From the article:
Two transport aircraft tasked with evacuating the special forces unit were unable to take off from a remote base in Iran. These aircraft were destroyed to prevent them from falling into enemy hands, sources said. The special forces therefore departed on three additional aircraft that were sent for them.
7136
MaybeTheDoctor5 days ago
+2331
Thanks for saving a click.
2331
NotUniqueWorkAccount5 days ago
+1584
What a shitshow this war is though.
1584
soggybiscuit935 days ago
+817
The war is a shitshow. This specific operation was very impressive
817
soggybiscuit935 days ago
+742
The US sent numerous combat teams deep into Iran and rescued downed pilots **twice**, engaging in large fire fights, and were successful both times.
It's impressive that the US was able to get to the pilots twice before Iran was, deep in Iranian territory.
742
solarpanzer5 days ago
+214
I wonder what the cost was. The two planes they lost, and probably lots of expensive ordnance to secure the operation?
214
4DollarsALB5 days ago
+577
The US determined that the life of one soldier was worth more than $200 million in equipment.
That might seem like the obvious choice but one look at the Russia/Ukraine war and you'll see not all militaries operate that way
577
LarxII5 days ago
+734
I've said this further up the thread. It's the *publicity* of saving the service member they determine to be of more value. If they valued the lives of said service members' then we wouldn't be involved in this war in the first place.
734
SnoweCat75 days ago
+258
That's right, it's about the "optics". The optics of having a captured US pilot being paraded on Iranian TV would have been a massive blow to Trump and the war's already dismal popularity vs the optics of a successful heroic rescue. The monetary cost isn't a factor.
258
arcadeenthusiast82455 days ago
+21
Both can be true. The admin is desperate for Ws, but US doctrine is also no man left behind. Because if you treat soldiers as expendable livestock, then you get the Russian situation where they are more likely to defect/mutiny then it just spirals from there.
21
LarxII5 days ago
+13
You're not wrong. But let's be honest, if it were solely up to the current administration, no one would know that there was anyone to rescue in the first place.
13
I-Might-Be-Something5 days ago
+32
I mean, one is a highly trained pilot and the other is a highly trained Wizzo. You can't replace experience.
32
FunLife645 days ago
+88
The admin has no problem firing experience lol
88
Puzzle-Necked5 days ago
+114
Life of an active soldier maybe. Veterans get ignored.
114
metengrinwi5 days ago
+104
Honestly, they weren’t all that worried about the life of the airman, rather the fact he’d be used as a bargaining chip against them.
104
Independent_Wash61515 days ago
+9
Pretty sure if we valued the lives of our soldiers as much as you think we'd not have started a war of choice in the first place.
9
Spaghett85 days ago
+36
2 C-130s, 1 A-10, 1 F-15. Several helicopters.
At least a few hundred million from aircraft costs alone.
Although they did succeed in the rescue. At the current stage of the war, any major loss is going to be caused by morale. A very slight dive in economy is going to cause billions in losses.
Not to mention that with such heavy aircraft loss. It’s very possible there were unreported losses in this rescue.
36
Practical-Ball14375 days ago
+3
Dollar value of aircraft doesn't make much sense when you're talking about things like the A-10 or E-3, which haven't been built for 35-40 years.
3
Oceanbreeze8715 days ago
+65
And undisclosed casualties
65
tacmac105 days ago
+25
When the US military says that no one left behind the very much mean it. The lengths we are willing to go to rescue pilots or POWs are fairly limitless and only restricted by what can realistically be done. After Vietnam the Airforce and SOF built an entire system of tech, personnel, and tactics to ensure we never had service members held as POWs again. It doesn’t always work but most of the time it does.
25
Atomic06915 days ago
+15
I suspect it’s a lot easier to get people to be willing to go into enemy countries or conduct mission flying over hostile areas if that person has a strong reason to believe if anything happens to them on the mission that there will be a serious effort to bring them home promptly. Gotta be a morale boost on the front lines that we’re serious when we say we’ll come get you.
15
Sanguinor-Exemplar5 days ago
+11
I for one would feel considerably better praying to delta force than I would feel praying to God
11
zombietrooper5 days ago
+120
The strategy is a shitshow, the tactical operations are a masterclass.
120
Key-Rough-83465 days ago
+63
We do have a good military. Good soldiers, good officers, the most advanced weaponry and top of the line logistics and power projection. What we currently lack is good leadership on top. We have an alcoholic and a conman leading from the Pentagon and White House, and they fire any general that doesn’t go along with what they say.
63
BRAX7ON5 days ago
+58
The American military is the best in the world. Unfortunately, the leadership is no longer the best, and it puts every operation in doubt.
58
xSaRgED5 days ago
+190
That’s relatively normal.
Even the Bin Laden raid resulted in the self-destruction of a US helo.
190
DjNormal5 days ago
+149
They did land one of them on top of the compound wall (and busted the tail boom). It wasn’t part of the plan.
The extraction was always going to be with the chinooks that came in after, but all the aircraft were supposed to fly back out.
There seems to be a few different ideas about what happened in Iran. Either these aircraft were intentionally left behind or they got stuck. Both seem weird to me.
I was a Blackhawk crewchief. We didn’t exactly make it a habit of sacrificing our aircraft. So, I’m guessing it was some kind of unforeseen issue, rather than intentionally leaving them behind.
That said, Iraq was a different place with different leadership, so who knows.
149
Remarkable_Aside13815 days ago
+56
> They did land one of them on top of the compound wall (and busted the tail boom). It wasn’t part of the plan.
They weren’t trying to land on the wall, they just built their mockup with chain link fence instead of solid walls like the compound had
56
therealslimshady12345 days ago
+44
Yes, which totally changed the aerodynamics (the walls cause upwards draft) which caused the heli to become out of balance and tumble over so the pilot had to do an emergency landing by killing the engine as correcting that is pretty much impossible once it happens (supposedly, I am not a pilot)
Now of course the pilot was extremely experienced and knew of this phenomenon, but things tend to go wrong in extreme situations like this. According to the documentary I watched, he made the right move by shutting down the engine as the tumbling over would have killed everybody inside.
44
yuikkiuy5 days ago
+9
Iirc techincal issues grounded them both, so they scuttled them
9
upnflames5 days ago
+21
I'm not a pilot so this is just heresy from a layman, but I read in another comment somewhere that they didn't prep the wheels correctly for the type of take off they were going to do. Like, the planes can take off on sand, but these two planes were not set up correctly for the conditions and they didn't have time to fix it before wanting to leave.
You probably know more about whether that's a legitimate reason or not though.
21
Ludwigofthepotatoppl5 days ago
+34
~~BURN THE HERETIC~~ think you meant hearsay lol
34
xSaRgED5 days ago
+26
Right, I’m not saying it’s intentional to leave stuff, only that it’s a military operation and things don’t always go to plan.
It doesn’t make the operation a failure, it just means Plan A didn’t work. Thankfully, Plan B did, and seemingly no friendly KIAs.
26
Dexterus5 days ago
+20
There is also a helicopter rotor visible in one of the pictures. There's a reason they came in in 2 planes and left on 3. Successful but costly.
20
airship_of_arbitrary5 days ago
+48
Still pretty wasteful when you realize the goal of this war is now to reopen the Strait.... That was open before the war began.
48
FeeHot58765 days ago
+41
While this statement is correct, this incident isn’t indicative of that. The US just pulled off the biggest and most complicated SOF operation in modern history. It’s everything Operation Eagle Claw was supposed to be and then some given advances in technology and lack of surprise
41
olight775 days ago
+52
Reminds me of the Russian war. Over in 3 days..
52
MiniGiantSpaceHams5 days ago
+153
Russia is losing a thousand men a day. The US has lost a dozen overall and just moved heaven and Earth to rescue one. Iran is a shitshow, yes, but these are not remotely the same thing.
153
BendersDafodil5 days ago
+97
Both are unnecessary wastage of blood and gold.
97
_SmashLampjaw_5 days ago
+6
You're not wrong.
But the US is very good at what it does at a tactical level, and at the moment very bad at what it does at the strategic.
Russia is very bad at both.
6
porican5 days ago
+69
both are burning capital at an alarming rate in a pointless war of aggression. it’s just that russia’s capital is human. the US will spend millions to defend against weapons equivalent to a honda civic.
69
Bruce_Sato5 days ago
+3
"2 weeks"
3
johnnycyberpunk5 days ago
+20
Saved a click but didn’t save any money.
Those specially outfitted C130s are probably $300m each.
20
TachiH5 days ago
+315
Sounds like it played out similar to when they tried to go in for the hostages in Operation Eagle Claw. Iran's environment itself is a danger to aircraft with all the fine particulate.
315
NoCSForYou5 days ago
+198
Ive been there. The land is green but the air is yellow. There were so many scratches on my iPod because of the sand that was in the air.
198
__Elwood_Blues__5 days ago
+40
So that's where they film all those Mexican scenes in movies.
40
Much-Instruction-8075 days ago
+10
The sepia filter was invented there.
10
trulyniceguy5 days ago
+58
Pretty sure the exact same thing happened in the assasination of Osama Bin Laden. During the operation a black hawk crashed due to weather and they had to destroy the aircraft before they left. It’s fairly common practice when you have advanced aircraft in the hands of the enemy
58
tagillaslover5 days ago
+87
Not exactly weather. In training the walls of the compound were a chain fence while it was a concrete wall at the real compound. Flying over the wall caused rotor wash they weren’t expecting and made the helicopter crash
87
Fauster5 days ago
+21
Yep, the built a reproduction of the compound for training, but they replaced the wall with a chain-link fence. Not the same thing.
21
Jack0715 days ago
+3
The 2 initial aircraft where struck by enemy fire during the rescue attempts, if its the same 2 aircraft now mentioned it makes sense since they were already damaged
3
paul-in-nyc25 days ago
+37
Why would 2 of them be unable to take off? I can see 1, is there’s some unfortunately timed problem, but 2?
37
Petrichord5 days ago
+53
Stuck in sand or mud
53
-Average_Joe-5 days ago
+38
Sounds like we are cutting it really close, I hope Trump declares victory soon.
38
YuppiesEverywhere5 days ago
+75
Well Trump declared a 48 hour ultimatum 24 hours ago, so we have at most 3 more months.
75
supersunnyout5 days ago
+13
He is really pulling out the stops, utilizing profanity to escalate the matter. Any minute now.
13
SmegmaWarrior08155 days ago
+27
Maybe 5th time declaring it is the charm.
27
Pocket_Biscuits5 days ago
+52
Why would they use aircraft that wouldn't be able to also leave? Genuinely asking.
52
Xirdus5 days ago
+93
They were supposed to be able to leave, but some unforeseen problem prevented them from doing so.
93
ShermansAngryGhost5 days ago
+186
They took damage on the way in that prevented them from leaving.
186
Longshot_455 days ago
+68
Depending on what article you read, they weren't damaged but got stuck. The aircraft had landed in an open area to set up a forward position and were unable to takeoff.
68
DeHeiligeTomaat5 days ago
+123
So, an operation to rescue became an operation to rescue rescuers as well?
123
Ryoken0D5 days ago
+134
Which is quite common in rescues behind enemy lines.. or any operations behind enemy lines..
134
Threebridges25 days ago
+61
Yes. They had to blow up one of the helicopters during the Bin Laden raid as well.
61
Cheeky_Star5 days ago
+23
There is always a plan B and C. So usually they have air support close by.
I think something similar occurred in the bin Laden operation. Where they had 2 helicopters on standby at a safe distance outside the airspace as one of the Helios in the operation went down.
23
Apyan5 days ago
+8
Guess that's quite common.
8
Itsarightkerfuffle5 days ago
+6
Now youse can't leave
6
Ouid_Head5 days ago
+11
Probably buried the landing gear in sand
11
azhillbilly5 days ago
+54
Helicopters are very sensitive and if they get shot in the wrong places or get debris sucked up in the intakes they are not safe to fly.
Like when they killed osama bin Laden, there was a helicopter that had to be destroyed and left behind.
54
WhoSaidWhatNow20265 days ago
+20
They dont have to take any damage to leave the helicopter. It is highly unlikely that the little bird flew in, and highly unlikely that they would try to fly it out. A Little Bird is often carried in a C130 and can be deployed from the C130 and flying in under 15 minutes. If the C130 that was planned for Little Bkrd transport isnt leaving, then the Little Bird isn't either.
20
40mm_of_freedom5 days ago
+7
Yup, I watched some rangers do a mix airfield seizure during an exercise. C-130 landed, rangers had a little bird and some dirt bikes in the back and rolls them out.
7
MacSage5 days ago
+27
They were C-130 Cargo planes, most likely the MC-130J.
27
coly8s5 days ago
+8
They literally got stuck in mud and couldn't get out.
8
boshbosh925 days ago
+6
The wheels were stuck in mud
6
musty_mage5 days ago
+8372
As long as you're in the US military, they'll literally spend hundreds of millions to get you back, but once you're discharged and back in the US you can starve on the street and no one gives a f***.
8372
Various_Good_69645 days ago
+5678
They aren't rescuing you, they're rescuing themselves from embarrassment and removing an exploitable weakness, nothing more.
Edit: This has blown up a bit and seems to have made lots of folk angry. I have maximum respect for those that give their lives in service and 100% back that the military will do any and every thing they can to bring back anyone left behind. The sentiment was aimed at the government, who as mentioned in the comment I replied to, clearly do not care anywhere near as much as they should about the long term future of their soldiers.
5678
BMW_wulfi5 days ago
+1080
Bit of column A bit of column B. Troops need to believe they will be rescued at almost any cost if the country is able to and you need visible examples of this. Otherwise morale collapses and knowledge is lost and you can’t buy that back as simply as you can aircraft.
1080
octoreadit5 days ago
+46
Yup, same with spies who get caught and those who defect and join your side. You get the first group back no matter the cost, because you want your intelligence workers to know that they will get rescued. With the second group, you want other guys to continue to spy for you, because if they get whacked while on your turf, that’s bad news for all of the future recruiting.
46
Buntschatten5 days ago
+37
Yup. The real difference is that the public would be outraged if an American soldier is tortured to death publicly in Iran. But they wouldn't give a second look to the homeless vet who is begging in front of their Starbucks.
37
JustinScott475 days ago
+21
Or forget that no one's been arrested for murdering Renee Good and Alex Pretti, and no one's been arrested or forced to resign over Epstein. But keep waving the flag and watching Top Gun and say it's all okay.
21
itsFelbourne5 days ago
+226
There is no functional difference for the soldier being rescued
226
U_Sound_Stupid_Stop5 days ago
+323
Until he gets home, as a veteran, and is faced with the other side of the medal.
Until his family calls on him to help them pay their medical bills because Medicaid and Medicare were defunded.
Until his wife tells him she had to quit her job because their daycare was defunded.
>Trump says it's 'not possible' for the U.S. to pay for Medicaid, Medicare and day care: 'We’re fighting wars'
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-not-possible-us-pay-medicaid-medicare-daycare-re-fighting-w-rcna266381
323
ariolander5 days ago
+131
The anti-DEI measures also included the dismantling of veteran preferential hiring by the federal government. Veterans as a share of the federal workforce are at the lowest then have been in recent history.
The Department of Veteran Affairs in particular has gotten massive budget cuts and had to lay off many veterans.
Something like 30,000 VA employees have been let go in the last year alone. With an average of 11 years experience this represents a massive brain drain and will likely hamper veteran services for years.
131
Floatzel4045 days ago
+94
I don't give a f*** what reason it's for I would just be happy I'm not left to die on a mountain lmfao
94
Suspicious_Brush40705 days ago
+14
Slightly off topic, but this is why I like *The Boys*. I just started a rewatch of season 1 and I love how they slowly reveal the fact that everything is staged, it's *all* about optics and reputation, and nobody actually cares about protecting or saving real innocent people.
It's really a great mashup of Hollywood and the US government.
14
McCool3035 days ago
+270
That’s because dead soldiers are a campaign issue. Dead veterans are a statistic.
270
TKFT_ExTr3m35 days ago
+58
Dead soliders are fine too, it's the live ones who are captured, paraded through the streets and tortured and posted all over social media that causes problems. Worse still the US has failed to take any POWs of its own despite being given the opportunity so there wouldn't be anyone to exchange for. Trump was probably pissed the guys ejected cause it meant they had to go search for them. Hell people were pissed at Gary Powers for not killing himself.
58
TadpoleOfDoom5 days ago
+5
Considering Trump's comments about John McCain being a POW, I don't find this hard to believe.
5
JimmyTango5 days ago
+9
Also hard to motivate other soldiers to take insane risks when they have 0 expectation of being rescued if something goes wrong.
9
Hextron5 days ago
+37
I will say this, VA has been treating me very well, with education benefits, healthcare and compensation. Even though this administration has been trying to dismantle that and already affected mental health treatment at the VA.
You do have to advocate for yourself to get those benefits and also read up on it. There is a week long course in the Air Force called TAP (Transition Assistance Program) for when people are getting out of the military. They're supposed to get information about all the benefits, VA, job applications etc. But a lot of them are not well organized or well attended.
Moved to a big city recently and I run into a lot of vets here and there, I try to inform as many as I can on what benefits they're eligible for.
37
PorkshireTerrier5 days ago
+127
it;s never about the soldier
127
Dreamlion_Inc5 days ago
+34
Exactly. If they actually gave a f*** about soldiers we wouldn’t be in Iran right now
34
Greedy_Rabbit_17415 days ago
+4
With this argument you couldn't have a military at all.
4
EmergencyWorld60575 days ago
+14
>but once you're discharged and back in the US you can starve on the street and no one gives a f***.
Yeah that's not true unless you're abusing drugs or alcohol.
I don't think you know how much financial support and benefits the US military gets, it's literally impossible for them to go homeless unless they are not financially well.
14
BasilisksRPretty5 days ago
+278
For anyone outside of the United States reading this, this comment is not sarcastic. It's literal. Veterans with injuries from the war can't even get healthcare. There are tons of homeless veterans, there are vets who can't afford food and relying on soup kitchens, all of it.
278
Goragnak5 days ago
+156
Weird, I get excellent care from the VA.
156
temporarycreature5 days ago
+85
I think it goes both ways. I also know vets that lack the care they need, however, I also get excellent care from the VA.
85
ccblr065 days ago
+36
So….maybe some VA offices suck more than others, probably due to population density and the support that they get for their region?
36
temporarycreature5 days ago
+36
Yeah, it is slowly getting better.
When I moved to Tulsa they had a really bad outpatient clinic.
Biden's administration gave the funds to rebuild a brand new one, and then Biden's administration up the ante and decided to hold off on putting an ER for veterans in the outpatient clinic that was being newly built for us and decided to build a VA Oklahoma State University teaching hospital for veterans in downtown Tulsa to replace the main facility over in Muskogee.
The only thing the Trump administration has done for us is hasten the privatization of the VA under the guise of more veteran choice.
36
comfortablybum5 days ago
+6
Yeah I've seen it go both ways with people in my family who served and were injured. Some of them got great treatment and never paid a dime for all sorts of things. Others got delays and denials. It all seems kafka-esque and Byzantine. I think we can all agree that there have been massive failures in our history when it comes to taking care of veterans. It's really expensive and it doesn't get factored into the price of war.
6
Badbullet5 days ago
+8
I think they can get health care, it’s just a shit process where they have to prove they are disabled and get it approved. I have a friend that has been out of the marines for more than a decade and is getting care from the VA due to having diagnosed PTSD where they require him to get treatment. He gets medical as well, not just psychological care. But it took a few years for him to get qualified.
8
JanitorOfSanDiego5 days ago
+5
This is just more anecdotal evidence though. Mine would be that two of my family members were able to achieve 100% disabled status without being truly functionally disabled fairly easily. Gotta depend on the doctors they see or something.
5
ittybittynuts5 days ago
+50
Disabled vet here! Broke my foot last week and I have been walking around on it ever since because I can't get in to see my f****** VA doctor. Even with disability I have to work to make sure that I can live.
Edit: Went in to urgent care when it broke and called the VA line to make sure that the visit was covered. It is. The problem is, is that the VA can't get me into a community podiatrist because they are booked out for 15 more days, and I'm having trouble scheduling with my GP at the VA. I know about emergency visits. I am complaining about follow up care. I should have been more clear, but some of you need to chill the f*** out.
50
Goragnak5 days ago
+51
If you can't get into them why haven't you gone to an urgent care/hospital? It only takes them a few minutes to call the VA and get an auth (I've done this twice this year already)
51
fleebleganger5 days ago
+39
I’d wager OP isn’t actually who they say they are or in the condition they say they are.
39
rifleshooter5 days ago
+22
It's a lie.
22
Kumbackkid5 days ago
+19
You can go to an urgent care for free or go to a private ER and call the VA within three days and they will cover it.Sounds like you don’t understand the system or aren’t actually a vet.
19
_WreakingHavok_5 days ago
+12
Um, not really... All ex-military personel and their family have Tricare, which is closest you can get to socialized healthcare in US. In addition, they can access commissary, which has in average 20% cheaper groceries.
12
DarthManitol5 days ago
+15
The US has the world's biggest comprehensive welfare system dedicated to veterans. It could be better but veterans are far from unsupported IMO(at least relative to the rest of the world). They get cheaper healthcare, housing loans, free college etc.
15
Sweaty_Membership_705 days ago
+7
Homeless veterans are either lying or got kicked out. There are so many resources for you to be successful this is just cope
7
Im_with_stooopid5 days ago
+22
It's all about optics. Imagine it's harder to get people to sign up if they know when downed you'll be left to fend for yourself. Then with discharged veterans they can get them hooked on Fox News and Newsmax to basically tell them it's all the oppositions fault for being deprived of mental heath care and veterans benefits.
22
Abject_Elevator54615 days ago
+436
That’s happened before.
436
Don_Fartalot5 days ago
+294
Not sure how accurate Black Hawk Down and Zero Dark Thirty are, but it seems the US always make it their mission to destroy any downed aircraft or equipment that may contain sensitive info.
294
DopplerEffect935 days ago
+103
They destroyed the helicopter in the Bin Laden raid especially considering that it was a stealth helicopter.
103
alexunderwater15 days ago
+14
Shhh, US doesn’t have any active stealth helicopters 🤫
14
HumanShadow5 days ago
+23
Not all of it was destroyed, unfortunately. I think they assume it ended up in Chinese hands.
23
Erilson5 days ago
+28
[The tail section remained.](https://www.twz.com/wp-content/uploads/content-b/message-editor%2F1596501019421-stealth-tail.jpg?strip=all&quality=85)
The Pakistanis felt thoroughly humiliated after the raid, so they secretly let China take a look at the wreckage before returning it, both obviously heavily deny it.
Particularly the rear tail rotor and paint were of interest.
28
pho-huck5 days ago
+129
It’s literally the training mission in that new Netflix movie “War Machine” lol.
129
Mako_5 days ago
+35
I did not expect to enjoy that movie, but I did.
35
Icy-Flamingo4205 days ago
+19
Same, but the netflix corny hit hard at the end. Only movie I wish they left without an ending, but then id complain about that too. They did well on this one.
19
PansarPucko5 days ago
+31
It's really standard procedure for a lot of militaries. If you can't recover it, you make it unusable for the enemy. Goes both ways, too.
It's why you see drones from Ukraine drop grenades down the open hatches of abandoned tanks. They can't recover them for themselves, but they can deny the enemy that hardware.
31
angelbelle5 days ago
+11
Isn't that just standard practice...since forever? Big Bertha, Enigma Machines, Korean Turtle Ships, equipment and recipe to make Greek Fire, etc
As with many things discussed on Listnook, it's not unique to US. Or even modern times.
11
drunk_tyrant5 days ago
+18
Operation eagle claw?
18
TrekRider9115 days ago
+399
"Delta Force, blowing up American planes on the ground in Iran since 1979."
399
airship_of_arbitrary5 days ago
+89
From 2 lost planes to 4 lost planes. Super easy, barely an inconvenience.
89
redidiott5 days ago
+28
Wow wow wow wow
Wow
28
b1llyblanco5 days ago
+15
Losing planes is tight!
15
Secret-Temperature715 days ago
+524
The War Zone is reporting 2 C-130 were abandoned and destroyed to keep from falling into enemy hands.
Off the top if my head airframe losses/damaged to date
2 - C-130 left behind/destroyed
1 - A-10 Warthog hit in rescue mission, crashed
2 - helicopters hit with small arm fire
1 - F-15 crashed
1 - KC-135 tanker crashed, 6 dead
1 - KC-135 tanker severely damaged in collision with above
5 - KC-135 tankers damaged in missile strike
3 - F-15 friendly fire
1 - AWACS aerial command and control destroyed on the ground with missile
1 - AWACS damaged in above incident
1 - CH-57 heavy lift helo damaged/destroyed in drone strike
10 to 12 - MQ-9 Reaper drones shot down
Missing anything?
524
GreyClay5 days ago
+339
1. A Chinook got destroyed in Kuwait on Friday.
2. An additional five tankers (probably KC-135s) were hit while on the ground in Saudi Arabia.
3. A second AWACS was reportedly damaged if not destroyed in the same incident that you mentioned.
339
Secret-Temperature715 days ago
+44
Will edit list. Thanks.
44
Bjorne_Fellhanded5 days ago
+18
If you look at the photo of the burned out c-130s, you’ll notice a helicopter rotor on the left foreground. Looks small. Little bird maybe?
18
XxPieIsTastyxX5 days ago
+7
Chinook is CH-47 not -57
7
LethargicDemigod5 days ago
+203
[List of aviation shootdowns and accidents during the 2026 Iran war - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aviation_shootdowns_and_accidents_during_the_2026_Iran_war)
42 US aircrafts damaged or destroyed.
203
this_place_stinks5 days ago
+50
On the surface that sounds like a lot, against total number of missions though doesn’t seem particularly bad or unexpected, no?
50
LX_Luna5 days ago
+44
Relative to say, Desert Storm or the expected numbers, this is appallingly one sided in the United States' favor. Accidents have done about 5 times the damage of Iranian fire.
44
RawerPower5 days ago
+6
Also even of US origin not all belonged to US.
6
HarEr895 days ago
+33
Most people, even experts, expected dozens or even hundreds KIA US troops in the first week and also downed aircraft in the first days. So 13 killed, including 6 in a refueling accident, is very low.
33
ShermanMcTank5 days ago
+51
> Most people, even experts, expected dozens or even hundreds KIA US troops in the first week and also downed aircraft in the first days.
Who the hell expected hundreds ? The entire gulf war, which was a higher intensity conflict with actual boots on the ground resulted in only 148 KIAs for the US, which includes 35 from friendly fire.
The highest recent US death toll in a war is 1922 killed in Afghanistan, and it took *20 years* to reach that tally.
51
Daffan5 days ago
+4
People all over listnook and twitter were saying that Iran was going to unleash dozens of missiles onto the decks of carriers and have mobile drone swarms.
4
Etzell5 days ago
+6
I'd like to see a source for this claim.
6
Used_Butterfly39595 days ago
+37
2 C-130s left behind, not one
37
Nathan-Stubblefield5 days ago
+11
How many aircraft were destroyed in Jimmy Carter’s attempt to rescue the embassy hostages?
11
Used_Butterfly39595 days ago
+28
1 EC-130, 1 RH-53D in a collision, 5 RH-53Ds left behind
28
Dragon61725 days ago
+3
One C-130 and 6 helicopters
3
famine-5 days ago
+23
1. 2nd AWACS
2. 6 more KC-135s
3. 2nd A-10
4. 17 MQ-9s
5. 2 MH-6s
6. And a HH-60 in a pear tree.
23
TheBroWhoLifts5 days ago
+13
That's about $2.5 to $3 billion worth of equipment. But I almost blow out a tire every day on my drive to work because the roads are so shitty. Nifty little society we've made ourselves here.
13
GreyClay5 days ago
+568
So the one F-15E being hit directly led to 7 other aircraft being damaged, at least 5 of which are irreparably destroyed.
There was an A-10 also shot down, two Blackhawks being hit and damaged, causing injuries to both crews, two C-130s being blown up and also 2 Little Birds being blown up.
568
Forest_Orc5 days ago
+387
US are famous for their *leave no-one behind* doctrine, and basically, knowing people will recover you if shit is the fan is one of the reason why you accept to do dangerous missions.
387
Loofahs5 days ago
+175
It’s one of the main doctrines in SERE. They emphasize repeatedly that if you stay alive the US will get you back, even if it takes 10 years like the Vietnam POWs.
175
interstat5 days ago
+36
Kinda awesome for that tbh
36
DisasterNo17405 days ago
+8
The equipment doesn't really matter that much, given that the equipment isn't exactly biological and breathing nor does it have family and countrymen. The shitstorm the admin and military would be facing both internally and externally from normal citizens is not something they wanna deal with. Nor is giving Iran leverage by having two pilots captive.
8
Finalshock5 days ago
+214
Yeah but equipment isn’t worth the lives it’s protecting. Given everyone got out, that stuff did its job.
214
SteadyOperative5 days ago
+53
Not to mention the crisis that would have arose over Iran capturing the pilot alive. Was definitely worth it.
53
ethnicbonsai5 days ago
+42
When you contrast the losses and cost to *not* rescuing the pilot, yeah. It's worth it.
When you contrast the losses and cost with *not being in this pointless war in the first place*, it's a lot harder to shrug off.
42
Best_Change41555 days ago
+12
Iran has killed 600 US soldiers in the past 20 years, including 3 in 2024. Another 200 if you include the bombing in Beirut in the 80s. Considering the life of a US soldier has now been listed as $300m, it's hard to say that this is *pointless.*
12
Canadian_Kartoffel5 days ago
+171
> Yeah but equipment isn’t worth the lives it’s protecting.
This is a crazy statement coming from a country without universal healthcare and weekly school shootings.
171
ethnicbonsai5 days ago
+76
Both sides in this country agree, generally, that lives are valuable. They just disagree on who is responsible for saving those lives.
When you get off the internet, engage with actual people, almost everyone will agree that human life is worth protecting. One side, generally, thinks we should look out for one another. The other side, generally, thinks we should look out for ourselves.
And (for that second group) the people who can't do that aren't worthy of much concern or effort, I guess.
76
icyhot0005 days ago
+25
The idea that the US will do anything it can to rescue service members in a war zone is completely unrelated to the other issues. You argue any random “aMeRiCa iS BaD” listnook bait but its completely unrelated to the leave no man behind culture of the military
25
helen_must_die5 days ago
+13
> weekly school shootings
Number of school shootings in 2026: 0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2026#Monthly_statistics
13
reivers5 days ago
+3
It's crazy to think you'd value stuff over a soldier you ordered to go out there.
This is not a bad thing. There are plenty of ways we could be better, but this whole situation is EXACTLY how it's supposed to work, and one of the big reasons we can do incredible things with our military.
3
GreyClay5 days ago
+20
Oh yes I agree with you, I am just pointing out the article headline says the “US was forced to destroy two of its own aircraft” when it was actually forced to destroy **four** of its own aircraft.
And lost the A-10 and had two helos shot full of holes as well.
20
WillieM965 days ago
+18
Those planes are somewhat expendable. The 10 KC-135 refueling tankers and the 1 (of only 16) E-3 sentry we lost in the first month of this debacle is a MASSIVE hit to our military, indicating failures in preparation and leadership.
18
IronyElSupremo5 days ago
+80
Destroying “high tech” equipment, in danger of being hauled, is actually the norm for US and other advanced militaries since the Vietnam War.
Not so much denying a trophy as denying picking apart design and technology. Of course the tech has to be there. There’s displayed chunks of B-52 (late 1940s design actually)in present day Vietnam, but the U.S. was going to replace the B-52 with the B-70 Valkyrie untitled latter was cancelled, then the B-1, B-2
80
Bluedroid5 days ago
+24
US doesn't give a shit this isn't material to them. In the Vietnam war they literally pushed off their own helicopters so they had room on a carrier for a Vietnamese civilian pilot to land his plane on their ship. To get one of their people back they wouldn't think about it.
24
IdiotBOT12345 days ago
+278
The Strait of Hormuz was open before this idiotic war began.
278
ShamanSix015 days ago
+49
And it remains open to most others besides the U.S. and Israel.
And by “open” I mean like the Suez and Panama Canals are “open”.
49
RawerPower5 days ago
+16
No, to countries that made deals with Iran. And even those like China and India still have 10s of ships stuck there for some reason.
16
Electrical_Ad45805 days ago
+5
Because they laid mines throughout the strait. It’s not like they can just reveal where they are or turn them off. It literally doesn’t matter who Iran “allows” as long as they’re under siege.
5
re62785 days ago
+6
Not really they are paying iran to access it, so it's open but like how it used to be
6
SwvellyBents5 days ago
+75
Hmmmmm, we had to leave some broken helos behind in Iran?
I think I've seen this movie before.
Woof! Thanks for this! I wasn't aware of the movie, now I have to track it down.
One of the hostages was a friend of mine.
7
Wa3zdog5 days ago
+86
Given the situation, it’s actually worth it from a broader perspective. The aircraft don’t fall into enemy hands and the airman isn’t captured which would have been huge political leverage (worth more than a few planes).
86
NewSir68175 days ago
+7
So the rescue only cost a quarter of a billion or so? Trump change.
7
Juls72435 days ago
+24
I hope people realize how important it is for the military to put resources into rescuing people. From a monetary cost perspective it’s absolutely not worth 10+M per life; however it’s benefit to morale in incredible.
Knowing that your govt WILL do anything it can to help you escape makes people far more willing to go on crazy mission.
24
SteadfastEnd5 days ago
+14
Not only that, but it is powerful intimidation to an adversary, knowing the US will go to such extreme lengths just to get 1 guy.
14
betawings5 days ago
+20
Its not only 2 planes . The images i saw online had 2 additional wrecked little birds inside the c130 destroyed fuselage. The count is 4.
20
Einsteinbomb5 days ago
+3
It may could be as high as six total wrecks at the FARP site. With the available pictures I’m seeing it’s only showing two MH-6 Little Birds. That said, we certainly left two C-130s that each typically carry two helicopters so may be four total helicopters plus the two planes. Here’s to hoping we get an update on what happened during an upcoming briefing from the Department of Defense.
3
SmokinJunipers5 days ago
+11
What's the total cost of this? 1 F15, 1 A10, 2 C-130s?
11
Accomplished-Run2215 days ago
+6
I wonder what really happened.
6
atomkraft5 days ago
+15
Ah, history certainly rhymes. This has flavors of when Roman troops abandoned Inchtuthil fortress (Scotland, ~87 AD). Rather than let a hoard of iron nails fall into the hands of Caledonian troops to forge into weapons, they were buried onsite and left forgotten for two millennia.
15
CampEmbarrassed1705 days ago
+11
Reminds me of the high value stealth military chopper that the seal team left back in Pakistan after they took out Bin Laden. Pakistan then sold the parts to the Chinese army for them to dissemble and copy.
11
I_Think_I_Cant5 days ago
+4
Never leave your friend's behind.
4
HemphBleh5 days ago
+4
Man my taxes were part of those.
4
Kurtotall5 days ago
+3
240 million dollars.
3
saoupla5 days ago
+4
Looks like trump can profit off the movie rights sometime in the future.
4
VVynn5 days ago
+31
All this to block the Epstein Files??
31
Maxpowerxp5 days ago
+3
Was anybody hurt or died over the rescue mission?
3
talktojvc5 days ago
+3
That’s gonna be bad for ratings 🙄📺
3
newdriver20254 days ago
+3
The channel's sources report that on Friday, US President Donald Trump paused some other operations in Iran to prioritise the search. I find it hard to believe that president bone spurs made the call to pause some operations while search was ongoing. This guys military experience is by his own words avoiding getting an STD during the Vietnam war.
3
Loki-L5 days ago
+14
The US had to abandon hercules transporter in Iran during a rescue mission?
What year is it again?
14
hifumiyo15 days ago
+9
The Herc got stuck in the LZ. She couldn't move in the sand.
9
fallenwout5 days ago
+6
That is what we call: a clusterfuck
6
bigDeltaVenergy5 days ago
+5
....Mission successful I guess
5
2ingredientexplosion5 days ago
+4
They apparently landed in mud and couldn't takeoff or were damaged during landing.
4
_Bon_Vivant_5 days ago
+20
A Democrat president lost his presidency for losing aircraft during a rescue mission in Iran.
20
SteadfastEnd5 days ago
+6
I think it was more about the 8 deaths in eagle claw and overall mission failure. If the operation had succeeded, no one would care about the loss.
6
Informal_Process22385 days ago
+30
And a republican candidate colluded with Iran to delay the release of the hostages until he was elected
30
abughorash5 days ago
+7
that's because (a) the mission was a failure, unlike this one, and (b) Americans died in that mission, unlike this one.
C'mon people lmao. If Eagle Claw had saved the hostages with 0 casualties nobody would care if 30 aircraft were lost
199 Comments