In a comment, John K points out that:
In any case, military fighter aircraft have to avoid icing, which is kind of odd for those that are considered "all-weather" interceptors..
This, to me, raises the question of "why would you omit wing anti-ice from a supposedly 'all-weather' aircraft?" Especially on a larger fighter like a F-15 or Su-27, it seems to me that the weight penalty for a couple of piccolo tubes, two butterfly valves, and a bit of extra bleed ductwork would be fairly minimal relative to the weight of the aircraft and payload, or am I wrong on that? Or are there aerodynamic or engine-performance reasons that prohibit fighter jets from using bleed-air anti-icing, or some other anti-ice system for that matter? I've also heard the saw that "fighters don't need anti-ice because they can simply fly fast enough to use ram rise to deal with icing", but could there be other reasons they couldn't fly in icing, such as not having heated pitot/static systems or inlet anti-ice functions?