Not really. Remember that Iran engaged in tit for tat the whole time. They hit Israel's military and secret services headquarters after they had hit similar buildings in Iran, they did the same with the refineries. The objective was never a crippling blow on Israel because they wanted to prevent Israel using its nukes. The objective was just to get Israel to stop.
2025 Israel - Iranian conflict
- Thread starter Maikeru
- Start date
For tit for tat logic to hold, Iran would have hit an Israeli plane for every TEL it lost. Israel attrited Iranian TEL more than Iran Israeli air, can't pretend it wasn't lopsided either. Iran tit for tat within their capabilties - spam missiles to hit area targets - and couldn't outside of it. Iranian fast missiles doesn't seem to be able to reliably hit point targets. I surmise their slower cruise missiles (whatever accurate stuff in Syria) / drone can't be cocentrated enmass to really penetrate, israel interceptor depth for that threat tier seem much deeper. Yes, Iran can reciprocally damage some large fixed targets, which is something, but let's not pretend that's operationally equivalent. Israel still in a position to replenish (with US help) and hunt down more Iranian TEL, faster then Iran can rebuild. Like Netanyahu in Washington now, Dermer last week. Another admin would probably kept Israel topped up. Iran lucky Trump wants the Nobel Peace Prize so much and might negotiate their way to rebuilding without Israel starting shit again.
Last edited:
If there is a bright spot (if we can call it that way) in this conflict, is that even the most advanced combined israeli-western ABM systems couldn't stop the moderately advanced iranian IRBMs. Imagine if the iranian missiles were nuke tipped, there would be no Israel left. If they couldn't do that what chance they'd have against the orders of magnitude more advanced russian, chinese and even DPRK missiles. This ought to put a cold shower on those nutjobs in the west dreaming of actually winning in a nuclear war be it limited or otherwise because of the supposed ABM shield protecting them, but then hard to expect reason from the psychos in the zionist american twitter government...
During data analysis it is very important to know the quality of undelrying information,and the transformation methods.
Now, ammount of Iranian affilitated media sources? Set value to 0.1% . Maybe it is waaay too much.
Israely affilitated sources? Ok, lets include the Jews owned sources as well. Presume duing anything against them in a close knited subculture means trouble.
Say it is 50%.
It means that a person receiving info from google (jews in owners), FB (jews owner) or MSM will have to process data for weeks to find positive news for Iran.
In practice ,it means the if I use the "satellite iran israel strike" and check the pictures after opening 30 pages tehe is no one showing the results of Iranian strikes on Israel.
Meaning?
Iran caused extreme damage in Israel, most likelly more severe than the other way around. Or Israel could use the sat pictures t oshow the failure of Iranás strike, like last time.
Means Iran win.
And the events support this as well.
If Iran hasn't got sophisticated weapons in ample supply then Isreal and USA still bombing them for second month.
and don't forget, Iranian military is there to protect the country and citizens, the Israeli is to DESTROY them.
Means if few TEL, miltiary personel died, but Israel managed to cause superfous damage only to Iran then it is a full success.
In war things blow up, soldiers die. But this is they job.
Now, ammount of Iranian affilitated media sources? Set value to 0.1% . Maybe it is waaay too much.
Israely affilitated sources? Ok, lets include the Jews owned sources as well. Presume duing anything against them in a close knited subculture means trouble.
Say it is 50%.
It means that a person receiving info from google (jews in owners), FB (jews owner) or MSM will have to process data for weeks to find positive news for Iran.
In practice ,it means the if I use the "satellite iran israel strike" and check the pictures after opening 30 pages tehe is no one showing the results of Iranian strikes on Israel.
Meaning?
Iran caused extreme damage in Israel, most likelly more severe than the other way around. Or Israel could use the sat pictures t oshow the failure of Iranás strike, like last time.
Means Iran win.
And the events support this as well.
If Iran hasn't got sophisticated weapons in ample supply then Isreal and USA still bombing them for second month.
and don't forget, Iranian military is there to protect the country and citizens, the Israeli is to DESTROY them.
Means if few TEL, miltiary personel died, but Israel managed to cause superfous damage only to Iran then it is a full success.
In war things blow up, soldiers die. But this is they job.
China denies report of air defense system transfers to Iran
The original news about Iran receiving SAMs is likely fake news.
Hmm. Overall in the second article the supply of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery system are denied, but the air defense systems do not belong to this.
However, there simply no time for China to produce any air defense systems for Iran. This is a long process. Similarly, in the case of rumors about J-10C. Even if Iran wants to buy urgently, it takes a lot of time for implementation. This is not a matter of days and a week, but many months and years.
Last edited:
If China doesn't use up the meetings and summits to kill the deliegation, or use them as a cover to kill the country political and military leadership in a suprise attack then they offer more than the USA and collective west.
SAM systems can be manned by Chinese civilians/trainers on holdiay from military duty. Like the USA patriots in Ukraine.
And they can slowly transfer the duty to the Iranians.
Any missile that the system shoot down one less to worry about for the Chinese.
Like every Israely missile that shoot an Iranian drone means one less Ukrainan missile to shoot a Russian Drone.
Wow, so easy to screw up the with idiotic diplomatic/military moves, isn't it?
I tink this wasn't the "overstretch Russia,Iran and China" strategy that the USA dreamed about in 2008.
It looks like oevesrtretch the USA with minimal investment from China, Iran and Russia.
If China really wanted they could send air defense systems and jet fighters from their own units. With their own operators if necessary. The J-10 is being replaced with J-35 anyway.
They could also send their own S-300 systems which are similar to the ones Iran already operate.
But there is little evidence the Chinese government is willing to back Iran to that degree.
As for destruction of the Iranian TELs people make too much of a big deal out of this. It is just a trailer with a jack, pulled by a civilian truck. And produced in Iran not imported.
The Iranian loss of SAMs was way more critical. These use electronics with long lead times and special all terrain vehicles.
They could also send their own S-300 systems which are similar to the ones Iran already operate.
But there is little evidence the Chinese government is willing to back Iran to that degree.
As for destruction of the Iranian TELs people make too much of a big deal out of this. It is just a trailer with a jack, pulled by a civilian truck. And produced in Iran not imported.
The Iranian loss of SAMs was way more critical. These use electronics with long lead times and special all terrain vehicles.
Last edited: