> Iran hasn't been neutralised. It was just reduced to a non-threat during the war. Of course it maintains future capabilities that could be threatening. I wou

> Iran hasn't been neutralised. It was just reduced to a non-threat during the war. Of course it maintains future capabilities that could be threatening. I wouldn't call 10 ballistic missiles hits in a day a non-threat. If they were accurate that's a significant threat: enough to disable all BMD radars in a day, and over a week to disable airbases. The most important factor that made them less threatening is the lack of pinpoint accuracy, and that is not something that changed over the course of the war. > Why not? It's an information war. Getting caught using fabricated imagery is inevitable within a couple days, so that's not something you'd want to do in an information war if you are looking for long term effect, unless you have to.