Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[j_hungary]

Hang on. I’m confused now. Tankers have booms . They are basically civilian aircraft and repurposed with a boom. There’s another method called PROBE-AND-DROGUE that has a long tube and a basket is used. The basket connects to probe of the aircraft. Hopefully US will release the information to put an end to this mystery.

You need a receiver to take fuel in flight with a boom. And you need to have a probe to do probe and drougue refuelling.

The receiver is like this on top of the aircraft



The Probe is like this on the side of the aircraft



Neither KC-135R has either of those; only KC-135R(RT), which is a specialised version of KC-135R that has a boom receiver upgrade (The USAF only has 8 of them). And I have looked it up from the military's own database to actually verify the serial number of both aircraft involved and confirm both aren't KC-135R(RT)

So while I can't tell you why the two planes crashed, I can tell you from my research that they weren't refuelling each other, because they can't, and that's the matter of fact.

 

[Desert]

Yes, IRI should create its own "Pay n Pass" toll fee of its own with coupons for whichever Zio controlled sheikhdom behaves nicer. Heavy fine + tankers sunk if otherwise.

why not .. Hormuz should be treated same as suez canal , pay and pass .. no pay no pass.

 

[Desert]

You need a receiver to take fuel in flight with a boom. And you need to have a probe to do probe and drougue refuelling.

The receiver is like this on top of the aircraft

View attachment 185924

The Probe is like this on the side of the aircraft

View attachment 185925

Neither KC-135R has either of those; only KC-135R(RT), which is a specialised version of KC-135R that has a boom receiver upgrade (The USAF only has 8 of them). And I have looked it up from the military's own database to actually verify the serial number of both aircraft involved and confirm both aren't KC-135R(RT)

So while I can't tell you why the two planes crashed, I can tell you from my research that they weren't refuelling each other, because they can't, and that's the matter of fact.

That's a good point...

 

[j_hungary]

That is okay, we all have gaps in knowledge. Thank you for being honest.

The details of this accident will probably be known only after the war is over, at some point. Right now it is the loss of service personnel that is regrettable and irreplaceable.

(For academic interest, there are many other refueler configurations: bridges, stacks and ladders, for example, and none of them are easy.)

I doubt they will tell the real reason if there is some F up. I still remember the whole M2 Bradley Fiasco that happened when they developed the thing and how they tried to cover it up, and I was in one of those things......lol

 

[j_hungary]

why not .. Hormuz should be treated same as suez canal , pay and pass .. no pay no pass.

Well, a canal and a strait are two different things. A canal owned by a single nation because it lies within an entire country (For example, the Panama Canal lies solely within Panama, and the Suez Canal lies within Egypt) Where as a strait may be split between 2 to 3 parties.

Iran can charge people using their side of the strait (Which would be violating international law by the way) they would just be going over to the UAE and Oman side.

 

[Desert]

Well, a canal and a strait are two different things. A canal owned by a single nation because it lies within an entire country (For example, the Panama Canal lies solely within Panama, and the Suez Canal lies within Egypt) Where as a strait may be split between 2 to 3 parties.

Iran can charge people using their side of the strait (Which would be violating international law by the way) they would just be going over to the UAE and Oman side.

Ok you got a point and I know that.
but the last time I checked , no one cares about international law.
2 countries in negotiations and voila 1 of them get attacked by several countries, international law is no more , Iran needs to do what's best for its people and using force is likely to get things done.

 

[Ibbi32]

From the beginning if the war, KSA actually did NOT allow the US to use its bases to attack Iran.

Regardless, attacks on KSA's infrastructure may pull Pakistan into the war.

And what exactly is pakistan supposed to do? We are fighting a slow methodical war in Afghanistan and have a nuclear armed neighbour staring us down ready to pounce.

If saudis indeed want to go to war they have a massive airforce sitting idle to do something with

 

[Bengal71]

Such a clear video and free roaming by drone indicates that it fiber optic based hence unjammeable.. in case of iraq where targets are stationary and close proximity (inside bases) these drone can bring havoc, if used expertly.

I have been saying all this time fibre optic drone is the way to go. They are highly effective. I have been watching Russia-Ukraine war and how they use the fibre optic drones. There is almost no defence against those. These drones have democratised the battlefield.

 

[shapurzolaktaf]

Ok you got a point and I know that.
but the last time I checked , no one cares about international law.
2 countries in negotiations and voila 1 of them get attacked by several countries, international law is no more , Iran needs to do what's best for its people and using force is likely to get things done.

Exactly, Iran has to create "regional laws" because international law was not followed by "international powers", none of them. We saw even some "allies" supporting claims against our islands.

So Iran has to create regional laws and attack the GCC piglets if they dont follow/agree with the new order and laws and reparation payments.

 

[Beijingwalker]

Trump asks China, France, others to help keep Strait of Hormuz open amid war in Iran

Mar 15, 2026
President Trump called on countries like the U.K., France, South Korea, Japan and even China to help keep the Strait of Hormuz open as Iran tries to strangle the flow of oil from the region. Charlie D'Agata reports.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[clutch]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[That_Guy]

It's called preemptive. If America has the right. Why not Iran. Let's assume Iran did not attack the American assets and bases in Saudi Arabia. However, we are at this point where we are today with the rest of the war field active, the Americans would definitely have utilized the Saudi assets and bases. Iran had to be proactive.. they they warned the region. Any countries hosting American bases are legitimate targets. From their defensive point of view after the horrific terrorist attack on their spiritual and supreme leader Ayatollah and the girls school. Iran had every right to defend itself. All countries harboring American bases is were targets. So from Iranian war strategy to that makes perfect sense.

For for the Saudis and the rest of GCC countries... Their American defense umbrella just broke.

America doesnt have the right.

So your entire argument falls apart.

 

[Zoyou]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[That_Guy]

KSA is not neutral. GCC is not neutral.

Even providing radar data to thwart Iranian missiles that are targeting Iran's enemy is a hostile act against Iran.

Seems like a stretch.

Its the sort of logic that the US used to bomb Laos, even though Laos did nothing.

[Edit]: you're so mad. @Kyussis . Prove me wrong.

 

[j_hungary]

Ok you got a point and I know that.
but the last time I checked , no one cares about international law.
2 countries in negotiations and voila 1 of them get attacked by several countries, international law is no more , Iran needs to do what's best for its people and using force is likely to get things done.

Well, as I said, I don't think it worked, even if Iran ignores international law and starts charging people crossing the Strait, those ships would have just hugged the coast from the other side.

And using force is not the same as charging people, and it may backfire, depending on the geopolitical situation. I mean, right now, we all hate the American President, so nobody did anything about this, and the US itself is too knee deep in this to do anything about this. But if things change or those countries affected (like Japan, South Korea, Australia, and to some point, Oman, Saudi or UAE) really feel their pocket is being hurt from this, even if this is a miscalculation from one mad US President, they won't be on the Iranian side, they will be organising an international escort to escort those ships to traverse the strait.