(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

(06-22-2025 10:43 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Btw, Elvis, you still are ignoring the comments about your statement that we should have used JDAMs instead of Tomahawks.

Are you sure you don't want to explain why we're wrong to think that was an incredibly stupid statement?

Or maybe average people saw it, and I missed it.

I made it pretty clear in this thread that B1 or B2 delivered JDAMs were much more economical that tomahawks, and that my speculation is that their inclusion is branch politics and the Navy basically not wanting to to be left out.

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Crap, for some reason I thought this was your thread, apologies.

I realize it's easy to get Elvis and me mixed up.

I will also remember not to visit your house unannounced.

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

Israel is flying C130s over western Iran, the east is slightly more contested with mobile SAMs according to the British media.

This begs the question, why isn't Elvis running this operation? I mean, he obviously knows more about military operations than the people actually running our military operations. It's just dumbassery that he isn't in charge.

(06-22-2025 10:49 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:43 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Btw, Elvis, you still are ignoring the comments about your statement that we should have used JDAMs instead of Tomahawks.

Are you sure you don't want to explain why we're wrong to think that was an incredibly stupid statement?

Or maybe average people saw it, and I missed it.

I made it pretty clear in this thread that B1 or B2 delivered JDAMs were much more economical that tomahawks, and that my speculation is that their inclusion is branch politics and the Navy basically not wanting to to be left out.

You made it clear about the cost. If you mentioned their inclusion is politics b/c the Navy didn't want to be left out, I missed it.

At any rate, I think that's a huge speculative leap to make.

First thing I thought was they did it for safety reasons. Firing missiles from a sub is a helluva lot safer than flying a fleet of bombers over enemy territory at night, regardless of what defense capabilities we assume they have or don't have.

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

The russian s-300 and s-400 systems are mobile systems. Israel has likely taken out all stationary systems and a chunk of the mobile systems, but Iran could keep some of those mobile systems in hardened storage until they are needed. (Like the mobile icbm launchers).

(06-22-2025 10:49 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:43 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Btw, Elvis, you still are ignoring the comments about your statement that we should have used JDAMs instead of Tomahawks.

Are you sure you don't want to explain why we're wrong to think that was an incredibly stupid statement?

Or maybe average people saw it, and I missed it.

I made it pretty clear in this thread that B1 or B2 delivered JDAMs were much more economical that tomahawks, and that my speculation is that their inclusion is branch politics and the Navy basically not wanting to to be left out.

It would have been much more “economical” for obama to have NOT given Iran billions and billions of US taxpayer dollars.
Since you’re now selectively so budget conscious.

(06-22-2025 10:53 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  This begs the question, why isn't Elvis running this operation? I mean, he obviously knows more about military operations than the people actually running our military operations. It's just dumbassery that he isn't in charge.

That's what I was thinking, but I'm apparently not your average person. I only spent 4 years in Naval aviation, including a deployment on a carrier in the Med, during the Nam era.

Then later, I spent about another 15 years working directly with SecNavs to improve overall operations, including working with both attack subs and boomers. I also was involved with the base closings.

But I retroactively apologize for all that work, b/c obviously, I'm not your average person.

(06-22-2025 10:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

The russian s-300 and s-400 systems are mobile systems. Israel has likely taken out all stationary systems and a chunk of the mobile systems, but Iran could keep some of those mobile systems in hardened storage until they are needed. (Like the mobile icbm launchers).

Yeah, now that you mention it, I remember Israel estimated recently that they had taken out about 55% of Iran's overall air defense capabilities, but plenty left. Which makes my theory reasonable, and Elvis' suspect.

(06-22-2025 10:49 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:43 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Btw, Elvis, you still are ignoring the comments about your statement that we should have used JDAMs instead of Tomahawks.

Are you sure you don't want to explain why we're wrong to think that was an incredibly stupid statement?

Or maybe average people saw it, and I missed it.

I made it pretty clear in this thread that B1 or B2 delivered JDAMs were much more economical that tomahawks, and that my speculation is that their inclusion is branch politics and the Navy basically not wanting to to be left out.

Btw, your idea that the Navy didn't want to be left out is, IMO, a ridiculous assumption.

Especially since I spent so many years working with SecNav. The last thing they would do in a critical war mission is make decisions based on "not wanting to be left out."

Frankly, that is absurd.

(06-22-2025 11:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

The russian s-300 and s-400 systems are mobile systems. Israel has likely taken out all stationary systems and a chunk of the mobile systems, but Iran could keep some of those mobile systems in hardened storage until they are needed. (Like the mobile icbm launchers).

Yeah, now that you mention it, I remember Israel estimated recently that they had taken out about 55% of Iran's overall air defense capabilities, but plenty left. Which makes my theory reasonable, and Elvis' suspect.

yes, and thats the challenge with mobile systems. Not all of them are actively deployed at a time. You have to take the ones that are deployed out, then search for the new ones brought online after that. So you cant wipe them all out quickly. You have to run continuous missions to keep destroying and degrading.

General Caine mentioned escorts of 4th and 5th generation fighters but did not mention the type. He said the fighters launched
'preemptive suppressing fires" against missiles. My guess is we employed F-16's and F-35.

(06-22-2025 11:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

The russian s-300 and s-400 systems are mobile systems. Israel has likely taken out all stationary systems and a chunk of the mobile systems, but Iran could keep some of those mobile systems in hardened storage until they are needed. (Like the mobile icbm launchers).

Yeah, now that you mention it, I remember Israel estimated recently that they had taken out about 55% of Iran's overall air defense capabilities, but plenty left. Which makes my theory reasonable, and Elvis' suspect.

Israel had already bombed Isfahan twice via fighters before we hit it with Tomahawks. The fact that they bombed it twice with no lost aircraft tells me they already eliminated the air defense network there.

Are you saying that our air force can’t do something that the Israeli Air Force already did twice?

This sounds like politics on the Navy’s part.

lol!!

You are priceless Elvis.

Elvis really is out of his depth. lol

It took 45 years, but the day came.....

(06-22-2025 10:49 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:43 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Btw, Elvis, you still are ignoring the comments about your statement that we should have used JDAMs instead of Tomahawks.

Are you sure you don't want to explain why we're wrong to think that was an incredibly stupid statement?

Or maybe average people saw it, and I missed it.

I made it pretty clear in this thread that B1 or B2 delivered JDAMs were much more economical that tomahawks, and that my speculation is that their inclusion is branch politics and the Navy basically not wanting to to be left out.

That's a hell of a Hill to die on. I guess next time they should contact you and get your input. I'm pretty sure they know a hell of a lot more than you do on this subject or who ever you got that talking point from.

(06-22-2025 11:20 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 11:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Forget about Iran for a moment. Putin can not be happy that the air defense systems he sold to Iran (some of their most sophisticated) did not detect the B2 bombers or their escorts. They basically flew into the heart of Iran and destroyed multiple sites and Iran was none the wiser.

Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

The russian s-300 and s-400 systems are mobile systems. Israel has likely taken out all stationary systems and a chunk of the mobile systems, but Iran could keep some of those mobile systems in hardened storage until they are needed. (Like the mobile icbm launchers).

Yeah, now that you mention it, I remember Israel estimated recently that they had taken out about 55% of Iran's overall air defense capabilities, but plenty left. Which makes my theory reasonable, and Elvis' suspect.

Israel had already bombed Isfahan twice via fighters before we hit it with Tomahawks. The fact that they bombed it twice with no lost aircraft tells me they already eliminated the air defense network there.

Are you saying that our air force can’t do something that the Israeli Air Force already did twice?

This sounds like politics on the Navy’s part.

So what?

Why do you hate America? Now politics matter?

It was good operational experience either way

Prog filth are misersble humans.

(06-22-2025 11:31 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 11:20 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 11:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-22-2025 10:47 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Didn't Israel already take out most of Iran's air defense capabilities? I'm not positive about that.

The russian s-300 and s-400 systems are mobile systems. Israel has likely taken out all stationary systems and a chunk of the mobile systems, but Iran could keep some of those mobile systems in hardened storage until they are needed. (Like the mobile icbm launchers).

Yeah, now that you mention it, I remember Israel estimated recently that they had taken out about 55% of Iran's overall air defense capabilities, but plenty left. Which makes my theory reasonable, and Elvis' suspect.

Israel had already bombed Isfahan twice via fighters before we hit it with Tomahawks. The fact that they bombed it twice with no lost aircraft tells me they already eliminated the air defense network there.

Are you saying that our air force can’t do something that the Israeli Air Force already did twice?

This sounds like politics on the Navy’s part.

So what?

Why do you hate America? Now politics matter?

It was good operational experience either way

Prog filth are misersble humans.

The only politics involved are the Dem’s calling for impeachment under the “Trump is King” rubric. Shameless…