In exercises, our military tends to overstate the capabilities of the enemy and understate the capability of our forces, for several reasons. Not only do they want to wargame worst case scenarios in order to prepare for them, but funding at times can depend on the outcome of exercises. Do we buy 10 or 20 of fill-in-the-blank weapons platform? The exercise indicates we need at least 20.
The MSM, always ready to denigrate the American military, is only too willing to pick up the refrain, thus we hear how the Afghani Mujahadeen defeated the great Russian army and will surely be the end of us, Saddam's vaunted Republican guard will rule the desert and now, the elite Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which was soundly defeated by the Republican Guard in the Iran-Iraq War, will nevertheless spell doom for the US Navy. They've got missiles now, so it's straight to Davy Jones' locker for us.
Might suicide attacks have some limited success? Perhaps, very limited. But keeping open the sea lines of communication throughout the Asian littoral is one of the primary missions of the US Navy. They've been wargaming this upcoming fight for decades (I should know) and the lesson of the USS Cole and the Iranian hit on an Israeli corvette last summer have not been lost. Bet on the US Navy.
That bias exists for a number of reasons, historic and political, in spite of the fact that modern missile technology makes capital ships extremely vulnerable in a hypothetical conflict against an Iran-class opponent. The small area and shallowness of the Persian Gulf amplifies the advantage enjoyed by the Iranians.
Very succinctly put!
I remember before Gulf War I, some analyst was on the tube describing how the Iraqi tanks would dig into the desert and pick off the Americans one by one. He sure wowed the talking heads with his blather.
As we know, it did not work as planned. Those tanks were sitting ducks and got blasted to kingdom come.