As everyone has heard by now, an F-15E was shot down last week in Iran. The E model is a two-seater, and both crewmembers ejected. The US immediately launched a massive recovery operation. One of the supporting A-10s was subsequently shot down and had to ditch in the Persian Gulf. One (or two) C-130s broke down at an improvised landing strip in Iran and had to be destroyed. We may find out about other losses as well.
The first lost crewmember was rescued in about a day and the other was just rescued last night after a prolonged firefight with Iranian IRGC, paramilitary forces, and civilians looking for a bounty. Here are some points:
- Prima facie, the shootdown proves that Iranian air defense is not totally dead yet, contra Trump's ill-timed claim last week. The current thinking is that they have abandoned whatever radar-guided SAMs they have left and are exclusively using heat-seeking SAMs.
- At the same time, the American response proves that Iranian air defense is spotty at best. In the recovery operation, American helicopters and C-130s, which are far more vulnerable to SAMs, were flying low over the crash area constantly in broad daylight.
- There is also a threat from Iranian MANPADs (shoulder-fired SAMs). Those would have shot down the helicopters, so it seems that the Iranians are being very choosy as to where they deploy their resources.
- American special forces landed in Iranian territory, got to the pilots first, and fought off a huge force of IRGC and paramilitaries to successfully accomplish their mission. America still has the edge in a ground engagement, especially at night.
- A decent number of civilians in the area were apparently motivated to capture the pilot, and the claim is that the Iranian government had to lie to them that the pilot was captured elsewhere in order to calm the crowd. This detracts from the claim that the Iranian people are itching to overthrow the regime. I am not sure exactly what ethnicity lives in that area.
- The first shootdowns of American aircraft are noteworthy, but they are not exactly out of the norm. Even when the US steamrolled Iraq in Desert Storm 1991, about 30-40+ aircraft and helicopters were lost to enemy fire.
- At the same time, the shootdowns prove that Iran is resilient and not ready to roll over. They have survived the shock and awe and are adjusting their tactics.
So in summary, we the goyim are still really good at waging war, but Iran continues to survive and make the war costly. This is still looking like a possible spreadsheet defeat for the US as we continue to rack up expensive losses of equipment and ammunition.
At the same time, Iran is a civilized country that depends on complex infrastructure, and they won't be able to defend or absorb the powerplant and oil strikes that Trump is threatening. They will, however, be able to bring down a lot of the Gulf with them.
They just put guys on the ground and it went basically perfectly.
Eastern bunny told you the story?
That was in an uncontested area -- and the randomness of the location meant Iranian forces were scattered.
When infrastructure is at stake, or convoys are involved, we saw how in Iraq and Afghanistan guerrilla tactics were maiming soldiers left and right and taking out small patrols with IEDs. It was Vietnam all over again, and that's not really something any sane person would want if ground engagements become the norm in Iran.
Besides that, it's a hostile invasion, and unlike Iraq, where there were as least some individuals who sided with the Americans displacing Saddam, in this instance there was no quasi "noble" pretense for invasion, and there are definitely going to be more civilians against foreign invaders than in Iraq's case -- especially if their infrastructure gets crippled like in Iraq, where basic necessities like water, petrol and electricity are put in short supply.
You're accidentally correct about the War on Terror being Vietnam again, but the actual reason is that US soldiers were intentionally kept from fighting in a way that would have let them actually win the war, not the brave foreign warriors being superior killing machines.
Sure, if you let any military force genocide the entire populace with superior firepower they could easily win.
But then what's the point when nothing is left but ash and dust?