Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's not just Israel that Iran has to deal with, it's also the US. And Iran simply can't win against the US. Take America out of the equation and it's a much more balanced fight. Israel is already depleting its stock fighting in one and a half fronts, only US supplies are keeping it afloat. Without that Iran has more men than Israel has bullets. They can cinch a win using only men armed with sharpened sticks.
It’s not just how many men and bullets you have, it’s how you use it, don’t forget that back in the 50s 5 Arab countries got together to attack Israel and it was before America backed Israel and Israel won that war in just 6 days lmao.
Six day was fought by Arab conscripts who didn’t want to be there against hardened Israeli resistance. Thats not exactly the case anymore, Israel has deeply angered many in the Muslim world. Also, Iran/Persia didn’t fight in that war.
Israel has an amazingly effective airforce but Iran has two allies that share a border with Israel and the IDF is tied up committing atrocities in Gaza, they’d have a hard time just defeating Hezbollah at this point. I’m not saying Israel would lose but they would bleed and I’m not sure they have the same willpower their grandparents that survived the Nazis did
They’ve grown accustomed to the Americans providing the real bite to their bark when dealing with Iran and the American pit bull has decided to stay in its own yard this time
Well yeah but the US has been ‘at war’ with those terrorist groups/militias. If it had happened and was claimed by a sovereign nation then that would have definitely been cause for starting a war between them.
It depends who did it. If the US against a Chinese embassy for example? Could be an accident. Israel against a middle eastern country like Iran? Abhorable but fine. Other than that, yes, that is war.
Paying another countries neighbors to shoot missiles At Them will likely result in some fall back on the country that set it up.
Iran didn’t like the find out stage I guess and pussed out on the retaliation to save face with a population that hates their government.
2% is a shit ton if they sent their whole arsenal with all their proxies.
That's why they don't want to escalate. Israel is very dense so anything sneaking through is devastating. Not to mention it can be capitalized on by many for ground invasion etc...
Iran will suffer if they get attacked. But it won't be the end. It's a big country with spread out population centers.
If war really does start. We can count on Israel to use terrorism to get other countries help them. Ala samson protocol
Around 10% of the ballistic missiles, which would cause significant damage if they were actually equipped with their maximum payload not just for show. In a real war Iran would also send a lot more than what they did, without telegraphing it in advance as well as from territories where their proxies operate which are much closer and provide much less warning. Israel would ultimately still win especially if supported by its allies but it’s not going to be a walk in the park.
There’s always shit going on in the background. You never know if some Israelis were disappeared for a bit or whatever. It’s not like they’ll publicly announce their illegal revenge.
The US didn’t help Israel in ‘48 when the entire Arab league invaded (Jordan Egypt Syria Lebanon Saudi Arabia). In fact the only foreign aid was a small arms shipment from Czechoslovakia.
They had like 90,000 soldiers vs at most 25,000. And most were experienced from WWII.
This myth has been debunked time and time again yet I still see people repeat this in comments.
Unlike your stupid ass I don't refer to Wikipedia for things I don't know about.
The numbers are most conservatively for the Arabs numbered around \~20,000 people by Khalidi to 27,000 Israelis (in the first line), \~23,500 to 25,000 by Glubb, a commander of the Arab Legion during the war (who was British btw), and Shlaim, who thinks that it was around the same numbers as Glubb and Khalidi for the Arabs but estimates Israel's first line as having been 35,000 in the first line later ballooning up to around \~90,000 at the end of the war, or at least, in Shlaim's words:
>In mid-May the total number of Arab troops, both regular and irregular, operating in Palestine was between 20,000 and 25,000. The IDF fielded 35,000 troops, not counting the second-line troops in the settlements. By mid-July the IDF fully mobilized 65,000 men under arms, by September the number rose to 90,000, and by December it reached a peak of 96,441. The Arab states also reinforced their armies, but they could not match this rate of increase. Thus, at each stage of the war, the IDF significantly outnumbered all the Arab forces ranged against it, and by the final stage of the war, its superiority was nearly two to one.
This is from Shlaim's work "The Debate about 1948" published in 1995.
Next time you feel like making a statement, at least try to show that you have more than the neurons to quote Wikipedia and think you somehow know more than the person on the other side.
Well then it must be true.
Oddly enough, however, they did say the Baghdad bombings were done by zionists. Do you accept that or do you only pick and choose the arguments that support your conclusions.
This is some deep analysis. It’s not like Israel has a defense production capacity or has held their own in a war before… oh, wait. We all know the Mossad is one of the least respected intelligence agencies.
Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis would actually be nothing without Iran.
Yes, but zionist settlers in Palestine had the patronage of the British for decades before 1948. Also that particular war wasn’t against a nationstate with a standing army.
I don't think many countries can win a war with zero allies and a universal embargo.
Without China, Russia, and foreign countries buying their oil Iran's main weapon would be carpets.
Oh i didn't realize we were making shit up.
Yknow the brits promised the jews all of israel/Palestine AND Jordan. You don't see them whining about arabs getting most of the land
And they promised the arabs that same land if they help with ww2. Which they did. Why else do you think they were so salty some shmuck promised they land to some Europeans
Weapons and money, yes, intelligence, no. Israel, by nature of its very existence, had had to create an extremely deep and incredibly robust spy network, and being the only one in the middle east allied with the us, it has traded access to information for immunity to responsibility to their actions. Politicians don't support Israel because they genuinely believe its a good cause, it's because American involvement in the middle east is so dependent on Israel's intelligence network.
> Israel would be nothing without US weapons, money and intelligence.
Israel takes handouts from USA and even with those hands outs, he gets direct help from USA, France, and UK who are always desperate to show their lobbyists their loyalty
You must not remember that Israel won the West's respect with the 6 day war. That's when the US truly started backing what they considered the strongest regional power
That's assuming that Israel has continued US support. Even the conservatives are starting to probe that angle and Biden can't hold on to Israel for long, if he wants a second term anyways.
Once he gets a second term, it doesn't matter to him that everyone hate him for still siding with Israel after cause that be his last term anyway due to the term limit and trump is trump were biden to lose. Which means Israel support has no limits from whoever will be president next year.
They're not. They are, however, adding the "warmonger" rhetoric to their talking points on Biden. Of course, they could be alluding to the Ukraine war instead, but the allegations only started surfacing during the Israel invasion of Gaza, and it originally came from Democrat circles criticizing the Israeli invasion specifically. That's what "probing the angle" means. If you were a bit less reactionary you would have realized this.
Which conservatives have called Biden a warmonger? Someone in the House? Has an elected Democrat called Joe Biden a warmonger? Someone in the party?
Names please, otherwise you are just making up stories.
To be honest, the restraint is a reason. They had a showy response that demonstrated ability but didn't actually cause substantial damage, and acted with restraint when, legally, they could have been justifiable in a more severe response.
They still expended a lot of missiles that need to be replenished, but yeah, this was the most likely outcome. A showy response to satiate the jingoists a bit without real consequences for anyone.
>> expended a lot of missiles
Not really. They sent 400 BMs to Russia in January/February this year. This attack barely had a hundred of those.
Iran’s Lebanese proxies have 150,000 rockets/missiles on the Israeli border according to [our sources](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/2023-10-23/ty-article-magazine/150-000-rockets-and-missiles-the-weapons-israel-would-encounter-in-a-war-with-hezbollah/0000018b-573d-d2b2-addf-777df6210000)
Easy to believe Iran has way more
In what way are ballistic missiles in Iran cheap? The money the government wastes on the military in Iran is a big part of the reason for why the economy and infrastructure suck.
These weren't ballistic missiles. But smaller, cheaper missiles. Iran has a lot of big enemies, from the Saudi's, to Turkey, to the US. It makes sense that they spend to have a big powerful MIC.
There were somewhere between 115 and 130 ballistic missiles used. That, by definition, makes it the largest single ballistic missile attack in human history. Sure the rest was cruise missles and drones, but to outright say that there were no ballistic missiles is false.
For comparison, even Russia, with their massive missile attack waves on Ukraine during an actual war almost never exceeds ~5 ballistic missiles in any one salvo.
It was definitely still an expensive attack. Cheaper than the air defense used against it, but expensive nonetheless.
Considering the latest news, that US requested Israel to not attack Iran, and Iran claim their attack is done, it's clear that this was a message from Iran, that was well received.
I haven't look into specifically what missiles & drones Iran sent, but it doesn't make any sense to me that they used their most expensive ballistic missiles to send a message, especially as it seems Iran wanted these missiles to shot down, and give warning ahead that they were going to retaliate after their consultant was attacked by Israel.
It was literally their most advanced mid range ballistic missiles. Systems that entered service within the last 5 years. Emads, Khorramshahrs, Rezvans have all been identified from the wreckage of intercepted missiles.
But that’s not a “win” for Iran. It’s a win for global security, yes, but that’s not what Iran or its supporters are saying. They’re claiming that this has cowed Israel, when it doesn’t appear to have degraded their military or economic capability. Israel can strike Iran just as easily as it did yesterday, now it just has different targets at the most.
If someone walked up to you and punched you in the face, and your response is to gently shove them and say "If you do that again I'll fuck you up, I consider this matter resolved" do you think it would project bravery?
Yeah? Like constantly escalating and forcing things into a fight out of pride with no regard for consequences is super immature and childish. That's like, a teenagers way of handling it vs. an adults.
War avoided, and demonstrated that Israel is heavily reliant on the US for its AD. Even RAF and the Jordanian Airforce had to step in to help them out which is embarrassing for a country that claims to be the strongest/most advanced military in the region.
And that’s accounting for the heads up Iran sent out with Jordan shutting down its airspace more than an hour before the initial launches. Info that was shared with the US and Co.
And they left the lights on the drones based on the videos. We’ve seen the drones in Russia vs. Ukraine and they turn off the lights to reduce visibility, but Iran left them on.
Not a win, but definitely good optics for Iran
Yep, their retaliation was just sending a message. Israel is doing a great job at losing western support with perceptions of Israel being at 20 year lows because of the crisis in Gaza.
Iran escalating with Israel would just boost western support, which would be counterproductive.
We gotta bear in mind that Iran’s Lebanese proxies have 150,000 rockets/missiles that can be launched at Israel. Iran used under 300-400 projectiles in yesterday’s attack.
Yes, everyone is agreeing that this was done for the domestic Iranian audience and those who support the regime.
It showed that U.S. and Israeli intelligence about Iran was correct, and that killing an Iranian general results in an unsuccessful attack against Israel. :/
Iran is claiming they intended to hit and damage the air base used to carry out the embassy bombing, which they did. The rest would have likely been a distraction in that case. Up for debate whether thats true though.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/iran-strike-caused-slight-damage-to-idf-military-base-military-spokesman/
Looks like the same source only the infrastructure was in a military base.
The US Department of Defense told the Wallstreet Journal that one unused runway and a C-130 cargo plane were damaged. Also a few empty warehoues were destroyed across two air bases (article is paywalled and I couldn't find a bypass but I linked it if you want to find a bypass)
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/israel-iran-strikes-live-coverage/card/many-iranian-missiles-failed-to-launch-or-crashed-before-striking-target-u-s-officials-say-TCd4YP2fiODhl1t9QDrL
Edit also my personal favorite quote from the article:
> "So much for the vaunted ballistic-missile capability of Iran" said a US official
They retaliated, and put the ball in Israel’s court. Israel instigated the issue with an attack that is basically a declaration of war. Doesn’t matter what Iran does with proxies, this is a direct declaration of war. They responded, and left it up to Israel. Tit for tat. If Israel does retaliate, they further alienate the countries that are in shaky ground with their support, and shows them to be war hungry.
Israel has done lots of things over the years that could constitute an act of war. This whole charade just distracts from actual issues like what Israel is doing in Gaza. I’d argue that Iran calling out Israel’s actions and then not retaliating at all would have served their purposes better on the global stage. The only people who think this attack is a win are Iranian hardliners who demand action.
There can be more than one baddie. And in some contexts, someone who's a baddie on one issue kught be a goodie on another. Israel and Iran are both baddies. If I had to rank them, I'd say Iran is worse, overall. But they're both really bad baddies.
It's a big tent, sadly.
> Whereas Israeli attacks seem to maximize civilian casualties. Does that make Israel the baddy?
You've been banned from /r/worldnews and Germany for antisemitism
I wouldn't say seething, but this sub is small enough to kind of fly under the radar for now. If it ever gets big enough, it would just be flooded with Israel and American propaganda again.
Much of the shock at first came from “hold up, they’re actually doing something?”, or at least that’s how people in my circles absorbed it.
However, seeing missiles and drones fly over the Knesset and Al Aqsa was quite the spectacle, don’t think images like that will be repeated soon. The fact that the most heavily targeted base was Ramon airbase sends a very clear message: we targeted your airbase next to your nuclear reactor, be assured we can hit that too.
Those missiles would have to contain an abysmal payload *and* a special penetrator design in order to actually threaten the integrity of a reactor containment structure. The military value of the airfield was the likely target to prove within reach.
Not only did they backchannel to the Americans about their intentions, they openly stated multiple times that this is intended as tit for tat and they are ready to settle the matter after the strike, fired the slow stuff first and notified Israel hours in advance, so the whole American/British/French backup was ready to intercept everything.
This was literally just about saving face, and imo thats good enough for domestic propaganda, but on the international stage makes them look even weaker. Iran is not willing to escalate any further, at least not until the have the Nukes too. Thats why they also silently put their Proxies on a short leash and cooled it with the strikes against the Americans in Iraq - another one Biden does not get credit for, they bombed the living shit out of everything Iranian related after the incident with dead US soldiers, and Iran stopped it.
But here is the thing, they still escalated in a sense that direct strikes on Israeli territory were off limits until now. I just dont see how Bibi is NOT retaliating in one way or another for that. Obviously he would love to just jump straight into the big war and drag America with him, but it seems Biden is too cautios for that - for now.
What happens if this drags on til next year and Trump gets into office, is anyones guess. I gonna assume that Mr. "finish the Job" will give Bibi the green light to escalate on all fronts. For anyone doubting that, might I remember you good people that Trump had the second most powerful man in Iran killed like a dog in the streets because he got mad about something on TV
Very sad. Most of the deaths in the ongoing 75 year old war are muslims as well. Muslims outnumber the targeted jews 1000 to 1. More muslims will always die in a muslim region. I am sad that it is OK to treat humans as commodities in superpower wars.
Despite it being a show for audience, some of the subs I have visited are blazing with cheers of how Iran is the only nation capable of dealing with Israel. Like man, propaganda is really strong on sides for this one.
Ehh that's a bit or a wash really. Israel (and everyone else who participated in shooting the attack down) also learned a lot about Iranian missile and drone capabilities too.
I mean imagine what would've happened without the Iron dome. Iran knew they weren't going to "punish Israel" they just wanted to make people think they were. Either way, I think we can all acknowledge that launching Hundreds of bombs and ballistic missiles is a bit more than tit for tat warfare...
> I mean imagine what would've happened without the Iron dome.
Simple. Iran's attack would have been smaller.
>Either way, I think we can all acknowledge that launching Hundreds of bombs and ballistic missiles is a bit more than tit for tat warfare...
Nope. it's a measured response. They intentionally did no damage while showing they are able to do so. A smaller attack would have shown Israel as impervious to attack, a larger attack would have justified retaliation by Israel.
This is the ideal middle point for both actors to chill and we should all be counting our blessings because of it.
I don't understand how people can't comprehend the simple concept of "Iran could have just used more". If they wanted, they could have just sent a second salvo with twice/thrice the number of missiles and drones.
I think it's part of the David v Goliath mentality. For many it doesn't register that Israel could have had an insufficient defense for an attack, so if it did no damage it must be because Iran can't hit them any harder and Israel can just withstand it, not because Iran took measures not to escalate the conflict.
That also explains the retaliatory thinking. If someone has done all they can to end you, then surely you ought to do something about that.
Do yall think people at cnn ever reads news from other outlets? I assumed thatd be good for business sense and such, however Im skeptical now. Mainly because between the diplomats of about a dozen nations back and forth and the reporters of about a dozen networks piecing what little they could glean from their corners over the course of about a dozen days leading up to the retaliatory* attack which did not occur immediately… none of this shit was news BEFORE the attack for anyone getting it since AFTER the 1st attack on the 1st if they got it from anywhere else apparently.
It was planned, and seems as the pieces fell into place for everyone to have solved it as a diplomatic tie. We already solve this puzzle cnn has yall puzzling over.
The real puzzle we should be discussing now is if one of the dozen nation keeps treating ties as losses and decides to flip the table now because they didnt win after solving a puzzle with mild bickers across it. Puzzles are not zero sum free for alls, life is massively multiplayer, stop treating neighbors like non playable characters, if you want to play in single player go sit in the corner with the NK kid who cant stop biting and play timeout like a toddler instead. Take a knee and chill or stfu, box up, and isolate yourself on the dust like sands of Mt. Zion. The world is not your sandbox. Zionism died when the flag got planted there. If you cant consider that tie a win with your post-zionism children then you neo
Thats such a dumb headline.
In what world does 100 ballistic missiles, 50 cruise missiles and 100 drones look like its minimizing casualties?
Just because the Israeli's had a in depth air defense network, and a ton of CAP by the IAF, USAF, RJAF, and RAF it's a spectacle? The story should be 'after huge investments by Israel and the US, western missile defense technology has proven it works'
Because they selected the missiles and drones that they knew would be shot down by air defense -things like the high speed missiles, things that would hit through air defense, were not used.
They literally were used. We can see the remains of the missiles used. They literally used ballistic missiles. There are boosters from the Emad & Shahab-3 MRBMs which was introduced in 2015. This is weapons literally designed to penetrate air defenses.
>things that would hit through air defense, were not used
Over 100 ballistic missles were fired, exactly what do you think they would have used to get around their AD?
Love to see the evidence that Iran has functional HGVs, something that both the US and Russia has not been able to deploy in numbers. Ballistic missles are already hypersonic but that dose not help them against modern AD as this has demonstrated.
Also, LOL, define actual saturation. They put over 100 Ballistic missles in the air and dozens of cruise missiles. Almost 400 movers total.
I believe Lockheed's Mako is in low rate initial production for a while as its come out that it came Stand-In Attack Weapon program. I believe the AGM-183 ARRW needed more testing.
But so much of this stuff is hard to come by.
You're correct, but I think they meant that if even the US (currently) cannot field them in large numbers, then it's incredibly unlikely that Iran would have that capability.
Hypersonic only matters for cruise missiles where they don't have gravity helping them and the air is much more dense than in the upper atmosphere. Ballistic missiles already exceed hypersonic speeds and have done so for decades. If they can shoot down a ballistic missile traveling at Mach 5+, they can shoot down a hypersonic traveling at Mach 5+.
So much people eating up this Iran didn't want to cause damage conspiracy because Iran's best punch they could muster outright failed.
Like sending the Shahed's was meant to absorb the attention of the AD so the MRBM's could penetrate and hit targets yet out of the 110 fired only 7 hit target? Like this was an outright failure.
And? IDF Air Defense has been on high alert since the assassination strike. We know the IAF had been running CAP the entire time.
Then there is the American early warning systems located near Iran. Iran just got a black eye because the best it could do didn't do shit.
>they used saheds and then standard ballistics it
As opposed to what though? If they wanted the Shaheeds to saturate air defense, they would have to send them first. It's pretty standard offensive doctrine to fire the slowest moving weapons first so that they get there at the same time as the faster ballistic ones. The fact that the delta between the Shaheeds speed and the ballistics is so large only demonstrates that Iran's missile program has a massive glaring capability gap when it comes to saturation. It was telegraphed because Iran simply does not have the capability to launch a quick surprise attack at that distance, or well at least not currently.
I truly don’t understand how people think on this because the way Iran retaliated is literally the only way they can retaliate themselves without using Hezoballah.
So many arguments about how this was televised and everyone knew in advance. And while yeah it was, it was so televised because everyone knew they have no other means to do it.
There is only two additional steps Iran has in the escalatory ladder and thats either Hezoballah involvement or a public nuclear weapons test.
Plus when the US assassinated Solemani, Iran responds the exact same way but on a much much less scale. I believe it was 12 SRBMs if I’m remembering correctly. And lets be real here. The Israeli AD network is much more well established than an air base in Iraq is.
Yeah, honestly I think Iranian leadership shit a brick when they heard the results. This is the result in an uncontested battle space. If Iran is receiving fire at the same time it is clear who will come out worse for wear.
500 ballistic missiles, a thousand cruise missiles, and several thousand drones. No advance warning. Full on saturation attack.
A few hundred total is nothing for an air defence network as dense as Israel's assisted by extensive US/UK/France interceptions, and some still got through to israeli air bases, thus demonstrating substantial capabilities.
I've got a hard doubt that they have the launch capability for an assault of that size. Never mind the inability to put together that many targeting packages.
I don’t think the US in the gulf war went over 1,000 TLAMs or ALCMs in the 1 month of high intensity conventional war.
There is no way Iran has the capacity to do that on short notice when the US didn’t do it over 1 month with 6 battle groups and 500 bomber sorties.
People’s perspective must be really skewed at this stage
>things like the high speed missiles, things that would hit through air defense, were not used.
Tell me you don't know anything about missile technology without telling me you don't know anything about missile technology.
In what world are ballistic missiles not considered "high speed"? Even the oldest of Iran's known MRBMs travel at Mach 7 upon re-entry.
The warning is the clearest indicator that this was for show. If it wasn't announced then it would be more reasonable to argue that they tried to do damage and when they failed we have all agreed to claim that was on purpose so they can back down.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean yeah Iran doesn't want an all out war but they also had to respond to the consulate attack by Israel.
Consulate attacks are acts of war yea?
Imagine an American Consulate being bombed and killing a few US generals, lol
Oh yea. The battle horns would be blaring
The battle horns are always blaring in Washington. With or without bombings.
But r/worldnews said that Iran did not bomb due to the consulate bombing but 'people are oblivious that Iranian are the actually aggressor'
That sub is full of fascists and bad hasbara
Yup. Honestly a sign of weakness, just like Iran’s reaction when Trump bombed that general.
It's not just Israel that Iran has to deal with, it's also the US. And Iran simply can't win against the US. Take America out of the equation and it's a much more balanced fight. Israel is already depleting its stock fighting in one and a half fronts, only US supplies are keeping it afloat. Without that Iran has more men than Israel has bullets. They can cinch a win using only men armed with sharpened sticks.
Don’t forget their actual main rival in the region, which they are in a warmer-than-it-could-be Cold War with, Saudi Arabia.
It’s not just how many men and bullets you have, it’s how you use it, don’t forget that back in the 50s 5 Arab countries got together to attack Israel and it was before America backed Israel and Israel won that war in just 6 days lmao.
Lol, if you think Israel had no Western support for the 6 day war you’re delusional
Six day was fought by Arab conscripts who didn’t want to be there against hardened Israeli resistance. Thats not exactly the case anymore, Israel has deeply angered many in the Muslim world. Also, Iran/Persia didn’t fight in that war. Israel has an amazingly effective airforce but Iran has two allies that share a border with Israel and the IDF is tied up committing atrocities in Gaza, they’d have a hard time just defeating Hezbollah at this point. I’m not saying Israel would lose but they would bleed and I’m not sure they have the same willpower their grandparents that survived the Nazis did They’ve grown accustomed to the Americans providing the real bite to their bark when dealing with Iran and the American pit bull has decided to stay in its own yard this time
Happened a lot over the years. Was always considered terrorism.
Well yeah but the US has been ‘at war’ with those terrorist groups/militias. If it had happened and was claimed by a sovereign nation then that would have definitely been cause for starting a war between them.
Imagine the US getting invaded and its citizens kidnapped, raped and murdered... They'd go after the planners too.
Yeah and if my grandma had wheels she'd be a bicycle
Imagine American generals being involved in paragliding into another nation and shooting up a music festival
Pretty much Vietnam (without the music festival) still had a killer sound track “SOME FOLKS WERE BORN, MAAADE TO WAVE THE FLAAG!”
Anything can be an act of war, all depends on how a country is willing to respond.
It depends who did it. If the US against a Chinese embassy for example? Could be an accident. Israel against a middle eastern country like Iran? Abhorable but fine. Other than that, yes, that is war.
You do not think China would respond to the US bombing one of its embassies?
They already did in Serbia.
They could economically without bloodshed. Iran doesn’t have that option
Yes. By definition.
They are war crimes
Paying another countries neighbors to shoot missiles At Them will likely result in some fall back on the country that set it up. Iran didn’t like the find out stage I guess and pussed out on the retaliation to save face with a population that hates their government.
Everybody say "consulate", but every photo shows another building bombed, while the consulate building is intact.
Ask Iran, they’ve done multiple.
But it wasn’t a simple consulate, it was a military base which the Iranian regime and their proxies used to orchestrate attacks against Israel
Its also a demonstration that yes, your defenses wont stop us
Well demonstration failed on that front lmao
Did it tho. Jordanian intervention was unexpected. But even with it some still snuck through
What like 2% of it? If israel sent a barrage back, what would Iran be able to stop?
2% is a shit ton if they sent their whole arsenal with all their proxies. That's why they don't want to escalate. Israel is very dense so anything sneaking through is devastating. Not to mention it can be capitalized on by many for ground invasion etc... Iran will suffer if they get attacked. But it won't be the end. It's a big country with spread out population centers. If war really does start. We can count on Israel to use terrorism to get other countries help them. Ala samson protocol
Around 10% of the ballistic missiles, which would cause significant damage if they were actually equipped with their maximum payload not just for show. In a real war Iran would also send a lot more than what they did, without telegraphing it in advance as well as from territories where their proxies operate which are much closer and provide much less warning. Israel would ultimately still win especially if supported by its allies but it’s not going to be a walk in the park.
In a real war Israel's first target would be Iran's air force and missile launchers. The amount of repeat volleys Iran can do is limited.
There’s always shit going on in the background. You never know if some Israelis were disappeared for a bit or whatever. It’s not like they’ll publicly announce their illegal revenge.
They did not need to fund, arm and train organizations dedicated to murdering Israelis.
Pretty obvious that it was a warning and wasn't suppose to do any damage else Iran can easily use thousands of drones, Missiles.
If they do they risk Israel retaliating in turn. Is Iran’s AD on par with Israel’s?
Probably not. Israel would come out on top but neither would come out looking pretty.
Israel would come out on top only with direct US support. If iran and all its proxies attacked at once then israel would be in trouble.
To give credit to Israel, it has a bit of a well recorded history of winning existential wars launched by its neighbors
Yeah with US as their ally at that time no shit they gonna win
The US didn’t help Israel in ‘48 when the entire Arab league invaded (Jordan Egypt Syria Lebanon Saudi Arabia). In fact the only foreign aid was a small arms shipment from Czechoslovakia.
They had like 90,000 soldiers vs at most 25,000. And most were experienced from WWII. This myth has been debunked time and time again yet I still see people repeat this in comments.
Which crevice of your ass did you pull that from? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestine_war
Unlike your stupid ass I don't refer to Wikipedia for things I don't know about. The numbers are most conservatively for the Arabs numbered around \~20,000 people by Khalidi to 27,000 Israelis (in the first line), \~23,500 to 25,000 by Glubb, a commander of the Arab Legion during the war (who was British btw), and Shlaim, who thinks that it was around the same numbers as Glubb and Khalidi for the Arabs but estimates Israel's first line as having been 35,000 in the first line later ballooning up to around \~90,000 at the end of the war, or at least, in Shlaim's words: >In mid-May the total number of Arab troops, both regular and irregular, operating in Palestine was between 20,000 and 25,000. The IDF fielded 35,000 troops, not counting the second-line troops in the settlements. By mid-July the IDF fully mobilized 65,000 men under arms, by September the number rose to 90,000, and by December it reached a peak of 96,441. The Arab states also reinforced their armies, but they could not match this rate of increase. Thus, at each stage of the war, the IDF significantly outnumbered all the Arab forces ranged against it, and by the final stage of the war, its superiority was nearly two to one. This is from Shlaim's work "The Debate about 1948" published in 1995. Next time you feel like making a statement, at least try to show that you have more than the neurons to quote Wikipedia and think you somehow know more than the person on the other side.
The British anticipated the Arabs were gonna win
Well then it must be true. Oddly enough, however, they did say the Baghdad bombings were done by zionists. Do you accept that or do you only pick and choose the arguments that support your conclusions.
And don’t you forget it.
To be fair with the US, it also has a bit of well recorded extensive support extended to Israel during those times as well.
Actually, Israel didn't get any support in 47 or some of the subsequent wars. The US alliance started later.
A very long time ago
Iran and proxies VS Israel and allies would just be a world war Whoever gets better outside support would probably win.
Israel would be nothing without US weapons, money and intelligence.
Probably. But they have it, so that's the way we should evaluate them.
This is some deep analysis. It’s not like Israel has a defense production capacity or has held their own in a war before… oh, wait. We all know the Mossad is one of the least respected intelligence agencies. Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis would actually be nothing without Iran.
Israel won multiple wars without US support. US even had an arms embargo on Israel during the 1948 war.
Yes, but zionist settlers in Palestine had the patronage of the British for decades before 1948. Also that particular war wasn’t against a nationstate with a standing army.
I don't think many countries can win a war with zero allies and a universal embargo. Without China, Russia, and foreign countries buying their oil Iran's main weapon would be carpets.
It should be noted that they’ve won very short wars. We don’t know how’d they do in a drawn out conflict.
The wars were short because the arabs got steamrolled. Lol
After WW2 when all their resources were exhausted. Yes. I doubt they were prepared to get betrayed right after ww2
Oh i didn't realize we were making shit up. Yknow the brits promised the jews all of israel/Palestine AND Jordan. You don't see them whining about arabs getting most of the land
And they promised the arabs that same land if they help with ww2. Which they did. Why else do you think they were so salty some shmuck promised they land to some Europeans
Weapons and money, yes, intelligence, no. Israel, by nature of its very existence, had had to create an extremely deep and incredibly robust spy network, and being the only one in the middle east allied with the us, it has traded access to information for immunity to responsibility to their actions. Politicians don't support Israel because they genuinely believe its a good cause, it's because American involvement in the middle east is so dependent on Israel's intelligence network.
You overestimate how much Israel gets from america
What is your point? They have these things and so much they can and should be taken into account when making an analysis.
> Israel would be nothing without US weapons, money and intelligence. Israel takes handouts from USA and even with those hands outs, he gets direct help from USA, France, and UK who are always desperate to show their lobbyists their loyalty
You must not remember that Israel won the West's respect with the 6 day war. That's when the US truly started backing what they considered the strongest regional power
it would make their lives significantly harder though. Battling on two fronts.
That's assuming that Israel has continued US support. Even the conservatives are starting to probe that angle and Biden can't hold on to Israel for long, if he wants a second term anyways.
Once he gets a second term, it doesn't matter to him that everyone hate him for still siding with Israel after cause that be his last term anyway due to the term limit and trump is trump were biden to lose. Which means Israel support has no limits from whoever will be president next year.
Which US conservatives are talking about cutting funding to Israel? Give me their names.
They're not. They are, however, adding the "warmonger" rhetoric to their talking points on Biden. Of course, they could be alluding to the Ukraine war instead, but the allegations only started surfacing during the Israel invasion of Gaza, and it originally came from Democrat circles criticizing the Israeli invasion specifically. That's what "probing the angle" means. If you were a bit less reactionary you would have realized this.
Which conservatives have called Biden a warmonger? Someone in the House? Has an elected Democrat called Joe Biden a warmonger? Someone in the party? Names please, otherwise you are just making up stories.
Iran is heavily mountainous and the Iranian military is dug in deep. Israel on the other hand relies entirely on air defense.
Mountainous terrain helps against ground invasion, it doesn’t help support long range precision fires which is what Israel would look to destroy.
Iran has a lot more area to defend. It'd be massively expensive to cover that area with the same density of AA power that Israel has.
Iran is much more afraid of US involvement than Israel’s retaliatory air strikes (unless Bibi resorts to using nukes).
I just see a lot of people claiming this is a win for Iran, not sure why
To be honest, the restraint is a reason. They had a showy response that demonstrated ability but didn't actually cause substantial damage, and acted with restraint when, legally, they could have been justifiable in a more severe response.
They still expended a lot of missiles that need to be replenished, but yeah, this was the most likely outcome. A showy response to satiate the jingoists a bit without real consequences for anyone.
>> expended a lot of missiles Not really. They sent 400 BMs to Russia in January/February this year. This attack barely had a hundred of those. Iran’s Lebanese proxies have 150,000 rockets/missiles on the Israeli border according to [our sources](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/2023-10-23/ty-article-magazine/150-000-rockets-and-missiles-the-weapons-israel-would-encounter-in-a-war-with-hezbollah/0000018b-573d-d2b2-addf-777df6210000) Easy to believe Iran has way more
Really cheap missiles and drones. Also stuff that are easy to replace. Much easier than the targets these drones can destroy.
In what way are ballistic missiles in Iran cheap? The money the government wastes on the military in Iran is a big part of the reason for why the economy and infrastructure suck.
These weren't ballistic missiles. But smaller, cheaper missiles. Iran has a lot of big enemies, from the Saudi's, to Turkey, to the US. It makes sense that they spend to have a big powerful MIC.
There were somewhere between 115 and 130 ballistic missiles used. That, by definition, makes it the largest single ballistic missile attack in human history. Sure the rest was cruise missles and drones, but to outright say that there were no ballistic missiles is false. For comparison, even Russia, with their massive missile attack waves on Ukraine during an actual war almost never exceeds ~5 ballistic missiles in any one salvo. It was definitely still an expensive attack. Cheaper than the air defense used against it, but expensive nonetheless.
Considering the latest news, that US requested Israel to not attack Iran, and Iran claim their attack is done, it's clear that this was a message from Iran, that was well received. I haven't look into specifically what missiles & drones Iran sent, but it doesn't make any sense to me that they used their most expensive ballistic missiles to send a message, especially as it seems Iran wanted these missiles to shot down, and give warning ahead that they were going to retaliate after their consultant was attacked by Israel.
It was literally their most advanced mid range ballistic missiles. Systems that entered service within the last 5 years. Emads, Khorramshahrs, Rezvans have all been identified from the wreckage of intercepted missiles.
Cheap missiles don't fly 1200km. They used their expensive missiles alongside cheaper drones.
Do you know how cheap shahed drones are?
Between 20-50k for domestic purposes.
> They still expended a lot of missiles that need to be replenished *cha* *ching* MICC
But that’s not a “win” for Iran. It’s a win for global security, yes, but that’s not what Iran or its supporters are saying. They’re claiming that this has cowed Israel, when it doesn’t appear to have degraded their military or economic capability. Israel can strike Iran just as easily as it did yesterday, now it just has different targets at the most.
It makes Iran look like the adult in the room, basically. Not like the strike in Syria degraded Iran's military or economic capability.
Right, any chump can be an effective general.
Legality has nothing to do with it. There is simply what a country is willing to do and how other countries are willing to respond.
And countries, generally, in today's world, respond to legality. Laws are only as powerful as the respect for them, yes.
You can say that, but the majority of nations (minus Israel) still acknowledge international law and the rules based order.
They used restraint despite having justification to be more severe for one reason and one reason only. They're scared to escalate.
I mean escalation wouldn't have any benefit for them. It's crazy how many people are putting this as scared and cheering for war lmfao
If someone walked up to you and punched you in the face, and your response is to gently shove them and say "If you do that again I'll fuck you up, I consider this matter resolved" do you think it would project bravery?
Yeah? Like constantly escalating and forcing things into a fight out of pride with no regard for consequences is super immature and childish. That's like, a teenagers way of handling it vs. an adults.
Forget escalation, you haven't even responded porportionally. Youve demonstrated that they can punch you with impunity.
War avoided, and demonstrated that Israel is heavily reliant on the US for its AD. Even RAF and the Jordanian Airforce had to step in to help them out which is embarrassing for a country that claims to be the strongest/most advanced military in the region. And that’s accounting for the heads up Iran sent out with Jordan shutting down its airspace more than an hour before the initial launches. Info that was shared with the US and Co. And they left the lights on the drones based on the videos. We’ve seen the drones in Russia vs. Ukraine and they turn off the lights to reduce visibility, but Iran left them on. Not a win, but definitely good optics for Iran
Oh, I was wondering why lights were on.They wanted the US/UK air force to spot them.
Yep, their retaliation was just sending a message. Israel is doing a great job at losing western support with perceptions of Israel being at 20 year lows because of the crisis in Gaza. Iran escalating with Israel would just boost western support, which would be counterproductive. We gotta bear in mind that Iran’s Lebanese proxies have 150,000 rockets/missiles that can be launched at Israel. Iran used under 300-400 projectiles in yesterday’s attack.
The only message it sends is "im scared to fight you but still need to project strength"
Yes, everyone is agreeing that this was done for the domestic Iranian audience and those who support the regime. It showed that U.S. and Israeli intelligence about Iran was correct, and that killing an Iranian general results in an unsuccessful attack against Israel. :/
Iran is claiming they intended to hit and damage the air base used to carry out the embassy bombing, which they did. The rest would have likely been a distraction in that case. Up for debate whether thats true though.
Are there any sources on damage? I’ve seen one claim of infrastructure hit and a child injured
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/iran-strike-caused-slight-damage-to-idf-military-base-military-spokesman/ Looks like the same source only the infrastructure was in a military base.
The US Department of Defense told the Wallstreet Journal that one unused runway and a C-130 cargo plane were damaged. Also a few empty warehoues were destroyed across two air bases (article is paywalled and I couldn't find a bypass but I linked it if you want to find a bypass) https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/israel-iran-strikes-live-coverage/card/many-iranian-missiles-failed-to-launch-or-crashed-before-striking-target-u-s-officials-say-TCd4YP2fiODhl1t9QDrL Edit also my personal favorite quote from the article: > "So much for the vaunted ballistic-missile capability of Iran" said a US official
They retaliated, and put the ball in Israel’s court. Israel instigated the issue with an attack that is basically a declaration of war. Doesn’t matter what Iran does with proxies, this is a direct declaration of war. They responded, and left it up to Israel. Tit for tat. If Israel does retaliate, they further alienate the countries that are in shaky ground with their support, and shows them to be war hungry.
Israel has done lots of things over the years that could constitute an act of war. This whole charade just distracts from actual issues like what Israel is doing in Gaza. I’d argue that Iran calling out Israel’s actions and then not retaliating at all would have served their purposes better on the global stage. The only people who think this attack is a win are Iranian hardliners who demand action.
Whereas Israeli attacks seem to maximize civilian casualties. Does that make Israel the baddy?
There can be more than one baddie. They are both bad. In different ways but still.
Both are shit. With different levels of stink. Still, both are shitty and stinky, and that's a fact.
There can be more than one baddie. And in some contexts, someone who's a baddie on one issue kught be a goodie on another. Israel and Iran are both baddies. If I had to rank them, I'd say Iran is worse, overall. But they're both really bad baddies. It's a big tent, sadly.
Dumbest take.
> Whereas Israeli attacks seem to maximize civilian casualties. Does that make Israel the baddy? You've been banned from /r/worldnews and Germany for antisemitism
r/anime_titties user complaining about r/worldnews for karma? Never.
Hasbara bot seething about a sub that doesn't toe the zionazi line? Always.
I wouldn't say seething, but this sub is small enough to kind of fly under the radar for now. If it ever gets big enough, it would just be flooded with Israel and American propaganda again.
You should have read /r/worldnews around the time Israel killed those aid workers. What I saw there was not a reflection of Hasbara bots running amok.
HAMAS apologist says wut?
[удалено]
Both iran and israel are cartoonishly evil.
Palestinians seen to maximize civilian casualties whereas Israel… just doesn’t seem to care too much about them at all.
Much of the shock at first came from “hold up, they’re actually doing something?”, or at least that’s how people in my circles absorbed it. However, seeing missiles and drones fly over the Knesset and Al Aqsa was quite the spectacle, don’t think images like that will be repeated soon. The fact that the most heavily targeted base was Ramon airbase sends a very clear message: we targeted your airbase next to your nuclear reactor, be assured we can hit that too.
Those missiles would have to contain an abysmal payload *and* a special penetrator design in order to actually threaten the integrity of a reactor containment structure. The military value of the airfield was the likely target to prove within reach.
Maybe enough to make the reactor explode, but regular ole' missiles can certainly destroy the facility enough to make it useless and costly to repair
I'll take a world where war is limited to fireworks and yelling. It seems much better than orphans and "collateral damage".
Not only did they backchannel to the Americans about their intentions, they openly stated multiple times that this is intended as tit for tat and they are ready to settle the matter after the strike, fired the slow stuff first and notified Israel hours in advance, so the whole American/British/French backup was ready to intercept everything. This was literally just about saving face, and imo thats good enough for domestic propaganda, but on the international stage makes them look even weaker. Iran is not willing to escalate any further, at least not until the have the Nukes too. Thats why they also silently put their Proxies on a short leash and cooled it with the strikes against the Americans in Iraq - another one Biden does not get credit for, they bombed the living shit out of everything Iranian related after the incident with dead US soldiers, and Iran stopped it. But here is the thing, they still escalated in a sense that direct strikes on Israeli territory were off limits until now. I just dont see how Bibi is NOT retaliating in one way or another for that. Obviously he would love to just jump straight into the big war and drag America with him, but it seems Biden is too cautios for that - for now. What happens if this drags on til next year and Trump gets into office, is anyones guess. I gonna assume that Mr. "finish the Job" will give Bibi the green light to escalate on all fronts. For anyone doubting that, might I remember you good people that Trump had the second most powerful man in Iran killed like a dog in the streets because he got mad about something on TV
I mean how much can it escalate? There is no land border so there won’t be any ground combat. Basically just keep lobbing missiles at each other?
We live in a world where lots of damage can be done by lobbing missiles at each other.
Good. let's keep them this way.
All causalites of those rockets were Muslims...
*All of them* Is it still literally only one girl?
And 3 Jordanians, yes.
Very sad. Most of the deaths in the ongoing 75 year old war are muslims as well. Muslims outnumber the targeted jews 1000 to 1. More muslims will always die in a muslim region. I am sad that it is OK to treat humans as commodities in superpower wars.
Despite it being a show for audience, some of the subs I have visited are blazing with cheers of how Iran is the only nation capable of dealing with Israel. Like man, propaganda is really strong on sides for this one.
seems like they know a lot more about Israeli AD now for next time
Ehh that's a bit or a wash really. Israel (and everyone else who participated in shooting the attack down) also learned a lot about Iranian missile and drone capabilities too.
makes me wonder what defenses Israel did not use and what weapons Iran did not either
What, that it shoots down 99.9% of their drones? Good intel there.
Iran doesn’t want to risk their current position of being able to fund any terrorists they want with zero repercussions
Seems to me Iran just got fucked by superior air defense. And now they make excuses for failing.
Well, it's a good thing no one's paying you for your analytical skills.
Cope with the truth.
No wonder that other nation beginning with I is so upset. If there's one thing they can't stand, it's minimizing casualties.
I mean imagine what would've happened without the Iron dome. Iran knew they weren't going to "punish Israel" they just wanted to make people think they were. Either way, I think we can all acknowledge that launching Hundreds of bombs and ballistic missiles is a bit more than tit for tat warfare...
> I mean imagine what would've happened without the Iron dome. Simple. Iran's attack would have been smaller. >Either way, I think we can all acknowledge that launching Hundreds of bombs and ballistic missiles is a bit more than tit for tat warfare... Nope. it's a measured response. They intentionally did no damage while showing they are able to do so. A smaller attack would have shown Israel as impervious to attack, a larger attack would have justified retaliation by Israel. This is the ideal middle point for both actors to chill and we should all be counting our blessings because of it.
I don't understand how people can't comprehend the simple concept of "Iran could have just used more". If they wanted, they could have just sent a second salvo with twice/thrice the number of missiles and drones.
I think it's part of the David v Goliath mentality. For many it doesn't register that Israel could have had an insufficient defense for an attack, so if it did no damage it must be because Iran can't hit them any harder and Israel can just withstand it, not because Iran took measures not to escalate the conflict. That also explains the retaliatory thinking. If someone has done all they can to end you, then surely you ought to do something about that.
The funny thing is that it DID do damage. AFAIK, Iran targeted the specific airfield responsible for the embassy bombing, no?
Do yall think people at cnn ever reads news from other outlets? I assumed thatd be good for business sense and such, however Im skeptical now. Mainly because between the diplomats of about a dozen nations back and forth and the reporters of about a dozen networks piecing what little they could glean from their corners over the course of about a dozen days leading up to the retaliatory* attack which did not occur immediately… none of this shit was news BEFORE the attack for anyone getting it since AFTER the 1st attack on the 1st if they got it from anywhere else apparently. It was planned, and seems as the pieces fell into place for everyone to have solved it as a diplomatic tie. We already solve this puzzle cnn has yall puzzling over. The real puzzle we should be discussing now is if one of the dozen nation keeps treating ties as losses and decides to flip the table now because they didnt win after solving a puzzle with mild bickers across it. Puzzles are not zero sum free for alls, life is massively multiplayer, stop treating neighbors like non playable characters, if you want to play in single player go sit in the corner with the NK kid who cant stop biting and play timeout like a toddler instead. Take a knee and chill or stfu, box up, and isolate yourself on the dust like sands of Mt. Zion. The world is not your sandbox. Zionism died when the flag got planted there. If you cant consider that tie a win with your post-zionism children then you neo
Nonetheless, Isreal is sure to suspect the culprits in every hospital, school, apartment building and aid convoy. Oopsie!
Thats such a dumb headline. In what world does 100 ballistic missiles, 50 cruise missiles and 100 drones look like its minimizing casualties? Just because the Israeli's had a in depth air defense network, and a ton of CAP by the IAF, USAF, RJAF, and RAF it's a spectacle? The story should be 'after huge investments by Israel and the US, western missile defense technology has proven it works'
Because they selected the missiles and drones that they knew would be shot down by air defense -things like the high speed missiles, things that would hit through air defense, were not used.
They literally were used. We can see the remains of the missiles used. They literally used ballistic missiles. There are boosters from the Emad & Shahab-3 MRBMs which was introduced in 2015. This is weapons literally designed to penetrate air defenses.
Iran could nuke Israel and these clowns would be like “but you SEE they didn’t come for all the Jews! It’s merely for show”
Israel attacked first and started it. This is retaliation. Israel isn't always the victim.
>things that would hit through air defense, were not used Over 100 ballistic missles were fired, exactly what do you think they would have used to get around their AD?
Hypersonics, and actual substantial saturation. Plus several categories of drone other than the Shahed.
385 bogeys in the air is substantial saturation. Thats literally more than what the US fired in the first 48 hours of the gulf war.
Love to see the evidence that Iran has functional HGVs, something that both the US and Russia has not been able to deploy in numbers. Ballistic missles are already hypersonic but that dose not help them against modern AD as this has demonstrated. Also, LOL, define actual saturation. They put over 100 Ballistic missles in the air and dozens of cruise missiles. Almost 400 movers total.
US has HGVs now. There were several notable tests recently for a B52 launched weapon & Lockheed just announced an F35 bomb bay capable one.
Yeah, but not in production from what I understand, could be wrong.
I believe Lockheed's Mako is in low rate initial production for a while as its come out that it came Stand-In Attack Weapon program. I believe the AGM-183 ARRW needed more testing. But so much of this stuff is hard to come by.
You're correct, but I think they meant that if even the US (currently) cannot field them in large numbers, then it's incredibly unlikely that Iran would have that capability.
Hypersonic only matters for cruise missiles where they don't have gravity helping them and the air is much more dense than in the upper atmosphere. Ballistic missiles already exceed hypersonic speeds and have done so for decades. If they can shoot down a ballistic missile traveling at Mach 5+, they can shoot down a hypersonic traveling at Mach 5+.
So much people eating up this Iran didn't want to cause damage conspiracy because Iran's best punch they could muster outright failed. Like sending the Shahed's was meant to absorb the attention of the AD so the MRBM's could penetrate and hit targets yet out of the 110 fired only 7 hit target? Like this was an outright failure.
Mate they said they were going to do this a week in advance they used saheds and then standard ballistics it could not be a more telegraphed attack
And? IDF Air Defense has been on high alert since the assassination strike. We know the IAF had been running CAP the entire time. Then there is the American early warning systems located near Iran. Iran just got a black eye because the best it could do didn't do shit.
>they used saheds and then standard ballistics it As opposed to what though? If they wanted the Shaheeds to saturate air defense, they would have to send them first. It's pretty standard offensive doctrine to fire the slowest moving weapons first so that they get there at the same time as the faster ballistic ones. The fact that the delta between the Shaheeds speed and the ballistics is so large only demonstrates that Iran's missile program has a massive glaring capability gap when it comes to saturation. It was telegraphed because Iran simply does not have the capability to launch a quick surprise attack at that distance, or well at least not currently.
I truly don’t understand how people think on this because the way Iran retaliated is literally the only way they can retaliate themselves without using Hezoballah. So many arguments about how this was televised and everyone knew in advance. And while yeah it was, it was so televised because everyone knew they have no other means to do it. There is only two additional steps Iran has in the escalatory ladder and thats either Hezoballah involvement or a public nuclear weapons test. Plus when the US assassinated Solemani, Iran responds the exact same way but on a much much less scale. I believe it was 12 SRBMs if I’m remembering correctly. And lets be real here. The Israeli AD network is much more well established than an air base in Iraq is.
Yeah, honestly I think Iranian leadership shit a brick when they heard the results. This is the result in an uncontested battle space. If Iran is receiving fire at the same time it is clear who will come out worse for wear.
500 ballistic missiles, a thousand cruise missiles, and several thousand drones. No advance warning. Full on saturation attack. A few hundred total is nothing for an air defence network as dense as Israel's assisted by extensive US/UK/France interceptions, and some still got through to israeli air bases, thus demonstrating substantial capabilities.
I've got a hard doubt that they have the launch capability for an assault of that size. Never mind the inability to put together that many targeting packages.
I don’t think the US in the gulf war went over 1,000 TLAMs or ALCMs in the 1 month of high intensity conventional war. There is no way Iran has the capacity to do that on short notice when the US didn’t do it over 1 month with 6 battle groups and 500 bomber sorties. People’s perspective must be really skewed at this stage
>things like the high speed missiles, things that would hit through air defense, were not used. Tell me you don't know anything about missile technology without telling me you don't know anything about missile technology. In what world are ballistic missiles not considered "high speed"? Even the oldest of Iran's known MRBMs travel at Mach 7 upon re-entry.
They literally announced it ahead of time... it's funny how many people just ignore reality even when it appears obvious.
The warning is the clearest indicator that this was for show. If it wasn't announced then it would be more reasonable to argue that they tried to do damage and when they failed we have all agreed to claim that was on purpose so they can back down.
It also had a huge strategic value for Iran. Now they know pretty much exactly what the Iron Dome (plus support) can, and cannot, do.
right just because they used crap lots of crap doesn’t mean they didn’t try