I understand the Iranians hitting US bases in range and closing the strait. What’s the logic behind hitting residential areas in the Gulf? Pressure on the UAE/Bahrain/Kuwait to lean on the US to stop?
Assuming there is no revolt/rebellion to overthrow the regime - which looks very likely - what happens afterwards? You have a bombed-up Iran, but regime still in charge, that is now pissed off - albeit probably with nuclear ability degraded further.
You mean the tomahawk has never been used in combat?
I mean, if the Iranian regime is degraded to the point where this is true, then that’s a major victory in and of itself. It’s hard to be absolute ruler when your underlings aren’t even absolutely sure if you are alive or not.
Regardless, if he is alive, he certainly knows that rumors of his death are circulating, and if he wants to maintain control of his country, letting everyone know that the rumors are false is of the utmost priority. Hell, even if he Is dead, it’s potentially in the best interest of the regime to pretend that he is alive, so the fact that the strongest statement we’ve gotten is a finance minister saying that Khamenei was alive “as far as he knows” makes me think it’s quite likely that he really is dead.
Symbolism is quite literally one of the most important things when it comes to regime change.
This really doesn’t seem to be an “aimless bombing campaign”.
This is all going off the Iranian state media report about a school being hit that’s still uncorroborated by anyone other than the original IRNA report?
Iran’s regime just brutally slaughtered 30,000 of their own citizens in the streets. It’s not like the two options are “peaceful utopia” or “being attacked by America and Israel”. Iranians understand that there is no path to a regime free Iran that doesn’t involve destruction and suffering. What do you think revolution is?
If you wanna blame Trump, blame him for dragging his feet for so long while Iranians bled in the streets. We should have been there to help them in mid January at the latest, not a month and a half later.
I agree 100%. Luckily, no one is indiscriminately throwing bombs at them. The only ones indiscriminately throwing bombs are the regime itself and their proxies.
They don’t have smart enough weapons to be accurate?
As far as precision-guided munitions go, the US has had the ability to pick which window the ordnance will go through for about twenty years now. So “aimless” is certainly not how I would describe the trajectories the missiles/bombs/etc. will be following.
However, on the strategic level, I think there is legitimate concern that the US’s plan is as follows:
- Rain of bombs and missiles on Iran
- ???
- Profit!
Yep, they view this as the final battle for the regime’s survival, and they’ve been threatening these countries for years that they’d attack them if they align with Israel and America, and now they’re carrying out that threat.
These are drones striking residential buildings in urban centers, not ballistic missiles hitting a building that’s right next to an American army base. Iranian weaponry is not as accurate as American or Israeli weaponry, but it’s plenty accurate enough to avoid striking residential or office buildings that are nowhere near military targets. This was no accident.
The Tomahawk is a cruise missile, not a drone.
I’m pretty sure they used at least one in Venezuela.
For an extensive examination of current events,
Features photos, videos, official statements.
You don’t know that. Remember the incompetence of the current POTUS and cabinet. It is not clear whether they have a plan, and if they do, what this plan is. Just picture the person in charge of the DoD, or DoW as it is supposed to be called now. What do you think he is doing now? I’d guess: pushups.
What is the difference? US drones are more expensive and you call them cruise missile. But the Tomahawnk, the Reaper and the Shahed look the same to me.
If you check, you’re actually going to find that the US had been in an undeclared naval war with Germany for at least 6 months before the German declaration of war, with the US Navy having orders to shoot on sight at German U-boats.
Oh, and three US destroyers had torpedoes fired at them, one of them sinking:
Right. I didn’t mean “aimless” in the sense of lacking accurate targeting capability. I meant it in the sense of not knowing or caring what the hell they were bombing. They are, after all, being commanded by their orange commander-in-chief, a noted low-intelligence lunatic.
I very much doubt that US has the intelligence to know or care exactly what to bomb – I use the word “intelligence” here both in the military sense of “information” and in the general sense of “having a freaking clue”.
AIUI, semantically, a drone/UAV is usually operated remotely, in real time, by a real person – a “pilot” or operator. A cruise missile operates via an onboard guidance system, and once it’s been launched, it’s typically not being guided, in real time, by a person.
Then the Shahed is a cruise missile, not a drone, but everybody calls it a drone. Many drones are autonomous. The only real difference is that US cruise missiles are better (i.e.: more letal and more precise) and more expensive. The Reaper, for instance, can be flown autonomously or remotely controlled. Does it switch from being a drone to being a cruise missile on the fly? No, it’s just that it is currently fancy to call some flying wepons drones.
Not everything in the world is about American domestic politics. For most issues, yes, whether it’s helpful or harmful to MAGA is my top priority. But this is so much bigger than Trump or America. This is about the existential threat to Israel from Iran, it’s about decapitating the head off the network of proxy groups that has destabilized the entire Middle East for decades. It’s about 100 million Iranians living under one of the worst regimes on the planet, and perhaps finally breaking free.
And that now the US has created a new line of drones that are much cheaper but also slower, to allow overwhelming number tactics to be used against air defenses.
As an interesting counterpoint, an Iranian friend of mine has asserted that today is the “best day for Iran” and that she knows of people clapping and cheering in the streets for each explosion. I know she has family there, but I’m not sure if they are the source of her information.
Let’s hope this ages well. I am not optimistic. I see ways this could end worse that today for Iran, Israel and the USA, all at once. Oh, and the rest of the world too, of course.
One word: technology. Weapons and other military systems today are so powerful, so precise and so expensive - which means there are so few of them, even in U.S. hands - that the difference between striking first and striking second is often the difference between winning and losing the war. In the ever-shifting balance between offence and defense in military thought, at least at the strategic level, offence has greater weight now than it has even had in history. Countries are loathe to give up that advantage, so they vastly prefer to attack first - even at the cost of legitimacy.
I am going to recommend we move that topic to a new thread. Just HOW precise are modern weapons? There have been studies suggesting that the bombing on both sides on WWII may not have had any real strategic effect on the outcome of the war. But let’s discuss this elsewhere?