Satellite Photos of Iran's attack on US bases

[Uguduwa]

Vast majority of the Sunnis are valets of the US.

Nope. They actively hate the US. Look at the Arab Caliphate guy from Saudi Arabia bragging that most of 9/11 terrorists are from his country.

 

[Piotr]

This is what everyone but Iran claims. Even Iran is iffy as well.

What do you mean by „everyone” ? Iran attacked US bases in Iraq, so you can trust either Iran or US and US has long history of lying.

If 80 US service members died, there is no way trump would not escalate. He'd start bombing Iran immediately.

I am sure before Iranian attack you would say: “If Iran attacks US military bases, there is no way Trump would not escalate. He'd start bombing Iran immediately”.

Likely, Iran deliberately avoided casualties. This way, the Iranians can claim victory by claiming they destroyed 2 US military bases, without any military retaliation. While Trump can claim they killed a senior Iranian military figure without a single casualty.

Likely, US deliberately hide own casualities. This way, Trump can save face.

What is the problem for US to hide 80 or even 270 casualities ? Trump is successfully hiding his tax returns from general public.

Bear in mind that US Empire for years had been successfully hiding it’s state sponsored doping. Did you know that US “athletes” like Serena Williams or Simone Biles were allowed to take amphetamine like drugs before Fancy Bears hack team hacked WADA and published informations about US state sponsored doping ?

For Police State like US it’s no problem to hide 270 casualities. Only chance for us to learn exactly how many US soldiers died is from US whistleblower. But after what happened to Snowden and Assange I don’t think someone in US would dare to tell the truth.

Neither side actually wants a war, and both sides managed to find a way to save face.

Oh really ? USA doesn’t want war ? So why did they assasinated destroyer of Daesh General Soleimani ? USA does want war, but they want easy and victorious war and the war with Iran would be neither easy nor victorious.

 

[VEVAK]

270 dead US terrorists - that's even better than 80 dead US terrorists as reported by other media. I wonder where is Trump hiding the dead bodies.

If the U.S. militaries assessment was that they didn't want to continue down a direct military confrontation with Iran at this time then clearly the only way for them to save face and get out of the mess they created would be to:
1. Claim that there were no casualties and that Iranians either couldn't or were afraid to kill any Americans.
2. Create a diversion for global media's of the world to obsess over instead of the satellite images of the precision strikes carried out by Iran on a base so well fortified that it was the base Trump flew into a year ago and his vice president visited more recently. and clearly that diversion was the Ukrainian plane crash.

 

[Piotr]

If the U.S. militaries assessment was that they didn't want to continue down a direct military confrontation with Iran at this time then clearly the only way for them to save face and get out of the mess they created would be to:
1. Claim that there were no casualties and that Iranians either couldn't or were afraid to kill any Americans.
2. Create a diversion for global media's of the world to obsess over instead of the satellite images of the precision strikes carried out by Iran on a base so well fortified that it was the base Trump flew into a year ago and his vice president visited more recently. and clearly that diversion was the Ukrainian plane crash.

Very well said. Now cretins from US media are talking about plane crash. They don't want to talk about precision strikes against US bases and US casualties. They don't want to talk about US air defences that failed to protect US bases. Only plane crash, plane crash, plane crash bla bla bla ... Typical dumb US propaganda.

 

[mangekyo]

Very well said. Now cretins from US media are talking about plane crash. They don't want to talk about precision strikes against US bases and US casualties. They don't want to talk about US air defences that failed to protect US bases. Only plane crash, plane crash, plane crash bla bla bla ... Typical dumb US propaganda.

Its not dumb, its working.

 

[Piotr]

Its not dumb, its working.

Working like Boeing 737 MAX 8

 

[Messerschmitt]

Battle damage assessment:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1215732495901241346

Iran’s attack wasn’t that impressive. Iran launched 16 ballistic missiles and 4 failed in flight. That’s a 75% success rate without any missile defense batteries. So that rate would be even lower. And to fully incapacitate the Al Asad sir base Iran would need a couple hundred successful ballistic missile strikes. And that’s just one base in the region.

Two types of missiles were used in this attack: Fateh-313 missiles (probably) aimed at Al Asad and Qiam missiles (probably) aimed at Erbil. The 4 missiles that failed were most likely the Qiam missiles aimed at Erbil while the Fateh-313 missiles that were fired towards Al Asad had a higher success rate and hit quite precisely. So there might be reliability issues with the Qiam model.

I think Iran's primary goal of this operation was to prove to the US that it can target their bases with precision strikes if necessary. To incapacitate the Al Asad Airbase Iran would not need a couple hundred successful missile strikes, it would need some dozens of successful strikes with missiles carrying cluster warheads to disable USAF aircraft stationed there. It's neither necessary nor practical to flatten the whole place to minimize its threat to Iran. Also, Iran could and potentially would use a combination of ballistic and cruise missiles, combat drones and loitering munitions against US targets in the region.

 

[jamal18]

I think your posts are stupid. You say Iran humiliated America? With a fake and staged missile strike that caused zero casualties? Just minor damages to pointless buildings that nobody cares about

Fake strikes? Did you see the aircraft pens destroyed? Each shelter housed an aircraft worth millions. And check out the Twitter feed, there is an Israeli report that nine US transport aircraft have arrived in Irael with the wounded.

 

[Philosopher]

Iran’s attack wasn’t that impressive. Iran launched 16 ballistic missiles and 4 failed in flight. That’s a 75% success rate without any missile defense batteries. So that rate would be even lower. And to fully incapacitate the Al Asad sir base Iran would need a couple hundred successful ballistic missile strikes. And that’s just one base in the region.

I am going to assume you're not trying to deliberately downgrade their capability. First of all, where is the evidence that 4 failed?
Secondly, the way you judge whether Iran's strike failed or not is whether the missiles hit their intended targets or not. Did you not see the satellite pics? dude, their ballistic missiles are more accurate than most nations' cruise missiles. Ballistic missiles are very complex systems and inherently venerable to failures during firing and its flight, that's why every-time a nation like Iran, Russia etc fires ballistic missiles, they fire more than what's needed, taking into account possible failures during firing (i.e missiles blowing up etc). So no, a statement in this case of their attach not being "that impressive" is very biased indeed. The accuracy of their ballistic missiles is incredible.

As for your missiles defense, please don't talk about something that has failed so much already.

 

[Stryker1982]

As for your missiles defense, please don't talk about something that has failed so much already.

Ooooh that one hurts!

 

[That Guy]

What do you mean by „everyone” ? Iran attacked US bases in Iraq, so you can trust either Iran or US and US has long history of lying.
View attachment 599077


I am sure before Iranian attack you would say: “If Iran attacks US military bases, there is no way Trump would not escalate. He'd start bombing Iran immediately”.


Likely, US deliberately hide own casualities. This way, Trump can save face.

What is the problem for US to hide 80 or even 270 casualities ? Trump is successfully hiding his tax returns from general public.

Bear in mind that US Empire for years had been successfully hiding it’s state sponsored doping. Did you know that US “athletes” like Serena Williams or Simone Biles were allowed to take amphetamine like drugs before Fancy Bears hack team hacked WADA and published informations about US state sponsored doping ?

For Police State like US it’s no problem to hide 270 casualities. Only chance for us to learn exactly how many US soldiers died is from US whistleblower. But after what happened to Snowden and Assange I don’t think someone in US would dare to tell the truth.



Oh really ? USA doesn’t want war ? So why did they assasinated destroyer of Daesh General Soleimani ? USA does want war, but they want easy and victorious war and the war with Iran would be neither easy nor victorious.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/10/poli...le-strike-not-kill-americans-cnntv/index.html

• "I'm not a military man, I cannot tell you exactly what was going on. But what I can tell you is that the target was chosen in order to show that we are capable of hitting the target where the plan to kill Soleimani was organized," he said, adding that "we are not interested, we are not looking after killing Americans within this operation."

Iran's own UN ambassador is saying that killing US personnel wasn't the intended goal, and I believe him.

==

I am sure before Iranian attack you would say: “If Iran attacks US military bases, there is no way Trump would not escalate. He'd start bombing Iran immediately”.

You're right, not only would I have, but I did actually say that.

But I was wrong.

I was also wrong about this being a failure on Iran's part. This was exactly what Iran intended, and they succeeded.

Unlike you, I'm more than willing to admit when I'm wrong. It's all a part of learning and fact checking, as well as forming theories and opinions.

Just a few notes...

• Iran gave a prior warning to the Iraqi government about the strikes, who have close relations with the US, thus Iraq probably warned the US about the strikes. Iran knows that Iraq and the US have a close military and government relationship.
• In this digital age, there is no way you can hide your casualties. It's impossible.
• Iran's government actually never claimed to have killed US personnel. As far as I know, it was a singular Iranian news agency.
• Iran has proven that while its BMs may not been 100 reliable, they are extremely accurate, with many of the missiles hitting dead center of the targets.
• Iran was openly preparing for the attack immediately after the Soleimani assassination. Khamanei openly said Iran would respond militarily. The US was likely keeping an eye out due to that, and already knew the attack was coming, just not when, which they probably learned from the Iraqi government.
• If the Iranians actually intended to cause casualties, they would have used far more missiles than they did. They also would have kept quiet about a military response, until it was too late to do anything. They likely missed on purpose to both save face, and warn the US that it is more than capable of hitting US personnel if it wants to.

Also, some further read...

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-middle-east-51042156

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/08/middleeast/iran-base-strikes-logic-intl/index.html

Battle damage assessment:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1215732495901241346

Iran’s attack wasn’t that impressive. Iran launched 16 ballistic missiles and 4 failed in flight. That’s a 75% success rate without any missile defense batteries. So that rate would be even lower. And to fully incapacitate the Al Asad sir base Iran would need a couple hundred successful ballistic missile strikes. And that’s just one base in the region.

So, 75% is actually a pretty decent rate, and yes, you're right that a missile defense shield would have lowered the rate even further, which is something everyone knows, both the US and Iran. But even with a 10% hit rates, that is still dangerous. Even then, if Iran was serious, they would have launched a lot more missiles, in order to overwhelm any sort of defense system.

I'm convinced that the Iranians did this to de-escalate, by only targeting infrastructure. Iran isnt stupid, their military planners know all this, and the fact that they only used a couple dozen missiles, instead of, say a hundred, tells me that they weren't looking to flatten the bases, or kill personnel.

Funnily enough, this does give Iran more data on it's own missile capabilities, as they've finally been used in a big enough scale, against actual military facilities, in a real world scenario. They'll likely learn a lot from this, and improve their missile capabilities.

 

[Silent Fighter]

Fake strikes? Did you see the aircraft pens destroyed? Each shelter housed an aircraft worth millions. And check out the Twitter feed, there is an Israeli report that nine US transport aircraft have arrived in Irael with the wounded.

ahahah so you believe Khamenei's lies even after this comedy. A real missile strike would have turned the base into a burning crater. There would be destruction all over the place. The USA never hide the presence of causalties, even in 2001 the first killed sodliers were announced immediately to the public. The graves inside the Old Glory flags were published by all news broadcasters worldwide. The USA is a democracy, it has no reason to hide casualties and it can't. Everyone can speak and type with complete freedom, any journalist would make a lot of money with the scoop of '80 marines killed hidden by Trump'. That would make him win the Pulitzer 2020 prize, he would become a millionaire.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/10/poli...le-strike-not-kill-americans-cnntv/index.html

• "I'm not a military man, I cannot tell you exactly what was going on. But what I can tell you is that the target was chosen in order to show that we are capable of hitting the target where the plan to kill Soleimani was organized," he said, adding that "we are not interested, we are not looking after killing Americans within this operation."

Iran's own UN ambassador is saying that killing US personnel wasn't the intended goal, and I believe him.

==



You're right, not only would I have, but I did actually say that.

But I was wrong.

I was also wrong about this being a failure on Iran's part. This was exactly what Iran intended, and they succeeded.

Unlike you, I'm more than willing to admit when I'm wrong. It's all a part of learning and fact checking, as well as forming theories and opinions.

Just a few notes...

• Iran gave a prior warning to the Iraqi government about the strikes, who have close relations with the US, thus Iraq probably warned the US about the strikes. Iran knows that Iraq and the US have a close military and government relationship.
• In this digital age, there is no way you can hide your casualties. It's impossible.
• Iran's government actually never claimed to have killed US personnel. As far as I know, it was a singular Iranian news agency.
• Iran has proven that while its BMs may not been 100 reliable, they are extremely accurate, with many of the missiles hitting dead center of the targets.
• Iran was openly preparing for the attack immediately after the Soleimani assassination. Khamanei openly said Iran would respond militarily. The US was likely keeping an eye out due to that, and already knew the attack was coming, just not when, which they probably learned from the Iraqi government.
• If the Iranians actually intended to cause casualties, they would have used far more missiles than they did. They also would have kept quiet about a military response, until it was too late to do anything. They likely missed on purpose to both save face, and warn the US that it is more than capable of hitting US personnel if it wants to.

Also, some further read...

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-middle-east-51042156

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/08/middleeast/iran-base-strikes-logic-intl/index.html



So, 75% is actually a pretty decent rate, and yes, you're right that a missile defense shield would have lowered the rate even further, which is something everyone knows, both the US and Iran. But even with a 10% hit rates, that is still dangerous. Even then, if Iran was serious, they would have launched a lot more missiles, in order to overwhelm any sort of defense system.

I'm convinced that the Iranians did this to de-escalate, by only targeting infrastructure. Iran isnt stupid, their military planners know all this, and the fact that they only used a couple dozen missiles, instead of, say a hundred, tells me that they weren't looking to flatten the bases, or kill personnel.

Funnily enough, this does give Iran more data on it's own missile capabilities, as they've finally been used in a big enough scale, against actual military facilities, in a real world scenario. They'll likely learn a lot from this, and improve their missile capabilities.

And who cares about Iran's military capabilities? They were known already, nothing new. So there is no Iranian reataliation, only a weapon drill that nobody cares about. It means Iran never retaliates in a real way because they are dead scared the US will hit them. It's a full blown win by the USA. Next it will be Khamenei's turn. I can see Trump taking Khamenei's life 2 days before the election day. And Iran will not retaliate because they already proved they are cowards.

Seems like your overly obssessed with casualty numbers when the fact is in war casualty numbers have NEVER resulted in victory for one side or the other! And I do NOT believe the 80 casualty figure given by Iran's media nore do I believe the 0 figure given by the U.S. especially since the U.S. has a history of lying about it's casualty figures.
casualty figures U.S. acknowledges is purely political and have NEVER been factual to be factual today!!!

As for Iran's initial response you can cry all you want about it but it's not going to change the fact that Iran is now that ONLY country on the planet since WW2 that has carried out precision missile strikes at a U.S. Air Base from 100's of km out and has taken out designated targets at that Base using purely domestically produced weapons. And this is a base so fortified and well protected that the U.S. president and vice president visited in their last trip to Iraq.

False, the US never hides the presence of casualties. It's a democracy not a dictatorship. In 2001 the first killed soldiers by the Taleban were immediately made public, same for the Gulf wars. Even the death of 30 Delta Force special forces were made public in Iraq, even if they do secret operations and their deaths could be hidden. As for the Iran being the only country to hit American armed forces, are you that ignorant? You don't know Vietnam fought the USA and won the war? The North Koreans fought with honour and resisted the American invasion. The Afghans fought and killed many US marines and still do, the Iraqis made the Americans fall into hell. Iran instead doesn't have spine, all it can do is weapon drill that damages nobody. Khamenei will be next, he's a walking dead. And Iran will do nothing again, at most another weapon drill. USA wins fair and square.

 

[Blue In Green]

@waz @Serpentine

"And who cares about Iran's military capabilities? They were known already, nothing new. So there is no Iranian reataliation, only a weapon drill that nobody cares about. It means Iran never retaliates in a real way because they are dead scared the US will hit them. It's a full blown win by the USA. Next it will be Khamenei's turn. I can see Trump taking Khamenei's life 2 days before the election day. And Iran will not retaliate because they already proved they are cowards." -- Please show us undeniable evidence that all Iranian military capabilities are known and 'nothing new'. Surely the Americans and Saudis, the latter of which is seeking active rapprochement with Iran, didn't know that Iran could hit Aramco with such devastating precision and skirt around billion dollar air defenses using a well planned out flight plan that caused surgical level destruction whilst not blowing the entire Aramco facility. This level of military capability was something the U.S. much less the Saudis never thought Iran had until Iran demonstrated it to the world. Iran has now, TWICE, demonstrated controlled surgical strikes achieving goals of hindering oil flow without destroying an entire facility and hitting a decent number of American facilities without blowing the entire thing out of proportion. This isn't cowardice, this isn't being 'sacred' this is cold and calculated military decisions mixed with political over and undertones meant to send a message whilst going around a full-blown war. Something in which you've shown everyone here you have zero to no knowledge about.

You go on to pose that Iran is 'scared' yet we on PDF have NOTHING to go on other than your own take on the matter, yet you purpose this as if it's a given reality, an undeniable fact, so keep going on with your ramblings that no one cares for, as long as you can't substantiate your opinions on the matter of 'cowardice' and 'sacred' your words ring hollow.

Lastly you mentioned the U.S. straight up murdering Khamenei just because Iran is 'coward'. Holy hell this is such an astonishing lapse in logic that it's truly noteworthy. If you actually think this then you have very little solid foundation to be posting here since, evidently, you have zero-grasp on geopolitics.

Okay....I've sincerely had enough of this Silent Fighter persona who's done nothing but try and predicate his positions based on his own opinions on the matter whilst needlessly shaming and name calling Iran for what he poses to be weakness on the side of the Iranians. There is nothing of substance to back up his claims of Trump expanding the strikes further or Trump killing Khamanei two days before the U.S. presidential elections, which is just absurd to the extreme. Silent Fighter is going above and beyond what would be deemed cordial interactions with intellectual discourse in mind, he instead is openly and antagonistically verbally bashing the Iranians based on nothing but his own opinions on the matter. Of which I sincerely doubt he has any formal authority in.

@Silent Fighter , you've gone to great lengths in order to show yourself off as an ignoramus given the subject matter so I don't know what it is you're trying to accomplish here other than making people click the ignore button on your profile forever muting your incessant ramblings. I told you earlier to keep things civil and objective yet you just can't do that can you?

If you feel so fervently about this why not move to Iran and join in the Iranian armed forces? You want American blood to be spilt very badly, almost dogmatically which is terrifying to say the least. Go, go to Iran and sign up for the war, get out of Italy and go move to Iran so you can fight the war you clearly know WAY more about than the Iranians.

Surely your input is sorely needed......

In case you think I'm going to further waste my time seeing you take up half a page with a post filled with inane garbage, you're mistaken. For my own sanity I'm going to ignore you and to all others who read this message please ignore those who come into the Iranians threads spreading nothing but hot garbage around as if it is something profound.

I'm done with you.....

I am going to assume you're not trying to deliberately downgrade their capability. First of all, where is the evidence that 4 failed?
Secondly, the way you judge whether Iran's strike failed or not is whether the missiles hit their intended targets or not. Did you not see the satellite pics? dude, their ballistic missiles are more accurate than most nations' cruise missiles. Ballistic missiles are very complex systems and inherently venerable to failures during firing and its flight, that's why every-time a nation like Iran, Russia etc fires ballistic missiles, they fire more than what's needed, taking into account possible failures during firing (i.e missiles blowing up etc). So no, a statement in this case of their attach not being "that impressive" is very biased indeed. The accuracy of their ballistic missiles is incredible.

As for your missiles defense, please don't talk about something that has failed so much already.

This is a good point you bring up, until we see evidence that 4 Iranian missiles failed, we have nothing to go on other than what the Pentagon said and what IRGC said on the matter which means you can view the situation either way.

 

[VEVAK]

False, the US never hides the presence of casualties. It's a democracy not a dictatorship. In 2001 the first killed soldiers by the Taleban were immediately made public, same for the Gulf wars. Even the death of 30 Delta Force special forces were made public in Iraq, even if they do secret operations and their deaths could be hidden. As for the Iran being the only country to hit American armed forces, are you that ignorant? You don't know Vietnam fought the USA and won the war? The North Koreans fought with honour and resisted the American invasion. The Afghans fought and killed many US marines and still do, the Iraqis made the Americans fall into hell. Iran instead doesn't have spine, all it can do is weapon drill that damages nobody. Khamenei will be next, he's a walking dead. And Iran will do nothing again, at most another weapon drill. USA wins fair and square.

If you believe that then you know NOTHING of military history! So good luck with that!

 

[Blue In Green]

If you believe that then you know NOTHING of military history! So good luck with that!

If you're responding to Silent Fighter, it is very much advised just to ignore him. He doesn't have anything of consequence to bring to the discussion table other than his own assertions on the matter.