Nope, that honour goes to the Vatican Guard.

The vatican guard?

the papacy long ago desirous of security in an uncertain world hired a body of swiss troops who at the time were the best mercenaries available in that they were highly competent and best of all unlikely to be bribed by the foe. if you google you should be able to find out the date they hired the swiss but the halberds the vatican guard carry were state of the art at the time. while the vatican guard you see wear their odd uniforms and carry halberds i am fairly sure there are more up to date versions tucked away somewhere in the background should unpleasantness break out.

I think the Swiss Guard qualifies more as a highly trained security force on the level of law enforcement instead of an "Army". The UK , in my opinion, has the best trained Airborne and Marine forces. The rest of their Amry ceratinly ranks up there among the best.

"The UK , in my opinion, has the best trained Airborne and Marine forces. The rest of their Amry ceratinly ranks up there among the best. " -- But the numbers are so small... I mean US Rangers are just as qualified as Para Reg and are probably in the same numbers, however if you compare the Paras with say 82nd AB then you might find a qualitative edge somewhere... but remeber there is a full division of 82nd. Same can probably be said of the Marines... RM is a commando unit, and should rightly be compared with the US Marine Recon or something (I dont know the US equivalant) with similar numbers.... not the entire US Marine Corps.

>>>-- But the numbers are so small... <<< size does not in ANY way equal quality.

Size does indicate quality to a certain extent. It would be great if the selection process for US Army Airborne School and subsequent duty with the 82nd Airborne were as rigorous as selection for the UK’s Parachute Regiment. However it is unlikely that they would graduate the numbers of personnel they think they need it all boils down to the cost of the attrition rate and reaching your authorized manning levels. I say think because the Army uses jump school as a ticket punching school. Personnel, mostly officers, who will never spend a day assigned to a airborne unit will attend the course, get their wings and never strap on a chute again. It looks good in their record but that is about it. There is little reason for an Armor officer to go to jump school. Anybody who has been to US Army Jump School, who is being honest, will tell you it is not particularly demanding. In fact what they spend three weeks teaching could be done in one week. Why Airborne School has more prestige than Air Assault School is beyond me. Air Assault School is not all that difficult either but for my money it was more demanding than jump school. What quality there is in the 82nd is not the result of Airborne School but of the training personnel receive once they are assigned to an airborne unit. But I would argue that there is little in quality that separates the 82nd from units like the 10th Mountain Division or 25th Infantry Division. But it is obvious that the Paras are step above a unit like the Welsh Guards. The Parachute is merely a means of delivery to the battlefield not how you fight on the battlefield. If US Army jump school was limited to those who had actual need to attend the selection process could be more demanding and you would have a higher quality of personnel because attrition costs would be less. Even with in the 82nd division there are those in some support units who have no real need of a pair of jump wings so you could tighten the selection process even more. The Marine Corps and Royal Marines are a different story. Numbers are still the big story here. Sure the Marine Corps would like to have a 30 plus week boot camp like the Commandos Course but they would never get the numbers they need. But unlike Airborne School, Marine basic Training is not some ticket punching exercise everybody who is to be a Marine must go through it. Now it could be argued that a country with the size population of the Untied States cold tighten up standards for both the Marine Corps and Airborne and sill meet it numbers. For Airborne they could because we are only talking one division. Bu tin the Marine Corps we are talking over 150,000 personnel and believe it or not there is political opposition to lengthening Marine Boot Camp. When General Gray was Commandant he tried to lengthen but Congress did not want to shell out more money. General Gray got around this by tacking on some extra training after boot camp by sending all Marines to Infantry Training School after boot camp for 4 weeks of Combat skills training. Above that what they received in boot camp. There is also some, though limited, political pressure of the Marine Corps to adopt co-ed basic training which of course would make it easier not harder. When you add the controversy surrounding recruit deaths the Marine Corps is lucky that its training is as demanding s it is. I do not think the rangers are the equivalent of the Royal Marines or Paras. Not everybody in the Ranger battalion has completed Rangers School were as everybody in the Royal Marines as completed the Commando course. As good as RIP might be I do not think it is on the same level as the Commando course. I would even argue the Infantry Battalion component of a Marine Expeditionary Unit, that has completed its train up prior to deployment, is the equal of a Ranger Battalion. On a day to day basis the ege would go tothe Rnagers becuase they do nto suffer the same personnel turbulance.

"size does not in ANY way equal quality." -- Size does constrain quality interms of training resources that can/are be allocated.

I equated Rangers to Paras... under the assumption that all Rangers have been to Rangers course. So who (or what percentage) of a Ranger battalion is exempt from going to Ranger course? I honestly dont know a thing about the Marine Recon, but still equated them to RM commandos out of a blind guess by the numbers and roles (of which I know of, but still cant remember if they come under SOCOM or not?)

In the Ranger battalion, everyone sergeant and above are Ranger qualified...most Specialist are Ranger qualified or get to Ranger school. They are trying to push more privates to go. But remember, unlike the Paras or others, an enlisted man in the Ranger Redgiment is on a 3 year enlistment. Now as far as Airborne School as such, the US Army Airborne School is responsible for training all airborne qualified personnel in the US military, not just the Army and not just the 82d Airborne. There is a certain economy of scale with the size of the school.....and since the Army personnel policy states once you are airborne qulaified you are eligible for an airborne assignment some folks go who may need it in the future. Efficient? Maybe not, but it works.