Topic: Which part of the USA Nuclear Triad was More Effective?

U.S. Cavalry

FAQ/Rules - Search - Military Photo Gallery

  International Military Forums > Military History Forums > General Military History Forum
User Name
Password

View Poll Results :What was the most effective part of the Nuclear Triad that protected the United States during the Fo
Strategic Bomber Force 0 0%
Land Based Missiles 0 0%
Sea Launched Missiles 8 72.73%
They werent needed: Our regular forces ensured the peace. 0 0%
All were needed: All were equal in effectiveness 3 27.27%
Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll

 
June 19th, 2004   Post 1
Mark Conley
Tribuni Angusticlavii
 
 

Post; Which part of the USA Nuclear Triad was More Effective?


Ok Cold war heros...we dont tend to think about it as much anymore...but of the three Nuclear Parts of the Triad (Airplanes that delivered Bombs, Land based Missiles in Silos, or Submarine Launched Missiles) which of these were the most effective at keeping the former Soviet Union at bay?

Just a honest opinion is fine..but state your reasons for your opinion please. As always...meanys will be rooted out...by the roots.


My contributions: The most effective part of the Triad was...the sea launched missiles from submarines. That underseas fleet of moving silos made more headaches for the russians to try and track than anything else our forces had to offer. And they just got better...as the years went by.

Yep..it was the Submarine launched Missiles!
__________________
“If we should have to fight, we should be prepared to do so from the neck up instead of from the neck down.”— General James H. Doolittle, USAAF
 
June 19th, 2004   Post 2
Marksman
Tribuni Angusticlavii
 
 
Submarines especially,they have that manuverability that is needed and posibility to cover in deep sea,idk if you remember during the cold war four russian submarines with nuclear torpedoes came from russia trought the pacific ocean undetected to cuba.My point is that typhoon type submarine can deliver its WMD's from north pole everywhere in the world.So im sticking on to submarines
__________________
 
June 19th, 2004   Post 3
1217
Primus Pilus
 

Post; Re: Which part of the USA Nuclear Triad was More Effective?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Conley
The most effective part of the Triad was...the sea launched missiles from submarines. That underseas fleet of moving silos made more headaches for the russians to try and track than anything else our forces had to offer. And they just got better...as the years went by.

Yep..it was the Submarine launched Missiles!
I think you're right. The great thing about the subs was (is) that if you attack the US, you know that even if you level the country completely before the US can react, the subs will level your country anyway.
__________________
"It is not supreme excellence to fight and conquer in all your battles,
It is supreme excellence if you break the enemy's resistance without fighting."
Sun Tzu, the Art of War
 
June 19th, 2004   Post 4
Gunner13
Centurion
 
 
Gear

I would have to go with the Ballistic Missile Subs as well, although you use present tense, as all three legs are still operational and needed.

I don't think the Soviets were ever effective in tracking any of the USN or UK Boomers for any length of time. Most of what I have read indicates that any tail by a Soviet sub lasted only a few hours - as compared to the days and weeks that the USN attack subs were able to tail the Soviet missile boats.
__________________
"Americans are so hard to fight because they do not know their doctrine, and if they do, they do not feel compelled to follow it" - Unknown, but attributed to a Soviet Officer.

Mortui Non Mordent - Pro Libertate Patriae - Celeritas Et Accuratio
 
June 24th, 2004   Post 5
Big_Z
Primus Pilus
 
 
Gear

Well im just adding baggage but yea the subs.. They held the most amount of nukes and could ride a russians subs ass intill they felt the need to stop without them having a clue. They would actually play games with them and ping them to let them know that we were sitting right on their asses. Just to let them know who the boss was.
 
June 24th, 2004   Post 6
Redleg
The fire is everything...
 
 
Gear


Agree with the rest of you, Subs!

(and the fear of the Norwegian Field Artillery of course )
 
June 24th, 2004   Post 7
Uncle_Sam
Centurion
 
 
Mainly sea lunch Mobile platforms, but all played a big role.
__________________

American Military Community
 
June 26th, 2004   Post 8
silent driller
Tribuni Angusticlavii
 
I'm gonna say sea launched missles. They would give less reaction time if they were used.
 
December 3rd, 2004   Post 9
airmanpatroler
Centurion
 
 
Im going to say bombers because it gives us time
 
December 3rd, 2004   Post 10
godofthunder9010
Tribunus Laticlavius
 
 
Gear

The submarine fired missiles were safer than bombers (no anti-aircraft network to worry about), but capable of launch at closer proximity to the target. Also capable of firing both Balistic, ICBM, or Cruise Missiles. That'd be my vote.
__________________
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it."
- General Robert E. Lee
Warning, critical pebkac error in the iD10t!! pebkac\wtflolurpwnzd\snafuroflmao.exe called iD10t, iD10t failed to respond!! System in danger!!

"It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong. I am NOT a big man." -Chevy Chase