As regional tensions run high, Iran has paraded drones, missiles and soldiers to show it is ready for a response from Israel after launching an unprecedented attack on its archenemy.
Iran carried out its first-ever direct attack on Israel at the weekend in response to an April 1 air strike on the consular building of Iran’s embassy in Syria.
⠀
Wednesday’s parade saw the Iranian armed forces showcase a range of military equipment, including drones and long-range ballistic missiles.
A mong them were multiple versions of the Ababil, Arash and Mohajer drones as well as the Dezful medium-range ballistic missile and S-300 air defence missile system.
Raisi reiterated warnings against “the slightest act of aggression” by Israel, saying it would lead to “a fierce and severe response”.
Israel has said it will respond to the weekend attack with military spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari saying Iran will not get off “scot-free”.
The Israeli army said most of the projectiles fired by Iran were shot down with the help of the United States and other allies and the attack caused only minimal damage.
Iran hailed the attack as “successful” and said it “achieved all its objectives”, including inflicting damage to an airbase and intelligence centre that it said was used by Israel to carry out the strike in Damascus.
⠀
In his speech, Raisi also hit out at countries that had “sought to normalise relations” with Israel.
“These countries are now humiliated in front of their own people, which constitutes a strategic failure for the regime” of Israel, he said.
Interesting article but this was not a strategic victory for Iran or Israel. Israel had some economic and diplomatic consequences and Iran's drones are exposed as vulnerable to modern air defenses. Half of their drones and missiles crashed on takeoff. Fewer countries are going to want to buy them after seeing that.
The US, UK, France, and Jordan are the winners because they got a free test taking down a bunch of hostile drones in a real world scenario. They didn't waste any money that wouldn't have been spent shooting practice targets anyway.
I broadly agree with you, but I’d welcome a discussion of a blind spot in almost everything I’ve seen. I haven’t read much specialty defense analysis recently, so if anyone has some I’d be fascinated to read it.
The wider press seems to ignore the strategic significance of Iran gathering all that detection, location, and performance data of all the AA, ABM, air superiority, and radar assets that popped off a billion dollars’ worth of interception. Can someone explain to me how this does not place Israel’s nuts in a vise?
Yes, a lot of that intel is fleeting as systems are moved and whatnot, but if they’re on the ball there is a whole lot of data selling and prankery that can be done all the same. Israel has tiny strategic depth and is limited in how elusive they can be around their tightly packed valuable targets, and Hezbollah has shown they know how to take advantage of probing Israeli defenses.
If the Likudniks escalate and draw a more committed Iranian and proxy barrage, that could get pants-shittingly serious. What am I, or what are we, not seeing?
Israel had hours of notice of the drones and rockets. Iran's parade is just a showing of things and people that will be destroyed if they get into a true head-on war with Israel
Of course, the regular Iranian people, many who have no love for the regime, get to pay this price as well
I was just talking to someone today who was all gung ho about the US bombing cities in Iran. Some people's stupidity and bloodthirstyness truly knows no bounds. They thought that the US should bomb a city to smithereens and then Iran would just do whatever the US wanted. So not only were they endorsing war crimes by attacking civilians, they did not anticipate how countries actually react when attacked.
Yeah, pretty much. Iran's advantage is in its proxies. An all out war with Israel will go poorly for Iran, especially if the US is playing much of a role. But from what I can tell, no one really wants to escalate to all out war. They just don't want to be left as the last one getting a slap on the face. The danger is that escalations add up over time until they reach all out war.
Did you get a chance to ask how well bombing others into submission went for Bin Laden in 2001?
I didn't use that particular example, but I used others. Germany after WWI would be a prime example where a nation losing face can severely backfire, but it's true more broadly that attacking a nation is a good way to strengthen support for a response among the population.
Reddit? Sounds like a reddit discussion.
Discord for a subreddit.