What unit is considered to be the strongest unit in the US armed forces?

[Dick Foster]

We would sit on a high balcony at the BOQ at NAB Coronado, and watch the distant beach where the SEAL candidates were going through hell week. While enjoying a cold beverage, of course. And being glad that it wasn't us out there.

We would sit on a high balcony at the BOQ at NAB Coronado, and watch the distant beach where the SEAL candidates were going through hell week. While enjoying a cold beverage, of course. And being glad that it wasn't us out there.

I saw a piece on TV were shit and sewage from Tijuana is constantly washing up on that beach and seal trainees get sick from it. Maybe they should move seal training further up the coast. Being in a world of shit shouldn't be taken quite so literally.

 

[daveman]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Do you know the Samson option?

Yup.

Do you believe the world will witness a Nuclear war? Not necessarily between the superpowers

[ I'd think there are more chances of Pakistan - India or maybe Israel Iran, if things are getting out of control. we need to remember that Israel has positioned its Jericho 3 missiles towards Egypt at 73', Mostly to inform the USSR and to push the US to support Israel as a counterweight to the USSR support to the arabs ]

I believe the first nuclear attack will be a terrorist dirty bomb, somewhere in a Western nation.

And Iran's fingerprints will be all over it.

 

[daveman]

May I ask which actually work for the benefit of American citizens ? That would be the US COAST guard....or are they still considered dept of transportation ?

I think they moved to Homeland when that stood up.

 

[Indeependent]

As a member of Delta Force, I cannot reveal anything I haven't as of yet been informed.

 

[freyasman]

I read a lot about the Navy Seals and Delta force, but couldn't really tell which unit is more ' Elite '.
[ for example, at 2011 those were the Seals (from team 6 ) to take down Osama Bin Laden, but at 2019 Delta force were the ones to take down the Head of ISIS ]

I hope you all can make it more simple

View attachment 394184

At what?

Everyone has different missions, so it's really hard to compare.

 

[TDontTouchMyCigars]

May I ask which actually work for the benefit of American citizens ? That would be the US COAST guard....or are they still considered dept of transportation ?

Well the Navy seals have rescued many American hostages all over the world. I'd call that a service.

Where were they held hostage ?

Somali, for short example

 

[TDontTouchMyCigars]

I read a lot about the Navy Seals and Delta force, but couldn't really tell which unit is more ' Elite '.
[ for example, at 2011 those were the Seals (from team 6 ) to take down Osama Bin Laden, but at 2019 Delta force were the ones to take down the Head of ISIS ]

I hope you all can make it more simple

View attachment 394184

At what?

Everyone has different missions, so it's really hard to compare.

Of course, there are the more 'regular' missions, Seals - maritime rescues and land operations for example

But my question is this.
How does the US Defence department choose what unit to take, Delta or Seals, for operations like taking down Osama bin laden and Abu Bakar al baghdadi.
Do the units compete each other in order to get the operation?

Here for example, the unit usually chosen for this operations is Sayeret Matkal

 

[mamooth]

Isn't hell week in Virginia?

I'm pretty sure it's still near Coronado (San Diego). The west coast is more suitable for that training because the ocean there is so cold. It would be difficult to cold-torture your candidates if the water temperature was 80F.

 

[Dick Foster]

I read a lot about the Navy Seals and Delta force, but couldn't really tell which unit is more ' Elite '.
[ for example, at 2011 those were the Seals (from team 6 ) to take down Osama Bin Laden, but at 2019 Delta force were the ones to take down the Head of ISIS ]

I hope you all can make it more simple

View attachment 394184

At what?

Everyone has different missions, so it's really hard to compare.

Of course, there are the more 'regular' missions, Seals - maritime rescues and land operations for example

But my question is this.
How does the US Defence department choose what unit to take, Delta or Seals, for operations like taking down Osama bin laden and Abu Bakar al baghdadi.
Do the units compete each other in order to get the operation?

Here for example, the unit usually chosen for this operations is Sayeret Matkal

The joint chiefs all get together and arm wrestle for each mission.

 

[freyasman]

I read a lot about the Navy Seals and Delta force, but couldn't really tell which unit is more ' Elite '.
[ for example, at 2011 those were the Seals (from team 6 ) to take down Osama Bin Laden, but at 2019 Delta force were the ones to take down the Head of ISIS ]

I hope you all can make it more simple

View attachment 394184

At what?

Everyone has different missions, so it's really hard to compare.

Of course, there are the more 'regular' missions, Seals - maritime rescues and land operations for example

But my question is this.
How does the US Defence department choose what unit to take, Delta or Seals, for operations like taking down Osama bin laden and Abu Bakar al baghdadi.
Do the units compete each other in order to get the operation?

Here for example, the unit usually chosen for this operations is Sayeret Matkal

That information is classified.
You might find out how it was decided 20 or 30 years ago but anyone claiming to have current information is probably talking out their ass.

 

[Sunni Man]

How does the US Defence department choose what unit to take, Delta or Seals, for operations like taking down Osama bin laden and Abu Bakar al baghdadi.
Do the units compete each other in order to get the operation?

Yes, there is a lot of inner service rivalry to be assigned to special missions.
In the case of which unit was used to take down Osama bin Laden.
The territories of Afghanistan and Pakistan had been divided between the special operations groups. It just so happened that bin Laden's location was in the area the Navy Seal teams were responsible for, and that's why they were the unit chosen to eliminate him. ...

 

[strollingbones]

yall do realize when the 'call' is made..the phone rings at ft bragg n.c. period

 

[westwall]

The US Marines are the best service, the SEALS are probably the best special forces since they encompass all aspects of warfare. Delta force is a conglomerate of special forces they take from every services.

Where is it harder to get in, Delta or Navy seals?

Delta. You have to be a SEAL, or FAST, or Green Beret, or Ranger first. Build up some experience, and then if you are deemed a possible candidate Delta will invite you to an interview. If you make it through that, then you have a shot at becoming a Delta member. A good friend of mine just retired out of Delta. He was A Ranger first, and then 10th mountain where he did four deployments to Afghanistan. He was on the Bin laden take down.

 

[Dayton3]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Minuteman was never capable of carrying 10 warheads. The most they could carry was on the Minuteman III which lifted up to three warheads.

Only the Peacekeeper (known as the MX missile to most everyone) which the U.S. deployed only 50 of in Minuteman silos for a few years (now withdrawn from service) could carry 10 warheads. The 500 W87 warheads mounted on the Peacekeepers were then mounted as single warheads on the surviving Minuteman IIIs..

And anyway, the W88 warheads carried on the Trident II missiles aboard the Ohio class ballistic missile submarines would probably be considered far more dangerous than the W87s mounted on the Minuteman due to superior accuracy.

 

[daveman]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Minuteman was never capable of carrying 10 warheads. The most they could carry was on the Minuteman III which lifted up to three warheads.

Only the Peacekeeper (known as the MX missile to most everyone) which the U.S. deployed only 50 of in Minuteman silos for a few years (now withdrawn from service) could carry 10 warheads. The 500 W87 warheads mounted on the Peacekeepers were then mounted as single warheads on the surviving Minuteman IIIs..

And anyway, the W88 warheads carried on the Trident II missiles aboard the Ohio class ballistic missile submarines would probably be considered far more dangerous than the W87s mounted on the Minuteman due to superior accuracy.

You're right about the Minuteman IIIs -- three warheads each. But since the number of warheads is limited to one each by treaty, the total fielded is still 450 per my other post.

How many Trident IIs does the Navy have at sea at any one time?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

 

[Dayton3]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Minuteman was never capable of carrying 10 warheads. The most they could carry was on the Minuteman III which lifted up to three warheads.

Only the Peacekeeper (known as the MX missile to most everyone) which the U.S. deployed only 50 of in Minuteman silos for a few years (now withdrawn from service) could carry 10 warheads. The 500 W87 warheads mounted on the Peacekeepers were then mounted as single warheads on the surviving Minuteman IIIs..

And anyway, the W88 warheads carried on the Trident II missiles aboard the Ohio class ballistic missile submarines would probably be considered far more dangerous than the W87s mounted on the Minuteman due to superior accuracy.

You're right about the Minuteman IIIs -- three warheads each. But since the number of warheads is limited to one each by treaty, the total fielded is still 450 per my other post.

How many Trident IIs does the Navy have at sea at any one time?

14 Trident II carrying Ohio class ballistic missile submarines (8 based in Washington, 6 in Georgia) with two thirds at sea at any one time means 8-10 submarines deployed at any one time carrying from 192-240 missiles total.

Actually IIRC the treaty limiting multiple warheads on land based ICBMS has lapsed and is no longer in effect. Reportedly the Russians are going back to mirving their ICBMs.

 

[daveman]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Minuteman was never capable of carrying 10 warheads. The most they could carry was on the Minuteman III which lifted up to three warheads.

Only the Peacekeeper (known as the MX missile to most everyone) which the U.S. deployed only 50 of in Minuteman silos for a few years (now withdrawn from service) could carry 10 warheads. The 500 W87 warheads mounted on the Peacekeepers were then mounted as single warheads on the surviving Minuteman IIIs..

And anyway, the W88 warheads carried on the Trident II missiles aboard the Ohio class ballistic missile submarines would probably be considered far more dangerous than the W87s mounted on the Minuteman due to superior accuracy.

You're right about the Minuteman IIIs -- three warheads each. But since the number of warheads is limited to one each by treaty, the total fielded is still 450 per my other post.

How many Trident IIs does the Navy have at sea at any one time?

14 Trident II carrying Ohio class ballistic missile submarines (8 based in Washington, 6 in Georgia) with two thirds at sea at any one time means 8-10 submarines deployed at any one time carrying from 192-240 missiles total.

Actually IIRC the treaty limiting multiple warheads on land based ICBMS has lapsed and is no longer in effect. Reportedly the Russians are going back to mirving their ICBMs.

We should do the same.

 

[Dayton3]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Minuteman was never capable of carrying 10 warheads. The most they could carry was on the Minuteman III which lifted up to three warheads.

Only the Peacekeeper (known as the MX missile to most everyone) which the U.S. deployed only 50 of in Minuteman silos for a few years (now withdrawn from service) could carry 10 warheads. The 500 W87 warheads mounted on the Peacekeepers were then mounted as single warheads on the surviving Minuteman IIIs..

And anyway, the W88 warheads carried on the Trident II missiles aboard the Ohio class ballistic missile submarines would probably be considered far more dangerous than the W87s mounted on the Minuteman due to superior accuracy.

You're right about the Minuteman IIIs -- three warheads each. But since the number of warheads is limited to one each by treaty, the total fielded is still 450 per my other post.

How many Trident IIs does the Navy have at sea at any one time?

14 Trident II carrying Ohio class ballistic missile submarines (8 based in Washington, 6 in Georgia) with two thirds at sea at any one time means 8-10 submarines deployed at any one time carrying from 192-240 missiles total.

Actually IIRC the treaty limiting multiple warheads on land based ICBMS has lapsed and is no longer in effect. Reportedly the Russians are going back to mirving their ICBMs.

We should do the same.

It has gotten monumentally difficult for Congress to agree to building replacements for our existing nuclear warheads, much less expanding our deployed strategic nuclear forces. And when it comes down to it the U.S. doesn't need its land based ICBMs anyway. The Trident IIs carrying W88 warheads aboard the Ohio class submarines are believed capable of disabling any Russian hardened missile site or command base. To say nothing of those in China.

 

[daveman]

Strongest? The strongest, without question, are the USAF's three missile wings, each composed of three squadrons with 50 Minuteman III missiles each.

In compliance with the New START Treaty of 2011, each missile is fitted with only one warhead, the 300-475 kiloton W87 thermonuclear warhead. The Minuteman is capable of launching 10 such warheads.

That's 450 warheads. 450 cities. The most lethal of all US military forces.

Minuteman was never capable of carrying 10 warheads. The most they could carry was on the Minuteman III which lifted up to three warheads.

Only the Peacekeeper (known as the MX missile to most everyone) which the U.S. deployed only 50 of in Minuteman silos for a few years (now withdrawn from service) could carry 10 warheads. The 500 W87 warheads mounted on the Peacekeepers were then mounted as single warheads on the surviving Minuteman IIIs..

And anyway, the W88 warheads carried on the Trident II missiles aboard the Ohio class ballistic missile submarines would probably be considered far more dangerous than the W87s mounted on the Minuteman due to superior accuracy.

You're right about the Minuteman IIIs -- three warheads each. But since the number of warheads is limited to one each by treaty, the total fielded is still 450 per my other post.

How many Trident IIs does the Navy have at sea at any one time?

14 Trident II carrying Ohio class ballistic missile submarines (8 based in Washington, 6 in Georgia) with two thirds at sea at any one time means 8-10 submarines deployed at any one time carrying from 192-240 missiles total.

Actually IIRC the treaty limiting multiple warheads on land based ICBMS has lapsed and is no longer in effect. Reportedly the Russians are going back to mirving their ICBMs.

We should do the same.

It has gotten monumentally difficult for Congress to agree to building replacements for our existing nuclear warheads, much less expanding our deployed strategic nuclear forces. And when it comes down to it the U.S. doesn't need its land based ICBMs anyway. The Trident IIs carrying W88 warheads aboard the Ohio class submarines are believed capable of disabling any Russian hardened missile site or command base. To say nothing of those in China.

You can never have too much ammo.