this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
70 points (93.8% liked)

World News

38744 readers
2262 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Researchers have used commercial satellite imagery to identify more than 30 points where Iranian missiles appear to have impacted an air base in southern Israel.

Based on preliminary calculations of what happened at Nevatim, Lewis believes a substantial number of Iranian missiles may have reached their targets.

Lewis notes that although over 30 missiles landed inside the base perimeter, the damage caused was still somewhat limited. That's notable because Iran is believed to have used some of its most advanced Fattah missiles.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I don't think Iran was really targeting that precisely. Like last time, this is mostly just to do something in response. If they actually wanted to cause damage, they'd probably be more precise in their strikes.

Appear weak when you are strong, and all that. No point in letting the enemy know how good your missiles can be if you don't have to.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

I’d go with the same thing but reverse logic: trying to appear strong, militarily supporting their terrorist allies, while hoping to avoid actual war with Israel

Maybe the US leans on Israel, saying “let’s keep calm here, nothing got through”, while Iran can tell the whole region “ we attacked Israel in response and they’re afraid to strike back”.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I dunno, I feel like displaying how accurate your missiles are is a better deterrent

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

It's not, unless it shows an overwhelming advantage. Else you've shown your hand, and now your enemy knows exactly what you're capable of, and what they need to do to counter your attacks.

[–] PlasticLove@lemmy.today -2 points 1 day ago

I dunno, I feel like lulling an enemy whose frothing at the mouth to attack you into believing your missiles aren’t a real threat is a good strategy to get them to underestimate you at their peril.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

I mean India missed some Israeli made glide bombs on Pakistan probably because they don't have proper access to military GPS or their INS info had deviated, so all 3 bombs hit like 100 yards left of their intended target.

I do find it sort of difficult to believe Iran’s INS technology could be that poor even for ballistic missiles, so I guess it's possible, especially since both times they made it clear they never attacked US targets nor publicized destruction of some high value assets. Though I feel like Mossad would have figured this out since they seem to have so many informants.

Still it kind of would have been cool to see Israel more exposed to aerial attack with some destroyed aircraft since they otherwise have complete air superiority in the region.