Iran did the same before the conflict in response to prior Israeli attacks - the two drone waves they sent that were intercepted were both demonstrations of capability, not actual attacks.

Unfortunately I’m not sure their current audience is gonna pick up the implied threat.

▲

srean 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Iran even has a history of calling in their attacks to ensure no one gets hurt.

I don't think they did it this time, but they have in the past.

▲

picture 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How do you know their intentions?

It's also a bit unreasonable to launch live munitions that have some 90% probability of being intercepted by a given system on a good day, while intending for "just a warning"

▲

roughly an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> How do you know their intentions?

Because they declared them loudly.

When they launched the drone strikes on Israel, they gave Israel and the US warning time so they could be intercepted. The second time, they gave them much less warning time.

The Iranians have a long history of negotiating loudly via their actions, which anyone who's spent any reasonable amount of time studying Iran knows and has seen in action. They're really not a mystery, they're very transparent, we just don't like what they're saying.

▲

AndrewKemendo 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s more like if David and Goliath are in a standoff

David takes a small rock and whips it at a sensitive spot on Goliath’s ankles that most people don’t know about (Diego Garcia)

David knows Goliath will probably dodge it, and most likely kick it away given it’s importance, but there’s a point being made by shooting: if it hits then that’s a win, but if gets knocked down it’s a warning that they know where they need to hit for it to hurt

	▲	3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]