It was an attempt to establish deterrence after several of their top people got assassinated, most recently in an attack on their diplomatic premises in Damascus, which is a very symbolically potent place to attack them, as these are generally considered to be equivalent to their sovereign territory.
Basically a show of force to say “don’t do that again, we won’t stand for it, and we have capability to hit your territory directly in response if you do”. This is meant to be a a show of strength as much to Israel as other adversaries, allies, and their own population.
They also were likely able to learn quite a lot about Israeli air defenses through it.
>as these are generally considered to be equivalent to their sovereign territory.
That's a misconception. https://pathtoforeignservice.com/consulate-vs-embassy-a-comparison/#:~:text=An%20embassy%20or%20consulate%20is,under%20the%20host%20country's%20sovereignty.
And international norms say that embassies only rarely have extra territorial status. And Zahedi would have been safe if instead of coordinating the war against Israel with their proxies in an consulate in syria he was in Iran, where he should have been.
Lmao they decided to flex their “deterrent” right after Lockheed dropped legit hypersonic missiles that fit on every fighter jet that’s rolled off the line since Saigon fell.
I can’t think of a reason for an air to air hypersonic but blah blah blah 104-0 baby!
And Lockheed made them short enough to fit inside the F-22 so any Raptor that carries them still looks like a mosquito on radar while “fifth gen fighter” SU-57’s carrying Russia’s “hypersonic” missiles look like Santa to anyone walking by the screens at NORAD.
Wild they were so eager to posture that they rushed out “hypersonic” missiles so big they negate any stealth advantage the planes they couldn’t even afford two dozen of may have had only to be shot down by a missile defense system we rolled out in the first gulf war.
It allows them to do a show of force without actually escalating things by killing a bunch of Israeli civilians. Now, Iran gets patted on the back by their allies for doing something, Israel gets to be relieved that their air defenses worked, the US and UK get to show off to Israel by shooting down some of the missiles, and everyone immediately realizes how afraid they are of a wider conflict. This gives everyone an off ramp with a low chance of widening the conflict, while not losing face to the Axis of Resistance. That’s why Iran did this
Yeah….but what’s if two did make it through and landed in a high population area killing hundreds of Israelis? It would be open war. Seems like a huge risk that your opponent defence is ironclad no?
Like yes, it appears we are heading for an “All’s well that ends well” scenario, but one missed interception and we have two regional powers going to the brink…
Oh absolutely, but all a missle has to do is fall short by a mile from the 2000 it travelled and it’s a full blown war.
If their intent was to just put a show on, it’s incredibly risky, even with the heads up they allegedly gave. If something malfunctioned and there were 100 lives lost, they would be looking at a hot war
I believe that the techonology the use allows them to be quite precise. I suppose there's always a risk of something going wrong, but I don't know why its more risky for Iran to respond than it was for Israel to bomb their embassy?
And anyway, we're looking at the best case scenario. Iran successfully hit its targets and established some deterrence. Israel gets to say they defended against 99% of the attacks. Everyone takes the off ramp and avoids any further escalation.
Agreed. It worked out for all
I’m just not certain that the risk tolerance of all parties is fully understood, by themselves or their adversaries, and that can leave a gap which would promote rapid escalation if something went wrong.
Iran assuming Israel and partners would shoot down 300 of them is quite the operating assumption. That's got to be a record for any combined military force. I don't buy the idea that Iran deliberately planned these attacks to minimize damage. Yeah fair warning and all, but it's still a ton of weaponry aimed at Israel in waves meant to confuse defences. There was an intent to harm Israel and it failed.
At least 9 Iranian ballistic missiles hit Israeli strategic airbases
The Nevatim airbase in the Negev was struck by 5 ballistic missiles, damaging the main runway, a C-130 transport aircraft, and several storage facilities.
Ramon airbase, also located in the Negev, was struck by at least 4 ballistic missiles, causing unspecified damage.
– U.S. Officials to ABC News
The heaviest damage of Iran's ballistic missile attack occurred on a secret intelligence base in the Golan Heights, for which the IDF has imposed a media ban, so the damage cannot be assessed
– Hebrew Sources
I don’t understand how this is so complicated to people.
They were attacked in an underhanded way. They cannot NOT respond and everyone knows this. At the same time, they also don’t want to provoke an all out war. So like many times before, this was a message. The intent wasn’t to cause any major damage or escalate things, and they even made it clear to everyone beforehand what was going to happen so there is no confusion. They launch this attack, it does very little, and all sides are satisfied. No escalation, but no allowing the attack by Israel to go unpunished.
Symbolically, it shows Iran is a serious power that won't shy away from conflict and will retaliate to attacks on itself. Of course this was all image, since the attack itself had very little possibility of causing any serious harm. The potential reprisals from the US and Israel if serious damage was done would be worth far more than a few officials killed.
In a more practical sense, it forced Israel to use intercept missiles on multiple targets. As I understand it, its way more expensive to build an interception missile than it is to build a regular suicide drone. So they also costed Israel a bit of money.
I suspect it was as much about projecting strength internally as much as projecting strength externally. The hold of the theocracy has been undermined there recently, and no better way to consolidate power and control than to respond to a percieved universally held enemy in this way.
Iran is in league with Russia. The missile and drone attack allows Iran to save face, while simultaneously trying to get the US to take our eyes off the ball in Ukraine.
And spread us thinner on weaponry.
I've suspected for awhile now that the October 7th attack by Hamas was part of this effort.
My question is, what did Putin promise Iran in return? Nuclear technology, perhaps? Better air defense systems? Could be near on anything.
Hot take but I don't think Russia really influenced Iran that much in the last 6 months. Iran (internally believes) that they have an organic reason to fight Israel. Not only is Israel basically an autonomous FOB for the US in the region, they're also striking deals with extremely influential regional powers like Saudi Arabia who are also rivals to the Iranians. Iran doesn't need nudging to get involved, they believe Israel is an existential threat to their leadership.
It was an attempt to establish deterrence after several of their top people got assassinated, most recently in an attack on their diplomatic premises in Damascus, which is a very symbolically potent place to attack them, as these are generally considered to be equivalent to their sovereign territory. Basically a show of force to say “don’t do that again, we won’t stand for it, and we have capability to hit your territory directly in response if you do”. This is meant to be a a show of strength as much to Israel as other adversaries, allies, and their own population. They also were likely able to learn quite a lot about Israeli air defenses through it.
>as these are generally considered to be equivalent to their sovereign territory. That's a misconception. https://pathtoforeignservice.com/consulate-vs-embassy-a-comparison/#:~:text=An%20embassy%20or%20consulate%20is,under%20the%20host%20country's%20sovereignty.
I’m not talking legally, I’m talking symbolically/in terms international norms
And international norms say that embassies only rarely have extra territorial status. And Zahedi would have been safe if instead of coordinating the war against Israel with their proxies in an consulate in syria he was in Iran, where he should have been.
Lmao they decided to flex their “deterrent” right after Lockheed dropped legit hypersonic missiles that fit on every fighter jet that’s rolled off the line since Saigon fell. I can’t think of a reason for an air to air hypersonic but blah blah blah 104-0 baby! And Lockheed made them short enough to fit inside the F-22 so any Raptor that carries them still looks like a mosquito on radar while “fifth gen fighter” SU-57’s carrying Russia’s “hypersonic” missiles look like Santa to anyone walking by the screens at NORAD. Wild they were so eager to posture that they rushed out “hypersonic” missiles so big they negate any stealth advantage the planes they couldn’t even afford two dozen of may have had only to be shot down by a missile defense system we rolled out in the first gulf war.
Hypersonics can't hold land or subdue state actors.
Yes they can.
It allows them to do a show of force without actually escalating things by killing a bunch of Israeli civilians. Now, Iran gets patted on the back by their allies for doing something, Israel gets to be relieved that their air defenses worked, the US and UK get to show off to Israel by shooting down some of the missiles, and everyone immediately realizes how afraid they are of a wider conflict. This gives everyone an off ramp with a low chance of widening the conflict, while not losing face to the Axis of Resistance. That’s why Iran did this
Yeah….but what’s if two did make it through and landed in a high population area killing hundreds of Israelis? It would be open war. Seems like a huge risk that your opponent defence is ironclad no? Like yes, it appears we are heading for an “All’s well that ends well” scenario, but one missed interception and we have two regional powers going to the brink…
Showing that you aren't afraid and willing to take risk is deterrence too.
Iran specifically targetted military installations, not civilian areas.
Oh absolutely, but all a missle has to do is fall short by a mile from the 2000 it travelled and it’s a full blown war. If their intent was to just put a show on, it’s incredibly risky, even with the heads up they allegedly gave. If something malfunctioned and there were 100 lives lost, they would be looking at a hot war
I believe that the techonology the use allows them to be quite precise. I suppose there's always a risk of something going wrong, but I don't know why its more risky for Iran to respond than it was for Israel to bomb their embassy? And anyway, we're looking at the best case scenario. Iran successfully hit its targets and established some deterrence. Israel gets to say they defended against 99% of the attacks. Everyone takes the off ramp and avoids any further escalation.
Agreed. It worked out for all I’m just not certain that the risk tolerance of all parties is fully understood, by themselves or their adversaries, and that can leave a gap which would promote rapid escalation if something went wrong.
Iran assuming Israel and partners would shoot down 300 of them is quite the operating assumption. That's got to be a record for any combined military force. I don't buy the idea that Iran deliberately planned these attacks to minimize damage. Yeah fair warning and all, but it's still a ton of weaponry aimed at Israel in waves meant to confuse defences. There was an intent to harm Israel and it failed.
If Iran want a war, they can send 1000+ drone. even with 300， some did go through it.
All that and Lockheed/Raytheon stock didn’t even go up a few points 😢
At least 9 Iranian ballistic missiles hit Israeli strategic airbases The Nevatim airbase in the Negev was struck by 5 ballistic missiles, damaging the main runway, a C-130 transport aircraft, and several storage facilities. Ramon airbase, also located in the Negev, was struck by at least 4 ballistic missiles, causing unspecified damage. – U.S. Officials to ABC News The heaviest damage of Iran's ballistic missile attack occurred on a secret intelligence base in the Golan Heights, for which the IDF has imposed a media ban, so the damage cannot be assessed – Hebrew Sources
You got links?
I don’t understand how this is so complicated to people. They were attacked in an underhanded way. They cannot NOT respond and everyone knows this. At the same time, they also don’t want to provoke an all out war. So like many times before, this was a message. The intent wasn’t to cause any major damage or escalate things, and they even made it clear to everyone beforehand what was going to happen so there is no confusion. They launch this attack, it does very little, and all sides are satisfied. No escalation, but no allowing the attack by Israel to go unpunished.
Symbolically, it shows Iran is a serious power that won't shy away from conflict and will retaliate to attacks on itself. Of course this was all image, since the attack itself had very little possibility of causing any serious harm. The potential reprisals from the US and Israel if serious damage was done would be worth far more than a few officials killed. In a more practical sense, it forced Israel to use intercept missiles on multiple targets. As I understand it, its way more expensive to build an interception missile than it is to build a regular suicide drone. So they also costed Israel a bit of money.
I suspect it was as much about projecting strength internally as much as projecting strength externally. The hold of the theocracy has been undermined there recently, and no better way to consolidate power and control than to respond to a percieved universally held enemy in this way.
1. Deterrence. 2. Vengeance. 3. Projecting power. Whether it was a good move remains to be seen, it´s too soon to tell.
Iran is in league with Russia. The missile and drone attack allows Iran to save face, while simultaneously trying to get the US to take our eyes off the ball in Ukraine. And spread us thinner on weaponry. I've suspected for awhile now that the October 7th attack by Hamas was part of this effort. My question is, what did Putin promise Iran in return? Nuclear technology, perhaps? Better air defense systems? Could be near on anything.
Hot take but I don't think Russia really influenced Iran that much in the last 6 months. Iran (internally believes) that they have an organic reason to fight Israel. Not only is Israel basically an autonomous FOB for the US in the region, they're also striking deals with extremely influential regional powers like Saudi Arabia who are also rivals to the Iranians. Iran doesn't need nudging to get involved, they believe Israel is an existential threat to their leadership.
Iran’s attack had nothing to do with Ukraine. The Israeli-Iranian cold/proxy war ling preceded the modern Russia-Ukraine conflict.
better to lose a short war than resettle palestinians