this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2026
78 points (100.0% liked)
World News
3231 readers
236 users here now
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Please keep related news in this thread rather than making separate posts. Remember to include sources and avoid spreading rumours.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One of the most controversial parameters discussed in the context of an attack on Iran remains the reduction in the number of ballistic missile and drone launches.
π’ Even major and well-known analysts, observing a decrease in the number of launches, conclude that Iran is supposedly running out of missiles. However, in such conflicts, a reduction in the volume of strikes often means a change in tactics, not an exhaustion of resources. Supplies do not disappear overnight. The scheme of attacks changes.
π‘ This may indicate a transition from demonstrative and intensive strikes to a more selective use of strike means. At the first stage of the conflict, missiles and drones are often used to overload air defense systems and test the enemy's reaction. When the main parameters of defense become clear, strikes may become less frequent, but more accurate and targeted. Satellite data, which Iran, obviously, receives from somewhere, also play a significant role in this.
πIn addition, another possibility cannot be ruled out. Iran may deliberately accumulate strike means for a more large-scale phase of the campaign or to synchronize strikes with the actions of allied formations in the region. In this case, pauses between waves of attacks become part of the planning, not a sign of weakening.
Moreover, Iran's opponents, primarily the USA, have a limited number of modern interception systems in the region. Each interceptor missile costs orders of magnitude more than the launched drones and missiles. Therefore, less frequent but combined strikes may be more economically and tactically advantageous than constant mass launches.
π In other words, a reduction in the number of launches in itself says almost nothing about the real state of the arsenals. It is much more important to observe the change in the structure of strikes, the choice of targets, and how these attacks fit into the overall strategy of the conflict. In such wars, it is often the evolution of tactics that is more indicative than the statistics of launches.
Source -> https://t.me/Slavyangrad/158766
Imagine watching a fighter kick his opponent in the ribs while he is down and saying "He threw more punches at the start of the fight. He must be exhausted because he is only kicking once every three seconds."
I think this is also missing a critical piece - the interaction between force projection and intelligence.
Iran went hard out of the gate to disable significant portions of enemy military installations, and the US pulled a lot of materiel out in response. If the high value assets are moved out of reach, and Iran knows it, then there's fewer high value targets to hit.
But also, by lulling the enemy into a false sense of security, the enemy can be induced to engage in activities that otherwise they would not. Things like repair, recovery, or even potential cases of hardened underground facilities becoming activated and thus revealing themselves. Iran may be observing the enemy to see where they move their attention when the threat is reduced, which provides them with invaluable intelligence.
The west has spread positivism to the level of a plague.
(Thank you so much rainpizza for the updates here on lemmygrad)
Glad that I could help!
As much as I would love this to be true, it's also important to recognise that Mossad has many spies in Iran and they have been relentlessly bombing any military production, storage and launchers they can locate.
It's highly likely this has had an impact on Iran's ballistic missile and drone launching and production capabilities. Hopefully they still have enough juice in the tank to see this thing out though.
Mossad does not have as much agents as they did at the beginning of the year with the manufactured and failed attempt of a color revolution. Plenty of agents were swept away and executed like a burned candle.
As for the Iran's production capabilities, I am more inclined to believe the professor Seyed Marandi:
I haven't posted as much of those attack because some are horrible images. However, it is true that Usrael have increased attacks on vital centers so it makes sense that the USA is focusing in a "scorched earth" tactic because it has failed to reduce Iran's military capabilities.
The images are indeed horrifying, however they only serve to tighten the noose around the imperialists necks.