US and Israel strike Iran. (title edited by MNHQ at request of the OP)

[Twiglets1]

Israel attacked Iran early on Saturday morning, saying it had “launched a pre-emptive strike against Iran to remove threats to the state of Israel,” according to a military spokesman.

Israel closed its airspace and declared a state of emergency, in anticipation of
Iranian drone and missile strikes in response.

Explosions were heard in Tehran on Saturday, Iranian media reported.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/28/israel-launches-attack-on-iran-as-explosions-heard-in-tehran

😮

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/04/britain-not-ruling-out-future-strikes-iran-missile-sites

Oh.

Yes when you lose the that surely they can take out production sites.

It's not your father's B-52. Thanks to sensor upgrades and more sophisticated munitions, it does everything from close air support to ocean surveillance.

https://www.barksdale.af.mil/Units/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/637065/b-52-stratofortress/

And the B-1s are also in the fight.

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/b-1-bomb-iran-fighters-hardest-hits/

We're off at a tangent now, forgive me, but carpet bombing is way down the list of things the B-52 is expected to do.

These days it'll struggle in a contested environment but they can carry a lot of payload/stay on station for a long time and verses low observable types is cheap to operate, so they remain in service.

Those operating in the strategic role are Air Launched Cruise Missile dispensers, others have been used when circumstances permit for "plinking" selected small targets with JDAM and other stand off muntions, and then there's a whole chunk of the force that has a maritime role...there were even stories of them doing Close Air Support in Afghanistan

Now I think a few might have been used dropping sticks on Tora Bora, so it may be a tertiary minus minus....role that they have retained just in case, but it's not their reason to be.

If they are sending B-52’s and B1’s then that means they have eliminated all of Iran’s air defenses.
They don’t need to rely of stealth aircraft and can send the older planes into combat over Iran.

Yes, thanks to the Israelis, it’s a permissive environment.

Will the Kurds draw out IRGC troops out so that they become targets for aerial attacks I wonder?

If the Kurds declare an independent territory within Iran and attempt to hold it by force of arms, it's more likely that the Artesh (Iran's regular army) would attempt to displace them. The Artesh defends Iranian territory, and the IRGC defends the regime.

Thanks for that. So Iran would probably want to prioritise the regime stating in some form rather than territory loss?

https://news.sky.com/story/iran-war-the-us-is-burning-through-ammo-its-enemies-will-be-taking-notice-13514896

Link to an piece elaborating on weapons stocks and cost of intercepting Irans attacks.

In this situation wouldn’t you get the skies, take out munition sites and some leaders and then there’s the army situation. The latter must depend on how willing they are, maybe they are more united with Iranians that currently ordered not to be.

No, they would defend both at once. While they overlap at a strategic level, each organization has a different focus. The IRGC would let the Artesh deal with the Kurds and only step in if they needed help.

Some thoughts on this. There is good evidence that the U.S. and Israel have greatly degraded Iran's ability to use long-range fires. According to the Pentagon, the number of launches per day has dropped by 86% since the first day of the war. In retrospect, Iran's building "missile cities" to house their stockpiles was a poor choice, because their locations are revealed every time they fire from them. Thus, what should be a mobile target becomes a static target. More here:

Iran’s Underground ‘Missile Cities’ Have Become One of Its Biggest Vulnerabilities - U.S. and Israeli aircraft are circling over the subterranean bases, destroying missile launchers as they emerge to fire

The entrances to the tunnels and caves are also being attacked and collapsed, sealing the remaining missiles and drones inside.

The U.S. (and others) need to do more to expand munitions production, and that's already underway here. Strategically, it's a question of deterrence. Political will counts for as much as military capability. The U.S. can choose to build more weapons, but it won't matter if our adversaries conclude that we won't accept the risk of using them. And Iran's missile production rates are far higher than our production rates for air defense weapons, so the longer you wait, the worse the potential shortfall becomes.

Thank you.

Interesting post/article.

Thanks for this, makes sense.

Except there is the Caspian sea, and the Russian factories that are churning out these cheap drones by the thousands. Are the US going to start bombing the Russian Caspian Navy ? Take out all the roads from the north of Iran to the South ? Take out every bit of Tarmac long enough to launch a drone from.

The ammo numbers issue is very real.

Are they providing much?

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-has-not-requested-russian-arms-supplies-kremlin-says-2026-03-05/

No idea. But the numbers thing is still valid. The supply system is in place. It just needs reversed. From Russia to Iran instead of Iran to Russia.

Ok so going by a quick read they’re not.

What are you hoping will happen?

I hope the Iranian people get freedom from their authoritarian government.

Given this time lag thing, perhaps the best thing would be those attacked by Iran rn help take out munitions quickly.

What do pp think

One practical problem here is given Iran's size most countries armed forces literally won't have the reach or ordnance needed to clobber targets well away from places where they are based like the Gulf airfields..

Here or elsewhere yesterday there was some discusson about the use or not of B-52s...if you want a mobile weapons dispenser able to stay on station for hours and then be able to be called up to hit selected targets such as tunnel entrances with hefty guided ordnance then the 52 is an ideal candidate....

Yes planes not on foot. Just go all in to take out munitions as otherwise the problem below kicks in.

Ah yes, I did actually mean most allied air forces but missed it - fat thumbs etc...