F-22Raptor
Elite Member
Two helicopters were struck by fire, but the crew returned safely
US Perspective on the Iran - Israel / US War
- Thread starter AZ_HighCountry
- Start date
Two helicopters were struck by fire, but the crew returned safely
F-22Raptor
Elite Member
Based off the video footage, there was a decent amount of small arms fire, but missile threat seemed minimal.
Falcon29
Elite Member
Somebody tell this guy to stop tweeting. The only mature person in this administration that can speak clearly and not in riddles is Marco Rubio.
This guy just cares for attention due to his Narcassistic Personality Disorder and is confusing the world and global markets/economy.
Why would partners in Asia, Middle East and Europe get behind an effort to secure Strait of Hormuz if this guy tweets erratically on a daily basis and nobody understands what he's trying to get out of this ?
This guy just cares for attention due to his Narcassistic Personality Disorder and is confusing the world and global markets/economy.
Why would partners in Asia, Middle East and Europe get behind an effort to secure Strait of Hormuz if this guy tweets erratically on a daily basis and nobody understands what he's trying to get out of this ?
Oscar
Moderator
Dude, what are the front lines here?
The lesson is that what used to count as a safe rear area is no longer reliably safe for high value air assets. An E-3G parked in Saudi Arabia is not magically safe just because it is not sitting on the literal front. If the threat envelope keeps expanding, then your choices are bad ones either way. Push it farther back and you lose useful coverage, loiter, and time on station. Keep it closer and you accept that even your supposed sanctuary is vulnerable.
And even when those aircraft are moved, they are still on runways somewhere. That is the point. They have to take off, recover, refuel, get maintained, and sit exposed during cycles. People talk as if moving them one country over solves everything. It does not. It just changes which runway you are gambling with.
Same problem with tankers. You cannot run a serious air war while pretending E-3s and KC-135s can orbit from ever more distant bases and still provide the same effect. Every extra bit of distance means less time on station, more fuel burned just getting there and back, more strain on crews, more escort requirements, and a thinner margin for everything. On paper the aircraft survives. In practice the mission gets hollowed out.
And that is before the politics. You cannot assume bases like Lakenheath or Aviano remain frictionless options forever while half of Europe is furious about being dragged into another reckless conflict.
So no, the pedestal lesson is not "do not be stupid near the front." The real lesson is uglier. This war is exposing how vulnerable our HVAAs have become even at ranges that used to feel comfortable, just as hardened threats and defended targets are already forcing operations farther back than planners would like.
The whole Hegshit claim of "our planners have been gaming this for ages" relied on operational commanders who understood ground realities, who had planned on political fallbacks and objectives based on X being true to achieve Y.
When you keep changing the Y because you dont know the WHY since you first went in for someone else while selling the "steal oil" narrative back home, and then you remove all dissenting professionals because they dont agree with your "God wills it!" narrative and "Where I stand it is holy ground" White ISIS - then you are bound to get screw ups DESPITE having the best force around.
Oscar
Moderator
Comparing Iran to Venezuela just shows a complete detachment from military reality. You are taking a bankrupt narco state in the American backyard with a hollowed out military that cannot afford boot polish, and holding it up against a nation of 90 million people covered in fortified mountain ranges. Iran possessed(and still has a decent amount operational) the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East and a combined military and IRGC force of over half a million active personnel. Assuming United States combined arms will just roll over the Zagros mountains like a Caribbean beach resort is the exact industrial age hubris that bleeds empires white in twenty year quagmires.
The jump from Combat Search and Rescue to an HEU extraction completely ignores the physical mechanics of the target. A CSAR mission relies on speed, surprise, and violence of action to scoop up a pilot and vanish in thirty minutes. You are using that tactical success to justify invading a fortified military base, digging through 100 to 800 meters of solid mountain rock, and extracting hundreds of kilograms of highly enriched uranium!
Helicopters and fast ropes do not crack granite. Getting to that material requires heavy mining equipment, tunnel boring machines, and months of continuous, uninterrupted excavation deep inside hostile territory.
Setting up a static defensive perimeter around that excavation hands the initiative entirely to the enemy. Tethering American operators to a hole in the ground means the IRGC dictates the tempo. Every Basij and IRGC unit within five hundred miles will converge on that perimeter. The enemy operates as a decentralized, networked swarm on their own terrain, which is exactly the kind of asymmetric threat we had in Iraq. They will maneuver faster, adapt quicker, and bleed the perimeter dry while the engineering teams are still trying to breach the first layer of rock.
Crowning this entire fantasy is the idea that President Trump might go for it. We are talking about a commander in chief who is desperately looking for a way to get some of his public standing back out of this mess while you are pitching a permanent, static mountain siege that the potential for a steady stream of causalities if not body bags.
Physical, logistical, and political realities dictate operations. You cannot just handwave away the logistics of a mountain siege because some operators pulled off a quick helicopter rescue.
Talk about being our version of a "Wumao"
Oscar
Moderator
Why not?C'mon people (including mods) please control yourselves.
Let's stick to the topic instead of focusing on attacking other members news posts.
You guys are heading down the rat hole.
I have veteran family and friends through them. Why do I want to have idiotic ideas that will put those men in danger as part of the IRAN - US war.
You just want to sit here and sing Kumbaya!
Hamartia Antidote
Elite Member
I'd say here
AWACS planes hit here on the runway
Are Iranians successfully hitting Israel far behind the line...they sure are...but that's where the line is.
Last edited:
F-22Raptor
Elite Member
Small arms fire confirmed, all crew being treated. SAR for the second crew member ongoing
52051
Registered Member
Without a land invasion, Iran can't be defeated by the US military. But here's the problem: Iran isn't Saddam Hussein. They won't just sit there waiting for your troops to leisurely finish deployment. They'll hit your logistics hubs and troop concentrations with whatever they have. Wake up and smell the gunpowder: the best outcome you can hope for in this war is losing every base in the Middle East, watching the petrodollar system implode, and seeing the Gulf sheikhdoms stop viewing you as their protector. Middle Eastern capital won't see the US as a safe haven anymore – just look at the Qatari princess touring Chinese tech firms days ago. That's the barometer. If you launch an offensive under these conditions, even your last shred of imperial delusion will crumble into dust.
Hamartia Antidote
Elite Member
The role of Naval aircraft carriers is not to park offshore at the front line.
We hope Chinese Naval doctrine is to do this.
Even in WW2 carriers always stayed at least 500 miles from the Japanese coast.
That first raid on Tokyo had to launch early because the carriers were detected 700 miles out and had to launch at 650 miles.
Guess how many US aircraft carriers got hit by the German, Italian, North Korean, North Vietnamese or Iraqi Air Forces…none…but did US carrier aircraft hit all of them from over the horizon..yep.
Is Iran also getting hit by them..yep.
Last edited:
F-22Raptor
Elite Member
Most base infrastructure damage was sustained in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, etc, but the US isn’t using these for air operations. The US has completed over 13,000 combat sorties. Combined with Israel it’s over 20,000 total. Base damage has had minimial effect on US operations.
-1 F-35 was damaged and returned to base
- 4 F-15s destroyed
- 1 A-10 crashed
- 1 E-3 destroyed
- 2 KC-135 destroyed, 5-7 damaged but 4 were confirmed to return to flight per Trump
In the grand scheme, these aren’t significant losses
F-22Raptor
Elite Member
AZ_HighCountry
INT'L MOD
- Thread starter
- #1,080
You've spammed a lot.
Users who are viewing this thread
Pakistan Defence Latest
-
-
-
-
Undocumented Immigrants Deportation Operation
- Latest: Hopefully Pessimistic
-
Country Watch Latest
-
-
-
-
-
Breaking: First F-47 Sixth-Gen Fighter Already Being Built, Expected to Fly in 2028- Latest: AZ_HighCountry
