this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
99 points (100.0% liked)

news

24471 readers
518 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body.

If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include not just the twitter.com URL but also Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source (archive.today, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org). Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed.

Mass-tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken Markov chain bot will result in a comm ban.

Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.

Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned.

Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It is very telling what the US military's own press releases will not say. A recent award ceremony gave a Silver Star to Lt. Col. William Parks for gallantry during missions in early 2025. The official story describes a fifteen minute life or death struggle where he performed high G maneuvers to evade missiles that were detonating feet from his aircraft. He is credited with six aerial victories and personally defending against five surface to air missile engagements, all while preventing the loss of two other US jets.

"For 15 minutes, with enemy missiles detonating mere feet from his aircraft, Parks led his flight through a serious of high-G maneuvers and countermeasure employment” and coordinated the emergency deployment of tankers, which “prevented the probable loss of two aircraft due to fuel starvation."

Parks was “Parks has been credited with six aerial victories protecting the lives of more than 5,000 Sailors aboard the USS Harry S. Truman” carrier, and “personally defended against five deadly surface-to-air missile engagements targeting his aircraft.”

The curious part they completely omit is who he was fighting. The release does not mention Yemen, the Red Sea, Ansar Allah, or the Houthis. The only clue is that his deployment supported Operations Prosperity Guardian and Rough Rider, the twin US campaigns against Yemen.

top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 50 points 3 days ago (2 children)

One of the big reasons ansarallah were able to succeed is because the US is not willing to take major losses to several things it claims supremacy in.

Maintaining the illusion of supremacy is more important to them than winning some fights, if they can be scared enough into believing that pushing too hard will get losses to fighters or ships, they back off because they want their airforce and fleet to be viewed as a force you simply can not contest. Maintaining that image is more important than winning because it wins many confrontations without ever fighting. As soon as someone makes them bleed otherwise will be more likely to try and fight too.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 40 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Incidentally, this is precisely why Ukraine has been such a debacle for the US. It stripped away the myth of superiority of US weapons and shows that they are in many ways inferior to Soviet and current Russian designs.

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 32 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think the illusion of supremacy helps at the political level. Military heads might know that it's not real but politicians are genuinely affected by the illusion of total supremacy and it informs their decision making, reducing acts of hubris.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 23 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Absolutely, the 90s, when the US was an unchallenged world power, were formative years for these people. They're still stuck in that time psychologically, unable to grapple with the reality of the world as it is today.

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There is a downside. The western political sphere is also still stuck in the past, they believe in their own technological military supremacy. This is partly why there are still western politicians that believe they can win in Ukraine.

No side being supreme and the very slowly losing side being in total denial leads an endless grinding war that barely moves and never ends.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 3 days ago

I think the war will end with the west having an economic collapse at this point. What I'm really worried about is that the US leadership will be crazy enough to go nuclear against Russia or China.

[–] BeanisBrain@hexbear.net 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's like the US is a big, scary-looking animal, like a tiger. But it's actually very flimsy, like balsa wood, or... ooh, paper! Someone should write that down.

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 10 points 3 days ago

✍️ US of A... is a... balsa wood... bobcat

[–] BeanisBrain@hexbear.net 46 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Knew a guy who insisted that the only reason the Houthis drove off the US carrier fleet was because "the military was prevented from fully engaging them by bureaucratic red tape"

[–] FlakesBongler@hexbear.net 49 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So basically the "We could have won if we just used our nukes, but the damn bean-counters said no!" argument

[–] BeanisBrain@hexbear.net 41 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

He also tried to tell me that war isn't necessarily political and when I asked him to give me an example of a non-political war goal, he said stopping a genocide

EDIT: He also used that exact same argument about Vietnam. His "proof" was that the Korean War with its indiscriminate bombing was a draw but the Vietnam War, where US forces were "prevented from bombing Hanoi by politicians" was a total defeat

[–] ChaosMaterialist@hexbear.net 28 points 3 days ago

"prevented from bombing Hanoi by politicians"

NORTH VIETNAMESE POLITICIANS! :peekaboo:

[–] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 28 points 3 days ago

MacArthur moment

[–] Catalyst_A@lemmy.ml 47 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Whatever they did they made America not want to go to war with them.

[–] jack@hexbear.net 34 points 3 days ago

Venezuela needs those missiles badly

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 32 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

This has nothing to do with sinking an aircraft carrier. This is about the suppression of enemy air defences/wild weasel mission.

480th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron flies a specialised variant of the F-16, called the F-16CJ, to suppress enemy air defences (SEAD). These aircraft are equipped with specialised electronic countermeasures, sensors and missiles to do this. Part of this mission involves purposefully baiting out air defence sites to fire at you, to reveal their location, this is the "wild weasel" part of the mission. Which would explain why he got fired upon and had to evade surface to air missiles targeting his aircraft. Another press release by the US states that this was the first time aircraft were fired upon carrying out the wild weasel mission in over 20 years. This press release mentioned Houthi SAM launches against US aircraft.

What this really goes to show, I think, is just how necessary stealth and 5th generation capabilities are on the modern battlefield. The US had to deploy F-35s, from land and another aircraft carrier, to continue the SEAD mission. Along with B-2s for bombing runs with bunker busters and lots of mass. If even the Ansarallah/Houthis in Yemen, albeit with lots of Iranian help, can put up this kind of air defence network that can restrict the movements of non stealth aircraft, then stealth is the price of entry for carrying out a modern air campaign. Ukraine also shows this, neither side can fly over each other's airspace, because they lack stealth aircraft in any sufficient numbers. It also explains why China is making so many stealth aircraft, J-20s and J-35s. And the new prototypes that they're iterating on.

It also illustrates, again in my opinion, that the battle in Yemen was almost a testing ground for the US and Iran to deploy their most advanced weapons, in anticipation for the inevitable Israel-US vs Iran conflict. Iran does have some advanced domestically produced air defence systems, with advanced AESA radars, long ranges, etc. Some of that probably ended up in Yemen. Unfortunately the US and Israel were able to learn from their experiences in Yemen against Iranian equipment, because they had no manned aircraft losses during the 12 day war in Iran.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)
[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 30 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Damn these maneuver pics are crazy

[–] red_stapler@hexbear.net 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)
[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

There was this incident with the carrier, so there's pretty strong indication that it was in fact under threat

Yes that's true of course, but it doesn't have much to do with the press release you posted, which mainly focuses on the wild weasel mission performed, the pilot intentionally baiting out anti aircraft fire. The maneuvering of the aircraft carrier pictured is about defending against anti ship ballistic missiles, which is a whole other topic, a very interesting one in terms of area denial tactics. The press release mentions shooting down cruise missiles and one way attack drones though

As the 480th EFS commander, Parks led the squadron to a record 108 aerial victories against enemy Unmanned Aerial Systems and Land Attack Cruise Missiles. Additionally, Parks guided innovative employment standards by using air-to-ground AGR-20F rockets in an air-to-air role and prioritizing older AIM-9M missiles, saving more than $25 million dollars in munitions costs and leading to the first successful AIM-9M combat employment in 30 years.

Parks has been credited with six aerial victories protecting the lives of more than 5,000 Sailors aboard the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75)

The AGR-20F APKWS is a good anti drone and cruise missile solution, because one F-16 or F-15 can equip 42 of them, and they're about 22 000 USD each, compared to hundreds of thousands for modern air to air missiles, which have a much smaller magazine capacity on the aircraft, usually 6-8 at maximum. There are also specialised air to air versions of it now, though it's a laser guided rocket, so not much of a difference. The AIM-9M is however quite old and therefore significantly cheaper than most air to missiles, hence cost savings mentioned.

108 aerial victories for a squadron, and an individual pilot shooting down 6 aerial targets, is not a record number anymore though. A US F-15E squadron based in Jordan shot down over 150 during the Israel - Iran conflict, with some pilots shooting down over 20 drones and cruise missiles.

The part about SAM launches vs F-35s is actually mentioned in another press release, linked here, you'll probably find this interesting.

“This is the first time anyone has been shot at in 20 years – actually carrying out the Wild Weasel mission. It’s the first time we’re carrying novel weapons on the F-35, bombing into tunnels, double-tapping targets with deep-penetration weapons,” Osborne said....

“To see the squadron grow and get to a spot where the Airmen are comfortable living and working in a place where you're being shot at and still be experts … to watch SAM launches happen (during Rough Rider) and see guys go toward it and jump on their targets. It was impressive to see,” Osborne said.

On the airstikes vs Iranian nuclear facilities

Our weapons officer was the overall mission commander,” Osborne said. “We employed weapons to great effect against surface-to-air missile sites… while they were trying to target us with some very high high-end systems and they were just unable to. … It was cool to see the jet detect and defeat things – to watch it do exactly what it was designed to do.”

The formation of F-35s were the last to leave. They were never fired upon. But, upon their return, they were prepared for retaliation.

“From that point forward, we’re operating under alarm yellow and alarm red conditions, dispersing aircraft and people, expecting ballistic missile attacks, preparing for casualties and medical evacuations. It was wild,” Osborne said.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, fair the carrier incident is a separate thing. I do think that what it's going to come down to is the ability to produce weapons and counter measures at scale. Even with the cost being brought down, the bottleneck might end up being actual industrial capacity in the US. Another problem is stuff like rare earths that China has a monopoly on, and US military is now cut off from. Developing independent supply will take at least half a decade. So, it'll be interesting to see how that impacts weapon production in the near future. With the existing stocks becoming depleted thanks to Ukraine and Gaza, I wonder what the remaining capacity looks like.

I imagine that if there was an all out war with Iran, then they would just use hypersonics to attack the airfields and carriers which is probably the surest approach to neutralizing F35s.

[–] MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

With the APKWS counter drone and cruise missile rockets though, that's just a laser guidance kit mounted to an unguided Hydra 70mm rocket, with a proximity fuse and cheap infrared seeker for the air to air variant. Much like how a UMPK kit turns an unguided Russian FAB bomb into a guided glide bomb, or a a JDAM kit turns a Mk 80 series unguided bomb into a guided bomb. The US has plenty of Hydra rockets already produced, the limitation on production would be on the guidance kits. Anti ballistic missile interceptors are the much bigger production bottleneck for stuff like THAAD and SM-3.

With Iran, during the last attack the US evacuated bases close by like Qatar, and attacked from areas where Iran would not attack, like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, even Greece potentially. And their aircraft carriers remained outside of the range of even Iran's longest range anti ship ballistic missiles. This also explains all the recent "mutual defence pacts" in the Middle East, as a strategy to encircle Iran. Iran then attacked the evacuated base in Qatar as a form of symbolic retaliation. Also for a counterforce attack with conventional ballistic missiles, a high degree of accuracy over long range is required. Iran is working on that by fitting optical seekers to the maneuverable warheads of their ballistic missiles, first starting with the shorter range missiles, and expanding to the longer range ones. I think they're up to 1200km range now. But it's quite challenging. Some from of radar guidance/radar mapping like on the Pershing-II and potentially the Chinese DF-21 could be more feasible long term.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 2 days ago

I mean, the US is currently having trouble ramping up stuff like artillery shell production. Even a relatively simple rocket is a far more complex thing to produce.

And that's why I specifically noted the scenario of total war. Right now, Iran just absorbs the hits because it doesn't want to escalate. However, if there was an open war then these bases would obviously be hit, and carriers alone aren't a solution because they can only carry so much gear. This is really the key problem the US has in general, the logistics are vastly in favor of the adversaries. The US has to ship everything across the ocean, while Iran or Russia can just transport things by rail.

[–] SteamedHamberder@hexbear.net 27 points 3 days ago

Keeping the door for the Houthi’s to become the new “moderate rebels.”

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 22 points 3 days ago

I'm guessing his aerial victories are against cruise missiles/drones? Yemen isn't exactly fielding Su-30s.

coordinated the emergency deployment of tankers, which “prevented the probable loss of two aircraft due to fuel starvation."

I'm sorry if your fighters are running out mid dog fight you've fucked up in a really egregious way

i say knowing nothing about aircraft or air warfare but with reasonable confidence