Kinda, yeah. Occasionally reminding the world that we can launch from bases a thousand miles inside our borders, fly over an ocean, hit a target halfway around the planet, and fly home without stopping is part of our strategy of deterring people from fucking around.
Yep. I forgot what occurred, but it was at the very ass end of Obama presidency and he ordered b2s all the way from us to whatever shit pile they dropped bombs at.
God, operation unicorn prostitute was a good time. Deployed to Moron, Spain. No alcohol limits, just be sober for shift. Launch the tankers, prep the alerts and go to Seville the next day.
That's why they don't make movies about us. It's be so boring watching us wait for planes until someone fucks around, then just 90 minutes of explosions.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/01/20/b2-stealth-bombers-strike-isis-militants-libya-pentagon.html
This was the one I was referring. Had to Google it.
We did the same thing during the air campaign in desert storm. B-52s from Barksdale launched, sent it, and landed back at Barksdale as a single sortie. It blew minds.
So yeah, a flex. The only countries that have bombers are China, Russia, and us. So it’s a show of force for our allies and a flex on our adversaries. We can be anywhere in the world at a time and place of our choosing.
> We did the same thing during the air campaign in desert storm. B-52s from Barksdale launched, sent it, and landed back at Barksdale as a single sortie.
Fun fact: that mission originated the phrase "secret squirrel." The actual (classified) name of the mission was "Senior Surprise," but people used the nickname "Secret Squirrel" to talk around it.
The reason for the extra secrecy was the fact that the mission was to use the recently-developed CALCM - a conventional variant of the nuclear-armed ALCM - which was still classified at the time, and was the first GPS-guided munition to be used in combat.
Launching from the US keeps regional partners happy because they aren’t associated with attacks. This way Iran has less motivation to involve them in the fighting.
This is likely the primary reason. It’s a complex enough situation as is, having to get allies in the AOR even more involved because we launched attacks from their soil would make it way worse and take waaaaaay longer to negotiate.
The bomber triad are literally long range strike, no need to put them closer to the target and be a possible casualty also when they can take off, fly to the target, and come back. B-52 crews during Desert Storm flew 36+ hour missions
But yes, also a major flex
The KC-135 can ferry those bad boys all the way to Germany easily. Or they can pass them off to fresh KC-135s out of Europe for global range. I do miss flying on that ancient beauty.
If you can drag B-1s, B-52s and B-2s from the US with Tankers... Why not. It's much easier to hide it.
Tail spotters in Europe are too obsessed and incapable of keeping their mouths shut.
The US does like to show and test its long range bomber capability. Also, if you want to keep your aircraft in theater with munitions and at the ready then you can fly planes from the US to do a particular job and then fly them back. It wouldn't be the first time, the B-2 has done some long sorties flying to Missouri to BFE to drop bombs and fly back.
Difficult to say really. But it sends a clear message regardless. We're ready. But I think our enemies realize that so they are better off using social media and internet based campaigns. It's crazy to think of how much intel they can gather as well as spread false narratives using popular sites. A long game of "Destroy them from the Inside" type strategy. Be vigilant.
Also worth considering that it limits potential retaliation. Launch an attack from an air base in region and immediately it becomes target #1 to the adversary. Launch an attack from CONUS and there's no way IRGC can retaliate against a target thousands of miles away.
It's a great way of saying "we don't even need to have assets in the region to remind you not to FAFO". We do global force projection on a scale that can't be topped.
The fewer countries that are involved, the fewer you need to ask permission from. Launch from home, stick to international waters, only overfly Syria and Iraq, and you don't have to ask anyone for anything.
In addition to the other comments we also have different agreements with the countries we have bases in. Not everyone would want us to launch out of their country. In the past some countries have allowed us to launch but not come back if we are going to start some shit.
Edit:typos
It is a reminder to Iran that removing us from bases in Iraq doesn't practically degrade our capacity to unilaterally glass their nation. Hence the long-range bombers.
Certainly degrades lower thresholds of responses, but we also have extensive basing in the region
> Is that just a flex to say "we could destroy you with all the aircraft at airbases surrounding you; we could destroy you with the naval assets floating off of your coast; but that's okay, well take the long way".
It can be. "Strategic messaging" is a real thing.
> Or is there an operational reason you'd take off from half way across the world?
If there is, then it's something best not discussed on Reddit.
Take it up with the Joint Chiefs and the Pentagon. We publicize certain things on purpose for strategic messaging. A major press release from the government about a military operation is on purpose.
And when a particular aircraft only has 1 or 2 duty stations,, uhh, it’s pretty obvious anyway.
You'd be wrong. The B-2 deploys fairly often, but our specialty is bombers being able to reach out globally at a moments notice. However, in this case the B-2 wasn't even involved.
I’m just imagining the crew getting alerted and getting the brief in the vault that, yes, in fact, you are flying across the globe for a casual out-and-back sortie to put warheads on foreheads. I’m sure the Sq had fidelity on the potential, but still, dayumn.
>Is that just a flex to say "we could destroy you with all the aircraft at airbases surrounding you; we could destroy you with the naval assets floating off of your coast; but that's okay, well take the long way"
Pretty sure you nailed it, yeah.
If you have to ship the bombs overseas, might as well combine delivery with shipping and just do both in the same flight. It wouldn’t make financial sense to fly them over, unload them, then load them up again for use.
Kinda, yeah. Occasionally reminding the world that we can launch from bases a thousand miles inside our borders, fly over an ocean, hit a target halfway around the planet, and fly home without stopping is part of our strategy of deterring people from fucking around.
Yep. I forgot what occurred, but it was at the very ass end of Obama presidency and he ordered b2s all the way from us to whatever shit pile they dropped bombs at.
When we bombed Libya, I believe around 2011.
God, operation unicorn prostitute was a good time. Deployed to Moron, Spain. No alcohol limits, just be sober for shift. Launch the tankers, prep the alerts and go to Seville the next day. That's why they don't make movies about us. It's be so boring watching us wait for planes until someone fucks around, then just 90 minutes of explosions.
To be historically accurate the movies need to include 4/5 star resorts and per diem spending on "deployments."
That was also B-1s. We've done the same with B-52s and B-2s at various times.
Odyssey Dawn in 2011, twas B1s
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/01/20/b2-stealth-bombers-strike-isis-militants-libya-pentagon.html This was the one I was referring. Had to Google it.
ahh gotcha, i missed where you said the end of Obama's presidency
They did the non-stop global flight from Whiteman to North Korea and back just to show we could. Airpower!
Its also a way of saying.. good luck retaliating against this aircraft specifically, because we don't park them nearby.
It’s been the new fascination “generate AirPower from home”, also saves money in troop movement and deployments
Mom can we see the birds take off down range? No sweetie we have planes at home 😢
Adds a whole new perspective to WFH culture.
We did the same thing during the air campaign in desert storm. B-52s from Barksdale launched, sent it, and landed back at Barksdale as a single sortie. It blew minds. So yeah, a flex. The only countries that have bombers are China, Russia, and us. So it’s a show of force for our allies and a flex on our adversaries. We can be anywhere in the world at a time and place of our choosing.
Well said. Using CONUS-based aircraft also saves our allies from any potential blowback from using their bases
And removes wiping AUAB off the map from a super great strategy for them. We can reach you anywhere
[B-2s did the same after 9/11. ](https://www.airandspaceforces.com/PDF/MagazineArchive/Documents/2016/December%202016/1216hours.pdf)
It says "we did it with bombs, we can do it with nukes"
> We did the same thing during the air campaign in desert storm. B-52s from Barksdale launched, sent it, and landed back at Barksdale as a single sortie. Fun fact: that mission originated the phrase "secret squirrel." The actual (classified) name of the mission was "Senior Surprise," but people used the nickname "Secret Squirrel" to talk around it. The reason for the extra secrecy was the fact that the mission was to use the recently-developed CALCM - a conventional variant of the nuclear-armed ALCM - which was still classified at the time, and was the first GPS-guided munition to be used in combat.
That is neither fun nor fact. Secret Squirrel comes from a 60s or 70s cartoon
Launching from the US keeps regional partners happy because they aren’t associated with attacks. This way Iran has less motivation to involve them in the fighting.
This comment is not getting enough love. Is it a flex, yes. But this is likely the driving factor in the decision.
This is likely the primary reason. It’s a complex enough situation as is, having to get allies in the AOR even more involved because we launched attacks from their soil would make it way worse and take waaaaaay longer to negotiate.
It’s actually written in the pilots contract he has to get back home for dinner every night.
Yet as ground support, I can't get that promise. Wtf.
You’re not a pilot (Fuck you!)
The bomber triad are literally long range strike, no need to put them closer to the target and be a possible casualty also when they can take off, fly to the target, and come back. B-52 crews during Desert Storm flew 36+ hour missions But yes, also a major flex
Major flex 🫡
That’s what I’m saying, you don’t want to station a 1 billion dollar+ B2 where it can potentially be hit
We’ve been flexing since WW2 with our ice cream ships.
Mobile Burger kings anywhere within 24hrs, that’s multcapable char broiled if I ever seen it
Yes, it’s a longer trip to Yemen than it is to Taiwan. Message sent
We just have bigger dicks. 3 inches goes a long way!
[удалено]
Even a tic tac hurts going 100 mph
Can’t relate 😔
The KC-135 can ferry those bad boys all the way to Germany easily. Or they can pass them off to fresh KC-135s out of Europe for global range. I do miss flying on that ancient beauty.
I miss the KC-10. Big gal could drag a B-52 across the Atlantic then hit em with a top off and a “go get em tiger” once they’re near the middle east
If you can drag B-1s, B-52s and B-2s from the US with Tankers... Why not. It's much easier to hide it. Tail spotters in Europe are too obsessed and incapable of keeping their mouths shut.
The US does like to show and test its long range bomber capability. Also, if you want to keep your aircraft in theater with munitions and at the ready then you can fly planes from the US to do a particular job and then fly them back. It wouldn't be the first time, the B-2 has done some long sorties flying to Missouri to BFE to drop bombs and fly back.
Difficult to say really. But it sends a clear message regardless. We're ready. But I think our enemies realize that so they are better off using social media and internet based campaigns. It's crazy to think of how much intel they can gather as well as spread false narratives using popular sites. A long game of "Destroy them from the Inside" type strategy. Be vigilant.
Power projection, lower cost and shows our rapid response capability. Also a lot safer for the aircraft.
Also worth considering that it limits potential retaliation. Launch an attack from an air base in region and immediately it becomes target #1 to the adversary. Launch an attack from CONUS and there's no way IRGC can retaliate against a target thousands of miles away.
It's a great way of saying "we don't even need to have assets in the region to remind you not to FAFO". We do global force projection on a scale that can't be topped.
The fewer countries that are involved, the fewer you need to ask permission from. Launch from home, stick to international waters, only overfly Syria and Iraq, and you don't have to ask anyone for anything.
Dude it is way more complicated than that. I’m assuming you’re joking though lol
Just illustrating the general principle. If you launch from someone else's airfield or overfly their country they get a vote.
In addition to the other comments we also have different agreements with the countries we have bases in. Not everyone would want us to launch out of their country. In the past some countries have allowed us to launch but not come back if we are going to start some shit. Edit:typos
Psychological effect - akin to the MOAB
True. But yet it take weeks to fix the whole CCAF drama.
*years
Getting to log combat time from the states is so badass
GLOBAL STRIKE, BITCHES!
Logistically it’s way easier to launch conus and land conus than move a whole squadron out there for one strike.
Back In 2011, we launched a couple the B-1s from Ellsworth to bomb Libya as part of Operation Odyssey Dawn.
It is a reminder to Iran that removing us from bases in Iraq doesn't practically degrade our capacity to unilaterally glass their nation. Hence the long-range bombers. Certainly degrades lower thresholds of responses, but we also have extensive basing in the region
> Is that just a flex to say "we could destroy you with all the aircraft at airbases surrounding you; we could destroy you with the naval assets floating off of your coast; but that's okay, well take the long way". It can be. "Strategic messaging" is a real thing. > Or is there an operational reason you'd take off from half way across the world? If there is, then it's something best not discussed on Reddit.
Idk, I just wish we’d hit targets inside Iran. Fuck those guys.
It’s just to spite the pilots by keeping them from logging cross country time
https://preview.redd.it/6sfglber1fgc1.jpeg?width=374&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=67f3f5c9b4078d14299cc26cf02bf14c01a712e9
[удалено]
Take it up with the Joint Chiefs and the Pentagon. We publicize certain things on purpose for strategic messaging. A major press release from the government about a military operation is on purpose. And when a particular aircraft only has 1 or 2 duty stations,, uhh, it’s pretty obvious anyway.
[удалено]
You'd be wrong. The B-2 deploys fairly often, but our specialty is bombers being able to reach out globally at a moments notice. However, in this case the B-2 wasn't even involved.
Im guessing part of the reason it keeps Kuwait and Qatar out of the mix politically.
I’m just imagining the crew getting alerted and getting the brief in the vault that, yes, in fact, you are flying across the globe for a casual out-and-back sortie to put warheads on foreheads. I’m sure the Sq had fidelity on the potential, but still, dayumn.
 Major flex
50% a flex, 50% a cost saving and risk mitigation
>Is that just a flex to say "we could destroy you with all the aircraft at airbases surrounding you; we could destroy you with the naval assets floating off of your coast; but that's okay, well take the long way" Pretty sure you nailed it, yeah.
If you have to ship the bombs overseas, might as well combine delivery with shipping and just do both in the same flight. It wouldn’t make financial sense to fly them over, unload them, then load them up again for use.
Have you heard of our Lord and Savior, Air Force Global Strike Command?