But note that “nuclear sub” refers to its power system, not armament. Nuclear subs can carry both nuclear and conventional weapons. This is not a threat to nuke Israel or Palestine.
Edit: per articles quoting the Navy dude, this is a guided-missile sub, not a ballistic missile sub, meaning it only carries convention weapons, no nuclear weapons. That is, Tomahawk missiles.
From another article I read, this is a nuclear-powered sub, that is one of a handful that has been retrofitted from ballistic middle duty to cruise missles. So basically it’s a cruise missle platform. The headline is playing a little fast and loose for effect.
Also worth considering that subs that launch nukes are assumed to be out, patrolling in enough areas to ensure last-word MAD deterrence, so you can just assume that US nuke-launching subs are already able to strike most major population centers and don’t need or want to broadcast their specific location (unless, like, a very intelligent former president specifically puts their location on a new broadcast for clout)
The US Navy has dispatched a guided-missile submarine to the Middle East.
The posting was revealed by the military in an announcement late on Sunday. The unusual revelation regarding the location of the ship, which can launch nuclear missiles
SSGNs are incapable of launching the missiles the article is thinking of. I suppose one could outfit the boat with the nuclear TLAM-D, but i doubt the Navy would bother.
And there’s no chance in hell an SSBN, the actual sub with SLBMs on it, is going to surface anywhere and pop open a missile hatch (the missiles are launched submerged).
Article is bunk, a GN showed up somewhere and is ready to put tomahawks through windows, business as usual for one of those boats. Show of force? Yes? Show of nuclear warhead force? No.
Sauce - Submariner.
Also sub fun fact, the 4 SSGNs in the US Navy are the Ohio, Michigan, Florida and Georgia. They have a building in Bangor for them, lovingly called the OMFG building.
We can do both.
But note that “nuclear sub” refers to its power system, not armament. Nuclear subs can carry both nuclear and conventional weapons. This is not a threat to nuke Israel or Palestine.
Edit: per articles quoting the Navy dude, this is a guided-missile sub, not a ballistic missile sub, meaning it only carries convention weapons, no nuclear weapons. That is, Tomahawk missiles.
From another article I read, this is a nuclear-powered sub, that is one of a handful that has been retrofitted from ballistic middle duty to cruise missles. So basically it’s a cruise missle platform. The headline is playing a little fast and loose for effect.
Also worth considering that subs that launch nukes are assumed to be out, patrolling in enough areas to ensure last-word MAD deterrence, so you can just assume that US nuke-launching subs are already able to strike most major population centers and don’t need or want to broadcast their specific location (unless, like, a very intelligent former president specifically puts their location on a new broadcast for clout)
The article is playing fast and loose as well.
SSGNs are incapable of launching the missiles the article is thinking of. I suppose one could outfit the boat with the nuclear TLAM-D, but i doubt the Navy would bother.
And there’s no chance in hell an SSBN, the actual sub with SLBMs on it, is going to surface anywhere and pop open a missile hatch (the missiles are launched submerged).
Article is bunk, a GN showed up somewhere and is ready to put tomahawks through windows, business as usual for one of those boats. Show of force? Yes? Show of nuclear warhead force? No.
Sauce - Submariner.
Also sub fun fact, the 4 SSGNs in the US Navy are the Ohio, Michigan, Florida and Georgia. They have a building in Bangor for them, lovingly called the OMFG building.
I concur. SSBN wouldn’t risk sailing through the canal without shutting the entire canal down just for security reasons.
Speak softly and carry a big stick.