# Green Berets Smartest, Most Lethal Fighters In The World



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

A short article, very cool and well done pics
http://www.businessinsider.com/gree...s-intelligent-well-trained-deadly-2013-3?op=1


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 26, 2013)

LMAO


----------



## CDG (Nov 26, 2013)

I felt like I was reading an online pop-up book.


----------



## reed11b (Nov 26, 2013)

Even better is the link to the "Most Elite Special Forces in the US military". States that Rangers are basically Marines. Someone drank the Semper Fi Koolaid.
Reed


----------



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

Its hard to believe this is modern journalism


----------



## x SF med (Nov 26, 2013)

IMTT said:


> A short article, very cool and well done pics
> http://www.businessinsider.com/gree...s-intelligent-well-trained-deadly-2013-3?op=1
> pic goes here





IMTT said:


> Its hard to believe this is modern journalism




Which is your real thought?  You contradicted yourself in these posts made less than 12 hours apart.


----------



## TheSiatonist (Nov 26, 2013)

This _could_ be a humor thread.


----------



## x SF med (Nov 26, 2013)

TheSiatonist said:


> This _could_ be a humor thread.



Hmmmmm.... funny haha, or funny strange?  I think the answer is ................................................................."YES"


----------



## AWP (Nov 26, 2013)

The one good thing about that link: not a slideshow. Otherwise...

"These are Green Berets. Run, Green Berets, Run."
"Green Berets are also known as Special Forces. Shoot, Special Forces, shoot."


----------



## RackMaster (Nov 26, 2013)

I didn't know @Ravage wrote for Business Insider...  :-"


----------



## Ravage (Nov 26, 2013)

I did? Did they at least pay me? Bastards....


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 26, 2013)

Ravage said:


> I did? Did they at least pay me? Bastards....



I'm sure some other clown-shoe wrote it and got paid, although I'm quite positive whoever did write this stole some of your awesome SOF pictures....


----------



## xGenoSiide (Nov 26, 2013)

Did anyone look at any of the other 'articles'?  I found this one amusing... "Pararescue jumpers insert well behind enemy lines in order to rescue lost personnel, typically pilots. Just a tick less cool than their combat controller brethren..."

I talked to a couple PJs today that disagree and I'm sure amlove will too.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/most-elite-special-forces-in-the-us-2013-2?op=1#ixzz2lmx54sjh


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 26, 2013)

Really though someone from the staff here should write the editor about their pole-smoking, ate the hell up article.

Ranger's are like Marine Infantry, and Pararescue are not as cool b/c they rescue not kill, and CAG is way better than DEVGRU, etc.

I honestly thought this was a humor piece last night after 5-6 beers, hints the "LMAO" now I'm like, fucking really?


----------



## AWP (Nov 26, 2013)

xGenoSiide said:


> Did anyone look at any of the other 'articles'?  I found this one amusing... "Pararescue jumpers insert well behind enemy lines in order to rescue lost personnel, typically pilots. Just a tick less cool than their combat controller brethren..."
> 
> I talked to a couple PJs today that disagree and I'm sure amlove will too.


 
If you actually bothered PJ's with that mess I feel bad for you. Seriously, who could look at those articles and not pine for the journalistic integrity of Piers Morgan? You could go down to any local airsoft "unit," pick 5 fan boys at random, and they would do a better job. I could drink myself into a blind drunken stupor and crank out 500 words better than that "article." The only thing businessinsider.com needs to be inside of is a shredder or a burn bag.

The sad thing is the article wasn't a parody. It simply sucked THAT BAD.


----------



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

x SF med said:


> Which is your real thought?  You contradicted yourself in these posts made less than 12 hours apart.



We disagree


----------



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

JAB said:


> Really though someone from the staff here should write the editor about their pole-smoking, ate the hell up article.Ranger's are like Marine Infantry, and Pararescue are not as cool b/c they rescue not kill, and CAG is way better than DEVGRU, etc.I honestly thought this was a humor piece last night after 5-6 beers, hints the "LMAO" now I'm like, fucking really?





Even the Army agrees?!


----------



## Salt USMC (Nov 26, 2013)

You'd have to smoke Rob Ford-levels of crack to make the argument that Marine infantry are anywhere near battalion Rangers.


----------



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

Right you are


----------



## MOTOMETO (Nov 26, 2013)

What's really embarrassing is that the authors served in the Marine Corps and wrote these fanboy idiotic articles.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Nov 26, 2013)

lol, that's just sad. 

No question about it in my mind, some of the best warriors I've known personally were in fact Marines......but I'd never tell them that and wouldn't hesitate to put a squared away Soldier up against a squared away Marine. But for the masses, I would say the USMC has a better product (run of the mill, light infantry).

That said Marine Infantry is not the same as Rangers, neither is any other Army Infantry unit. There is a reason they are called the "premiere light infantry" as they are.


----------



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

MOTOMETO said:


> What's really embarrassing is that the authors served in the Marine Corps and wrote these fanboy idiotic articles.



What's interesting is they published this, the brevity of the article and lack of completeness and depth of content. The title was way over the top... A short article, very cool (as in slick) and well done pics, its hard to believe this is modern journalism. But it is! Kind of like a recruitment brochure. I think it's just the splash appeal thing, short attention span focus audience. This seems to be a mainstream publication.


----------



## Salt USMC (Nov 26, 2013)

I see that they're copying the Buzzfeed style of vapid news reporting

1. Put up a sensationalist headline
2. Recycle pictures or gifs from the internet
3. Put a short caption on each
4. ????????
5. Profit!

Don't get me wrong, I like Buzzfeed sometimes.  When they actually produce original content, it tends to be pretty good.  But 90% of their stuff is "15 ways you know you're a totally random and cool guy", with accompanying subtitled gifs from "Parks and Rec" and other shows that may be tangentially related to the topic.  It's very low-effort and superficial.

EDIT: As if to prove my point, here's their top story right now http://www.buzzfeed.com/mikespohr/what-no-one-tells-you-about-becoming-a-parent


----------



## Sendero (Nov 26, 2013)

From a pure Website publishing perspective. My guess is it has a title tag optimized for SEO and keyword research with responsive design and mobile users in mind. Thumb scrolling without having to read small text.

 Driving search traffic and in that ad revenue.  Add on the teaser links which people click on driving more page view's and ad revenue. Rinse. Repeat.


----------



## Loki (Nov 26, 2013)

Deathy McDeath said:


> I see that they're copying the Buzzfeed style of vapid news reporting
> 1. Put up a sensationalist headline
> 2. Recycle pictures or gifs from the internet
> 3. Put a short caption on each
> ...



Well said!


----------



## Salt USMC (Nov 26, 2013)

Sendero said:


> From a pure Website publishing perspective. My guess is it has a title tag optimized for SEO and keyword research with responsive design and mobile users in mind. Thumb scrolling without having to read small text.
> 
> Driving search traffic and in that ad revenue.  Add on the teaser links which people click on driving more page view's and ad revenue. Rinse. Repeat.


This makes too much sense.  Stop it!


----------



## Sendero (Nov 26, 2013)

Deathy McDeath said:


> This makes too much sense.  Stop it!



Ha! I said the same as you, I just nerded out a little bit.


----------



## fox1371 (Nov 27, 2013)

Here we go...the old "Rangers vs. Marines" battle.  

Rangers are just the Divas of the Infantry.  All they care about is looking like they're more special than they really are...It's okay.  We get it.


----------



## Loki (Nov 27, 2013)

fox1371 said:


> Here we go...the old "Rangers vs. Marines" battle.
> Rangers are just the Divas of the Infantry.  All they care about is looking like they're more special than they really are...It's okay.  We get it.



I wouldn't make a comparison...


----------



## xGenoSiide (Nov 27, 2013)

Freefalling said:


> whole post
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## TLDR20 (Nov 27, 2013)

The next person who posts something about a comparison of units will have me lobbying for a temp ban to the admins. It is pretty clearly understood that this is not the site for that, and we dogpile people for posting questions or comments like that regularly.


----------

