| ▲ | AnotherGoodName 5 hours ago |
| > This seems to reveal previously-unknown range of Iranian ballistic missiles and, if true, could touch basically all of Europe True but they have also literally launched multiple orbital satellites from iran on iranian rockets. Eg. The Noor 2 spy satellite and before that the Noor 1 series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noor_2_(satellite) These are in orbit to this day. They regularly post images it takes of US military bases. Essentially it’s similar to how sputnik was a demonstration of icbm capability. Iran can launch a first generation ICBM right now. Pointless if they use a conventional payload (too small payload to be cost effective militarily) and a non manoeuvrable warhead (would just be intercepted) and so these aren’t used militarily but essentially everyone acting shocked they can hit 4000km range was not paying attention. I think one of the problems we are having right now is that we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilities. It’s one thing for the common civilian to think the enemies missiles are made of cardboard and tanks of paper but it’s another when the leader of a nation believes it. Now here we are with a war that’s stalemated and no way out. |
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilities Iran has done precisely nothing unexpected in the entire course of this war. Closing Hormuz has been mooted since the 70s. And its IRBM stockpile has been known. This is more a case of something between political leaders and possibly the media being ignorant of even open-source intelligence. |
| |
| ▲ | hirako2000 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I thought the US president said they didn't expect a number of things that happened. It also expected a quick intervention, 2 weeks max. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > the US president… The President is a political leader. | |
| ▲ | chasd00 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | To be fair Trump admins most optimistic timeline was “4-6 weeks maybe longer”. We’re at the end of week 3. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | rayiner 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The downplaying of Iran’s capabilities is a weird kind of racism IMHO. In the modern view, Iranians have been categorized as “brown” so people lump them together with Somalians and Afghans. But Iran is a technologically and politically sophisticated country. In terms of the Civ tech tree, it’s higher than any middle eastern country except Israel. |
| |
| ▲ | oa335 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The downplaying of Iran’s capabilities is a weird kind of racism IMHO. Agreed, but it’s not at all surprising to me. Propaganda means that people will project fictitious motives and capabilities on their opponents, even if they are internally inconsistent (e.g. Iran must be attacked because they will threaten the USA mainland vs Iran’s missiles are very inaccurate and barely hit anything). | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | logicchains 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >Iranians have been categorized as “brown” so people lump them together with Somalians and Afghans. Even from a racist perspective that's completely wrong; Iranians are white, the name "Iran" literally means "Land of the Aryans". | | |
| ▲ | breppp 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Iranians are white, the name "Iran" literally means "Land of the Aryans". The Indians were also Aryan according to race theories. I wouldn't put much sense into racism | | |
| ▲ | srean 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Leaving the 'aryan' and 'white' bit aside there are mountains of things that are common between Indians and Iranians -- the system of classical music, musical instruments, mythological characters, food, and of course language. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | zabzonk 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > a non manoeuvrable warhead (would just be intercepted) Intercepted? In the UK, by what? London has no missile defence system that I am aware of. |
| |
| ▲ | kenhwang 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Probably by the Sea Viper system from a destroyer parked in the Dover Strait. Now, the UK probably doesn't have enough interceptors or destroyers carrying them to be confident they'll be able to stop a proper all out attack, but that seems to be a common problem with every Western country right now with a peacetime military budget in an increasingly unpeaceful time. | |
| ▲ | chatmasta 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | A missile would need to fly all the way over Europe before reaching London. It would be noticed, jets would be scrambled and it would be shot. Just like what happened here. | | |
| ▲ | delichon 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | These were ballistic missiles. They are only vulnerable during the terminal phase, when they are moving at hypersonic speeds. Standard fighter jets aren't going to do it. It would take ground based THAAD, Patriot, or ship based Aegis systems. London might want to budget for that. | | | |
| ▲ | hirako2000 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They can fly well above any commercial and military aircraft. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | lostlogin 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I think one of the problems we are having right now is that we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilities. Was that the problem? The US handling of the situation seems the elephant in the room. |
|
| ▲ | alephnerd 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > is that we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilities We've been hinting about these capabilities for decades [0]. A lot of what is being brought up now is stuff a number of us touched on during the Obama years. None of this is really hidden either - it would be brought up in think tanks and even undergrad classes if you attended a target program. Civilian leaders have always had a hands-off approach to Defense and NatSec policy - once you show them how close to a polycrisis everything is they quickly defer responsibility. It's actually pretty similar to working in a corporate environment - it's all about managing upwards. [0] - https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/middleeast/29missil... |
| |
| ▲ | jopsen 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > it's all about managing upwards That might not work with the current administration. Which probably a/the problem. | | |
| ▲ | alephnerd 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It still does/is. Most of what I'm seeing with Iran is similar to what was discussed back in the early 2010s. There hasn't been significant churn in the NatSec space aside from political appointees, and core policymakers like Doshi, Maestro, Allison, Colby, and even Hill have worked with administrations irrespective of party affiliation. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | breppp 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | throw310822 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Iran's missiles are used as a terror weapon against civilian population Classic. An advanced tech US missile hits a school and kills 200 schoolgirls? "A tragic mistake, it happens in war". A much less advanced Iranian rocket hits a building? "Terrorists! They point their weapons at civilians!" Since Iran was attacked and it has a right to defend itself, we should give it more precise weapons so it can hit directly the military headquarters in central Tel Aviv. | | |
| ▲ | dastuer 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Did you protest when they killed 40,000 unarmed civilians in early January? | | |
| ▲ | ta8903 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | No need to downplay the IRGC's brutal murder of 60000 civilians. |
| |
| ▲ | kortilla 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Intent is literally the difference in terrorism though. The US hitting 500 targets in Iran and one of them being a school is the exact opposite of a strategy of terrorism. With terrorism you explicitly target civilians to drive fear. Trying to hit the Burj Khalifa without targeting any military or high political office is terrorism. When Iran launched at military bases or tried to shoot at planes, it was not called terrorism. | | |
| ▲ | JasonADrury 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | >Trying to hit the Burj Khalifa without targeting any military or high political office is terrorism. It's really not credible to claim that Iran has made any serious efforts to hit the Burj Khalifa, they would have succeeded if they wanted to do this. |
| |
| ▲ | isr 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Its a mystery how "the terrorists" have launched 1000's of missiles & drones, in 70+ (and counting) waves, across 3 weeks, spanning across the region, and yet they have ABJECTLY FAILED to: * hit any hospital * blow up any school * nor murder any journalists. Yet, despite this stunning lack of accuracy from ... "the terrorists", they have somehow managed to hit EVERYTHING ELSE they were aiming at. On the other hand, the "West", who are absolutely NOT terrorists, have managed to blow up schools, slaughter hundreds and hundreds of school children, smash multiple hospitals, take out as many health workers & first responders as possible with double tap strikes ... and let's not even mention the number of journalists deliberately targeted & killed, nor the families of journalists, deliberately targeted & killed And to answer the "but they killed 25 million of their own civilians just weeks ago", it would be almost churlish to point out that the MASSIVE pro-Iran public sentiments expressed by ALL sectors of Iranian society would, to a logically thinking person, lead one to conclude that perhaps, just perhaps, the media campaign behind those riots was just pushing a complete LIE. Because those reports don't fit in a reality where, under direct bombardment and personal risk, those same civilians are supporting their state, their government & their leadership. As always, the simplest explanations which fit observable facts are usually closest to the actual truth. And the simplest explanation is that the "definitely NOT terroristic" West has been lying about Iran, consistantly, for decades. Either that, or the Mango Mussolini is the new Oracle of Delphi. Go pick the hill you want to stand on ... | | |
| ▲ | breppp 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Actually Iran has hit the Soroka hospital in Israel in the previous war and the Weizmann Institute, a research university | | | |
| ▲ | magic_hamster 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Iran literally hit a preschool in Israel today, with an MRV which is solely designed to terrorize the population (and is a war crime btw). Plus a 12 year old is in critical condition alongside 40 civilians from a single Iranian missile hitting a residential building later today. And in June Iran hit a hospital in Israel with a ballistic missile. > Its a mystery... Not a mystery, though, is it? Israel has excellent air defense which is why the damage isn't x10 worse. But Iran is definitely making a huge effort to hit the civilian population for maximum damage. Unlike Iran which is literally aiming statistical weapons at population centers, the US has high accuracy weapons - the school was hit because intelligence wasn't up to date (it used be an IRGC building). Your comment is absolutely misinformed, or worse, spreading disinformation on purpose. |
| |
| ▲ | golemiprague 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | sofixa 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Iran's missiles are used as a terror weapon against civilian population They've also sucessfuly been used against energy and military infrastructure. | | |
| ▲ | breppp 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Those were mostly UAVs, you can see the abysmal aiming ability in Israel, where they have largely stopped aiming at facilities and moved to cluster warheads to maximize civilian hit ratio in large metropolis | | |
| |
| ▲ | bdangubic 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | that would be stupid and their regime is not stupid | | |
| ▲ | breppp 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Hardly, after attacking all their friends in the region, which would leave them even more isolated after the war, I would not attribute careful strategic planning either | | |
| ▲ | cjbgkagh 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | “Better to be feared than loved” - Niccolo Machiavelli | |
| ▲ | watwut 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They were not mutual friends. They were mutually hostile. And the friends are hosting american soldiers and bases. | | |
| ▲ | breppp 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Qatar and Oman were mutually hostile? that's a very unique interpretation of Middle Eastern politics |
|
| |
| ▲ | jopsen 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Do you think launching a dumb ICBM at New York would make the US put boots on the ground. I kind of doubt it's enough. This wouldn't be another 9/11, it would be merely be retaliation. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > This wouldn't be another 9/11, it would be merely be retaliation The Japanese and Al Qaeda framed their attacks defensively. An attack on the homeland is an attack on the homeland. I wouldn’t put it past Iran. But you’d rapidly see political consensus to ensure the regime is destroyed at all costs, including and up to leaving a power vacuum and humanitarian crisis. | |
| ▲ | Hikikomori 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 9/11 was retaliation for US imperialism. | |
| ▲ | kortilla 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It already looks like the US is sending marines over. Any excuse to make it more politically palatable would be latched onto. | |
| ▲ | bdangubic 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | the war is wildly unpopular in the US (rightfully so) - attacking US would rally the country (rightfully so) and regime would fall within a week (with significant casulties on our side) | | |
| ▲ | AnimalMuppet 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Probably all true, except for the "within a week" part. We don't have nearly enough there yet to do that, and buildups take time. |
|
| |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > their regime is not stupid It’s pretty fucking stupid. Convening the top brass above ground, failing to scatter the navy, bombing Azerbaijan and Qatar and Oman. I’m not saying the individual actors are dumb. But the result of the competing centers of power between the IRGC, military proper, clerical establishment and god knows who else produces a stupid strategy. | | |
| ▲ | bdangubic 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | what would be a non-stupid strategy? | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Broadly, taking American and Israeli threats seriously. And not overestimating how easily their neighbors would capitulate if bombed. Tactically, this would mean not concentrating senior leadership above ground. Scattering their navies out of port. Targeting U.S. military bases and not the civilian infrastructure around them. |
|
| |
| ▲ | PixyMisa 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Their regime is made up of hardline Shia Twelvers that believe that if they kill enough people the Twelfth Imam will appear and lead them to global victory. Only problem is the Twelfth Imam has been dead for a thousand years. They may not be stupid, but they consistently act based on counterfactual beliefs. | |
| ▲ | 9991 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They're Muslims. You can debate whether that means 'stupid', but they've come to totally erroneous opinions on the structure of reality. | | |
| ▲ | BLKNSLVR 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Equal to any other religion? | | |
| ▲ | 9991 an hour ago | parent [-] | | No, not equal. They're all varying amounts of stupid. |
| |
| ▲ | wolvoleo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I disagree heavily with them too but that doesn't mean we should eradicate them. We can't expect the whole world population to be aligned. But once we start shooting they will obviously shoot back and we're many steps further away from the desired "agree to disagree and live together anyway" outcome that is the only way to peace. I mean the US tried this too with Afghanistan. Many lives lost, trillions of dollars wasted and everything was back to 'normal' in two weeks. Change has to come from within and the thing is this was actually happening in Iran. Now with military law and the regime uniting people against a common enemy this is much further away. | |
| ▲ | bdangubic 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | first, what does it matter whether they are Muslims or not? second, what is the structure of reality?! you may have some notion you know what “reality” is given what your media allows you to think - the actual reality is vastly different than you think it is - that is a certainty |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | pfannkuchen 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Why does it matter if they have some capabilities to hit whatever targets in Europe or America? They’re not crazy, it would still be suicide for them to do it. It would just give them leverage, which I can’t think of a fair reason to prevent them from having. |