Our Undeclared Wars

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

[cradleandshoot]

Apparently one of our incoming drones caused confusion about the other incoming drones. Human error...

[youthathletics]

Briefing POTUS this afternoon: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/17516 ... a82I2GssRg

Biden has to make a difficult decision. I think I know what he needs to do. I don't think he has the giblets to do it. Being an election year will influence whatever Biden chooses to do.

By all accounts of his current term and those advising, I suspect a passive approach. Recent history has shown us that all these $hitbags in the ME want is death to the infidels. Our ROE also handcuff “in war” , so better off just utilizing strategic strikes.

Air activity: https://x.com/sentdefender/status/17517 ... a82I2GssRg

Moments ago: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live ... rcna136110

Israel-Hamas war live updates: Biden ‘working through’ options after Iran-backed militants kill 3 U.S. troops
Negotiators from Israel, the U.S., Egypt and Qatar have agreed on a framework for a new hostage deal, and a draft is being presented to Hamas today, a source familiar with talks held in Paris over the weekend told NBC News.

Blinken: OSINTdefender
@sentdefender
U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken stated tonight that the Situation in the Middle East is currently the most Dangerous since the Arab-Israeli War of 1973 and arguably before that.
4:48 PM · Jan 29, 2024
·
102.5K
Views

[old salt]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

Yep. When you look at the number of attacks on US forces ashore & ships in the ME, it's remarkable that only 1 got through sufficiently to cause 3 deaths, & that due to confusion with a returning US drone. Overall, if accurate, that speaks well for our overall force protection measures & the effectiveness of our ISR & air defenses. I'm particularly impressed with the performance of the Navy's Aegis system compared to what we lived with in my day trying to counter the Soviet anti-ship cruise missile threat. We would have expected hits & losses by this point.

This is strictly a comment on the effectiveness of our air defense systems & their integration into our force protection measures.
It is not a comment on the effectiveness of our strategy of deterrence in the ME against Iran & proxies...which has failed.

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

Yep. When you look at the number of attacks on US forces ashore & ships in the ME, it's remarkable that only 1 got through sufficiently to cause 3 deaths, & that due to confusion with a returning US drone. Overall, if accurate, that speaks well for our overall force protection measures & the effectiveness of our ISR & air defenses. I'm particularly impressed with the performance of the Navy's Aegis system compared to what we lived with in my day trying to counter the Soviet anti-ship cruise missile threat. We would have expected hits & losses by this point.

This is strictly a comment on the effectiveness of our air defense systems & their integration into our force protection measures.
It is not a comment on the effectiveness of our strategy of deterrence in the ME against Iran & proxies...which has failed.

My theory OS is when one of our destroyers is positioned correctly it will not be one missile being fired. I believe they will launch many missiles and drones in a coordinated attempt to overwhelm the Aegis defense systems. 40 or 50 threats all approaching at the same time from different directions and different trajectories would be real test for defense radar. I don't know how many incoming threats can realistically be engaged simultaneously. I also don't know if the bad actors have the ability to launch such an attack. I wouldn't underestimate their capabilities. That would be a huge feather in their caps if they could take out an Aegis destroyer. They only have to get lucky once. FTR what about that Phalanx guns? What effective range can they engage targets?

[Kismet]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

Yep. When you look at the number of attacks on US forces ashore & ships in the ME, it's remarkable that only 1 got through sufficiently to cause 3 deaths, & that due to confusion with a returning US drone. Overall, if accurate, that speaks well for our overall force protection measures & the effectiveness of our ISR & air defenses. I'm particularly impressed with the performance of the Navy's Aegis system compared to what we lived with in my day trying to counter the Soviet anti-ship cruise missile threat. We would have expected hits & losses by this point.

This is strictly a comment on the effectiveness of our air defense systems & their integration into our force protection measures.
It is not a comment on the effectiveness of our strategy of deterrence in the ME against Iran & proxies...which has failed.

My theory OS is when one of our destroyers is positioned correctly it will not be one missile being fired. I believe they will launch many missiles and drones in a coordinated attempt to overwhelm the Aegis defense systems. 40 or 50 threats all approaching at the same time from different directions and different trajectories would be real test for defense radar. I don't know how many incoming threats can realistically be engaged simultaneously. I also don't know if the bad actors have the ability to launch such an attack. I wouldn't underestimate their capabilities. That would be a huge feather in their caps if they could take out an Aegis destroyer. They only have to get lucky once. FTR what about that Phalanx guns? What effective range can they engage targets?

Force protection is paramount. If you don't think the US Navy has simulated your threat you're likely mistaken. What you fail to mention is that US Navy ships have multiple layered protection from other ships with AEGIS capability plus overhead assets from both carrier-based and USAF land-based assets. Report on CBS Evening News last night overview of Naval Operations Center in Bahrain is instructive as to their capabilities.

https://cnreurafcent.cnic.navy.mil/Inst ... A-Bahrain/

That said, just got a lesson in force protection in Jordan on a smaller scale where a confluence of actions adversely affected air defense operations and a drone got through said defense. Not technically a bad guy escalation per se' but military fatalities are escalatory from our POV

Phalanx is uber-short range last line of defense

https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Fil ... stem-ciws/

[PizzaSnake]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

Yep. When you look at the number of attacks on US forces ashore & ships in the ME, it's remarkable that only 1 got through sufficiently to cause 3 deaths, & that due to confusion with a returning US drone. Overall, if accurate, that speaks well for our overall force protection measures & the effectiveness of our ISR & air defenses. I'm particularly impressed with the performance of the Navy's Aegis system compared to what we lived with in my day trying to counter the Soviet anti-ship cruise missile threat. We would have expected hits & losses by this point.

This is strictly a comment on the effectiveness of our air defense systems & their integration into our force protection measures.
It is not a comment on the effectiveness of our strategy of deterrence in the ME against Iran & proxies...which has failed.

My theory OS is when one of our destroyers is positioned correctly it will not be one missile being fired. I believe they will launch many missiles and drones in a coordinated attempt to overwhelm the Aegis defense systems. 40 or 50 threats all approaching at the same time from different directions and different trajectories would be real test for defense radar. I don't know how many incoming threats can realistically be engaged simultaneously. I also don't know if the bad actors have the ability to launch such an attack. I wouldn't underestimate their capabilities. That would be a huge feather in their caps if they could take out an Aegis destroyer. They only have to get lucky once. FTR what about that Phalanx guns? What effective range can they engage targets?

Force protection is paramount. If you don't think the US Navy has simulated your threat you're likely mistaken. What you fail to mention is that US Navy ships have multiple layered protection from other ships with AEGIS capability plus overhead assets from both carrier-based and USAF land-based assets. Report on CBS Evening News last night overview of Naval Operations Center in Bahrain is instructive as to their capabilities.

That said, just got a lesson in force protection in Jordan on a smaller scale where a confluence of actions adversely affected air defense operations and a drone got through said defense. Not technically a bad guy escalation per se' but military fatalities are escalatory from our POV

Phalanx is uber-short range last line of defense

https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Fil ... stem-ciws/

LPWS for terrestrial use.

Question isn’t whether these systems, being finite, can be overwhelmed, the question is whether any adversary has capacity and will to kick the hornet’s nest.

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

Yep. When you look at the number of attacks on US forces ashore & ships in the ME, it's remarkable that only 1 got through sufficiently to cause 3 deaths, & that due to confusion with a returning US drone. Overall, if accurate, that speaks well for our overall force protection measures & the effectiveness of our ISR & air defenses. I'm particularly impressed with the performance of the Navy's Aegis system compared to what we lived with in my day trying to counter the Soviet anti-ship cruise missile threat. We would have expected hits & losses by this point.

This is strictly a comment on the effectiveness of our air defense systems & their integration into our force protection measures.
It is not a comment on the effectiveness of our strategy of deterrence in the ME against Iran & proxies...which has failed.

My theory OS is when one of our destroyers is positioned correctly it will not be one missile being fired. I believe they will launch many missiles and drones in a coordinated attempt to overwhelm the Aegis defense systems. 40 or 50 threats all approaching at the same time from different directions and different trajectories would be real test for defense radar. I don't know how many incoming threats can realistically be engaged simultaneously. I also don't know if the bad actors have the ability to launch such an attack. I wouldn't underestimate their capabilities. That would be a huge feather in their caps if they could take out an Aegis destroyer. They only have to get lucky once. FTR what about that Phalanx guns? What effective range can they engage targets?

Force protection is paramount. If you don't think the US Navy has simulated your threat you're likely mistaken. What you fail to mention is that US Navy ships have multiple layered protection from other ships with AEGIS capability plus overhead assets from both carrier-based and USAF land-based assets. Report on CBS Evening News last night overview of Naval Operations Center in Bahrain is instructive as to their capabilities.

https://cnreurafcent.cnic.navy.mil/Inst ... A-Bahrain/

That said, just got a lesson in force protection in Jordan on a smaller scale where a confluence of actions adversely affected air defense operations and a drone got through said defense. Not technically a bad guy escalation per se' but military fatalities are escalatory from our POV

Phalanx is uber-short range last line of defense

https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Fil ... stem-ciws/

I understand very well what layered protection is all about. I'm sure it tested in simulation all of the time. In a perfect world it will function as designed 100%. What is not known and I believe is highly classified information is how many targets the layered defense can engage simultaneously. Especially when the window of opportunity to engage could only be a few seconds. From what I have read the system is designed to engage the highest priority threat first. That is quite an impressive display of our technology if in my hypothetical scenario there are 50 incoming threats coordinated so they will all impact within a few seconds of each other. I highly doubt the bad actors have that sophisticated of a targeting system. I also wouldn't be surprised if they are being assisted by other countries that may have such technology. I would never underestimate the will and the fanatical dedication to doing so.

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, what I'd want to know is how exactly this drone particular attack evaded air defense of the facility and then include any locations where drones are located or manufactured in any retaliatory strike regardless of whether they are inside Iran or not.

Force protection is job #1 for our military in this region. Was this attack a lucky hit or something bigger than that. If bigger, then that capability must be targeting in any response.

I said this in another thread. We have to be on point 100% of the time every damn day. The bad actors only have to get lucky once. Except was it luck or did they exploit a weakness our people didn't see?

Yep. When you look at the number of attacks on US forces ashore & ships in the ME, it's remarkable that only 1 got through sufficiently to cause 3 deaths, & that due to confusion with a returning US drone. Overall, if accurate, that speaks well for our overall force protection measures & the effectiveness of our ISR & air defenses. I'm particularly impressed with the performance of the Navy's Aegis system compared to what we lived with in my day trying to counter the Soviet anti-ship cruise missile threat. We would have expected hits & losses by this point.

This is strictly a comment on the effectiveness of our air defense systems & their integration into our force protection measures.
It is not a comment on the effectiveness of our strategy of deterrence in the ME against Iran & proxies...which has failed.

My theory OS is when one of our destroyers is positioned correctly it will not be one missile being fired. I believe they will launch many missiles and drones in a coordinated attempt to overwhelm the Aegis defense systems. 40 or 50 threats all approaching at the same time from different directions and different trajectories would be real test for defense radar. I don't know how many incoming threats can realistically be engaged simultaneously. I also don't know if the bad actors have the ability to launch such an attack. I wouldn't underestimate their capabilities. That would be a huge feather in their caps if they could take out an Aegis destroyer. They only have to get lucky once. FTR what about that Phalanx guns? What effective range can they engage targets?

Force protection is paramount. If you don't think the US Navy has simulated your threat you're likely mistaken. What you fail to mention is that US Navy ships have multiple layered protection from other ships with AEGIS capability plus overhead assets from both carrier-based and USAF land-based assets. Report on CBS Evening News last night overview of Naval Operations Center in Bahrain is instructive as to their capabilities.

That said, just got a lesson in force protection in Jordan on a smaller scale where a confluence of actions adversely affected air defense operations and a drone got through said defense. Not technically a bad guy escalation per se' but military fatalities are escalatory from our POV

Phalanx is uber-short range last line of defense

https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Fil ... stem-ciws/

LPWS for terrestrial use.

Question isn’t whether these systems, being finite, can be overwhelmed, the question is whether any adversary has capacity and will to kick the hornet’s nest.

I have no doubt whatsoever that the bad actors have the will to kick the hornets nest. Whether they have the capacity to do so is still debatable.

[cradleandshoot]

This comes to my mind only to remember what the US Navy firmly believed in early 1940. They believed our fleet at Pearl Harbor was safe from aerial torpedoes. The waters at Pearl were too shallow for aerial torpedoes to be effective. Well the Japanese engineers figured out that the wooden fins on their aerial torpedoes would solve that problem. Much to the chagrin of the US Navy the Japanese were spot on. I don't say this to try and compare 1940 technology to 2020 technology. What I'm saying is the bad actors are always looking for a back door they can take advantage of.

[Kismet]

This comes to my mind only to remember what the US Navy firmly believed in early 1940. They believed our fleet at Pearl Harbor was safe from aerial torpedoes. The waters at Pearl were too shallow for aerial torpedoes to be effective. Well the Japanese engineers figured out that the wooden fins on their aerial torpedoes would solve that problem. Much to the chagrin of the US Navy the Japanese were spot on. I don't say this to try and compare 1940 technology to 2020 technology. What I'm saying is the bad actors are always looking for a back door they can take advantage of.

Nothing is 100% certain. There is risk in every operation. You plan to mitigate the risk and adjust as your enemies adjust.

[cradleandshoot]

This comes to my mind only to remember what the US Navy firmly believed in early 1940. They believed our fleet at Pearl Harbor was safe from aerial torpedoes. The waters at Pearl were too shallow for aerial torpedoes to be effective. Well the Japanese engineers figured out that the wooden fins on their aerial torpedoes would solve that problem. Much to the chagrin of the US Navy the Japanese were spot on. I don't say this to try and compare 1940 technology to 2020 technology. What I'm saying is the bad actors are always looking for a back door they can take advantage of.

Nothing is 100% certain. There is risk in every operation. You plan to mitigate the risk and adjust as your enemies adjust.

I agree with you. The problem is we probably don't know what the enemy knows about our defensive capabilities. We also don't know the nature of the assistance being given to them by other countries. It becomes more problematic to defend yourself when you don't know for sure what the bad actors know and do not know..

[cradleandshoot]

Our leaders are shaking in their shoes at the threat of ticking off Iran and escalating the situation even further. The fact that there have been 150 plus attacks on our troops since October already tells you the situation has escalated. It also indicates that the bad actors are doing the escalation. I'm just saying.

[Kismet]

Our leaders are shaking in their shoes at the threat of ticking off Iran and escalating the situation even further. The fact that there have been 150 plus attacks on our troops since October already tells you the situation has escalated. It also indicates that the bad actors are doing the escalation. I'm just saying.

Personally I like leaders who are thoughtful and who think things through which some (you) perceive as weakness.
Just as dangerous as those hair trigger types like Graham and Cotton plus moronic football coach masquerading as a Senator from Alabama and, of course, weak kneed tough talker Orange Fatso.

You, of course, do recall that we lost a few soldiers at an air base in Iraq after we whacked Soliemani a few years back to a missile strike.

[cradleandshoot]

Our leaders are shaking in their shoes at the threat of ticking off Iran and escalating the situation even further. The fact that there have been 150 plus attacks on our troops since October already tells you the situation has escalated. It also indicates that the bad actors are doing the escalation. I'm just saying.

Personally I like leaders who are thoughtful and who think things through which some (you) perceive as weakness.
Just as dangerous as those hair trigger types like Graham and Cotton plus moronic football coach masquerading as a Senator from Alabama and, of course, weak kneed tough talker Orange Fatso.

You, of course, do recall that we lost a few soldiers at an air base in Iraq after we whacked Soliemani a few years back to a missile strike.

Your missing my point. The bad actors have attacked our forces over 150 times since October. I think the fear that defending those forces = escalating is a ship that has already sailed. It now has taken the loss of 3 soldiers to light a fire under under our leaders to do the thing they should have done 4 months ago. They hemmed and hawed because after all... we don't want to get the Iranians upset with us. A fair question is why a contingency plan to deal with this situation wasn't already in place? After 150 attacks over 4 months that is a response that should have already been planned for. Now it appears our leaders have pulled back and are scratching their heads as to what their next move should. That should have been done 4 months ago.
These folks would make very lousy chess players. Any decent chess player knows you have to plan many moves ahead of the game your playing.

[Kismet]

Our leaders are shaking in their shoes at the threat of ticking off Iran and escalating the situation even further. The fact that there have been 150 plus attacks on our troops since October already tells you the situation has escalated. It also indicates that the bad actors are doing the escalation. I'm just saying.

Personally I like leaders who are thoughtful and who think things through which some (you) perceive as weakness.
Just as dangerous as those hair trigger types like Graham and Cotton plus moronic football coach masquerading as a Senator from Alabama and, of course, weak kneed tough talker Orange Fatso.

You, of course, do recall that we lost a few soldiers at an air base in Iraq after we whacked Soliemani a few years back to a missile strike.

Your missing my point. The bad actors have attacked our forces over 150 times since October. I think the fear that defending those forces = escalating is a ship that has already sailed. It now has taken the loss of 3 soldiers to light a fire under under our leaders to do the thing they should have done 4 months ago. They hemmed and hawed because after all... we don't want to get the Iranians upset with us.

No. I see your point and disagree with it. I simply reminded what happened last time we thought we were acting tough and got the same outcome

[cradleandshoot]

Our leaders are shaking in their shoes at the threat of ticking off Iran and escalating the situation even further. The fact that there have been 150 plus attacks on our troops since October already tells you the situation has escalated. It also indicates that the bad actors are doing the escalation. I'm just saying.

Personally I like leaders who are thoughtful and who think things through which some (you) perceive as weakness.
Just as dangerous as those hair trigger types like Graham and Cotton plus moronic football coach masquerading as a Senator from Alabama and, of course, weak kneed tough talker Orange Fatso.

You, of course, do recall that we lost a few soldiers at an air base in Iraq after we whacked Soliemani a few years back to a missile strike.

Your missing my point. The bad actors have attacked our forces over 150 times since October. I think the fear that defending those forces = escalating is a ship that has already sailed. It now has taken the loss of 3 soldiers to light a fire under under our leaders to do the thing they should have done 4 months ago. They hemmed and hawed because after all... we don't want to get the Iranians upset with us.

No. I see your point and disagree with it. I simply reminded what happened last time we though we were acting tough and got the same outcome

You can't the past. You can learn from your mistakes and do your best not to repeat them.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Of course no mention of all the retaliatory attacks we've poured on those militias prior to this attack. Or the militia members we've killed in response to all the attacks before this.

Nope, we're just clutching pearls and sitting on our hands.

[cradleandshoot]

Of course no mention of all the retaliatory attacks we've poured on those militias prior to this attack. Or the militia members we've killed in response to all the attacks before this.

Nope, we're just clutching pearls and sitting on our hands.

Those retaliatory attacks worked so very well. Proactive beats reactive everyday of the week. By the time those reactive strikes occured the bad actors were at home, in their PJs and tucked into bed. You think these folks haven't figured out the modus operandi of how our retaliatory strikes work? Predictable is the word that comes to mind. Ask me what you think Biden should consider doing.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Of course no mention of all the retaliatory attacks we've poured on those militias prior to this attack. Or the militia members we've killed in response to all the attacks before this.

Nope, we're just clutching pearls and sitting on our hands.

Those retaliatory attacks worked so very well. Proactive beats reactive everyday of the week. By the time those reactive strikes occured the bad actors were at home, in their PJs and tucked into bed. You think these folks haven't figured out the modus operandi of how our retaliatory strikes work? Predictable is the word that comes to mind. Ask me what you think Biden should consider doing.

How are they predictable? All the dead militiamen should have known they were coming. We're creative with our strikes when we wanna be. I mean we have sword missiles for cripes' sake.