2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran and elsewhere in region - News and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually not really, because of the nature of MALE/HALE drones ( comparatively slow, lumbering about to/over/from their destination for long time). How many of them are in the theater, low 3 digits at most? And compared to the 20,000 sorties mentioned i doubt MALE/HALE sorties would radically affect that number, maybe low 4 digits at most.

MRBMs are the "problem"of the regional actors, i'm refering here to iranian ADS performance.
 
Forest Green said:
But if you count MALE drones then sortie numbers/rate would also skyrocket. Also do you count an MRBM destruction/use as a lost aircraft, because they're probably as expensive as MALE drones? You'd probably have to count every 10 cruise missiles as a lost aircraft too.
Click to expand...
it would be unfair to count cruise missiles and MRBM since theyre meant to be single use whereas MALE drones are not single use
 
EmoBirb said:
Unlike the B-52, which the USAF intends to keep more or less until these things fall apart, the H-6 will ultimately face retirement once the H-20/H-XX enters service in numbers. Even today it's not survivable and the Chinese know this. Stand off munitions hin oder her.
Click to expand...
Are you seemingly forgetting about the B-21? Or intentionally leaving it out for the sake of your own bias?

Something else you mentioned that id like to touch on. You said the US has “near zero SHORAD” or something to that extent, but this is far from the truth. The US actually has the most direct energy shorad programs out of any country right now. In fact we were the first to deploy them and get real world data about them. We haven’t been driving prototypes, or even mockups for that matter, in parades.

And for your upcoming response “why aren’t they in CENTCOM”, fortunately or unfortunately the US plays the global police. Our systems are widely dispersed. And as you mentioned this conflict was initiated by a certain third party that didn’t allow us time to adequately prepare.
 
mokahete said:
I don't consider stealth bombers as obsolete.

Like current J-36 itself is kinda a stealth fighter-bomber.
Xi'an H-20 program still going on.
Recently flown large chinese stealth bomber drone.

Russia which has invested highly on offensive missiles of all kinds , IADS etc. Is still working on PAK-DA, still adding more su57's, Su35's, Su-34's.
Click to expand...
The B-2 with it's boutique numbers of which like a handful are operational at any given time is not the main US bomber. And even the B-2 is becoming dated, which is why the B-21 is being developed. The B-52 and B-1 are the backbone of US long range aviation and especially the B-52 is becoming geriatric

mokahete said:
Though late but U.S. is also doing it.

Drones: LUCAS, Switchblade,Textron Damocles,Anduril Altius-600 etc.

Missiles: JASSM, tomahawk, dark eagle, PrSM, scramjet projects still on, etc.

U.S. Navy has one of the most capable and complete IADS system in the world.

RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile is a SHORAD.

Next Generation Short Range Interceptor (NGSRI): The U.S. Army is currently testing this as a direct replacement for the aging Stinger.
Click to expand...
All of these are incredibly overpriced, thanks to being American products, other countries produce similar or more capable systems in large quantities and cheaper. Because labor is cheaper, they are less deindustrialized and because their respective MICs are state owned enterprises for the most part. Meanwhile the US Military/Government gets ripped off by the MIC which overpromises and underdelivers for premium prices. That's not only troublesome from a political POV, but also quite frankly impacting the strategic thinking and goals the US can and has to work with.

mokahete said:
The United States' inability to fully achieve its desired strategic and geopolitical objectives in this conflict is not the same as saying its armed forces have been ineffective in their operational role.

Consider the counterfactual: if Iran possessed a capable air force that could have survived and contested the skies for even a single week, it would have enjoyed far greater freedom to launch its large ballistic missile arsenal. With hostile aircraft not dominating its airspace and actively hunting launchers near tunnel entrances, Iran’s missile campaign could have been significantly more intense and sustained.

In this conflict, both sides have demonstrated their respective strengths and limitations. Iran continues to hold out, retaliate, and maintain control over the Strait of Hormuz, but is very heavily degraded — to a level that would likely have caused a more conventional Gulf state like the UAE or Saudi Arabia to collapse many times over.
Click to expand...
They die not only "not fully" achieve their objectives. So far they didn't achieve them at all. Strait of Hormuz, closed. The Regime is still the same, Iran's missile force is still very much present and they still have every bit of enriched fissile material they ever produced. By all metrics until this day, the whole operation has so far been a strategic failure. Draining resources and exhausting critical assets, at a time where other geopolitical rivals are becoming stronger than ever really. Overall there are only losses and so far no wins for the US in Iran, unless we count killing Khamenei, which is now being succeeded by hardliners.

mokahete said:
In a potential Taiwan conflict—where China would be the offensive party—China would likely have a significantly lower threshold for sustaining inflicted damage before deciding to pull back, compared to Iran, which views the fight as an existential crisis.
Click to expand...
I disagree because throughout their millenia of history, the Chinese have proven to be incredibly willing and able to sustain major casualties to achieve their military goals. The US never did, even in WW1 and WW2 their casualties were rather low.
 
to touch upon the above messages, those are NOT the only drones we have. And they are not “all” “overpriced” there are *tons* of S-UAS and OWA drones in service.

In fact you will find suspiciously Ukrainian looking long range OWA drones on AFSOC affiliated social media pages
 
EmoBirb said:
The B-52 and B-1 are the backbone of US long range aviation and especially the B-52 is becoming geriatric
Click to expand...
The answer to this lies in the fact the B-52 is set to outlive the B-1.
The B-1 improved performance without going into VLO design. But it no longer provides an advantage nor can it match up with the B-2/B-21.
So the B-52 exists to provide additional payload for standoff, and to capitalize on permissive environments where it can provide higher efficiency than other manned platforms. It is important to build capabilities to capitalize on gains.
EmoBirb said:
By all metrics until this day, the whole operation has so far been a strategic failure.
Click to expand...
Even if a ceasefire was signed right now, Iran's economy was in shambles before the war and will wake up to a catastrophic situation, together with a massively degraded DIB and military.
EmoBirb said:
Strait of Hormuz, closed.
Click to expand...
There are reasons to believe a temporary closure of SoH has strategic benefits to the US, and these may outweigh some downsides.
EmoBirb said:
Draining resources and exhausting critical assets, at a time where other geopolitical rivals are becoming stronger than ever really.
Click to expand...
Although the China-Russia-Iran axis (and associates) is loosely tied, they are still allies.
With Venezuela within the American sphere of influence, Russia locked in a war, and Iran gone or on life support, China will be more isolated in 2027 than it was in 2022.

It is also wrong to consider this war to be entirely optional and voluntary on the US's part. The so called Axis of Resistance went all in on October 7th. In quick succession Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, PMF, and finally Iran, by April 2024, have all attacked Israel.
Long time Iranian threats materialized, like the closure of the "Bab the Mandeb" and attacks on east med energy assets. The assumption the SoH wouldn't be closed relied on the same false premise that the Bab won't be closed.

For the US this may well have been a dilemma of whether to let it become a regional war of attrition and energy, or take the initiative and let things develop more in the US's favor.
 
Big_Zukini said:
Even if a ceasefire was signed right now, Iran's economy was in shambles before the war and will wake up to a catastrophic situation, together with a massively degraded DIB and military.
Click to expand...
Their main source of income has grown by a factor of ~2.5, and there's a new one which can go to ~1.5 per known numbers. Given that their economic outlook before the war was hopeless, they're (much like Ukraine btw) in a position where they see a ray of hope now. Right before the war, Iran was outright hopeless - its collapse was when, rather than if. It isn't any longer, potentially.

Moreover, the entire Middle Eastern security ecosystem built on excluding Iran (for appropriate monetary compensation from one of worlds' richest cash cows) will quite likely collapse. There's a good reason the UAE and SA are really pushing for Iran to be finished now. They will have to somehow adjust.
Their reserve bet(Pakistan) has failed, and should US fail to decisively win, their entire doctrine will collapse as a house of cards.
Big_Zukini said:
It is also wrong to consider this war to be entirely optional and voluntary on the US's part. The so called Axis of Resistance went all in on October 7th. In quick succession Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, PMF, and finally Iran, by April 2024, have all attacked Israel.
Click to expand...
Had Axis actually attacked Israel, one may argue Iran wouldn't have ended in the Epstein war in the first place.
This was the rather obvious bet by Sinwar. But ironically, Israel plays the US better than Hamas managed to play Iran.
Big_Zukini said:
Although the China-Russia-Iran axis (and associates) is loosely tied, they are still allies.
Click to expand...
China is already "~isolated", they don't even consider it a bug.
The problem is China grows super well just by itself, and we're approaching the historical norm where the world needs China more than China needs rest of the world really.
I.e. Russia may lose *something* should Iran really collapse (though up for debate if it will really win, should it achieve victory).
China won't.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
Their main source of income has grown by a factor of ~2.5, and there's a new one which can go to ~1.5 per known numbers. Given that their outlook before the war was hopeless, they're (much like Ukraine btw) in a position where they see a ray of hope now. Right before the war, Iran was outright hopeless - its collapse was when, rather than if.
Click to expand...
I see no evidence of this.
Ainen said:
Moreover, the entire Middle Eastern security ecosystem built on excluding Iran (for appropriate monetary compensation from one of worlds' richest cash cows) will quite likely collapse. There's a good reason the UAE and SA are really pushing for Iran to be finished now. They will have to somehow adjust.
Their reserve bet(Pakistan) has failed, and should US fail to decisively win, their entire doctrine will collapse as a house of cards.
Click to expand...
In the US's eyes, more capable allies = better. So more capable GCC allies = better. Even if it means temporary damage.
Ainen said:
Had Axis actually attacked Israel, one may argue Iran wouldn't have ended in the Epstein war in the first place.
This was the rather obvious bet by Sinwar. But ironically, Israel plays the US better than Hamas managed to play Iran.
Click to expand...
jfc...
Have fun, I guess.
 
EmoBirb said:
the B-2 is becoming dated, which is why the B-21 is being developed
Click to expand...

Difficult to believe an informed commentator of the project would assert this in good faith.

Suggest you re-review CRS Brief R44463 and report back with your findings. Don't worry, you won't have to read very far into the document.
 
A LOT of the 'willingness to absorb large numbers of casualties' thing has to do with the national awareness. News. WWI had huge numbers of casualties but in the national consciousness this was expected going by prior wars/conflicts. The description of WWI as "The war to end all wars" demonstrated a bit of change. Enough was supposed to be enough.

In GW1 or Op Granby, there was a distinct aversion to huge losses and the end was called by the US president at the 100 hour mark because the pubic was bombarded with images and video, good job they did not go with smellovison then. Management at the time simply shied away from any more of that and we did NOT get the job done.

As someone who volunteered for that job, from civilian life, I STILL feel cheated. Many of us have huge health defects from that event and it was not FINISHED. There has been a steady stream of health issues from serving and the younger people of today have learned a lesson I did not until it was too late. When the system cares so little, when the politicians come calling - just say NO.

IMHO, parts of the world where there are extreme systems in charge reduce the ability of the public to know anything other than the scene painted by the regime. There are folk willing to end themselves because a particular regime say's they should be ready to from a young age. If for example, the North Korean gen pop knew the truth, does anyone here think the Kim dynasty still be around?

Education folks, it changes everything
 
Does thinning down the fleet free up money for other systems? Gross over simplification but just an odd thought
 
GreenBullet said:
Difficult to believe an informed commentator of the project would assert this in good faith.

Suggest you re-review CRS Brief R44463 and report back with your findings. Don't worry, you won't have to read very far into the document.
Click to expand...
Okay let's look at some pieces of the brief and compare it to what I said.

My Statement:
the B-2 is becoming dated, which is why the B-21 is being developed
Click to expand...

First Paragraph of the congressional briefing:
The Department of Defense is developing a new long-range bomber aircraft, the B-21 Raider
(previously known as LRS-B), and proposes to acquire at least 100 of them. B-21s would initially
replace the fleets of B-1 and B-2 bombers, and could possibly replace B-52s in the future.
Click to expand...

Followed by:
Prior to 2006, the Air Force had indicated that its fleet of B-1, B-2, and B-52 bombers would
suffice until 2037, when advanced technologies, such as hypersonic cruise vehicles, would
potentially reach maturity and be incorporated into a follow-on bomber aircraft
Click to expand...

Then:
The B-21 is intended to initially replace the 20 B-2 and 63 B-1 strategic bombers currently in the
fleet. B-2s date from the 1990s; B-1s date from the 1980s.
Click to expand...

And:
By contrast, the Air Force plans to retire its B-2s and B-1s by 2040. Following those retirements,
with the full planned buy of 100 B-21s, the bomber fleet would grow in number from 159 to 176
Click to expand...

Difficult to believe an informed commentator of the project would assert this in good faith and then not having read the documents they link and told others to look at. Because if you did you would have known that it (evidently) supports my claim. The B-21 is being developed to replace the dated B-2 which exists in small numbers. And the dated B-1 as well. And possibly in the future perhaps even the B-52.
 
Big_Zukini said:
I see no evidence of this.
Click to expand...
Low point of their income was 40ish billion USD from oil trade. At current rate, they're making >>100 this year. And it's unlikely to fall anytime soon, unless US blockades Iran(=entire gulf and red sea) and sends global energy market down for good.

+Small per ship "protection toll" for brotherly islamic nations, which for 60-ish transitions of the strait per day will produce same ~40 billion per year.

I.e. ~150(or more) instead of >40(low)...70(best).

The only way out at this point is a ground invasion. True ground invasion, bot Kharg island. Which Israel will take no part in: not my department, says Wehrner von Braun.
Big_Zukini said:
In the US's eyes, more capable allies = better. So more capable GCC allies = better. Even if it means temporary damage.
Click to expand...
In gulf eyes, the service was to keep things going and Iran down.
Not keeping things going and letting Iran become global South champion their lives depend on, while losing relationship with Pakistan (which btw is their shortcut to nuclear deterrent) is not the deal.
Basically, Israel set up US for second Suez in a different role, and runs happy about it.
 
Tribesmen and rural populations fired at two US Black Hawk helicopters with hunting rifles on Saturday.
Click to expand...

Clearly these idiots want to die, shooting at US aircraft they may as well wear signs saying "I want to die, shoot me".

Ainen said:
Their main source of income has grown by a factor of ~2.5, and there's a new one which can go to ~1.5 per known numbers.
Click to expand...

All the US needs to do is bomb and destroy the onshore pumping station supplying all of the crude-oil via a sub-sea pipeline to Kharg island cutting off 95% of Iran's crude-oil exports.
 
NMaude said:
All the US needs to do is bomb and destroy the onshore pumping station supplying all of the crude-oil via a sub-sea pipeline to Kharg island cutting off 95% of Iran's crude-oil exports.
Click to expand...
Kind of yes, but then Iran likely goes desalination/oil-pumping crazy and Yemen blocks BEM.
This is MAD, MAD where Iran is still in control of whatever exits the strait.
And to solve this MAD, you need either Tehran or sufficient part of Hormuzgan(entire province).
 
Ainen said:
Kind of yes, but then Iran likely goes desalination/oil-pumping crazy and houthis block BEM.
Click to expand...

And in retaliation will have its own desalination plants and water reservoirs destroyed, Iran has 90 million people and is in a prolonged drought crisis, if Iran chooses that route then they are committing national suicide.
 
NMaude said:
And in retaliation will have its own desalination plants and water reservoirs destroyed, Iran has 90 million people and is in a prolonged drought crisis, if Iran chooses that route then they are committing national suicide.
Click to expand...
This doesn't open up the strait (nor breaks Iran way more than it already is), just makes you everything you accused Russians of(which Russia never even contemplated though).
It's stupid, as for all their water shortage (to a significant degree self-inflicted by IRGC construction lobby), Iranian water sources are mostly natural. What's the plan, poisoning snow caps of Iranian mountain ranges? That's a lot to poison even for a cartoonish evil.

The point is opening strait and maintaining credibility, not keeping it closed and going into MAD. And to open it up, the solution isn't spreading agent Orange over snow（there's quite enough of him around already), it's removing Iranian leverage over strait. Iranian leverage is more or less the entire province (Hormozgan) bordering it - from coastal underground IRGCN navy bases (no one knew they're the threat and not the sacrificial corvettes) to missile batteries spread all the way into Zagros. They were building it up for last 30 years with this specific purpose, it's honestly fascinating how it comes as a surprise.
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
The B-21 is being developed to replace the dated B-2 which exists in small numbers. And the dated B-1 as well. And possibly in the future perhaps even the B-52.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The omission in your original statement did a lot of heavy lifting. A simple look at the numbers the Air Force wants demonstrates that the strategic bomber remains a relevant and necessary component of the force structure. B-21 is not one exquisite and specialized capability replacing that same capability (in the B-2), it is a broad replacement for a large cross-section of the bomber fleet that can also perform the same role that that aging exquisite and specialized platform does now.
 
Has China actually become an ally of Iran? There are rumors that the Chinese-made Wing Loong 2 drone, which Iran shot down a few days ago, was actually from China. Does this mean that China is now funding the enemies of its own allies to attack its allies?

Of course, I know many people want to link Iran and China together, at least it allows themselves to be reassured with thoughts like 'It must be China or some other country helping them, otherwise we wouldn't have suffered such losses.' But the truth is, Iran is not really China's ally; it can only be considered a certain degree of 'friend.' Oh, by the way, 10 years ago, the U.S. could also be considered China's 'friend.'

Also, I don't really recommend everyone to bring up the topic of mainland China and Taiwan here, including China itself. I don't see much connection between China and the current situation in the Middle East, except for oil. I hope everyone can return to the discussion on equipment.

Here are the photos of the rumored Wing Loong 2 drone wreckage. I hope some experts can help confirm them.
1775358722191.png
1775358803263.png
 
GreenBullet said:
Exactly. The omission in your original statement did a lot of heavy lifting. A simple look at the numbers the Air Force wants demonstrates that the strategic bomber remains a relevant and necessary component of the force structure. B-21 is not one exquisite and specialized capability replacing that same capability (in the B-2), it is a broad replacement for a large cross-section of the bomber fleet that can also perform the same role that that aging exquisite and specialized platform does now.
Click to expand...
The B-2 will keep flying just like the B-52 with upgrades. As an example, we did two 30 year structural fatigue life tests, so structurally, she'll be around for for a good while. We are going to need all of our B-52, B-1, B-2 and B-21 assets, things are probably going to be heating up in the future.
 
Iran shooting down a Chinese MALE UAV, even if operated and owned by China, says ultimately very little. It's a unmanned system that can be easily thought to be an equivalent western system when it's being engaged. Thus it's importance, if operated by the PRC directly which isn't confirmed, says very little.

But yes, people always tend to make out the Iran, Russia, China, North Korea bloc to be far more connected and coherent than it actually is. China does indeed trade with all of these countries, and these countries with China because it's a very large unsanctionable market to sell to. The most connected are arguably Russia and the DPRK, Iran and China are mostly doing their own thing. Although Russia and China are increasingly operating together on a military footing. Either way, Iran is still largely independent from them and their connection is more so happenstace because the US led sanctions on Iran pushed them into their arms. The reason China or Russia would supply Iran with significant intel is mostly just to spite the Americans and inflict as much of a cost as possible to them while they're tied up in the Middle East. Which weakens their position in Eastern Europe and East Asia respectively.

Geopolitics are driven by pragmatism and not idealism about some supposed "global south". And Iran is a very pragmatic country (look back at their joint strikes with Israeli assets against Iraqs nuclear facilities).
 
Has anyone come up with a comparison of the damage done by Saddam dynamiting well-heads with a no-holds barred zero-sum conclusion of this war?

The world deserves to know.

I am no fan of, say, Gavin forcing poor people to pay for catalytic converters worth more than their work car—-but this petrochemical havoc is beyond the pale.

This is a disaster both ecological AND economical.
 
SUPER=BUG said:
Has China actually become an ally of Iran? There are rumors that the Chinese-made Wing Loong 2 drone, which Iran shot down a few days ago, was actually from China. Does this mean that China is now funding the enemies of its own allies to attack its allies?
Click to expand...

China has extensive commercial investment in the Gulf States (including governmental infrastructure) and in Iran. It's not as simple as one side or the other, they've always pragmatically done business with all the involved parties. They are in a geopolitical dilemma at the moment, but not one that would have any catastrophic consequences. They also stand to profit from rebuilding Iranian infrastructure under the existing regime (if it survives) or under whatever replacement springs out of the intervention (if successful). I for the most part actually agree with Emobirb's take on this.
 
Last edited:
SUPER=BUG said:
Has China actually become an ally of Iran? There are rumors that the Chinese-made Wing Loong 2 drone, which Iran shot down a few days ago, was actually from China. Does this mean that China is now funding the enemies of its own allies to attack its allies?

Of course, I know many people want to link Iran and China together, at least it allows themselves to be reassured with thoughts like 'It must be China or some other country helping them, otherwise we wouldn't have suffered such losses.' But the truth is, Iran is not really China's ally; it can only be considered a certain degree of 'friend.' Oh, by the way, 10 years ago, the U.S. could also be considered China's 'friend.'

Also, I don't really recommend everyone to bring up the topic of mainland China and Taiwan here, including China itself. I don't see much connection between China and the current situation in the Middle East, except for oil. I hope everyone can return to the discussion on equipment.

Here are the photos of the rumored Wing Loong 2 drone wreckage. I hope some experts can help confirm them.
View attachment 807999
View attachment 808000
Click to expand...
The Wing Long 2 is operated by Saudi and UAE.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom