US forces locate and evacuate downed airman in Iran
foxnews.com
foxnews.com
WE GOT HIM!
My fellow Americans, over the past several hours, the United States Military pulled off one of the most daring Search and Rescue Operations in U.S. History, for one of our incredible Crew Member Officers, who also happens to be a highly respected Colonel, and who I am thrilled to let you know is now SAFE and SOUND! This brave Warrior was behind enemy lines in the treacherous mountains of Iran, being hunted down by our enemies, who were getting closer and closer by the hour, but was never truly alone because his Commander in Chief, Secretary of War, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and fellow Warfighters were monitoring his location 24 hours a day, and diligently planning for his rescue. At my direction, the U.S. Military sent dozens of aircraft, armed with the most lethal weapons in the World, to retrieve him. He sustained injuries, but he will be just fine. This miraculous Search and Rescue Operation comes in addition to a successful rescue of another brave Pilot, yesterday, which we did not confirm, because we did not want to jeopardize our second rescue operation. This is the first time in military memory that two U.S. Pilots have been rescued, separately, deep in Enemy Territory. WE WILL NEVER LEAVE AN AMERICAN WARFIGHTER BEHIND! The fact that we were able to pull off both of these operations, without a SINGLE American killed, or even wounded, just proves once again, that we have achieved overwhelming Air Dominance and Superiority over the Iranian skies. This is a moment that ALL Americans, Republican, Democrat, and everyone else, should be proud of and united around. We truly have the best, most professional, and lethal Military in the History of the World. GOD BLESS AMERICA, GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS, AND HAPPY EASTER TO ALL!
The late of Russian air defence have fallen apart completely. One could argue that Venezuelans of Iraqi weren't good at operating them, but Iranians are certainly extremely competent using every piece of gear they get their hands onto.
> striking Iranian military-aged males believed to be a threat who got within three kilometer” according to a correspondent with the US Air & Space Forces Magazine, who said he had been briefed on the operation.
That's problematic here, because neither the US nor Iran are strangers to initiating violence. So a further refinement is necessary, based on a principle that I haven't had to fall back on very often: whoever initiates violence during negotiations is the bad guy.
They're lucky it's still at this level.
Speaking of terrorism, only one of the belligerents has been antagonizing both its allies and its enemies recently. Didn't they just snatch another country's head of state? Try a decapitation strike unprompted against Iran? Threaten to invade Canada, Greenland and Cuba? If one regime is using terror to achieve political aims these days...
Nah, not really.
If I had 'friends' who went about kidnapping and assassinating leaders, mass murdering little girls, bombing literally hundreds of schools in a month, blowing up civilian bridges and power plants, etc etc etc... I wouldn't need to invoke "the newsfeed algorithm" to explain why people are genuinely happy to see the people committing those atrocities get a tiny taste of what they've been inflicting.
Friends don't let friends commit war crimes. And indeed, from that perspective, America might never have had any real friends. We've just been the biggest bully with the biggest stick, the kid whose parents owned the biggest local news channel and industry.
And frankly, friendship with America doesn't even come with the same perks as it used to. You want Europe to buy all their oil and weapons from the US at inflated prices? You want to stir shit up all over the world and then use the ensuing refugee crisis to bolster far right parties across Europe? You want to have a go at Greenland??
... And then complain that we don't have any "real friends" except Israel any more?! Well shit dude, I wonder why. Spoiler alert: It's not because Hitler comparisons are being amplified by the evil anti-genocide media.
This situation has been apparent for a long time, so I do not feel sorry for the people who signed up to fight in Israel's proxy military -- a military that was already guilty of mass war crimes prior to being occupied I might add.
I have many Muslim friends, they are some of the best people I've ever met in my life. I'm an atheist. Not one has ever had a problem with that.
IRGC caused more suffering/death, more starving of children, in the Yemeni civil war than Israel has in Gaza. If you care about military caused suffering/death, IRGC has to be on the top of your horrible people list.
IRGC is currently importing Iraqi Shia PMF to be enforcers of the Shia apartheid regime currently occupying Iran, because as a religious occupying apartheid regime they don't have enough organic internal support to draw from Iranians in Iran. If you are against occupation, you are against the unrepresentative Shia Theocratic regime (with many regime members born in Iraq) occupying Iran. Daring to dress like this (as a woman, men can dress as they want) will get you murdered by the Shia occupiers:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/09/16/woman-dies-custody-irans...
IRGC is currently recruiting 11-12 year old to man Shia apartheid enforcement checkpoints across Iran and to act as regime enforcers for future events like when the regime murdered 3000 (regime statistic) to 30,000 (civilian statistic) in two days because those people were tired of being ruled by Shia apartheid occupiers forcing Shia conformity (girls must wear hats or be punished, sometime via rape/murder). Again because as an theocratic apartheid occupying (not popular supported) regime they don't have enough manpower without resorting to children/foreign militia.
That is literally your side? Religious theocracies occupying nations without majority organic consent/support of the people? Segregation/lesser/modesty law treatment for women? Imported foreign militias on the streets to enforce unpopular theocratic oppression? Child soldiers? WTF is wrong with you if that is 'your side'.
The Iraqi PMF posted videos of their arrival and their meeting and stating their commitment to the IRGC, so not propaganda.
The IRGC has gone on state TV talking about recruiting 12 year olds, so not propaganda.
HRW has documented the murder of women from violating dress code, so not proganda.
The IRGC has stated that 3000 Iranian protesters will murdered by them in January, so not propoganda (though their admitted number is in question as being too low).
The Iranian regime/IRGC are very clear they are a repressive theocratic regime for Shia Islam, so not propaganda. The have religious/morality police that enforce Shia rules/requirements, with violations resulting in punishment up to rape/death.
The government/IRGC are made up of Shia regime loyalists. IRGC and the state own large amounts of industry in Iran, and promote loyalist Shia supporters making Iran an apartheid regime favoring Shia and disfavoring those that follow other religions (religion is often tribally based in Iran), so not propaganda.
Iran supported the Houthis in their civil war that resulted in over 200,000 dead children, so Iran is actively spreading war/death unrelated to fighting Israel (Israel was not in control of Yemen's previous government).
You haven't actually posted anything of substance why you won't engage just vague 'I'm not willing to engage discussion even though I want to post on this subject on HN over and over'.
FYI more invaders, this time Pakistani militia are now being recruited into Iran to oppress/occupy the Iranian population in service of the occupation theocratic government:
"The roaming of the Islamic Republic's proxies in Iran; entry of "Zainabiyoun" of Pakistan after "Hashd al-Shaabi" of Iraq and "Fatemiyoun" of Afghanistan
Reports of the presence of forces affiliated with the Zainabiyoun Division of Pakistan have been published in various areas of Sistan and Baluchestan province."
I think what a lot of Americans fail to understand is just how galling the rest of the world finds your government’s rank hypocrisy. Your current president and his enablers are mostly considered to be literal madmen. Judging by words, deeds and outcomes it’s hard to defend an opposing view.
As for theocratic governments, the region is full of them and the biggest (Saudi Arabia) are supported by the US despite their similar practices of theocratic oppression to the Iranian regime (probably more so in SA than Iran), so please spare me the hypocritical handwringing.
You are you saying you are OK with Saudi Arabia's behavior then? That is the hypocritical handwringing is am pointing out. The hypocritical people who talked out against Saudi Arabia, against religious favoritism/laws in Israel, people who in the past criticized religion like Rushdie dared to but Iran attempted to murder him for. But things those people now overlook and call Iran their 'ally' in alignment with them.
Is Saudi Arabia good? If not, then how is Iran being the same good? That you can't see I was pointing out the hypocrisy of Iran supporters with my points is wild. They are all things they claim to care about, and would not be accepting of from other nations, but because they like that Iran has attacked the USA/Israel since 1979 they hand waive away as fine. My entire life I was raised with Iranians chanting for death to me as an American (resultantly fundamentally shaping my opinion of Islam), and that policy is what Iranian supporters say supersedes all bad acts Iran commits (excusing Irans regime raping/murdering young girls for not wearing hats, executing by regime numbers 3,000 people on the street over two days, repressive religious theocracy, murder contracts on people like Rushdie who speak negatively about religion).
Personally the pervious moderation to the change in moderation stance for this topic makes it obvious that HN/YCombinators official position aligns with this and I think their official current position will start to have larger impacts for YCombinator. YCombinator, your position is now aligned with posts on your site justifying the deaths of American service members. Not really a good look.
Iran is occupied by a Shia apartheid government. They mandate Shia religious rules that they enforce with extreme violence and death, often against little girls for not wearing hats correctly. They staff the government and the majority of Iranian industry with Shia apartheid supporters. They recently murdered 3,000 (Apartheid regime number) to 30,000 protesters (broader Iranian civilian claim) in the span of 2 day. Iran is currently importing thugs from the Iraqi Shia PMF to be enforcers of the apartheid (showing this is a Shia occupation government forcing itself on the populace) on the streets of Iran along with inviting occupying enforcers from other surrounding Shia militant organizations. People who claim to be against religious apartheid oppressive states immediately turning positions to support such regimes show that they don't really hold that position for any reason but political expedience.
The current US government (and the millions who voted them in power despite their clear fascistic tendencies) made perfectly clear to the rest of the world that the USA is friends with nobody: we are all supposed to be either enemies or vassals.
You can't have Vance come to Europe and insult all of them and expect us to be friends with you.
I am more than forty y.o. and I know the story, I've been there. The story isn't that Europe are freeriders, but that the USA kneecapped any attempt at European strength, for example by using their special relationship with the UK to veto every European defense agreement outside of NATO, because they wanted the EU to always be dependent on the USA.
The current push is also a pure extorsion racket, as provent by the violent threats the US is making against the EU for the crime of rebuilding their continental security with European weapons: https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2026/02/pentagon-...
proving once and for all the the US isn't really pushing for "Europe taking taking charge of their own security" and that you are a liar and a gaslighter.
>after 9/11 and the, shall we say, tepid enthusiasm that the rest of NATO (absent maybe Great Britain) had with supporting the US
See? What can I answer except "Fuck you, fucking asshole".
Sorry to have not sent even more of our soldiers to die into a war that... you now think were very bad mistake, perpetual wars that shouldn't have happened... We tried to tell you and got "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" as an answer. And then you still sent soldiers, and now you say they never mattered.
Why are you surprised we don't want to follow your lead at all now? We should help you in the war with Iran that you won, you need our boats but you don't need them - which is it?
>UK opposition politicians accused JD Vance of disrespecting British forces after he said a US stake in Ukraine's economy was a "better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn't fought a war in 30 or 40 years".
This is just objectively true, sorry.
I was in the GWOT and am familiar with how our NATO "partners" intentionally kneecapped themselves at the expense of supporting the mission and the safety of their own soldiers. This country can't fight at night, this country can go outside the wire, this country can't do convoy ops beyond such and such distance, this country can't.... Can't was the operative word. Sure, point taken that the war was prosecuted over 20 years in a very, very stupid way. That doesn't change the fact that what Vance is saying is true.
That article is pay-walled, but the point of the response from the Americans is that if European Defense vendors wish to maintain access to the (much more lucrative) US market, then US vendors should be able to retain the same access to Europe. How is this not simply fair play amongst "alliance" members? NATO should not be selling NATO technology outside of NATO, so to the extent that the US vetoed (via the UK) foreign military sales to non-NATO members ... yes I support this 100%. This is how a defensive alliance works.
>Why are you surprised we don't want to follow your lead at all now?
I am quite literally asking you to do the opposite for European security. I am tired of my country being the guarantor for security and sovereignty of places that maybe 1 or 2 people at the New York Times could find on a map without googling it, but who then turn around and pretend that the existence of democracy itself is a function of the 82nd being able to seize airfields in that country to stop the Russians. I am tired of Europeans telling me that my country sucks and how GWOT vets are war criminals, on and on, when you guys can't do a proper casevac or figure out CAS without calling daddy. Figure that shit out yourselves, thanks. Happy to help teach, though.
>We should help you in the war with Iran that you won, you need our boats but you don't need them - which is it?
We do not need anything from you. Everyone, with some notable exceptions, in this "alliance" threw a hissy fit about overflights originating from bases across Europe that my country built to keep your country safe from the Soviets. Perhaps we should simply close these bases, and let you all figure out how to deal with IRBMs and the host of other 21st century war tech on your own. To the extent that this WH or anyone in my government is asking for "help", it's probably meant as a troll, given that outside of France there's very little force projection on blue water coming out of the rest of NATO. That was a choice, that those countries made. No one in the American government told, for example, the UK to essentially mothball their Navy. No one in the American government told the Germans to shutdown their reactors like a bunch of fools, making them dependent on Russian gas. You people voted for this, knowing that the Americans are always the backstop if shit hits the fan.
Ironically, the last time I had an argument with a Euro about American military involvement and defense policy I was in London in 2023, and to my surprise the only person coming to my side of the debate was the lone Frenchman. Pity.
Completely false. Just a counterexample, there are tons of videos of French and European action in the Sahel region where we do exactly that - without war criming all the time like you did with your carpet bombing of "sand n-ggers". You are so far up your own ass for a country that failed miserably in Afghanistan and Iraq.
>Everyone, with some notable exceptions, in this "alliance" threw a hissy fit about overflights originating from bases across Europe that my country built to keep your country safe from the Soviets.
Yeah, and you don't see the problem with using these bases to launch an attack against another country without asking us if we were on board? The Iranians are not the Soviets. NATO is supposed to be a defensive alliance, not your private army. And your idiot leader wants to invade Greenland by force! When you already have bases there for decades!
>let you all figure out how to deal with IRBMs
You love nuclear proliferation now? You think we don't have nukes or we can't build more nukes? You think it is in the USA's best interest to have more countries with nukes everywhere? Are you dumb or do you have a death wish?
>You people voted for this*
You people voted for the GWOT. You people voted for Trump who clearly wanted more wars and more war crimes.
>Best I could find on what you're referring to for the Vance insult
You are brain damaged if that's all you can find. And "hasn't fought a war in 30 or 40 years" isn't even remotely true, like, at all. You are completely ignorant.
>You love nuclear proliferation now? You think we don't have nukes or we can't build more nukes? You think it is in the USA's best interest to have more countries with nukes everywhere? Are you dumb or do you have a death wish?
I'm talking about Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs), which don't always have nuclear payloads, and which Iran, Russia, and others are desperate to produce at scale and for which Europe has no defense against without the United States. Maybe you mean that Europe would simply launch their own strategic weapons in response? Perhaps, though given the completely schizophrenic political situation there I doubt any government would approve the launch of nuclear weapons.
I'm happy to read any particular you quote you think was specifically offensive, though all I've been able to find has been something I'd book as "true, but perhaps touches a nerve with our friends across the pond". We can yell at each other back and forth but that doesn't change the reality that Europe cannot defend itself in current state without the United States, and policy makers in my country are a) acknowledging this fact and b) wanting that to change.