Talk:Green Light Teams

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bboone333.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Lede needs cleanup & copyedit
I fixed a couple of minor errors & linked relevant articles. But there's a lot of repetition & clunky prose here. On my list, unless someone beats me to it.

Ideally, there's an active editor around who was involved in these programs. Anyone? My knowledge is third-hand (at best). Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 22:31, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree. There's no such thing as a Special Forces "squad" and "Green Light" was more of a Fort Bragg thing (I only ever saw it referred that way in the 7th Special Forces Group when they were at Fort Bragg) within Special Forces. The way this is written it makes it sound like these were teams of Army SF, Navy SEALs and Marine whatevers working together to deliver atomic bombs which wasn't the case at all.John Simpson54 (talk) 19:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Youch
I can't find anything in this article that's correct, maybe other than the name.

The article claims that New Look was a limited strike concept developed because of the US's fear of Soviet nuclear stockpiles. It points to an article to back this up. The article directly states that New Look was "threatening to respond to any attack with a nuclear onslaught of apocalyptic proportions -- a doctrine known as "massive retaliation."

The entire article is like this, and I suggest everyone read it with a large grain of salt before it undergoes a complete re-write.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 01:14, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Issues with article.
I would suggest that editors on this article take a look at the articles on the W54 and Special Atomic Demolition Munition. A number of statements in this article (which are from tertiary sources), directly contradict declassified documents.

For example, the statement "Early models contained a mechanical detonation line merely 330 feet (100 m) long from nuclear device to detonation team" is clearly debunked by the secondary source "History of the Mark 54 Weapon", which describes early SADMs as using a mechanical timer for detonation. Also, a "mechanical detonation line"? Is this supposed to be some sort of wire they would tug on? Such a device is not mentioned anywhere in the document (thought it's possible it's under the redactions).

What is quite clearly described is the Field Wire Remote Control System, a device designed to detonate the weapon remotely using a field wire. I don't have a specific source for it's length, but field wire apparently came in 1000 ft reels and could be connected together for longer lengths.

Another issue is the suicide attack allegations. I'm not aware of any official documents that describe this and the statement is directly contradicted by US military manuals on ADM use.Kylesenior (talk) 03:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree re: suicide missions. The problem is how else to phrase it, as many people did see it as suicide attacks. This runs into it being "weasel words" though. R K NI (talk) 07:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)