Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

[Ali_Baba]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

KingQamaR made a good plausible theory on what happened. That is, Israel planned a stronger multi-wave attack, but the first wave failed to take out enough of the Irans IADS to punch through a hole, to allow waves 2,3 to get through to all the places they wanted to attack and they were subsequently called off.

We need to see the extent of damage in Iran from what Iran managed to achieve, but it does look like either Israel was either forced to do a smaller response by the Americans, or their attack itself failed to achieve their mission objectives.

It is possible that the IADS was robust and active enough to not give Israel the freedom of movement they wanted and needed to be able to do their mission.

If you consider how many USA assets have been moved into the area, the USA and Israel were/are expecting a big response, which suggests that Israels attack was meant to be far larger than what they managed to achieve, logically.

Question is what was destroyed in Irans IADS and how quickly can those holes be plugged quickly.

Israel's attack while causing some damage and death, failed relative to what their plans and missions were for the attack. However, in practical terms, they may have achieved more actual damage of "things" than Iran did with its strikes.

 

[Lulldapull]

I have seen the drone interceptions in videos

That’s the April Irani attack. I’m talking bout now paa G. Ijh-raheel used only 4 missiles launched from over Al-Jordan no? Ijh-raheel don’t got the capability to respond to Iran no?

 

[Awwad]

Looks like a lot of Zio-US missiles were actually intercepted. These look like cruise missiles and they seem to be taken out by anti-aircraft artillery.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

There is not a single interception in this video. This is anti-aircraft ammo that explodes at certain altitude. If there is a successful interception then you see a massive explosion and debris of missile. What you see is a quick burst of anti-aircraft ammunition, its designed to explode at certain altitude. Its a WWII technology. You see when dive bombers used to dive on targets or ships / carriers. The anti-aircraft fire used to be exploding all around.

All AA shells are set to explode in air.

 

[Nuffle]

Evidence is all there.
SAMs are supposed to defend Iranian assets but we are seeing they are highly ineffective.(Either Israelis are too smart or Iranian Air Defence crew is poorly trained)
Israel simply uses its drones to locate them and then hits them with highly accurate ALBMs.
The death of Air Defence Personnels indicates that these systems were not isolated but properly manned up when Israel hit them.

Iranian Air Force is literally non-existent to challenge the enemy.
Its like a man breaks your door,shoots you from door step and returns unchallenged.


Why do you think they cannot replicate this strategy for sustained compaign in doomsday scenario?

It's funny that I mentioned the lack of evidence of Israel sustaining a multi-wave campaign, but you're evading the subject of Iran's inability to defend itself. Is that self-affirmation or self-preservation? Is the flag on your profile where you were born and live? Because I'm not sure now. Anyway, that's beside the point.

The point is:

The IAF didn't attack in two or three waves, nor was it a "sustained air campaign," because they simply can't do that.

The Air Force's ability to adapt quickly to changing situations, using its Air Units to carry out different types of missions,
using, in each case, tactics and weapons appropriate to the operation to be carried out. This characteristic, inherent to the Air Force, results from the possibilities of multiple use that are normally peculiar to aircraft to a greater or lesser extent, from the application of varied tactics that respond to the needs and conveniences of each particular situation, and also from the diversity of weapons that can constitute the load of aircraft in different configurations.

In applying the Mass Principle, one must consider, among other things, the aspect of saturation of enemy defenses and objectives. Basically, a mass of resources is used that is capable of preventing or hindering an effective air, anti-aircraft and electronic reaction by the enemy. In addition, the resources used must be capable of irreparably destroying an objective, damaging it or neutralizing it to the point where it is not feasible to recover or operate it. The intended effect may also be interdiction or neutralization for a certain period of time.

Saturation plans must be carefully prepared, not only in terms of the resistance of the target and its defenses, but, above all, in terms of the intended strategic effects.

Thus, if the established goal is to achieve air superiority, maximum concentration should be planned against the enemy aerospace complex, with emphasis on its Air Force.

Israel has neither the mass nor the legal requirements to sustain multiple waves of attack for several reasons due to the limiting factor of range. Unfortunately, geography is still the deciding factor for Israel to sustain any major campaign against Iran, and this is completely independent of whether or not Iran is able to defend itself, which is really the least of Iran's concerns.

Unless you can give me concrete evidence that Israel can move its geographic territory closer to Iran, this is simply out of the question. Or do you really think they can do that?

 

[StrategicBear]

Evidence is all there.
SAMs are supposed to defend Iranian assets but we are seeing they are highly ineffective.(Either Israelis are too smart or Iranian Air Defence crew is poorly trained)
Israel simply uses its drones to locate them and then hits them with highly accurate ALBMs.
The death of Air Defence Personnels indicates that these systems were not isolated but properly manned up when Israel hit them.

Iranian Air Force is literally non-existent to challenge the enemy.
Its like a man breaks your door,shoots you from door step and returns unchallenged.


Why do you think they cannot replicate this strategy for sustained compaign in doomsday scenario?

To be fair, it's tough to defend against ALBMs.

Even the much-vaunted Russian S-300 and S-400 are destroyed by the Ukrainians, and Nevatim air base is hit easily too, so this shows air defense systems are pretty hard to fight against an enemy which has ballistic missiles and significant offensive capability.

 

[UKBengali]

Iran fully rebelled the attack. Zionist mouthpieces can spread their propaganda, but it is obvious the child killers failed in their aggression against Iran.

Not fully but mainly.

Remember at least 2 Iranians are dead and it seems more may be injured.

The heavy use of drones and cruise missiles seems to suggest that the entity does not have that many ALBMs. It is not to do with "lighting" up the radars as the range is too vast anyway and cannot be "seen" over the curvature of the Earth's horizon from western Iraq.

 

[Nuffle]

Some drones were intercepted by AA guns ( those drones travelled all the way to Tehran to distract point defences while CMs may have hit the actual target ) . No ALBM was intercepted.

And WZ qoutes officials from both sides.i see nothing wrong with that.

There is no evidence that it was a drone. It could be either a CM or a drone. There is no evidence that there were any ALBM interceptions or any ALBM strikes by Israel. Or did you see this on Copium Zone just because someone on twitter said so?

 

[tsunset]

KingQamar made a plausible theory on what happened. That is, Israel planned a stronger multi-wave attack, but the first wave failed to take out enough of the Irans IADS to punch through a hole, to allow waves 2,3 to get through to all the places they wanted to attack and they were subsequently called off.

We need to see the extent of damage in Iran from what Iran managed to achieve, but it does look like either Israel was either forced to do a smaller response, or their attack itself failed.

If you consider how many USA assets have been moved into the area, the USA and Israel were/are expecting a big response, which suggests that Israels attack was meant to be far larger than what they managed to achieve logically.

Israel's attack while causing some damage and death, failed relative to what their plans and missions were for the attack.

We went from destroying entirely Iranian BM stockpile and nuclear sites in 1 second to this

Iran should continue to produce as maximum of BMs possible, Israel looks to have no real answer to stop that and can only inflict limited and short-term damage, just like the sabotage attacks

 

[MLK]

Reading through this thread is both amusing and disappointing.

It's amusing because, imagine if I’d told you on October 1, after all the bold promises and threats from Israeli officials and pundits about their impending, massive response-one that would supposedly decapitate Iranian and IRGC leadership, targeting figures like Khamenei, and destroy nuclear and oil facilities, as well as ballistic missile production facilities - that a month later, all we would get is this. Calling it "more bark than bite" feels generous; it’s an outright letdown relative to what was promised.

No one sane believed Israel couldn’t inflict harm on Iran, especially with the logistical and intelligence backing of powerful allies like the US, Great Britain, and Germany. The idea that Israel could hit Iran hard wasn’t in question. The failure, however, is how dramatically the reality fell short of their own expectations.
Israel publicly set the bar incredibly high, claiming it would decimate Iranian leadership and devastate nuclear, energy, and military infrastructure. Yet now, a month later, we’re left with a response that seems extremely diluted, with goalposts shifted dramatically.

The disappointment part is wen we see how so-called Muslims from other countries are jumping to Israel's defense, praising the “success” of this weak response and downplaying its failures by cherry-picking and ignoring context.

This kind of reaction is expected from Western Zionists, Indians, and certain kind of exiled Iranian groups, like the so called supporters of the Shah. But for others, this attitude reveals more of a bias against Iran or Shi’a Muslims than any real principles.

Whenever Israel is attacked, the West rallies around it, downplaying the damage done while hyping its successes-like claiming a 99% interception rate on October 1, despite numerous videos clearly showing multiple impacts.

This is how the West keeps certain groups weak—not only through physical military dominance but by mentally occupying minds, sowing division and undermining solidarity, whether by class or by faith.

 

[UKBengali]

There is not a single interception in this video. This is anti-aircraft ammo that explodes at certain altitude. If there is a successful interception then you see a massive explosion and debris of missile. What you see is a quick burst of anti-aircraft ammunition, its designed to explode at certain altitude. Its a WWII technology. You see when dive bombers used to dive on targets or ships / carriers. The anti-aircraft fire used to be exploding all around.

All AA shells are set to explode in air.

Those missiles disappear in the videos and so where did they go? There is too much going on to spot invidual explosions.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

What? The child killing "Israelis" are shitting in their pants and begging Iran not to hit them hard? Not only that, but they also got their enablers to issue both threats and pleas to Iran not to hit hard against the child killers.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Awwad]

Those missiles disappear in the videos and so where did they go? There is too much going on to spot invidual explosions.

LOL bro, there is not a single missile in this video. Its an old fashioned anti-aircraft fire. The AA flak explodes in air at certain altitude.

The AA shells are set to explode itself in every AA gun in every army since WW-II. Its done by purpose. So one, the quick burst at end of effective range can hit anything in its proximity and secondly, you don't want the shell to come back at your own population and rain down over it.

 

[tsunset]

Another logic response would be to target Jordan, they are fully complicit in the death of 5 Iranians (for now) and the injury of dozen of them and material damage

And don't tell us that they can't shoot down Israeli jets that are flying 100m above

 

[StrategicBear]

True Promise 3 might happen soon.
Can't wait for it to see the baby-killing Genociders in that Terrorist State get some justice for killing Iranians and too many women and children.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Nuffle]

There is not a single interception in this video. This is anti-aircraft ammo that explodes at certain altitude. If there is a successful interception then you see a massive explosion and debris of missile. What you see is a quick burst of anti-aircraft ammunition, its designed to explode at certain altitude. Its a WWII technology. You see when dive bombers used to dive on targets or ships / carriers. The anti-aircraft fire used to be exploding all around.

All AA shells are set to explode in air.

So does this mean that Iron Dome here also did not intercept Hamas rockets?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The images are completely similar, you will not see massive explosions and missile debris.