|
|
|
|
|
|
by nandomrumber
63 days ago
|
|
|
I mean, it’s not like Iran built those intermediate range ballistic missiles / hypersonics as yard ornaments for their underwater basket weaving community classes. It’s not like the location of US bases in the area is a secret. If Iran wanted to use those hypersonics in an act of defence they would target military installations only. We can then safely assume that those intermediate range ballistic missiles have been used for their intended purpose: the intentional destruction of industrial and residential areas in Israel and industrial targets of US allies in the area. The probability that those missiles would be used on those targets was always unity. |
|
|
Yup
In your assessment, unity.
In my assessment well above 80%, certainly so much that they IRGC missile program should have been dealt with decades ago.
But in the assessment of the rest of the market, both the stock market and the industry planning 'market', the probability was in single digits. Likely in no small part due to normalcy bias. If it had been any higher, they would have made backup and recovery plans already.
Of course, I think the US should have been making a stockpile of replacement power grid transformers, and requiring every house to have 1kW of solar power decades ago. But they don't.
It is the new situation in consideration of their lack of insight into the probabilities and planning that makes it different, no? Just because you an I can foresee a problem, doesn't mean everyone can, or will do anything about it. So now, if that target is not defended, the backup plan is years away instead of already running. Worse yet, if the backup plan was already running, targeting that production facility would be near-pointless...