Was there something special about Iran's missiles, or did the iron dome just fail?

Unsure what the total shoot down count was, someone will know, but we saw specific cases where launcher units couldn't even defend themselves, there was one case of an arrow counter missile falling back on telaviv and blowing up on the ground, there were failures to shoot down soviet scud which theoretically should all have been shot down.

>>64003097
Israel's official numbers are between 500 and 550 missiles fired in total, third-party counts are 543. In total, we have confirmation of 60 impacts, but we don't have a solid breadown of failures to intercept, declines to intercept ("that's going into the desert, who gives a shit") and interceptor malfunctions. Of those 60 impacts, 3 hit military facilities and 2 hit energy infrastructure. In total, there were 28 fatalities, one of which was active military.

>>64003087 (OP)
Iron Dome isn't the system meant to intercept Iranian BM's, you're thinking about Arrow and David's Sling
There was one instance where Iron Dome actually intercepted a BM, which was an impressive feat since its not meant to intercept this.
An 85-90% interception success rate on hundreds of BM's descending on Tel Aviv still means that there will be some damage to residential buildings, but otherwise there was no real strategic damage, mostly some morale loss for the civilian population

Each iron dome battery reportedly costs around $US100 million, and each interceptor missile around $US50,000.
The medium range David sling and the anti ICBM Arrow-3 are enormously expensive.

So hammas is basically firing thousands of tin can rockets across the Gaza border simply to waste isreali counter missiles. The hammas rockets aren't a serious threat, unlikely to cause any actual damage because they are totally unguided and have a very small payload, but the Israeli colonists who live on the border demand protection from the Knesset. It's often the case that isreal will spend $200,000 USD shooting down a hammas missile that's only worth $1500 USD.

Then Iran attacks isreal and boom, turns out isreal doesn't have enough iron dome rockets loaded or in stock.

And worse, the Iranians have at least 5 types of nuclear capable missile which could hit telaviv. That's the whole reason isreal invested so much in David's sling and arrow-3.
But then Iran actually hit telaviv directly with missiles of at least one of these classes, so isreal could legitimately have been nuked, and we saw not only iron dome, but also arrow-3 fail on live TV.

>>64003129
Cool story, shame they shot off a decade's worth of production over three weeks in the last couple years and lost the production facilities to the backlash.

>>64003124
For 550 strikes that's a very solid performance, or it would seem that way.

Until you consider that the redundancy was on the missiles isreal actually attempted to intercept, and how Iranian missiles targeting airports still got through despite that redundancy.

Damage on the ground doesn't really concern me, it was far less that the isrealis caused in surprise attacks against Iran, my interest here is the system.

iron dome isn't made for ballistic missiles

us had 4 ddgs off the coast that shot sm-3 (mid-course intercept)
israel fired us made arrow-3 (mid-course intercept)
us fired us thaad inside israel (terminal intercept)
israel fired us made arrow-2 inside of israel
israel fired us made david's sling inside of israel

israel was unironically the most well defended area in history

the majority of missiles that got through seem like they were those with hypersonic marvs, which makes mid-course and terminal interception difficult. there may have been some with gliders too based on a rather shallow impact.

>>64003128
The three systems provide overlaping defence because iron dome also has to protect the actual launcher units of the other systems from lower level threats.

The isrealis claim an 80%+ intercept rate but that's disputed. And the intercept rate of the system itself is relative to redundancy. If the isrealis fire 5 counter missiles at the same target and 4 miss, the intercept rate is 20% because 4 missed, not 100% because the target was destroyed by the fifth counter missiles.

Because the way I see it, the iron dome clearly isn't a cost effective response to low level threats and isreal can't actually afford it, if it wasn't for US funding the program would collapse financially.

And then relative to a critical threat, like an medium range ballistic missile, scud4 heavy, a nuclear threat, or short range threats against critical infrastructure like power stations or the launch units, fuel depots etc, 80% means Iran fires ten missiles and telaviv is a crater.

I'll get on the wire later and work out if Iran ended up using any of their new missiles or if it was mostly SCUD-3 spam

>>64003141
A big question mark is tactical rationing. As a point of comparison, when Iran shot at the US base in Qatar, there were two Patriot batteries there, and they just mag dumped into the incoming. Under the more sustained conditions Israel was dealing with, the reload time of the big launchers becomes a major concern, and they have to make much harder decisions about how many weapons to task on each vampire. That not only widens the margin for Murphy's Law to strike, but it also adds C3 challenges that we're probably never going to get public documentation of, so go ahead and widen that Failure to Intercept category to "failures to kill" and "failures to shoot at".

>>64003153
Well everyone knew the attack was coming, in many ways it was a tokenistic response from Iran in reply to the assassination of several military and civilian figures the week prior.

Which arrow was it that failed to launch? I heard arrow-3 but it could just as easily been an arrow-2

The Iranian missiles that got though (I remember them specifically) were hypersonic, but I'm unsure if they were shahab 3/4, sejil, ghadr-110.

The Iranians have so many missiles in this class that they might as well give them individual baby names. So many are experimental.

But I think the bulk of the Iranian arsenal are scud/shahab-3, and that gives Iran 2000 nuclear capable missiles from the outset. They've been upgrading these with an re-entry cone to basically fit ancient soviet nuclear warheads.

So the way I see it, isrealis missile defence, forewarned, with US support, with British EWS and strategic air wing, with everything, still wouldn't have averted a nuclear strike on telaviv. That was the threat.

>>64003153
continuing, iran will now have a really good idea on the best way to defeat such a system of multi-layered defense and what they should focus on building, since they know exactly what they fired at where and what got through.

their good missiles are better than pershing-ii in capabilities, which itself is a solid missile.

>>64003163
The iron dome units are probably too large in all honesty because with 20 tubes clearly they couldn't stop shooting for long enough to reload them, and when they've got 10/20 left they run into that strategic problem with the special name, where if they start reloading them before there empty, well at that point they might as well have a ten tube unit. But if they fire off all 20, by the time they've reloaded 10 missiles they're not going to want to reload the other ten.
And that really only relates to iron dome.

But the other issue is that Iranian scud is not meant to get through rafael/Raytheon systems. Those systems were sold at a huge costs specifically to intercept these threats. David's sling probably has a million dollar unit cost when you count program expenses.

Everyone said the Iranian domestic program was shit and that mossad had assassinated all the program scientists, destroyed stockpiles. But then Iran produces the ethad, and it becomes clear that Iran is actually winning the race.

And so I could only conclude that isreal wasted so much protecting settlers from hamas tin can rockets that it lacks the funds for sufficient ballistic missile defence

>>64003197
By now we should have a proper count.

If it turns out that shahab-4 or the newer missiles had a 20% or lower intrcept rate, well then things really change for isreal and the isrealis may have to stop terrorising the region. China wasn't around to protect Iran but you'd have to suspect that when isreal originally put this into motion a deal had already been struck. Bizarre how isreal actively supports China, China supports Iran, and Iran attacks isreal. Honk situation where the isrealis are playing both sides

>>64003213
A good reply to that is going to take more brainpower than I've got left in me tonight, I will get back to you if the mods deign to let the thread live.

>>64003087 (OP)
There are some lessons here. Israeli air defenses were most effective early in the war when Iran was sending large saturation attacks. However, Iran seemed to learn a better system was launching fewer, more-advanced missiles at a different places. Israel also became more discerning as Iran stressed their interceptor stockpiles. This tells us that 100% interception, especially in a long war, is unrealistic.

However, the bigger lesson is just how bad Iran's offense-only military strategy is. Foe the billions of dollars spent on their missile program, Iran received very little military effect. Sure a handful of missiles hit civilian areas and symbolic targets, but Israeli force projection wasn't meaningfully hampered. This shows the limits of long-range missiles to tip the scales of battle.

>>64003153
>us made arrow
isn't Arrow made by IAI?

>>64003087 (OP)
>fail
it prevented large amounts of damage from the chimpout attacks, so i don't think it failed.
if the minor amount of damage iran is able to cause is the best they can do with their billions of dollars in missiles, then it's a pretty pointless tactic.

>>64003141
I'm not sure I would call expending 550 ballistic missiles for a grand total of 60 hits and 28 enemy casualties "solid performance" but maybe that's just me

>>64003087 (OP)
>>64003097
>>64003124

This is factually disturbing considering that Israel has no real chance of winning this. If they did not attack Palestine the whole of Israel would still be alive meanwhile Iran is untouched.

>>64003560
What is the point of having a weapon that could not defend you? Realistically, strategic-wise, and logically, surrendering would be a better option.

>>64003517
True but Israel heavily favoured in any situations because they have unlimited money and get US high tech for free that nobody can match. Arabs and Israel are not near peer does.

With out that the balance would be very different. If by some bizarre reason china would do the same Iran billions a year and top tech the situation would have been very different.

>>64003129
There are some detailed PDFs online from political protocols and inquiries. There is a lot of complaints about cost and efficiency.

TL:Dr retarded Zionist bait a rocket attack. It costs a few million to defend some settlers house on a hill nothing changes. Money that could have been used for improving Israel by building schools etc. gone. a rocket is a civil servants salary for a year. city folk dislike the waste of money.

It's a heavy drain on resources and some politicians complain that there is MIC influence/corruption by those who benefit from the contracts/companies involved. Bickering like with any state funded project.

Efficiency/effectivity is quite overstated but that's acceptable because it's good for public opinion and the myth. The incoming missiles are really bad and do very little damage if people would follow instructions. But it's political suicide to let Mortars hit the highway that would repaired in 15 minutes and $200 of work and asphalt. So lots of shit gets interceptors spammed.

To major lines discussed are alternative defense like lasers and cheaper kinetic interceptors and more US cooperation with funding like USA paying for systems to be stored/used/stockpiled in Israel but that can be recalled if the US needs them. And generally plans to have investors partners to pay for security guarantees. Shared business shared costs shared research and missiles used are partially booked as tests.


Pretty normal stuff not really surprising the numbers are interesting and very detailed in some stuff you can find. But usually outdated by 10 years.

>>64003592
>surrendering
There is no way Israel will ever surrender. Every conflict is existential, or at least they believe it to be. They will destroy the entire middle east in nuclear fire before capitulating.

>>64003637
Such animals that only know genocide unprovoked.

>>64003643
What a braindead take. You don't have to like them to understand why they believe that. Almost every single founding member of the nation is a survivor of pogroms the world over, and they formed a society that understands that the majority of the world hates them and wants to see them destroyed. Israel will do anything to survive, and if they cannot survive then they will ensure their enemies wish they had died first. If there's anyone to blame for that attitude, it's the thousands of years of them being punted around (which is plain historical record of fact)

>>64003650
109 countries can't be wrong

>>64003572
Meh it's still a proof of concept. And 10% failure rate ain't good with nuclear threats on the horizon. It is now real in the civilian eyes because if even one of those would have been a bomb it's game over. It's easy to be brave if you have 100% effective defense. If you are no longer safe from retaliation public opinion will reflect that. People think War is all fun and games until you get bombed back.

>>64003656
You're kind of proving my point here. There's no way they will ever surrender to anyone, because to do so would mean their extermination. They can expect no sympathy no matter what, so why should they bother doing anything but what they think they need to? Like these dumb declarations do nothing but reaffirm their belief that the only one who will help them is themselves.

>>64003124
you literally doubled the actual number of impacts

>>64003592
>what's the point of having a weapon that cannot defend you
for iran i guess it's more of an internal thing to soothe their supporting populace and show them that they totally have autonomy whenever israel buttfucks them, even if it's not very strategically or tactically effective.

>>64003643
>unprovoked

>>64003587
Are you stupid? It's been the assessment of virtually everyone not directly reporting to some Islamic authority that Israel is simply choosing to not destroy the multitude of openly hostile nations around them out of respect to the US oil interests.

>>64003666
>we shouldn't expect sympathy because our own actions got us kicked out of 109 countries
gee whiz

>>64003698
>our own actions
Its da joooz fault for holding on to their culture, religion, and history instead of assimilating into the proto-globohomo church

>>64003698
We are so far past the point where that would be some kind of relevant idea. Those 109 countries talking shit only emboldens them to be more ruthless, amass more strength, and elect more leaders whose primary goal is the elimination of threats. Because, again, they are affirming the idea that everyone is against Israel.

>>64003704
>it's the jews fault for being parasites of actual nationalities
yes, if they don't want to be treated like dirt they should intergrate and stop with their weird matrilineal incest line bullshit along with all the nepotism and mental illness it brings.
i don't have a universal hatred against all jews, but they're largely doing this to themselves.
>inb4 mudslime
i also made >>64003690 >>64003560 these posts so nah, i'm not delusional about their military situation, but i'm perfectly aware that they create a lot of their own enemies.

>>64003664
>And 10% failure rate ain't good with nuclear threats on the horizon.
Anon, all current missile defense aimed at countering nukes are generally designed with the assumption that at MOST they'll be intercepting a dozen or so missiles at most.

Any full blown all-out nuclear attack is unstoppable and everyone knows it.

80-90% intercept rate is actually fantastic for the number of missiles being fired/intercepted within that time frame.

>>64003729
>nepotism and mental illness is a distinctly jewish thing!!!
This kind of retardation is why you have nukes aimed at you to begin with.

>18 posts by this OP

>>64003729
Eh, they're no worse than the mormans imo. Monocultures are largely a myth anyway. Back on the actual topic, I think the Iranians are just coping. The defense network largely did its job, and Israel is always quick to patch holes in their defenses. The question is if Iran can even try something on this scale again

>>64003757
>is a distinctly jewish thing
never said that, so you seem insecure about something.
it is far more pronounced in jewish circles, yes, that's why it's a topic of conversation.
>this kind of retardation is why you have nukes aimed at you to begin with
see >>64003729
you're retarded and didn't read.

>>64003141
We also know AEGIS/SM-3/SM-6 and THAAD were all involved. Navy has not openly said how many interceptors they burned through but 28 THAAD interceptors were expended. The IDF said two missiles engaged with THAAD and Arrow still got through, but there is not much clarity on in total how many interceptors were used or how they performed, as the Israelis only publicly disclose when THAAD/standard fail to intercept, not when they are successful.

The Navy also made a weird announcement that they had burned through a ton of their LRASM stocks, with no other information. Which is pretty odd.

>>64003087 (OP)
All Iran did was waste missiles because of the lack of a nuclear payload.

>>64003812
The navy only deploys ~8 SM-3 and ~16 SM-6 missiles per destroyer.

And it's unlikely they totally emptied their stores, so I'd guess ~24 SM-3 and ~50 SM-6 would've been fired.

>>64003812
I thought someone on k would have done the autistic launch count by now. My suspicion is that between isreal and its allies fired an enormous number of counter missiles.

Iran is probably looking at their shahed 3's, realising that their medium range ballistic missiles are actually really good now and will decide their best use of the soviet scud is simply wasting isreals money and preventing isreal investing in offensive capabilities.

Iran could have nuked telaviv, and the peak air defence capability of the West couldn't prevent even a fifth of Iran's missile stocks. First scud strikes on US based, now this. The Saudis are looking at this like Kuwait was looking at Saddam.

>>64003087 (OP)
1-31/550=0.944
so 94% interception rate
so how did the israeli air defense failed exactly?

ps: the iron dome is shorad you imbecile

>>64003894
Given the Iranian launch count, which was far easier to observe, that many American missiles is significant because that's a 20% redundancy which came from the US not the iron dome.

US warships aren't safe in the gulf any more, you're going to get libertied

>>64003922
>US warships aren't safe in the gulf any more
lol

lmao even

Weird, I didn't notice a single Iranian missile targeting US destroyers...


I do enjoy your fantasy though, very entertaining.

>>64003921
How did it fail?
1. It failed to prevent telaviv being hit by a nuclear capable missile. That's a critical threat, you only need to get hit by one.
2. Iran hit you with more missiles than you had counter missiles. Because your hit rate was too low, your redundancy was too high
3. You ended up using a ton of high value counter missiles in response to low value Iranian scud 3.

And the sum of this was that Iran had proven their capacity to d1 isreal, because the 5 or so missiles the Iranians actually needed to hit, did hit.
And if they wanted to do that again tomorrow they totally could. If they wanted to use 1500 missiles they totally could, and if they wanted to nuke you, and fire 1500 missiles at you, they totally could.

>>64003980
They have less than 100 launchers left, even if they have 1500 missiles, they have no way to launch them all simultaneously.

It's why the largest single wave of missiles launched at isreal was only ~75 missiles. The largest concentration being two back-to-back waves totalling ~150 missiles.

You're delusional and your cope is getting kinda pathetic (though still hilarious).

>>64003935
Strange cope because the Iranians have attacked your ships directly at least for times, and they've never hesitated to do that.

I think you had to hit them with submarine launched missiles because you're surface fleet couldn't approach. You assassinated a bunch of Iranian leaders, yes, but the Iranians are clearly willing to die, and clearly ready for open war against the US.

>>64003980
>1. It failed to prevent telaviv being hit by a nuclear capable missile. That's a critical threat, you only need to get hit by one.
iran doesn't have nukes
>2. Iran hit you with more missiles than you had counter missiles. Because your hit rate was too low, your redundancy was too high
>you
and clearly not
>3. You ended up using a ton of high value counter missiles in response to low value Iranian scud 3.
you're actually retarded
>And the sum of this was that Iran had proven their capacity to d1 isreal, because the 5 or so missiles the Iranians actually needed to hit, did hit.
>And if they wanted to do that again tomorrow they totally could. If they wanted to use 1500 missiles they totally could, and if they wanted to nuke you, and fire 1500 missiles at you, they totally could.
yeah they surely held back which is why they shot so few

>>64003980
What makes you think Iran is in any position of power because a handful of their missiles got through to the kikes while they were getting an uncontested aerial train run on them? I sure hope one of the five that get through happens to be one of the spicy ones just to make it worth it because the jews sure as shit aren't going to miss their chance to turn tehran into a parking lot.

>>64003995
This was the standard jidf line at the time, failing to stop the missiles they claimed to have hit the Iranian launchers.
As far as I can tell there's actually no basis for that claim, Iran is saying they didn't lose many launchers at all.

The US failed to hit Saddam's launchers in the desert before desert storm, they're probably in a better position now but it's an area of historical weakness. And the Iranians have a bunch of solid fuel rockets which only have a 20 minute readiness window now. Iranian shoot and scoot has got much better.

>>64004022
Ah so they chose to make paltry ~75 missile launches in waves repeatedly over a week because they wanted to, not because they had to?

Wow, they really are weak bitches.

>>64004022
It's estimated isreal destroyed ~50% of ballistic missile stocks (estimated to be at ~2000-3000 pre-conflict) with ~1000-1500 destroyed by isreal, and another ~500-600 fired at isreal. That leaves just ~500-1000 missiles left.

Similarly for launchers pre-war estimates were 350-400 launchers, current estimates are 50-66% lost, so ~120-150 launchers remaining.

>>64004009
This is a technical discussion, if that upsets you or you have ideological/ political issues with what happened I suggest you use /pol/

>>64003980
>>64004009
also
iran can at most build two small fission nukes
not anytime soon because of the strikes, but for the sake of the argument let's assume they already have those 2.
so 0.9*0.9=0.81
less than 20% that any nuke impacts
do you think iran is dumb enough to take that risk considering they'll 100% get nuked in response
>>64004044
ah cool you're just trolling

>>64004011
I'm more interested in the performance of Rafael and Raytheon missiles than the politics.

The ability of US warships to repel missiles is a very touchy subject, if it's established through these strikes that the missiles themselves aren't as effective as advertised, well then US warships with a known number of tubes could be under a lot more pressure. The Chinese are very, very keen to know how many cruise missiles an American frigate can repel.

>>64004028
I'm unsure of the exact number, and made this thread because reliable sources are scarce and there are missing pieces here. My assumption would be that Iran guessed the saturation level, used as many launchers as they needed to, got the outcome they had expected. Enough launches to make hits on telaviv to prove they could, enough scud to force America to directly defend telaviv, to make the attack repeatable.

>>64004071
I mean, just based on open source information, we can mostly confirm the US missiles are at least ~80% effective and they rarely have published intercept % rates, so it's not like anyone would know for sure if 80% is good or bad outside of the military or the defence contractors who make them.

All we really know are the published figures from the tests they've done, which for all Aegis BMD missiles (SM-2/SM-3/SM-6) which includes 54 tests, with 42 intercepts, a 77% success rate.

>>64004091
>got the outcome they had expected
They wanted to accomplish next to nothing...?

Lol


Lmao even

okay.

>>64004061
If Iran has nuclear warheads they're either cold war stock acquired in the past, or because Russia, North Korea, Pakistan or China simply gave Iran the warheads.

And because of the 500 missiles fired in the barrage, the important missiles got through. So if Iran armed nuclear warheads they'd only need 5, 10, and add them to the next barrage.

>>64004103
>And because of the 500 missiles fired in the barrage
That 500 missiles was spread over multiple days anon, the largest single wave was only around 80 missiles.

>>64004071
>The ability of US warships to repel missiles is a very touchy subject, if it's established through these strikes that the missiles themselves aren't as effective as advertised
Somehow I think that if they can stop 90+% of missiles from hitting regular cities they probably aren't sweating too hard about defending a floating maneuvering city surrounded by air defense boats, that can also launch it's own air defense planes. The subject is only touchy to browns who are coping about their much touted arsenal of power projection compensators not working as well as advertised. Yes, you got your teeth kicked in until the international community pulled Israel off of you, but the west totally trembles in fear of those missiles! We're so scared!

>>64004103
you barely have the means for a 100 missile barrage
so 5 times that? repeatedly?
it take hours to fuel up most of irans missiles anyway
and their TELs are endangered

>>64004093
A lot of clarified material is leaked specifically because it's untrue, it's properganda.

This was a rare opportunity to actually count the missile launches and watch live shootdowns. Because many of the Iranian missiles missed, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a 5-8 redundancy against the same Iranian missile. Some will have been targeted mid flight, terminally and by point defence. At least one scud was taken out by point defence so fair to assume many were engaged, with or without orders to that effect.
Shit if I had an Uzi I would have shot at an incoming scud, what else could you do?

>>64004137
HAHAHAHHAHAHAAH

so now your cope is that you've imagined a scenario where 5-8 interceptors are targeting a single missile because they're just SO unreliable alone?

Wewlad.


I do enjoy your fantasy cope, keep it up.

>>64003592
>Our air-defenses were only a measly 90% effective
>Their air-defense were an astounding 0% effective
Well. When reviewing the facts unconditional surrender really is the only option.

>>64004137
>clarified material
>properganda

>>64004097
You can't even use this site properly, take your ten shekles and go.
>>64004108
Barrages, thank you.
My point stands that the critical threats, the nuclear capable missiles actually hit telaviv. So if the objective was the nuke telaviv, the isrealis would have essentially shot down the wrong missiles and got nuked.
>>64004111
>if
But if only 50 missiles were engaged in each wave, and the redundancy was 2, then a US frigate with 10 launch tubes would only be able to repel 5 missiles.

If you fired ten, the US warship would reduce its redundancy to one, and at that point would be hit by the miss rate of the individual counter missile.

So even if the hit rate was 90%, a frigate with ten tubes would get hit by a ten missile attack. And it only needs to get hit once to sink.

>>64004178
>a US frigate with 10 launch tubes
The US doesn't have frigates

The frigate they ARE building has 32 launch tubes.

USN DDGs (Burkes) have 90-96 launch tubes.

Why do you keep inventing more fantasies to make the west look bad when objectively, Iran got their shit pushed in?

>>64004132
The launch window on the Iranian missiles varies, and the refuelling window is much shorter so if they're firing one missile after another then that time comes right down.

So 40, 20 minutes. But then they also have solid fuel rockets which can be fired instantly from standby or 12 minutes readiness.

With more than 3000 missiles which could range telaviv, the Iranians could do this all day just to waste the isreali American resources

>>64004197
that's cope from before the war
update your metodichka

>>64004197
>more than 3000 missiles
anon, that was the pre-war estimate, at this point estimates put it around 1000 missiles at most.

Syria General appears to be leaking.

>>64004197
Question: if Iran can destroy Israel and sink any US carrier group within the Med… why didn’t they?

lots of muslims/russian shills here

>>64003894
Yeah, that's a regular mix, but I'm not sure if after Rough Rider/ a year of Truman et al just face tanking saturation ASBM/ASCM attacks that the missile mix for 5th fleet tin cans hasn't changed to be more of an AAW mix than the regular load out. Also kind of think that since apparently only a SSGN launched TLAM, none from the DDGs

>>64004267
The Venn diagram of pedo-prophet worshippers and vatniks is a circle, which is why the shills are constantly pushing the "Israel is Russian" narrative despite IDF veterans fighting for Ukraine and Israel sending Ukraine aid and weapons.

It's understandable when you realize you'd be seething too if the self-styled 2nd best military in the world ended up being the 2nd best military in Ukraine, not to speak of the humiliation of their vaunted Axis of Resistance dissolving like 1-ply toilet paper on first contact with reality.

Their cope is a reflection of internal cognitive dissonance and desperation to prove they aren't the gigantic losers everyone else can plainly observe them to be. It's glorious.

>>64004280
>none from the DDGs
Because the DDGs would've had to fire across isreal, jordan, syria, Iraq.

The SSGN was almost certainly in the Persian Gulf, or the Gulf of Oman able to fire directly into Iran.

Even more so because Iran wouldn't have air defense radars focused in that direction.

So yeah, even if the DDGs had TLAMs in stock, there would've been no reason to fire them at Iran from where they were positioned.

Also the distance from Tel-Aviv to Isfahan is ~1000 miles, which is the extreme range limit of TLAMs.

>>64004044
>this is a technical discussion
strange then, that you feel the need to inject every single emotional argument in there, simply because you can't accept that a few missiles hitting some noncritical infrastructure in israel does not save iran from getting their entire air defense system and most of their strategic missile reserves annihalated.
iran should focus less on chimpouts and more on defending their airspace effectively if they want to be taken seriously.

>>64004178
>if we had nukes we would have totally nuked you!
said like the most impotent retards on earth, then, israel can nuke right back, and they don't have nukes so it's a moot point.
>>64004178
>but only 50 missiles were engaged
not sure where you're getting these numbers from, lol.
also many missiles were intentionally not getting engaged because tracking radars determined they weren't going to hit anything of importance, you'll note that you can't hit a maneuvering US ship with hopes and dreams, if you're off by 50 meters, you miss.

>>64003129
>>64003636
>materialist money arguments that jews are losing because of finance
>wanting to defeat the jews through finance
this is a shitty propaganda thread from our swarthy middle eastern /int/ neighbours. Anyway, economicism has ruined the brains of ESL internet nerds too I see. Good luck defeating the jews through finance on a rolling blackout economy, Iran.

>>64003643
>ESL bait posting
5/10

The iron dome couldn't counter a critical threat, a single nuclear capable missile.
The iron dome couldn't keep up with a barrage of low value Iranian scud
The iron dome isn't a cost effective solution to missile attack

>>64004390
>wanting to defeat the jews through finance
There are various guys who come up with this plan to out-Jew the Jew by making their own crypto coin and then rugpulling their own followers.

>>64004164
Properganda!

>>64003129
>isreal could legitimately have been nuked
Jesus christ I want to see a city nuked in my lifetime so fucking bad.

The American taxpayer shall pay for this!!!

>>64004005
US warships were not safe twenty years ago. It is why they are "warships". I understand you think you have a chance of hitting one. This risk we are obviously willing to take as the chance of something happening in our favor is far higher and at an exponent greater. This idea that the US doesn't make you piss your pants and try and talk tough while you are dripping on the floor is as retarded as you are. US Allies are all by themselves scarier than Iran.

>>64003124
>In total, we have confirmation of 60 impacts
Proof?

>>64003715
this is why a lot of people wanted you genocided and why it almost happened.

>>64003587
Fuck off thirdie.

itt: jews seething, coping and dilating

>>64003636
> unlimited money
Invest them in crypto and then rug

Why do america have to pay for it?

>>64003129
>money
But American taxpayers pay for it, anon.

Hamas extermination when? It can't happen fast enough.

>>64003587
Lolwut

>>64003087 (OP)
>greater than 90% success rate
lol

>>64003664
Yeah its proof of concept, it proves that ballistic missile attacks are a huge fucking waste of money
The Iranians fired several decades worth of Iranian GPD at Israel and got two dozen dead jews for their money, in the time it took them to build those missiles Israel didn't just catch up to Iran economically they beat them with less than one tenth the population and no oil
Imagine if Iran had invested that money in something militarily useful (or better yet, its own economy) instead