>>512048727
Nobody is buying this shit.
What statement are they referring to?
Ofc they don't say, because we are expected to believe that because all of them condemn the unspecified statement, it has to be real and really bad...
While in reality it was neither real nor bad.

We have been supporting assassinations on Iranian soil, unprovoked military attacks on Iran, piracy against them, regime change operations, proxy war and calling them a terror state while everyone knows that apart from Hezbolla (a legitimate movement), all those terror groups are in fact supported by Israel.
But if Iran responds by saying the proxy war we are engaging in against them will move to our homelands, then that would be worth condemning?
They haven't even done that, but if they did (as the accusation hints at), then it would be perfectly warranted.

>How dare Iran tell us that we may be treated as we treat others?

>>510998189
>Wait, how the fuck is EW supposed to stop a bomb using inertial guidance and flying to a pre-set destinatioin
IIRC the most common altimeter used in drones is sensitive to ultrasound. If they are hit within a certain frequency range of sounds they will think they are upside down and correct themselves into crashing.

So it depends on how the sensors operate to determine speed and direction. But in principle, no. INS systems should not be possible to jam.
The only attack vector is antennas (for the potential to fry what they are connected to) or altometer/speedometer etc that are made in a stupid way to be as cheap as possible.

So to the extent EW has been effective against IMS glide bombs, I think all of those exploited design choises are changed.