Live Conflict Israel-US vs Iran War (2026)

[TR_123456]

literally no other country would be capable of flying in C-130s and setting FOB deep inside enemy territory to rescue a single pilot and then getting everyone out

What kind of a comment is that?
Many countries can do what the Americans did in Iran.
So,it depends on where you do it,not if you can do it.
Think about it and come back.

 

[Sanchez]

literally no other country would be capable of flying in C-130s and setting FOB deep inside enemy territory to rescue a single pilot and then getting everyone out

Closest I think would be the Entebbe Raid and they had a fully functioning airport and the earlier failed Eagle Claw, also in Iran. Funny thing; CV-22 was entirely sold and later developed as a tailor built platform to combine the best sides of a cargo aircraft and a helicopter and it would be great in CSAR ops with lessons learned from Eagle Claw. But, there were no CV-22s deployed by the air force for this mission. 46 years after Eagle Claw, we once again saw cargo aircraft and helicopters to do the business instead of CV-22. I think it's less about the platform and more about highly trained and specialized aircrews still not "upgrading" to CV-22s.

The limit to Satellite imaging company has less benefit to reduce Iran capability for target confirm, the mostly reason is to control OSINT and serving as propaganda to cover up battle damage.

I can't really fault Americans for doing this tbh.

What kind of a comment is that?
Many countries can do what the Americans did in Iran.
So,it depends on where you do it,not if you can do it.
Think about it and come back.

Nope, I'm pretty sure this was unparalleled. Required total air supremacy; the gall to send in nearly unprotected MC-130s and HH-60s with overhead cover from F-35s and drones, MC-130s deploying MH-6s from their cargo bays, 30 hours of gunfight; not being able to take off with the stuck/damaged MC-130s so sending in more aircraft to retrieve everyone. They burned through like 5 aircraft and 4 helicopters to rescue one guy. We for example don't have that number of CSAR aircraft and certainly not the crews. Noone else in NATO does; Russians wouldn't bother saving one pilot; Chinese are entirely clueless about these kinds of ops. "Leave no man behind" motto is a wholly American thing that later trickled down to NATO countries through the decades. Others simply don't have this kind of mindset or operational readiness.

 

[TR_123456]

Nope, I'm pretty sure this was unparalleled. Required total air supremacy; the gall to send in nearly unprotected MC-130s and HH-60s with overhead cover from F-35s and drones, MC-130s deploying MH-6s from their cargo bays, 30 hours of gunfight; not being able to take off with the stuck/damaged MC-130s so sending in more aircraft to retrieve everyone. They burned through like 5 aircraft and 4 helicopters to rescue one guy. We for example don't have that number of CSAR aircraft and certainly not the crews. Noone else in NATO does; Russians wouldn't bother saving one pilot; Chinese are entirely clueless about these kinds of ops. "Leave no man behind" motto is a wholly American thing that later trickled down to NATO countries through the decades. Others simply don't have this kind of mindset or operational readiness.

That not it,the French and British could do it in current Iran where there is almost no Air defence specially in that area/part of the country.
The Americans made the mistake of assuming they had a free hand,no defence at all.
If they had covered a 10/20 km radius with satelite coverage and more aircraft they would have done it without casualties.
Just a big miscalculation as they did many times before.

 

[Sanchez]

That not it,the French and British could do it in current Iran where there is almost no Air defence specially in that area/part of the country.
The Americans made the mistake of assuming they had a free hand,no defence at all.
If they had covered a 10/20 km radius with satelite coverage and more aircraft they would have done it without casualties.
Just a big miscalculation as they did many times before.

French have shown in the past that they don't have the capability in Africa during Barkhane and Serval other than the most simples CSAR ops and Brits simply don't have the capability.

 

[TR_123456]

French have shown in the past that they don't have the capability in Africa during Barkhane and Serval other than the most simples CSAR ops and Brits simply don't have the capability.

What dont the French and British have the Americans do for such a rescue?
Similar situation to Afghanistan,no?

 

[Passenger]

Closest I think would be the Entebbe Raid and they had a fully functioning airport and the earlier failed Eagle Claw, also in Iran. Funny thing; CV-22 was entirely sold and later developed as a tailor built platform to combine the best sides of a cargo aircraft and a helicopter and it would be great in CSAR ops with lessons learned from Eagle Claw. But, there were no CV-22s deployed by the air force for this mission. 46 years after Eagle Claw, we once again saw cargo aircraft and helicopters to do the business instead of CV-22. I think it's less about the platform and more about highly trained and specialized aircrews still not "upgrading" to CV-22s.


I can't really fault Americans for doing this tbh.


Nope, I'm pretty sure this was unparalleled. Required total air supremacy; the gall to send in nearly unprotected MC-130s and HH-60s with overhead cover from F-35s and drones, MC-130s deploying MH-6s from their cargo bays, 30 hours of gunfight; not being able to take off with the stuck/damaged MC-130s so sending in more aircraft to retrieve everyone. They burned through like 5 aircraft and 4 helicopters to rescue one guy. We for example don't have that number of CSAR aircraft and certainly not the crews. Noone else in NATO does; Russians wouldn't bother saving one pilot; Chinese are entirely clueless about these kinds of ops. "Leave no man behind" motto is a wholly American thing that later trickled down to NATO countries through the decades. Others simply don't have this kind of mindset or operational readiness.

Source said this operation is not the only one in the few days, there were other tries for landing but failed.

Yes, China has zero preparing of such actions, but the right choice is avoid send any man drive aircraft to the air zone has not been controled.

 

[Yasar_TR]

So they landed 2 x C130 with probably 2 x 2 MH6 little bird helicopters inside (that is how many it can accommodate with rotors folded) and these helicopters and plane were totalled by US forces when IRGC units arrived and started a firefight and no one even were injured. Those MH6s have 2 crew members and 6 Special Forces soldiers each. C130 have a crew of 2-5 as well. That makes 36-40 men landed and their aircrafts were destroyed. But they all survived.
Then they were all extracted to safety with the one rescued pilot. (Do we know how the extraction occurred?)
That only happens in films!!

Going back to @TR_123456 ’s comments; If you have total air superiority and total control of enemy airspace over the area, any well trained special forces of a modern army can attempt such a rescue operation. But the area has to be well cleansed from ground forces too. Otherwise you lose aircrafts and personnel.

You send men in the land forces to attack heavily fortified enemy lines, knowing very well that many will not survive. Same logic has to be applied to airforce too. It is not good logic to put 40 men in to danger to save one. This is war!

 

[500]

The biggest achievement of IRGC in this war so far: they managed to captured US pilot underwear.

 

[Satan]

Truth Social

Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating on the basis of political ideology.

truthsocial.com

This is the leader of the free world.

 

[Sanchez]

What dont the French and British have the Americans do for such a rescue?
Similar situation to Afghanistan,no?

Numbers, training and firepower. This is not even in contention. French cannot even do a major airlift without American assistance. Brits don't even try.

Yes, China has zero preparing of such actions, but the right choice is avoid send any man drive aircraft to the air zone has not been controled.

You could say don't start a war over a mountainous country in the first place, but it is what it is.

So they landed 2 x C130 with probably 2 x 2 MH6 little bird helicopters inside (that is how many it can accommodate with rotors folded) and these helicopters and plane were totalled by US forces when IRGC units arrived and started a firefight and no one even were injured. Those MH6s have 2 crew members and 6 Special Forces soldiers each. C130 have a crew of 2-5 as well. That makes 36-40 men landed and their aircrafts were destroyed. But they all survived.
Then they were all extracted to safety with the one rescued pilot. (Do we know how the extraction occurred?)
That only happens in films!!

Going back to @TR_123456 ’s comments; If you have total air superiority and total control of enemy airspace over the area, any well trained special forces of a modern army can attempt such a rescue operation. But the area has to be well cleansed from ground forces too. Otherwise you lose aircrafts and personnel.

You send men in the land forces to attack heavily fortified enemy lines, knowing very well that many will not survive. Same logic has to be applied to airforce too. It is not good logic to put 40 men in to danger to save one. This is war!

Numbers we have are 2 MC-130s, 2-4 MH-6s, 2(+?) HH-60s, and then 3 Dash 8s(or CN-295; which could be unrelated).

Weiss says up to 100 personnel was involved and were extracted. Pilot climbed a hill and trekked few kilometers and was extracted by an MH-6.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2040767344511721974

Noone is claiming no American was injured. We don't have that information. There are also claims of a mortar emplacement sending accurate shots over the FARP which might have hit one of the aircraft. But we wouldn't expect these men to sit around in aircraft if it was hit or not. From what's available we know that there was a continued firefight that lasted hours and MH-6s and overhead aircraft provided fire support to the running WSO "for hours." No modern army have this kind of firepower and the logistics train to undertake this kind of operation outside its borders in such a short notice. We don't for example.

This is the American way of doing war; they accept going into the fire with the belief that help cavalry will be on the way if things go bad, and it did arrive on this occasion. Same happened in Libya in 2011, in Mogadishu, multiple times in Vietnam, WW2. Even so, Trump admin couldn't accept a POW; so they went all in.

 

[hugh]

Truth Social

Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating on the basis of political ideology.

truthsocial.com

This is the leader of the free world.

he's really funny, i'll give him that

we had the strait open before you started bombing their schools you dumb mf. what exactly did you achieve with this war? you cleared out the old admin and replaced it with young hardliners who's hellbent on making nukes. you also gifted the strait to Iran which they will never cede and use it as a toll-booth to recuperate.

--

he will probably produce a dumb excuse to walk away from this threat like he always does. no one takes him seriously anymore.

 

[Yasar_TR]

No modern army have this kind of firepower and the logistics

Bro, no modern army has the US’s firepower and logistics. Full stop.
They are the top dog in terms of these two capabilities.

But it doesn’t mean that other modern armies lack the capability to attempt a similar rescue operation. Would they risk it? That is the question!

In this case US were also lucky.
They had full control of the skies,
They had a sort of a landing strip they could use,
Where the F15 crashed was close to Kuwait for bringing in back up.

 

[Spitfire9]

This suggests that a C-130 was destroyed with engines running and forward velocity

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2040792636865515928

The photo does not seem to tie in with the US account that US forces destroyed the aircraft deliberately.

 

[Satan]

Live Updates: War returns to Iran with Israel, US strikes

Live Updates: The US and Israel on Feb 28 launched what they described as a “pre-emptive” joint strike against Iranian targets,...

www.dawn.com

 

[Satan]

Trump issues expletive-laden threat to Iran demanding Strait of Hormuz be opened

In a post on social media, the US president says in Iran “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one” if the key shipping lane is not reopened.

www.bbc.com

 

[Sanchez]

This suggests that a C-130 was destroyed with engines running and forward velocity

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2040792636865515928

The photo does not seem to tie in with the US account that US forces destroyed the aircraft deliberately.

Those are carbon fiber propellers, they don't bend on collision, they break. They clearly lost form due to high heat from the fire; which actually supports the claim that they were hit on the ground. We have 2 MC-130s and at least 2 MH-6s sitting right next to each other as wrecks. They were clearly on the ground when they were destroyed. Hit aircraft don't neatly crash on to ground next to each other.

 

[Sanchez]

I'm not posting the photo as it's gnarly but there's possible human remains on one of the C-130 wrecks. Increases possibility that aircraft was hit on the ground and that was the reason they had to ditch at least one of them.

 

[Huelague]

As part of that conflict..

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

 

[Azeri441]

What kind of a comment is that?
Many countries can do what the Americans did in Iran.
So,it depends on where you do it,not if you can do it.
Think about it and come back.

you think many countries can pull off sending in special forces 200+ miles into enemy territory, setting up FOB and searching for missing pilot
while 50 to 100 aircraft aircraft are supporting the operation, and aircraft waiting on standby for potential need for support?

 

[TR_123456]

you think many countries can pull off sending in special forces 200+ miles into enemy territory, setting up FOB and searching for missing pilot
while 50 to 100 aircraft aircraft are supporting the operation, and aircraft waiting on standby for potential need for support?

Did you read the posts after mine?
You dont need 50 aircraft,remember that Iran has no air assets or real air defence.
It only has ground forces which means when you rule the skies you have the upper hand,the ground forces can be taken out easy.
The US has satelites,every movement on the ground can be seen and imediately eliminated by missiles from ships or air assets.