Iran Super Thread- Merged

[rmc_wannabe]

I’m not sure how many ‘D’s of chess this is.

It's the maze on the childrens placemat menu.

 

[GR66]

Wow. Iran fired two ballistic missiles at Diego Garcia, a range of some 4000km. One failed mid flight, another was shot down by the U.S. Navy. That’s a bit of a big-balls move by Iran.

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/iran-us-israel-war-updates-2026/card/iran-targeted-diego-garcia-base-with-ballistic-missiles-rb7MdZW1CfwRTauDYHOt

I suggest you re-read your history of WWII. While, for the Blitz and the V-1 campaigns, Londoners knew what was coming and could shelter, the V-2 made absolutely no noise and gave no warning whatsoever. The Londoners learned of a V-2 arrival when a city block somewhere just blew up. Since they were imprecise, nobody knew who or where the next hit would be. That stress from the V-2 campaign almost broke the Londoners' morale and psychologically affected quite a large number of them. Based on historical research shortly after the war, it was the one campaign (V-2) that caused the most distress to the City's inhabitants in the whole war.

Now take that and the 4000Km range circle and see who could be targeted in the West or the middle east and, unlike the first two aimed at DG who went under the civilians' "Radar", hit a city without warning a few times and the population will be screaming for action, and that would lead to an all out war in the M.E.

In fact, Tehran to London isn't much further than Tehran to Diego Garcia. I wonder how the strong the ABM defences in Southern England are?

Not saying it would be in Iran's interest to do so, but just pointing out how easily this could seriously escalate.

 

[daftandbarmy]

In fact, Tehran to London isn't much further than Tehran to Diego Garcia. I wonder how the strong the ABM defences in Southern England are?

Not saying it would be in Iran's interest to do so, but just pointing out how easily this could seriously escalate.

They wouldn't want to blow up their expensive flats in Belgravia

 

[Cloud Cover]

Mm hm. We’ll see more shift to oil contracts settled in other currencies out of this.

Canadian Tire money for the win.

 

[Brad Sallows]

So they are allowing Iran to get paid legally for this oil which in turn they can use that money to continue to pay their supporters within Iran to continue to kill/suppress anyone protesting against the regime. Does that sum it up nicely?

Yes. Iran gets its money, and a slight bit of economic pressure is relieved. Both sides get something. The Iranian government of course has to decide what mix of guns and butter is imperative for its survival at this point.

It's not the first unusual trade-off. Ukraine kept pipelines open from Russia to Europe for a few years before turning them off, and might turn them on again. That can be framed the same way: Russia got paid legally and could use that money to continue to attack Ukraine.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Now take that and the 4000Km range circle and see who could be targeted in the West or the middle east and, unlike the first two aimed at DG who went under the civilians' "Radar", hit a city without warning a few times and the population will be screaming for action, and that would lead to an all out war in the M.E.

It might, but it would be terror bombing. That's a different context than long-range attacks on military forces and military-supporting infrastructure.

Politicians caving to terror bombing would be an interesting lesson.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Politicians caving to terror bombing would be an interesting lesson.

You mean like President Reagan after the bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon?

 

[Brad Sallows]

You mean like President Reagan after the bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon?

That was a military target. The distinction between military and civilian is critical here.

 

[brihard]

It might, but it would be terror bombing. That's a different context than long-range attacks on military forces and military-supporting infrastructure.

Politicians caving to terror bombing would be an interesting lesson.

Yeah, I don’t see them just lobbing rounds into population centers. And they can’t have many of those missiles at all. I think yesterday was a demonstration of capability and defiance; “if you walk away from this, know that you haven’t won”.

I could see them firing at a base or two that are directly connected to attacks. That said, if it was a low volume of missiles I think NATO’s collective ABM would have things covered?

 

[Brad Sallows]

I think yesterday was a demonstration of capability and defiance;

Yes. Iran seems to have more capability (range) than some people thought and have conveniently confirmed a new minimum. Some will take that as a warning, and some as a challenge; of the latter, some will regard it as an unacceptable risk.

 

[Jarnhamar]

We claim to be a middle power and want to maintain influence in that region, it means we needed to have a presence (even a token on) in the region.

Canadadian politicians talk like we have a few WW2 size divisions behind us.