I am afraid I have to disagree with you on this one. It may be a little more dangerous (at face value), but it's not like you are making it out to be. It's the totallity of things that you really need to look at when it comes to groups like this.
Originally Posted by cacacabeza
I feel cinfident in being able to speak with a little authority on this, bot in general terms and specifics to FAST. I was on the USMS SOG for over 8 years and deployed for a variety of high-threat missions domestically, as well as a couple tours in Iraq and Aghanistan (and our tours were >twice as long as FAST tours, but more infrequent). I worked with FAST regularly in Afganistan. While we all did some high-speed stuff, I think their greatest danger (like mine when I was there) was catching a stray round from the Afghans. We did more vehicle ops than them, so did not have to worry about the VBIED side of things as much.
You see, there is a reason that, while in dangerous situations, they still have a low mortality rate... they are surrounded by other highly-trained individuals, which signifcantly reduces danger. More DEA Agents die UC, as they are alone and in less of a position to dominate with weapons and tactics.
I was in more danger serving warrants with some of my retard co-workers than I was racing up Route Irish in Baghdad.
Of course, that is just my opinion.
We bring evil things to evil people, kicking in a door near you!
."In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But,
in practice, there is."
- Jan L.A. van de Snepscheut
"The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like
an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig
Working on a PhD in CQB one doorway at a time.
When the wolf attacks, he will find not all who run with the flock are sheep!