited to attend the selection course. Ranger and SF status by themselves do not confer special status for selection purposes. (although you are more likely to find people who can pass the A/S course among SF and Rangers, that's correlation, not causation) Once in the Delta Pipeline (upon completion of Selection and Assessment), and upon completion of the Operator's Training Course, these soldiers fall under the auspices of SOCOM and on that basis are considered Special Operations Forces. However, they are not 18 series, nor do they undergo any 18 series training, so they are not "Special Forces". There is a difference between SOF and SF, so Swatjester's statement is misleading.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.162.53.104 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 24 April 2006.
Delta selection is open to all branches of the military, period. A couple years back I posted listings from multiple branches showing this, but the history for this page is too long for me to go back and get them. I am going to change this once and for all! 66.65.116.72 06:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC)Aceee
The selection of Delta applicants is completely different from the selection of Special Operations "Green Beret" applicants. Special Operations applicants go through a more formal standard military type selection process which emphasizes working in teams, physical training, and conventional application of military skills. Delta applicants are given a physical training test then a very non-standard type selection process that focuses on individual performance, the ability to act autonomously, a psychological profile, and interviews to determine if they "fit" with Delta. Special operations selection has very specific pass-fail standards that you must achieve to move forward, whereas the Delta applicant never knows what the pass-fail standard is. Additionally, someone in Delta will have completed the Q course and be authorized to wear the Special Operations tab. Any Delta in uniform wears the standard "Green Beret" of the Special Operations Command. It is not uncommon for any given Q course to have a Delta or two in it to learn a specialty. When they train in a more standard Army environment, they do so in uniform but have a cover story for the type of unit they are in. The breadth and scope of training that a Delta operative receives is far beyond the scope of any other military training soldiers receive including Rangers and Special Ops. Delta operator training is more what you would expect a covert operative to receive rather than standard military training. It is very broad and is highly technical. While it is true that physical and weapon training for an operator is intense. The myriad of other technical skills learned are impressive in their own right. Couple that with a priority to teach operators to think outside the box and work with complete autonomy then you will begin to understand that comparing Delta with any other type of Army unit is ridiculous.
So is the Delta Force considered a more elite force than say the Green Berets (Army Special Forces)? Zachorious 00:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
They're different. Delta's principal task is counter-terrorism, whereas Green Berets' operations involve mainly unconventional warfare and direct action. --Nkcs 02:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
The Green Berets are supposed to do mostly training of rebels allied with the US for Spec. Ops style campaigns. MikeNM 23:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

69.162.53.104 is wrong on the airborne standards ( i realize, nitpicking). they are not 70-70-70, they are 60-60-60. i attended jump school in nov. 2004, and unless they've changed since then (which is highly unlikely) that's what they remain. Parsecboy 21:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Last time I was by Ft. Benning (earlier this year) the PT standard was 60 60 60 to pass the army standard: BUT US Army Airborne school required a 70-70-70 by the start of Tower Week. SFAS requires a 70-70-70 minimum, on top of the required standards for airborne school and army standard. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 01:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

since when do you take a 2nd pt test at jump school? there isn't enough time for 2 pt tests. although, my roommate actually got back from jump school today, so i'll ask him when he's around. i'll let you know what he says... Parsecboy 00:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Read again what I said: You don't take 2 PT tests: But if your first PT test you score 60-60-60, you have to improve by Tower Week. Like I said, things may have changed, but ask your friend, I'd like to know for certain. And regardless it doesn't matter: SFAS requires 70-70-70. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 14:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

i realize what you said. but in the army, if you don't prove it on paper (i.e., on a pt test) nothing has occurred. and even if what you say is the standard, there aren't too many nco's in the army who care enough to actually verify progress without being forced to hold a 2nd pt test. Parsecboy 22:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Undercover with long hair and moustaches

One of several operations in which Delta Force operators are thought to have played important roles was the invasion of Iraq in 2003. They allegedly entered Baghdad in advance, undercover with long hair and moustaches..

The last bit of that seems like it could be false. As it happens, I don't know that much about the subject, and am most probably wrong, hence why I didn't make a change. Just let me know if I did correctly, so that I can learn in future.--Dreaded Walrus 03:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it "could be false" hense the reason the line says "thought to have played". Anything about Delta is difficult to verify. However, there are many pictures in the book "Black Hawk Down" of Operators with shaggy hair and thick mustaches while in the Mog. Also, I know some of the SF guys first on the ground in Afghanistan after 9/11 and they all have heavy, native-style beards in their photos - Rezdave 12 May '07

My husband has pictures of his time in Iraq of going on raids with special forces and they were wearing dark tennis shoes and nothing even close to regulation uniforms longer dirty hair and beards.

Fiction

Fiction, as defined by the Oxford American Dictionary: "Invention or fabrication as opposed to fact." Folks have been persistently editing this article with citations from The Unit, a show on CBS; 24, a show on FOX; and Deception Point, a novel by Dan Brown; among others — and these citations are, to say the least, inappropriate. Small wonder the mainstream doesn't take this project seriously, if you're going to publish an encyclopedia that asserts certain facts to be true based on their depiction in dramatic works. Cribcage 04:43, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been doing my best to remove any such edits. It's a disrespect to Delta operators that such assertions and citations exist. Anyway, that's why we have a "Delta force in popular culture" section. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 14:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Delta casualties

I've put together a list of Delta soldiers that have died in action since the beginning of the unit. Given the secrecy of the unit, a death is one of the few times the unit is even somewhat tacitly acknowledge by the Pentagon, which doesn't even list the unit in the press release announcing the soldier's death, choosing only to say the soldier was assigned to Headquarters, U.S. Army Special Operations Command. I think this would be a good addition to this page but wanted to run it past others before adding to the page. Thanks. Dsw 11:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

No. You could conceivably make an article called "List of US Army Special Operations Command soldiers who have died in action" but since you have no way to explicitly verify that they were in Delta, you cannot include it in the article as per WP:V and WP:CITE. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 01:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I think the sacrifice is the same if a person was delta or a fry cook on the USS Missouri. I agree that a page for soldiers who died in service might be good, but long, as it really should include all the names available for all conflicts. I am not sure if it would get vandalized if it is even possible to make such a list. Perhaps some sort of clearing procedure would need be dreamed up and obviously restrict user posting. I am sure there are databases with list of Fallen Soldiers somewhere that could be used. One nice thing about such a list would be that families, friends, comrades, could then link to a page in memory for each of the fallen, in those pages information like citations, unit, branch, or other information could be included. Just my 2 cents. Mantion 21:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Problem is, you generally can't verify which unit KIA's come from, and even if you could, you certainly couldn't verify that they were delta. If you can't verify it, you can't include it.⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 20:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

re-orginize

The article seems to be a bit confusing. This is typical when it is contributed and then edited. I think that reorganizing it would be beneficial.

First the "background" section jumps right into the failed 1980 mission then goes on some random tangents. I think starting over or deleting the section entirely. I think that "Delta force in modern conflicts" could be changed to "Delta in conflicts" and include all operations including the ones listed in the Second "Operations".

Maybe expanding some sections and adding some, like people credited with delta's formation. Also the term "Delta Force" is used a bit too much and though it is common in popular culture it is kind of annoying to some. Delta would be just fine. It is like people who say "PIN Number" which is redundant and annoying because the "N" Stand for number already. Anyways, "Delta" or "1st SFOD-D" would be better then delta force

Well there is a bunch of changes I think could stream line things and improve flow, just want to hear other's idea before anything is done.Mantion 21:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, that where it says "Delta Force" should be changed to "Delta". ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 20:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Mantion, the page is too confusing, especially about operations : you've got a part entitled "operations" but dealing with the structure of Delta (?), another part also entitled "operations" (!?!) with a list of the bigs US military operations, and finally "Delta Force in modern conflicts" about some operations including Colombia (1992-92), Somalia (1993), Afghanistan (2001-02) and Iraq (2003) but not in the chronological order, and this part also includes various details about Delta weaponry, nicknames, etc. I suggest to add a warning like "page needing cleanup" or something like ; to re-organize the page ; and later to expand it and quote more sources.
About the name, I think that the term "Delta Force" should be keep as title because it is very common (at least for those who are not in special forces), but I think too we should create a sub-section about Delta names/nicknames, and to use only "Delta"/"Delta unit" in the page. I suggest also not to use "1st SFOD-D" as a current unit's term because it is probably no longer Delta's name. 1st SFOD name was already compromised after the operation Eagle Claw, and Combat Applications Group has been reported since.
Otherwise, I think that the page may be widely expanded by relying on more and better sources such as "Delta Force", by Col. Charles Beckwith, "Inside Delta Force" by Eric Haney, and others such as "Black Hawk Down" and "Killing Pablo" by Mark Bowden or "Not a good day to die" by Sean Naylor. Newspapers versions of Mark Bowden's writtings are available here : [2] and [3] for B.H.D., [4] for K.P. Photos of Deltas in the Iran mission are available here : [5]. On my own, I have "Secret Warriors" by Steven Emerson (about covert military operatios in the 1980s, including some od Delta) and "Black Hawk Down", and I'm ready to help you if you want it. Rob1bureau 17:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, I have begun to re-organize the page. Rob1bureau 00:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Immunity

Is/are there any legal citations for claims made in this portion of the article? The legal standing described in the "Immunity" section seems rather improbable for several reasons: PDD 25 (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd25.htm) is a Clinton era document dealing with peacekeeping operations and while a sitting President can pardon someone for past crimes (think of Nixon and Ford) a President has no authority to exempt anyone from the laws of the United States. Even the president of the United States is not exempt from the law. Again, any valid citations suggesting that the President of the US can simply exempt someone (FBI, CIA, military, or the Boy Scouts) from the law? If not, perhaps the section should be removed.

It's true that they have presidential inmunitty? thanks...

It is what someone has written in the page some time ago, but it's probably false as said above your own message. I don't know the laws problems, but it seems that the President of the U.S. can't give imunity to anyone. Rob1bureau 18:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Technology

This section, particularly the reference to MEMS (microbots), makes absolutely no sense at all. What is the point of microbot techonolgy in the overall context of Delta? How and why are they applied or used? Where is the citation documentation? This needs a serious rewrite or should be eliminated. Sduplessie 01:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that the problems of "immunity" and "MEMS" are among those making a clean-up and a re-organization of the page necessary. The page should cite more sources, and primary focuse on information directly linked to Delta, for example planned operations about POW/MIAs in Laos or hostage rescue in Middle East (US hostages in Lebanon, TWA-847 and Achille Lauro hijackings). Rob1bureau 22:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

1911 pistol and non-standard equipment.

I think it is plainly obvious that many special operations forces use non-standard equipment. Perhaps a discussion about how this is done is in order. The issue of 1911 use brings the issue up for me here. I dont' doubt its use by members of Delta or other special units. It is merely not the only one. I have seen references to Delta using HK USP Tactical Pistols, Glock 19, and even the ubiquitous Beretta 92. Stating that the pistol of choice is a personally bought highly customized 1911 is disingenuous, and does not give an accurate portrayal of what is used and carried by these soldiers. The fact that they have discretion is not disputed, just the portrayal here is remarkably one sided. Smash05

The part about the 1911 quotes a clear and identified source, what is rather rare in the page, so I advise to keep it. But I agree that as most SOF, D-Boys can carry the weapon they want. In his second book, Robert Baer reports D-Boys in the Beyrut embassy using 9 mm Glock pistols (probably 17s, but he doesn't told what model) - it was between 1986 and 1988. It is another good reference, maybe someone could add it (I don't do it because I have read the French translation of the book, no an English one). Otherwise, it seems that the 1911 is the most used pistol in Delta (various reports including Black Hawk Down). Rob1bureau 19:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC) upd 16:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I think it is very clear that the 1911 is the clear choice for Delta. A very telling source is Larry Vicker's web page, because as a professional soldier his retirement plan became custom gunsmithing but his only experience with that was from the Delta Armorers and hence the only pistol he builds is the 1911. Here is a good quote from his webpage, "I was also fortunate to be in a Unit where more .45 ACP ammo is shot out of 1911 style pistols than any other place in the world; the ultimate test bed. I learned alot in the 15 years I was at 1st SFOD-Delta about what it takes to make a 1911 work reliably and how to keep it running. I also want to thank the individuals who work in the arms room at the Unit; they will remain nameless but I learned alot from them on making a 1911 run." I plan to intergrate this into the article if no one else has objections. --Semper Fidelis 16:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The stipend for the personal 1911, however, is unusual even amongst the discretion given to both "vanilla" SF group, and other elements of SOCOM. Fact is, Delta has free reign to use basically whatever the hell they want, but as we have a clear, very good source for the 1911, we need to keep it in there. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 00:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Additions to Overview Section

Someone added a bit about the HK416 that was uncited and seems to violate NPOV. Also as noted in a conversation above - I think a well regarded weapons magazine may not be a good enough source on the 1911 issue. I hate to be picky but it irks me for reasons I will get into if someone wants me to. Anyway I would like to see a citation for information on the HK416 - and perhaps alot of this information belongs in an equipment section. Smash05 19:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Smash05

(UTC)Smash05, perhaps you are referring to Larry Vickers. I made a page for him, but it was shortly deleted. He was hired by HK for his experience as a Delta Operator and was a cheif designer for redesigning the M4/M16 into a operating piston system. You can find more information here, http://www.hkpro.com/hk416.htm, or here, http://www.vickerstactical.com/about/HK416.htm. I would also like the Larry Vickers page to be reinstated, but if not maybe his reference should be taken off this page. He was also responsible for pushing the development of the 7.62 HK 417 as he is a well stated fan of the larger NATO round. --There is no replacement for displacement. 03:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I cleaned up the 416 section: the weapons platform is not new, it's a marketing trick by HK to repackage the AR system. It's had lots of issues itself in testing, and gas piston AR15's have been around for some time before the 416, just none with HK's slick marketing and branding system. Also, the article as written makes the M4 sound like direct impingement systems are horribly unreliable, which is patently untrue. I've neutralized the tone. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 00:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I reinstated the Larry Vickers page and am rewriting it. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 00:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for rewriting the Larry Vickers Page, I had planned to complete it but your draft was far better then what I could have completed. As for the M4/M16 Piston system that was written by myself, and I was speaking from what I felt was common knowledge about the weapon but I apologize if it violated the neutral tone. I felt it was important to mention because a unit such as Delta is often deployed without support for several weeks and quite often taking time to break down their firearms is not an option, due to the fact that each member must wait for his turn to break down their personal weapon so that at any time there is no more but one gun out of action, as I have been told that is the SOP for Recon Marines. Reliability is crucial when in this situation and I think we can accurately assume that this is the reason why only SOF have received this rifle. As I mentioned below, I would request permission to detail some of these issues in a separate article along with alternatives so they could only be briefly mentioned here. You are most certainly correct that gas piston systems have been around for the M16/M4 family long before Heckler and Koch came into town, Patriot Ordinance (http://www.pof-usa.com/) being my personal favorite. I think a separate page with some of the over viewing some of the issues (the 5.56 NATO being unsuitable for CQB), and alternatives such as the HK416 and other guns, along with mentioning that it would not be feasible for the Army to replace the M16 rifle entirely but could rather only replace the upper receiver and reuse their stock of magazines with other alternative options. Speaking from personal experience I must respectfully disagree with you evaluation of the rifle's mechanism. I have seen soldiers fight over the M249 because nobody wanted to have to use a M16 because after several hours in the field it was unknown it your rifle could fire more then a half dozen rounds. Even the Army and Marine times have published articles that state the HK416 is far superior to the M16 and there is a rather large push among some of the command to get the best weapon for the troops. The M16 is a fine rifle in many aspects but only so much so when it has been properly cleaned, not including criticism of the 5.56 NATO. The Jessica Lynch incident, and hundreds others that did not receive attention show us what the ramifications are of a rifle that does not offer reliability in harsh environments. It's quite true that some or most of this incidents were the fault of improper weapons maintenance but it is not always possible to maintain the weapon at it's operating condition in many circumstances, to most obvious being SOF units such as Delta. This issues stem back to Vietnam and the original rifle because of changes in the final production plans. Take note, I am not trying to put down the M16 completely. For a shooting war on the plains of Europe this rifle, and the 5.56 NATO, would have proven to be a very powerful combination against Soviet weapons as was envisioned but today's military must adopt to overcome the issues that are present in the current war we are fighting. While the HK416 no doubt had issues in it's testing phase that is actually a positive point because every issue caught early is an issue that can be solved before the final product is deployed. As seen Heckler and Koch have had great experience and positive results helping redesign the British SA80/L85 so this is not their first time doing this. I think this merits further discussion and I am looking forward to your reply but I mean no disrespect towards your position. --Semper Fidelis 13:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Thing is though, criticism of the direct impingement system is listed on the M16 (rifle) and M4 carbine pages, as well as on another page, can't remember the exact title but it's like Comparison between the AK47 and the M16. It's only tangentially related to Delta, so it doesn't belong in this article; that said, nothing stopping it from inclusion elsewhere.⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 15:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Changes

I added more to the HK416 and HK417 along with sources, and made a seperate section for weaponary because it seems to be such a hot topic. I also expanded Larry Vicker's section, and plan to help create a page for him once I find more sources (other then his personal webpage). I also plan to create a page for issues with the M4/M16 to it's possible in the future that less of those issues have to be highlighted in these passages. The Army Times (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/atCarbine070219/) spacifically states that only Delta Force and other special forces units are going to see the new HK carbines so I feel that it is fitting to mention them. --There is no replacement for displacement. 13:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

M14 to M21

I changed instances of the M14 to the M21 because this is the military term for the rifle. Although the original author mentioned the M14 because that is how it is referred to in Black Hawk Down by Mark Bowden, the author of that book only used the term M14 because he felt his readers would not be familiar with the more obscure term "M21". --There is no replacement for displacement. 14:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Well somebody changed one of the M21 mentions back to M14, most likely based on the movie "Black Hawk Down". In an effort to avoid an edit war I'm changing the other instances of M21 to M14 but I request that it be up for consideration that it is changed back to M21. The M21 has other differences then the M14, other then just the scope. I would highlight those of the action in pictures using my personal M21 and M14 if someone is curious. --There is no replacement for displacement. 15:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
I've changed references to M21 because Shughart's weapon, according all accounts I've read, wasn't a M21. It was a M14 with specific modifications including a non-magnifying red-dot scope. It wasn't based on a M21 (national match barrel, mount for ART scope, etc.). This is already said at the M14 rifle page. Rob1bureau 19:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Rob, it was my personal understanding that the M21/M14 rifles built for Delta and other groups such as the SEALS, and Recon have the larger gas chambers, the Krieger barrel, the 1:10 rifling twist, and other modifications that are associated with the M21 but perhaps I am wrong. I cannot find a source online that verifies this so I concede that the page should stay with the term M14. As for the SR-47, I had it on there because the buzz was that this rifle was built specifically for Delta and SEAL task forces hunting Al-Qaeda in the long caves of Afghanistan and other areas where they couldn't bring in all the ammunition they needed. It's also a useful weapon in areas where you do not want to leave American manufactured shell casings as a calling card. Either way, it's a fairly trivial weapon and did not last long (at least publicly). I don't have a source other then word of mouth, but I wrote an article on the .458 SOCOM round that is rumored to be in use with Delta for some of the latest CQB missions in Iraq --There is no replacement for displacement. 00:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

As far as I've understood, Shughart's weapon was an accurized, modified M14, but was not an M21, or later M25. However, the M21 is highly in use within Delta, more currently as the M25 variant, and I've edited the article to reflect it as such. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 00:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Recruting foreigners?

Its nothing that says this in the article, but does Delta recruit foreign soldiers? I think I have heard that Delta asks soldiers from foreign special forces, like the British SAS and the German KSK (and other special force units they cooperate with), if they'd like to join Delta (if they have impressed Delta in some kind of way). Of course after they'd been put through the same tests as normal recruits. On link under this text it says: "Delta conducts worldwide recruitment twice a year prior to its fall and spring assessment-and-selection courses."

Link: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/sfod-d.htm

Anyone who can answer my question?

I seriously doubt they recruit foreigners, and those foreigners would have no reason to leave their own elite unit to join an American one. The line from the global security page you posted means they'll go to South Korea to recruit from 2ID or Europe to recruit from the units stationed there, instead of just sitting at Fort Bragg and waiting for people to find them. Parsecboy 16:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Looking for members of task force 116 Vietnam 1969 to 1971 PBR river recon

Hello,

     I am looking for members of the 116 Mekong delta task force river recon PBR force. I was in country 1969 to 1971.  I was injured on river ops, And now I am 100% disabled have been since 1973.  I live in Florida and I am looking for some old friends, That may have surived and may be reading this.  I am looking for Mike Gann, Dan Feber, Bill Hess, Bob Betes, Dan Tucker.  They were my crew on my PBR when I was wounded.  I was in the hospital for 3 years and lost touch. I do not know were they went or if they made it. 

      So if any of you guys are out there, Or if any one knows them a family member or such please contact me at gscarnato@wildblue.net or at gabrielscarnato@msn.com  you can also call me at 386-446-3466.

       Also this means alot to me so no bull shiters please.  If you know something contact me if not then do not. 

                                                        Thank You



                                                  Gabriel Scarnato USN. Retired