[ChuckMcM]

I think the article downplays the element that the attack probably achieved its goal which was not to actually hit something at Diego Garcia, but to show that thing 2500 miles from Iran are potentially targetable by Iran. That starts conversations like the one here and in other fora about whether or not Iran would limit themselves to military targets (Russia doesn't as an example) and if not how could Europe and its East Asian allies protect literally everything with their finite supply of defensive units.

[JumpCrisscross]

> to show that thing 2500 miles from Iran are potentially targetable

Iran has had IRBMs for some time. Demonstration doesn’t hurt. But demonstrating failure doesn’t particularly help either.

[chasd00]

The thing is Iran has long promised their max range was 2k Km and so defensive only. This shows that was a lie.

[roncesvalles]

All countries publicly understate the max range that their missiles can go. This is generally understood in the defense community.

[ofrzeta]

What's the point? Naively one would think it is the opposite.

[navane]

I heard the same about the number and location of French nuclear war heads, or their exact red lines. If you tell the enemy your limit they're gonna sit exactly on it.

[Glawen]

To surprise your ennemy. I've heard recently that they tune military hardware differently in peace than in war, e.g. radar signals frequency.

[sashagim]

> whether or not Iran would limit themselves to military targets

This question has long been answered

[machomaster]

How is it? So far they seem to be trying to hit actual non-civilian targets. Missing with the rockets on intended targets is a different matter.

And yes, hitting offices with American financial institutions or hotels with American soldiers in them is fine.

[sashagim]

Attacks on Israel clearly show that Iran - just like Russia - sees the civilian population as a legitimate target. Question of tactics remains, of course.

[parthdesai]

So just like US and Israel?

[big-and-small]

Except it would be very weird goal to achieve because it's only give more reasons to bomb whole country into oblivion and justify deployment of ground troops.

[Spooky23]

They’re at war. The US and Israel are bombing everything anyway.

Strategically, Diego Garcia is a forward operating base for irreplaceable B-52 and B-2 bombers. Placing them at risk on the ground seems like a reckless call, more likely the US pulls those resources back to the US.

I’m not rooting for Iran, but since the US has who they have making the calls, Iran has obvious strategic cards to play - escalation benefits them.

[DoctorOetker]

one missile fails, the other is intercepted

your conclusion: US will pull those resources back?

[Spooky23]

As a defender, you only need to fail once. Blow up a few B-2s on the ramp and that becomes a event with unlimited bad potential.

[urikaduri]

By the time it takes the missiles to reach there, the planes could be in the air.

[machomaster]

Could be. But won't be. The flying time to target is mere minutes, and taking the plane from zero (not even crew inside) to air takes much longer than that.

[JumpCrisscross]

There is probably a hardline faction within Iran that still thinks it gains from further bombing and forced isolation.

[jhanschoo]

Why would Iran end up further isolated due to this war, and out of escalation? (your sentence is slightly ambiguous so I assume that you are referring to it.) If it successfully asserts control over the Strait as it seems to presently be doing, it should be able to negotiate a peace favorable to itself. Even with the status quo, I don't know how that figures into things, but the US has temporarily lifted sanctions on Iranian oil.

I don't follow the news very well, but from what I know the claim that you make isn't very obviously true but needs some evidence for it to stand.

[kombookcha]

I think this is the elephant in the roomt - in terms of quantifiable goals, Iran is winning this thing. I think they're going to want to punish the US and Israel to an extent where they will be reluctant to feel this particular sting again, and they want to assert their ability to control the strait. And it's working! They're clearly demonstrating that the US cannot simply decide when this is over and dictate terms, because Iran can pinch off an important vein of global commerce and probably sustain that pressure for far longer than it can be tolerated by other economies.

They've already gotten one concession in terms of this temporary sanctions relief, even as Trump frames it as a domestic emergency measure and repeatedly declares total victory each day of the conflict. They also got him to back off on targeting their power plants by promising to retaliate in kind against the power infrastructure of US aligned states in range.

I think the US has the ability to beat Iran in a fight, but it does not have the preparation or the resolve to do so at this time, because this is some halfcocked nonsense plan with amorphous goals that they thought would be over in a week.

[jacquesm]

Not without 100K coffins. And that doesn't really sell all that well in the US.

[kombookcha]

Exactly. The price to actually do this is simply not one the US is willing to pay.

[PixyMisa]

Yep. The IRGC runs the country at this point, and they do not have anyone else's best interests in mind.

[pasquinelli]

maybe they aren't as worried about that as they should be. maybe america isn't as worried about that as it should be.

but, what are you saying? it would be weird for iran to act in a way that might provoke escalation? you mean in the totally unprovoked war israel/america launched against them?

[yongjik]

I don't know which country you're from, but in most countries, "our troops may get bombed if we join this war" is a very strong public argument against joining the war.

Just look at Trump's latest attempt to enlist his "allies" into sending warships to the Strait of Hormuz, and what a resounding success it was.

[hshdhdhj4444]

Not really. Because no one in Europe wants to bomb Iran into oblivion, if for no other reason but the fact that the Europeans (and Turkey) would face another massive refugee crisis.

The only people wanting to continue this war are the U.S. and Israel (and maybe Saudi Arabia?) and even Trump is clearly looking for an off ramp.

This is most likely a way for Iran to tell Europe to do what they can to end this otherwise they will drag Europe into this mess as well.

[bigfatkitten]

> and maybe Saudi Arabia?

The war is extremely bad for business for Saudi Arabia and has already cost them enormous amounts of money. It is causing damage to their oil refineries that will take years to repair.

The only person who gains anything out of this is Netanyahu and his friends. Everyone else loses, including the Israeli people.

[srean]

That is so because of Iran's choice of targets. SA might have misjudged that their business assets would be attacked.

There is some chatter that crown prince supported and approved the assassination of Khamenei and possibly supplies supportive intelligence.

They haven't been exactly friendly with Iran.

The odd ball is Qatar. Qatar had been working hard to have friendly relations with Iran. So I was surprised by Iran's attack on Qatari interests.

[machomaster]

This is what actually happened, but not what was predicted.

According to journalists, it was Saudis who have been trying for a long time to convince Trump to attack Iran.

Sunni vs. Shia, there is a history there.

[jacquesm]

There are unfortunately plenty of idiots in Europe who learned nothing from accompanying the USA on their previous illegal adventures abroad.

[big-and-small]

Europe to do what to stop the war? EU cant even stop war on their own borders. And we seen what Trump buddies think about EU in their leaked Signal chat.

Also it's not like EU and UK actually have any military capacity to bomb Iran even if they wanted because again everything they do have is going to Ukraine already.