History in the making, Part 2, V.2 - Israel/Palestine - NO RELIGION

I saw some Jordanian footage last night of Iranian drones flying over their country and they appeared to have their navigational lights on 

I know next to nothing about military tactics or international diplomacy but from a common sense prospective it strongly suggested to me that Iran was going for the highest bluster (300 weapons launched) / lowest damage (we even left the fricking lights on to make these things as easy as humanly possible to shoot down) solution they could come up with.

Again, I know next to nothing but I did giggle when I saw what appeared to be nav lights.  

In reply to RX Reven' :

No, I think you are right on with that assessment. It's pretty clear they kinda, don't really want to have a successful attack, but they certainly want to make it look like they are trying really hard. It's a very bizarre, potentially deadly, dance.

I would guess the attack drones do not have nav lights (! kinda defeats the point). The lights may have been Jordanian jets chasing the drones / cruise missiles.  I think they are all F16's now.  I am pretty sure the Jordanian president used to be a fighter pilot BTW.

Iran, like every other country, has to contend with domestic pressures - a dire economy, high unemployment, inflation, and pushback against strict religious rule - but they have also woven an intricate web of proxies that each have their own priorities and are using the Iranians just as much as they are being used by them. In the best of circumstances, Iran can leverage its position to get what it wants, but for as much as they've gained in the last six months, they also have no way out as long as Israel keeps pushing to eliminate Hamas. If they don't stand behind their proxies, they will lose the ability to control them, and if the don't keep the Israeli threat in the headlines, they lose the ability to repress their people with limited risk of backlash. But they're not stupid; they know Israel can hit them very hard indeed, and they won't have many options if it does. Iran's government has achieved a great deal from the Hamas operation, but they risk losing it all and then some if they can't keep juggling all the balls they've put in the air.

In reply to aircooled :

It's the same bluster that has existed for almost 80yrs at this point. 
Talk a big game of destroying/killing the populace of Israel, berkeley around, finally berkeley around enough Israel berkeleys them up, cry to the world about Israel's response. 

Some interesting visuals of the attack.  The first one is more recent and likely more accurate numbers wise.

One report indicates that Iranian television has been showing footage of a fire in Chile and claiming it is damage from strikes inside Israel.

9,300 miles..."Plausible"

Anyone have any idea how much money was spent attacking Israel vs how much money was spent defending Israel?

In reply to Noddaz :

Oh man, it has to be exponentially more on the Israeli defensive side, right?

I read a quote today about the disparity between a $10k drone and a $2m anti-drone missile, and IIRC it was an Israeli source who said "you have to also consider the value of the thing you are protecting," which was something I hadn't really considered before. 
 

Not that it needs a metaphor, but it reminds me of spending $1000 on a transmission service since that's way cheaper than having to replace a whole car.  

"you have to also consider the value of the thing you are protecting," which was something I hadn't really considered before. 

Valid point!

Noddaz said:

Anyone have any idea how much money was spent attacking Israel vs how much money was spent defending Israel?

 

Right, asymmetrical warfare.   

P3PPY said:

In reply to Noddaz :

Oh man, it has to be exponentially more on the Israeli defensive side, right?

I read a quote today about the disparity between a $10k drone and a $2m anti-drone missile, and IIRC it was an Israeli source who said "you have to also consider the value of the thing you are protecting," which was something I hadn't really considered before. 
 

Not that it needs a metaphor, but it reminds me of spending $1000 on a transmission service since that's way cheaper than having to replace a whole car.  

Or buying a $500 firearm to protect your life.  

Not to belabor the point, but I suppose a better metaphor would be that of using $800 body armor to stop a 30 cent bullet. Totally worth it.

In reply to P3PPY :

You're buying $.30 bullets? Dude, where?

Israel has a very good defense system. But, Israel would not win if they went toe to toe with Iran without the US help. Those 300 aerial threats that Iran sent were nothing but a a light pluck from them. 

barefootcyborg5000 said:

In reply to P3PPY :

You're buying $.30 bullets? Dude, where?

I mean, 1000 rounds of 9MM is like $200, so...

In reply to yupididit :

Not entirely sure of that.  Most any defensive system can eventually be overwhelmed, but it's also dependent on the ability to launch that many.   Drones of course can be launched in large numbers pretty easy, but they also took something like 5 hours to get to their target, so plenty of opportunity to take them out if you know they are coming.  Cruise missiles and even more so ballistic missiles will be very much restricted by the number of launchers.  Ballistic missiles (which can be the hardest to intercept and the shortest flight time) will have a rather lengthy reload time.

Now... if you are talking about Hezbollah, in Lebanon (an obvious Iranian proxy) attacking, you are likely very correct.  And again, the fact that they didn't says alot.

Ignoring Hezbollah, without help, I am sure you are right, more would have hit, but it's probably not as certain they have much more capability than they showed (I am sure there are launcher numbers somewhere).  As noted of course, if Iran was successful in killing thousands of Israeli's (I suspect they were aiming for military targets, but misses do happen) that would likely have been very bad for them, assuring a very strong Israeli response, and you think the Israeli's have issues stopping Iran's attacks alone.... 

Looks to be a more official view (?) of the attack tracks.  As you can probably guess, Saudi Arabia also took down a number:

It should also be noted, if it is not obvious:

   Saudi Arabia and Jordan, both Muslim countries...

   Defended Israel from an attack.

(of course they are Sunni Muslims, and Muslims can definitely hate other Muslims, especially if they are not the right "type").

This short article from The National Interest emphasizes the pragmatic approach the Saudis and other Gulf states are taking toward both Israel and Iran. For those living in the neighborhood, it's clear who the problem child is.

Israel struck Iran overnight with an apparently very limited attack that one Israeli cabinet member called "feeble". Information is very limited at this point, but from what I've seen in terms of scale of air defense activity, I suspect there was more going on than meets the eye. Israel is very well-practiced at gathering intel, and any sort of kinetic strike would generate tons of info on Iran's air defense posture, regardless of what was actually hit. A couple of missiles accompanied by a swarm of ELINT drones sniffing around, and possibly decoys without warheads as well, could prove very useful indeed if things escalate further, while at the same time calming US fears of a massive retaliatory effort. Of course, Netanyahu still has to juggle his domestic problems, but the immediacy of the Iranian threat makes that easier, at least in the short term.

I wonder what the determination of US actually being involved other then just selling weapons, tech, ect..? How the Russia and Ukraine conflict, may change the Iran strategy as the giant squashing the bug is not easy or is this what causes WW3?

Yes, Israel's retaliation has been called feeble and pathetic.

Which brings me to a question for people who know much more about those cultures than I.  

Will the Iranian government see this as an insult?

The interesting aspect of this, as o2 mentioned, is the "marketing" of it.  Very little information is being released, by either side, which says a lot.  I think the primary information is some drones where shot down over central Iraq.  Those potentially where MALD decoys, which are drones that can make themselves appear as almost any aircraft and are essentially meant to be shot down (while something else sneaks up and...).

"reports" of strikes at an airbase and some nuclear facilities.  This of course is in stark contrast to the media blitz that both preceded and followed the Iranian strike.  The Iranians want to look tough, but don't really want to do much.  The Israelis want to make a point and do as much damage as possible with the least amount of visibility and effort, which essentially allows the Iranians to ignore it, because it's not obvious to the outside world.  The Iranians obviously are motivated not to report much since it is rather embarrassing that hundreds of missiles and drones launched by them did almost nothing, and whatever Israel just did was certainly far smaller and may have done wildly more significant damage.  Though it should be noted, and likely the case, the Israelis were very much trying to avoid any casualties.

Isfahan, where the strike reportedly happened, is apparently where the Iranian nuclear program is based....

The intel gathering that O2 mentioned is of course very valuable.  Along those lines, the Israeli's likely were privy to the massive amount of data that has been collected on Russian air defense systems (which the Iranians use) used in Ukraine, and couple that with some very advances systems (e.g. F35), likely had very little issue and very few surprises in penetrating Iraqi defenses.

I guess you could say, it's a bit of a message of:  "See how easy that was for us?  With such little effort.  Do you really want us to try harder?"

I am guessing this situation allows enough plausible deniability by Iran to essentially ignore it.  E.g. Al Jezzera is only reporting the drones shot down that I can see and are essentially ignoring it as any sort of significant strike.  As noted in the media thread, Al Jezzera has a pretty neutral view on a lot of things... this is NOT one of them!!

In reply to Noddaz :

I was listening to an interview this morning where they were talking to someone in Iran and also got the impression that maybe the Israelis intended it to be an insult. 

The school that I work for and the schools surrounding them have been protesting, some arrests have been made and security is heightened.  This was before the passing of the bill below.

The Senate on Tuesday evening voted to approve a $95 billion foreign aid package that includes $60 billion in Ukraine aid, $17 billion weapons aid for Israel with over $9 billion in humanitarian aid for Gaza and others.

H.R.8034 - Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024  The Aid for weapons to Israel appear to be small range (25-186 miles), so likely not a target of Iran. I have to assume some of the intelligence gathering is probably connected to Iran. 

I guess this legislation only passed because the other version 10/2023 failed close to the financial end of year and this aid I believe continues into September.  I am wondering if any of this is going to influence the American elections, I imagine it is going to be weak turn out in terms of presidential elections. 

Noddaz said:

Yes, Israel's retaliation has been called feeble and pathetic.

Which brings me to a question for people who know much more about those cultures than I.  

Will the Iranian government see this as an insult?

A guy at work stated that it was akin to a gentleman removing his fancy white glove and slapping a nemesis across the face.