World News

About helicopters

Bigger sorts of US helicopters (e.g. Chinook) have ultraviolet detectors and infrared lasers in jammer pods. Those help against small air defense missiles, especially old flavours without an imaging (focal plane) seeker. These jammer pods are impressive if you shoot one missile. They lock onto an ultraviolet flash (presumed launch point) and jam in that direction. Now introduce "know your enemy". Introduce flares, fireworks, ultraviolet flashing LEDs and fire several missiles. The jammer pod is chasing false missiles and the real missile hits. Maduro boasted with the Venezuelan armed forces having 6000 "Igla" missiles. With a bit of knowing their enemy and doing counter-countermeasures, firing 20 of them in a short time would have ruined the operation - lots of helicopters down and soldiers dead.

I also note: jammer pods don't prevent firing, they prevent hitting. In videos of the operation, we'd be seeing launches and misses, but aren't seeing them. But hey, proximity fuzes can be jammed. Let's check if the Igla has one. It has a contact, magnetic and delayed fuze. Of those, if contact fails, the magnetic fuze still works, and delayed fuzes would be causing "fireworks" in the sky. Having watched the videos, I can say that no such fireworks occurred.

Most likely, guys on ground weren't issued their missiles. If some were, they weren't briefed about how to shoot down an US helicopter (start with counter-countermeasures, then shoot for real). Or they were positioned in predictable places and bombed in advance. Or their missiles had been sabotaged. Or they partied hard during new year and were recovering, and the US had knowledge of that.

Venezuela also supposedly had Swedish RBS-70 laser beam riding MANPADS, but maybe those were past their "best before" date. But you can't effectively jam a beam rider - it reads the beam with its back side. Ultimately, if antiaircraft missiles fail, you can shoot down a helicopter with antitank missiles. Ukrainians have used their beam riding antitank missiles to shoot down Russian helicopters. Against a helicopter which has laser warning sensors, again, tactics would matter. You point the missile on the wrong course first. It would miss. You let it approach the target. Then you "pull" the missile onto the target, giving the target minimum time to react.

At close range, you can bring down a helicopter with an inertially guided ("predicted line of sight") antitank missile, or even an RPG. And of course, with a bad old air defense gun, which leaves the telltale sign of tracers in the sky. In the sky above Caracas, strings of tracers weren't flying and air defense projectors weren't beaming any light. These tools don't fall silent at the press of any button. If they are silent, it indicates organizational problems.

Conclusion: Venezuelan air defense was not ready for combat. US intelligence agencies likely knew about its poor readiness and designed the operation to take maximum advantage of it.

About jamming

Yes, jamming was likely used, and used well. It likely disabled stationary air defense. I note that some air defense vehicles were hit in the same positions where they were noted months ago. "Sitting duck" is not a tactic which you use against an overwhelmingly equipped opponent who has satellites. You must have a schedule of satellite overflights, warning of drone overflights, and you must set up your system in a new place several times per day.

About intel

Apparently, Venezuela had no lookouts posted near US air bases. That's not how you do it. During the wars in Yugoslavia, Serbian intelligence services had lookouts near US bases in Italy, and it helped them a lot.

About novel weapons

From what I have heard, I might suspect that maybe special forces used some sonic weapons (or maybe the reports are wrong and they simply used thermobaric weapons) to assist themselves against the bodyguards. Lesson: if you are a bodyguard expecting US special forces, dress like a cosmonaut - a proper helmet with noise mitigation and cancellation is advised.

Regarding Trump and silly words

Someone should inform his supporters of having successfully used Gaynator 2000 on the president, demading proof of the opposite, and see if comedy ensues. :)