War with Iran

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
109,512
33,034
113
I agree it's Frankie trying to bloat the number of US killed, considering they've yet to put boots on the ground and only using air power. I do believe this would change if boots hit the ground. The number will go up and Americans I believe, will be screaming from every knoock and cranny of the shithole called USA.
I'm just asking why you would trust trump and Hegseth.

 
  • Like
Reactions: crocket

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
26,831
22,524
113
Manipulation of casualty numbers is very common during war though as part of the information warfare.


While casualty figures are often manipulated as part of information warfare, doing so with soldier deaths specifically has become much more difficult in modern conflicts. Unlike civilian casualties which can be harder to verify, military losses occur within structured units, chains of command, and documented deployments.

When troops are deployed “boots on the ground,” their losses tend to leave multiple forms of traceable evidence. Drone footage now routinely captures direct engagements, vehicle strikes, and their aftermath. These clips are rapidly circulated on platforms like Telegram and X, where both sides and outside observers analyze them in near real time.

On top of that, open-source intelligence groups such as Oryx document visually confirmed equipment losses, which indirectly reflect personnel casualties since destroyed tanks, IFVs, and artillery almost always involve crews.

There are also institutional constraints: militaries must account for personnel internally through payroll, unit strength, and next-of-kin notifications. Even if governments delay announcements or underreport figures publicly, large discrepancies become difficult to sustain over time without affecting morale, logistics, and force readiness.

In short, while exact numbers can still be adjusted or delayed, the scale of military deaths is increasingly hard to conceal. Modern surveillance, digital evidence, and independent verification make it far more difficult than in past wars to hide significant troop losses, only to obscure their precise count temporarily.
 

Shaquille Oatmeal

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2023
10,130
11,091
113
While casualty figures are often manipulated as part of information warfare, doing so with soldier deaths specifically has become much more difficult in modern conflicts. Unlike civilian casualties which can be harder to verify, military losses occur within structured units, chains of command, and documented deployments.

When troops are deployed “boots on the ground,” their losses tend to leave multiple forms of traceable evidence. Drone footage now routinely captures direct engagements, vehicle strikes, and their aftermath. These clips are rapidly circulated on platforms like Telegram and X, where both sides and outside observers analyze them in near real time.

On top of that, open-source intelligence groups such as Oryx document visually confirmed equipment losses, which indirectly reflect personnel casualties since destroyed tanks, IFVs, and artillery almost always involve crews.

There are also institutional constraints: militaries must account for personnel internally through payroll, unit strength, and next-of-kin notifications. Even if governments delay announcements or underreport figures publicly, large discrepancies become difficult to sustain over time without affecting morale, logistics, and force readiness.

In short, while exact numbers can still be adjusted or delayed, the scale of military deaths is increasingly hard to conceal. Modern surveillance, digital evidence, and independent verification make it far more difficult than in past wars to hide significant troop losses, only to obscure their precise count temporarily.
There are still many ways to manipulate these counts though.
Underreporting own casualties and inflating enemy losses is standard practice, but more importantly, a lot of what’s cited as “verification” has limits.
Drone footage and OSINT only capture what is visible and released, not total losses.
Equipment tracking doesn’t translate cleanly into personnel casualties, and both sides selectively publish footage that supports their narrative. (Example: The E3 sentry aircraft recently destroyed by an Iranian missile, was reported as "damaged" or having sustained "minor damages").
Internal data like payroll, unit strength, or casualty reporting isn’t publicly accessible in any meaningful way, so it’s not something outsiders can reliably audit in real time.
Reclassification (e.g., missing, accidents) and delayed reporting also create room to shape the narrative.
Bottom line: while it’s harder than before to completely fabricate numbers, it’s still very possible to significantly distort the picture especially in the short to medium term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crocket

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
109,512
33,034
113
There are still many ways to manipulate these counts though.
Underreporting own casualties and inflating enemy losses is standard practice, but more importantly, a lot of what’s cited as “verification” has limits.
Drone footage and OSINT only capture what is visible and released, not total losses.
Equipment tracking doesn’t translate cleanly into personnel casualties, and both sides selectively publish footage that supports their narrative. (Example: The E3 sentry aircraft recently destroyed by an Iranian missile, was reported as "damaged" or having sustained "minor damages").
Internal data like payroll, unit strength, or casualty reporting isn’t publicly accessible in any meaningful way, so it’s not something outsiders can reliably audit in real time.
Reclassification (e.g., missing, accidents) and delayed reporting also create room to shape the narrative.
Bottom line: while it’s harder than before to completely fabricate numbers, it’s still very possible to significantly distort the picture especially in the short to medium term.
Agreed, Hegseth publicly refuses to say how many have died.


Their bases have been hit hard and they won't admit it either.

 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
31,352
8,788
113

Shaquille Oatmeal

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2023
10,130
11,091
113
This:
"Anybody who thinks that the US has a technological upper hand, and that American marines are somehow tougher than the Persian Revolutionary Guards is really crazy."
People seem to think that technological superiority is everything and makes America unbeatable.
If anything, these latest wars have shown us, it is that numerical superiority and morale trumps technological superiority, in asymmetric wars of attrition.
 

mellowjello

Well-known member
Jan 11, 2017
3,482
1,865
113
This:
"Anybody who thinks that the US has a technological upper hand, and that American marines are somehow tougher than the Persian Revolutionary Guards is really crazy."
People seem to think that technological superiority is everything and makes America unbeatable.
If anything, these latest wars have shown us, it is that numerical superiority and morale trumps technological superiority, in asymmetric wars of attrition.
Sometimes the smartest guy in the room has to play dumb to get ahead, you don't put your brain on full display. Same with warfare, just because you're the strongest you don't show your full hand.

As much as Iran may have been underestimated, I'm sure the U.S. have more than meets the eye. People get wrapped up in wishful thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaulGoodman777

Shaquille Oatmeal

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2023
10,130
11,091
113
Sometimes the smartest guy in the room has to play dumb to get ahead, you don't put your brain on full display. Same with warfare, just because you're the strongest you don't show your full hand.

As much as Iran may have been underestimated, I'm sure the U.S. have more than meets the eye. People get wrapped up in wishful thinking.
To win, Iran does not have to beat the US. They just have to survive.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
34,005
7,883
113
Sometimes the smartest guy in the room has to play dumb to get ahead, you don't put your brain on full display. Same with warfare, just because you're the strongest you don't show your full hand.

As much as Iran may have been underestimated, I'm sure the U.S. have more than meets the eye. People get wrapped up in wishful thinking.
It doesn't matter. Only boots on the ground wins.
 

Insidious Von

My head is my home
Sep 12, 2007
43,834
10,122
113
Correct, all Iran has to do is follow Vo Nguyen Giap strategy and Iran survives.

I keep hearing the call to send Barron to war. How ridiculous, he's the son of God. Donald Jehovah Trump has more than enough suckers and losers to give up their lives for his glory.

 
Toronto Escorts