• wanderwisley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    18 hours ago

    How could the Iranian’s do such a thing! Won’t someone please think of poor Israel who shot first, or the idiotic American president who just wants to drop a nuke to satisfy his ego.

  • itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Reports indicate it was a muted response to indicate an intention to deescalate. They had to do something but they didn’t go crazy. We’ll see, I guess.

    • D_C@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I’m pretty sure we will find out…in about 15 years when the big budget all starred Hollywood propaganda movie comes out.

    • PaulBunyan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I heard they fired six missiles - the same amount the US used - intentionally. Targeted non-civilian locations. Weren’t complete dicks about it.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Same thing when trump assassinated soleimani. They rattle a saber a little bit and call it even. Trump announced a ceasefire agreement 3 hours ago so it looks like business as usual.

        • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Evidently it’s an imaginary ceasefire agreement and nobody even asked Iran, so… We’ll see. The token retaliation suggests they aren’t trying to escalate with the US specifically.

  • Hux@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    23 hours ago

    So far, reports state “fired at” but come up short of saying “hit”.

    Sounds like air defenses may have intercepted all of them? At least to the extent we can trust reporting at this stage.

    ngl, it’d be more satisfying to read about a successful counterstrike…

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Why not attack the U.S. directly? There are plenty of coastal bases in the U.S.

    I feel like it would hurt a whole lot more if they were to go after something on U.S. soil…not that I exactly want that. Being bombed at home sounds terrifying.

    Im just curious what the logic was behind this.

    • LillyPip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Perhaps because if they did that, there’s a very high chance trump would nuke them. He’s been itching for a reason to use nukes since his first term, and that would give him the excuse he wants.

      e: I think the fact I got 2 opposing comments (he’d do it without justification and he’d be stopped by the CoC even with justification) might be telling here. He’s a monkey with a machine gun, and who knows if justification would work on others in the chain of command? Perhaps they’d rather not risk that.

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        If Trump wants to nuke them, he nukes them. He doesn’t need a reason, he is a demented megalomaniac with a cult following. There will be some more finger-waggling in congress and pearl clutching for the midterms after the fact and that’s it. So why appease him or try not to upset him?

        Iran probably just thought hitting these targets was easier.

        I fucking hate the world we live in.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Maybe, there are a lot of people who would probably not be too keen on doing that through the chain of command. Nukes aren’t something you just pull out a brief case and push a button with.

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      You are getting downvoted but i agree with you its obvious they dont really try to hurt the US.

      Even the missiles they did fire, ALL of them were intercepted by US missile defence and not a single person was hurt.

      Its just to show that they hit back a little symbolically.

    • cattywampas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      This seems performative. Only a handful of missiles and apparently Iranian state TV is reporting successful strikes, but I can’t find anything reputable that confirms that. Sounds like all missiles were intercepted. Iran gets to show their people that they’ve responded without risking a true escalation.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        That would make sense. I guess from my point of view, I’d be pretty pissed if I was Iran right now. At least 9 of their nuclear scientists were assassinated last week, and now their nuclear sites have been all bombed. That’s as good of a declaration of war as youre going to get. But I can understand why they wouldn’t want to wage an all put war if they dont think they’re prepared for one.

        • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          There’s no way they come out on top in an all-out war with the US. Terrorists working unofficially are their best best. Not like there’s any lack of people who (justifiably) hate the US.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Yeah from the footage I saw in this thread it seems like they were all intercepted by Patriot missiles and if any did hit they did minimal damage. Russia just launched hundreds of drones and missiles into Kyiv. Iran certainly could have done more, so I absolutely agree it’s performative

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Because these are short to medium range ground fired missiles? They don’t reach that far. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think they have submarines that can get close and fire missiles at the United States proper.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      The ONLY good point to this would be that it would draw the US public into action. A base in the Middle East got hit? People shrug it off, it’s nothing new and doesn’t affect them. A naval or army base on the East Coast gets a missile hit? At least if there was disagreement on what to do, we’d be arguing about it. Assuming that Iran can even get that far…

      And to be clear, it’s only a good point in that it would wake people up that shit isn’t right, and maybe they’d feel threatened enough for their own welfare to do something.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      21 hours ago

      There will be a “terrorist” attack in the near future. The something with guns during a crowded event. My money is on a 4th of July event shooting. Sadly that’s the only way Iran and other poor nations have to fight back. Until Iran and poor nations get nukes they will be taken advantage of. I’m pro Iran nukes simple because them not having them is obviously not working for anyone

    • OrganicMustard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      20 hours ago

      There hasn’t been a war on U.S. mainland in 150 years. If a misil hits it it could trigger easily WWIII. Last attack on U.S. was 9/11 and that started multiple wars.