9 ms·
99% of Iran's 300 missiles and drones intercepted
- delichon 2y agoLittle damage and > A growing chorus of US congressional leaders are calling for the supplemental aid bill to be passed, with US Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer saying it was the clearest way to help Israel. The $95bn supplemental spending bill includes $14bn for Israel ... This particular attack seems to have been quite successful for Israel. Hopefully that will be part of their retaliation calculation. Everyone loses if this escalates further.
- stareatgoats 2y ago> Everyone loses Not everyone. For every escalation there is a small risktaking contingency that cashes in, all according to their calculations. These cliques are entrenched in their communities, exist on both sides and are dependent on each other to keep the conflict alive. Innocent victims be damned. This is how sectarian conflict can finally engulf the whole world if reason is not allowed to prevail, and these conflictdependent risktakers are not contained.
- mytailorisrich 2y agoMost likely that Iran calibrated this attacking not to cause much damage. They also made clear that this was it. So they had to respond to Israel's attack but they want to avoid further escalation, which probably suits Israel as well.
- mamonster 2y agoYeah, they just want to respond enough to not seem weak, but otherwise Iran is quite happy letting the spotlight be on Gaza. The biggest question now is what Netanyahu will do as retaliation(which he did promise).
- xenospn 2y agoHe won’t do shit. No one wants a war with Iran. They’ll just keep bombing their targets in Syria and Lebanon.
- mytailorisrich 2y agoThat's most likely, indeed.
- tptacek 2y agoCountries outside of Iran are where Iran's military actually operates. The Lebanon embassy strike wasn't a reprisal: they killed the commander of the Quds Force in Lebanon. I think --- unfortunately --- that you're actually quite wrong, and that the Netanyahu administration would be more than happy to be engaged in an open war with Iran (which they would with certainty win, not just because of US support, and not just because the IDF/IAF is much better equipped than the IRGC, but also because the entire rest of the region is locked in an Arab/Persia conflict that is if anything more salient than the one Israel is in). Iran's air assault response here looks surprisingly weak. They telegraphed it in advance, clearly set it up to avoid causing any major civilian disruption, announced "the matter can be deemed concluded", and basically managed to create a giant advertisement for Boeing and for pan-Arab resistance to Iran. Ever since October 7, the vibe I get is that they're trying to Homer themselves back into the hedges as quickly as they can.
- juliusdavies 2y agoIt’s a replay of their Soleimani response which they also telegraphed in advance, only targeted military targets, and also resulted in zero fatalities. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martyr_Soleimani I see a clear message of: “please stop assassinating our generals, and next time we won’t be saying please.”
- kstenerud 2y agoThe West will lose, but Israel won't. America has to support them in case of a full scale war or risk losing even more prestige and influence, which further opens the door for a new world order based on China. Netanyahu knows that once the missiles fly freely, nobody's going to look too closely at Gaza or the West Bank. Meanwhile, in open warfare Israel can pound Iran into dust, sustaining minimal damage in the process. Jordan and Egypt will do their best to stay out of it, and America will be stuck retaliating for anything that hits US troops in Israel via Syria.
- seo-speedwagon 2y agoCrowing about interception rates misses the point. This was Iran’s targeted retaliation to the 1 April embassy bombing. And now there’s reports that Biden is planning a “diplomatic” (not military) response, and will not help Israel attack Iran. The whole settler-colonist thing depends on regional domination to ensure and reassure your settlers that they are safe. It doesn’t look like that’s the case to me. And don’t forget Iran also captured an Israeli-owned ship, reinforcing that they indeed can project power in the Strait of Hormuz. Overall seems like, if anything, a strategic defeat revealing how exposed Israel is.
- jfengel 2y agoThe interception rate is what allows Biden to tell Israel not to reply with force. This is retaliation for Israel's embassy bombing a week ago. More retaliation would provoke even more retaliation. So a high interception rate is about the best we could hope for here. Iran gets to claim they struck back. Israel gets to put the matter to rest. We all get to live one more day. Maybe not two more days, because they will continue to provoke each other. But for the moment, it's not escalating.
- weatherlite 2y agoInterceptions rates certainly matter, if Israel would have been hit hard by this attack you think it wouldn't have mattered? Iran's settler colonialist regime (see what I did there?) is based on terrorizing the neighboring countries (and Ukraine) by proxies using mostly inexpensive drones and missiles. If this strategy has big holes in it yes it does matter.
- catlover76 2y ago[dead]
- PM_me_your_math 2y ago[dead]
- master_crab 2y agoThis seems to have been a completely calibrated response. Everyone knew it was coming. Iran threw a bunch of a cheap drones at Israel with hours of warning. Others have commented the same, but Iran just wanted to give a small slap, step back from the limelight and continue to let Israel politically isolate itself.
- weatherlite 2y agoThey could have done that with 20 drones, why use 300 drones, cruise and ballistic missiles?
- master_crab 2y agoWhy broadcast it ahead of time? They said for weeks they are going to do this. They can do 300 drones because they are cheap. They don’t use the American procurement system to pay 1 mil per drone.
- weatherlite 2y agoBallistic and cruise missiles aren't cheap, they used those as well. I do agree that they didn't want a full fledged war (especially not with the U.S) and even said this before the attack. But I also think they probably expected to be able to do more damage than they did (pretty much no damage at all as it seems)
- master_crab 2y agoYeah they probably expected to be a bit more successful. But we also don’t know the exact numbers of either drones or cruise missiles fired. Now the US is reporting about 200 in total. So it might take a few days to figure out what was involved in the attack
- weatherlite 2y agoMore than 300 according to CNN. But sure, we'll know more in a few days. It was certainly a huge attack though.
- xenospn 2y agoThe big winner here is Israel’s defense industry. An attack of this magnitude is basically a doomsday scenario for most countries, and Israel got off without a scratch.
- xanthor 2y agoWhat happened to people to make them take extraordinary claims by governments at face value? PR is an observable phenomenon.
- jfengel 2y agoIt's not at all unbelievable. Israel and the US have put a ton of work into stopping these relatively slow-moving attack. We've seen similar results in Ukraine. And conversely, if large numbers of attacks were getting through, you'd be reading very different news stories about large numbers of civilian casualties in Israel. It's hard to deny a story like that. This is entirely believable. It may or may not be true, but it's not as extraordinary as you're suggesting.
- xanthor 2y agoSo you appeal to other extraordinary claims to buttress this one.
- tptacek 2y agoWhat do you propose happened instead?
- xanthor 2y agoI don’t really care. It has nothing to do with me in America. The social phenomenon I mentioned does, however.
- simonblack 2y agoSo only three (3!) got through? Sure. Which three?