3/21/2026 at 5:00:50 PM
The article kind of downplays the most interesting elements. Not an expert, but to my limited understanding:* I think this is the longest-range use of a ballistic missile in anger, possibly ever?
* This seems to reveal previously-unknown range of Iranian ballistic missiles and, if true, could touch basically all of Europe?
by carbocation
3/21/2026 at 6:58:25 PM
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.by ChuckMcM
3/21/2026 at 7:14:26 PM
> to show that thing 2500 miles from Iran are potentially targetableIran has had IRBMs for some time. Demonstration doesn’t hurt. But demonstrating failure doesn’t particularly help either.
by JumpCrisscross
3/21/2026 at 8:44:36 PM
The thing is Iran has long promised their max range was 2k Km and so defensive only. This shows that was a lie.by chasd00
3/22/2026 at 2:35:07 AM
All countries publicly understate the max range that their missiles can go. This is generally understood in the defense community.by roncesvalles
3/22/2026 at 4:59:56 AM
What's the point? Naively one would think it is the opposite.by ofrzeta
3/22/2026 at 12:13:26 PM
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.by navane
3/22/2026 at 8:25:46 AM
To surprise your ennemy. I've heard recently that they tune military hardware differently in peace than in war, e.g. radar signals frequency.by Glawen
3/22/2026 at 6:01:37 AM
[dead]by NomDePlum
3/22/2026 at 6:55:16 AM
> whether or not Iran would limit themselves to military targetsThis question has long been answered
by sashagim
3/22/2026 at 12:10:43 PM
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.
by machomaster
3/22/2026 at 12:39:07 PM
Attacks on Israel clearly show that Iran - just like Russia - sees the civilian population as a legitimate target. Question of tactics remains, of course.by sashagim
3/22/2026 at 4:04:48 PM
So just like US and Israel?by parthdesai
3/21/2026 at 7:10:50 PM
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.by big-and-small
3/21/2026 at 7:28:40 PM
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.
by Spooky23
3/21/2026 at 9:39:55 PM
one missile fails, the other is interceptedyour conclusion: US will pull those resources back?
by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 2:30:00 AM
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.by Spooky23
3/22/2026 at 7:00:12 AM
By the time it takes the missiles to reach there, the planes could be in the air.by urikaduri
3/22/2026 at 12:13:06 PM
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.by machomaster
3/21/2026 at 7:15:07 PM
There is probably a hardline faction within Iran that still thinks it gains from further bombing and forced isolation.by JumpCrisscross
3/22/2026 at 5:55:42 AM
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.
by jhanschoo
3/23/2026 at 11:56:24 AM
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.
by kombookcha
3/23/2026 at 8:40:39 PM
Not without 100K coffins. And that doesn't really sell all that well in the US.by jacquesm
3/24/2026 at 5:34:26 AM
Exactly. The price to actually do this is simply not one the US is willing to pay.by kombookcha
3/21/2026 at 7:18:12 PM
Yep. The IRGC runs the country at this point, and they do not have anyone else's best interests in mind.by PixyMisa
3/21/2026 at 7:35:19 PM
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?
by pasquinelli
3/21/2026 at 7:22:01 PM
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.
by yongjik
3/21/2026 at 9:46:38 PM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 6:08:57 AM
Maintaining peace is not the same as restoring peace. Perhaps the American executive should have extrapolated the consequences of their actions using a model of the real world and not the fever dream they seem to be in. I am all for the Europeans standing their ground and not letting themselves get dragged into a conflagration not of their desiring nor of their making.Trump and co are finding out that FAFO goes both ways. Much to the cost of all of us, Americans, Iranians, Europeans and the rest of us.
by phs318u
3/22/2026 at 4:34:07 PM
When the Nazi regime proliferated, do you think the allies considered it of their own desire or their own making? Should they have prevented themselves from getting dragged into WW2? Or was it good they allowed themselves to get dragged into WW2 and disarm the Nazi regime?Suppose the Allies just moved away and made "lebensraum" for the Nazi regime, would you have called it "standing their ground and not letting themselves get dragged into a conflagration not of their desiring nor of their making" ??
I think most people would understand a different course of action when reading "standing ground"...
Of course there are costs that come with peace, and if we postpone those costs for too long, the average expenditure can rise compared to timely intervention.
by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 4:58:09 PM
WW2 had a clear bad side. This conflict doesn't have any clear good or bad sides. The only expansionist party in any case in this conflict is Israel.by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 11:57:32 AM
I'm explaining why a European holds this position, Iran approaching nuclear weapons capability, approaching ICBM launch capability, approaching re-entry vehicle capability is the "lebensraum" we shouldn't tolerate.Watching from the sidelines disapprovingly, while benefiting in this sense from the US/Israeli mission objectives, and even being "willing to go as far as" effectively posing in a security theater role (since a single shot fired would imply abortion of the mission), wasting tax payer money on symbolic gestures, is what I protested.
But it matters little now, European countries are starting to turn around and think a little deeper than the b-hurt mentioned earlier.
by DoctorOetker
3/23/2026 at 12:01:40 PM
Lebensraum? Lebensraum is a very nice word. Israel has been the only country in this that is engaging in Lebensraum. Europe would have negative benefit in joining a stupid war created by fanatical Israeli and American governments.by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 1:38:36 PM
I don't vouch for the incentives nor actions of Israel, I vouch for why a nonzero number of Europeans (including me) think Europe should get involved in disarming Iran, and prevent it from attaining the "lebensraum" to threaten Europe with nuclear weapons.by DoctorOetker
3/23/2026 at 1:53:08 PM
Why not? Then I should in WW2 times have said we must oppose jews and work our hardest to disarm jews and their defenders. Hitler did Lebensraum? I don't vouch for the incentives nor actions of Israel.You seem to have some kind of hallucinatory issue where you see chemical weapons where there are none, and accuse a country that has never done and shown no signs of Lebensraum of doing so while completely ignoring the only country in that region actively doing Lebensraum.
If you worry about Lebensraum you should be working urgently to control and make toothless the only country thats actually doing Lebensraum, not live in made up stories with of your own making that have absolutely zero even speculative sense and getting scared off of them.
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 5:31:37 PM
> Why not? Then I should in WW2 times have said we must oppose jews and work our hardest to disarm jews and their defenders. Hitler did Lebensraum? I don't vouch for the incentives nor actions of Israel.I don't understand your argument?
> You seem to have some kind of hallucinatory issue where you see chemical weapons where there are none, and accuse a country that has never done and shown no signs of Lebensraum of doing so while completely ignoring the only country in that region actively doing Lebensraum.
If you believe such discussion would be fruitful I am more than willing to describe what I see when, and how I collate evidence and arrive at my conclusions. I did ask you if you watched the long multi-segment version of Mahsa Amini at the fashion police, or just a short one.
Also take note that anyone else reading along will think it strange that of all possible manners of dying you mentioned the right mode before I mentioned it to you, basically saying you also see it.
It seems you don't understand the concept of lebensraum, I'm not worried about European lebensraum you seem to be referring to: while we failed to learn our lesson after WW1, the mandatory education programmes after WW2 seem to have worked much better, and European nations haven't been lobbing chemical weapons at each other for roughly 100 years now, it works, and we know it works, we disapprove of Iran's regime, not because of their religion (there are muslims in the West as well), not because of skin tone, nor because of the oil under their feet, we disapprove of Iran's regime because we recognize our former collective selves (by education, since almost every direct witness has withered away by the passage of time).
I'm worried about Iran's concept of "lebensraum" involving the capability to threaten Europe with nuclear weapons. Yes Russia, Pakistan, India, China, ... can already do that. Our inability to disarm established nuclear powers should not be confused for acceptance of upcoming nuclear powers. If we can nip those in the bud, we could, we should and I assure you we will.
by DoctorOetker
3/23/2026 at 8:32:42 PM
>I don't understand your argument?Yes, you seem to be having some issue with your glasses or monitor today, so I will just write it again to make it clearer.
Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.
I think your problem with your monitor might cover a large swath of the screen so it is beneficial for me to repeat the key text a few more times, so that it has a better chance of getting past your screen's problems:
Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.
Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.
Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.
Israel is the only country in this conflict who has and is engaging in Lebensraum.
>Also take note that anyone else reading along will think it strange that of all possible manners of dying you mentioned the right mode before I mentioned it to you, basically saying you also see it.
That's because its the only logical reading of your brain machinations I can think of when seeing a video of a person fainting, when literally no other news in the world seems to say chemical weapons about her, even if it mentions chemical attacks on other people. Again, you have another weird thing where you feel a country would bring out obscure chemical war agents just to kill a single person. Chemical agents are for the battlefield to kill thousands of people. For a single person, any perfectly mundane poison or chemical is fine even if that were actually the case.
Who said anything about European Lebensraum?
Israel is ALREADY AND EXPLICITLY ENGAGING IN LEBENSRAUM. Israel is the only country doing lebensraum. Iran has shown no interest in Lebensraum. If you are so concerned about Lebensraum, go attack Israel and decapitate their military capabilities.
Both Iran and Israel are governed by religious fanaticism, if you wish to twist and redefine Lebensraum to be something ridiculous it clearly isn't then Israel is engaging in DOUBLE LEBENSRAUM, not just the original Hitleric definition of Lebensraum but also your completely made up imaginary definition of Lebensraum. Again, go launch a military campaign against Israel if you are so worried about that.
Since you love puzzles so much, I will give you a much better puzzle with clear objective answers. Tell me who said this quote, and whether the nations he mentioned have ever threatened his country:
"We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force."
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 9:36:55 PM
It's Martin van Creveld, an Israeli military theorist and military historian.To my knowledge European nations have never threatened his country, if you mean the modern state of Israel.
If you refer to the holocaust during WW2, then yes multiple European nations were collaborators and participated in the holocaust.
If you refer to earlier events, then also yes, there is a long history of persecution and Diaspora.
As I said, there are many nations that possess nuclear weapons, the non-proliferation treaties don't describe how to treat possessors of nuclear weapons, it describes agreements on how to prevent new nations from acquiring the capability.
Can you please tell me if you watched the long multi-segment video of the surveillance footage surrounding Mahsa Aminis death, or just the single scene of her collapse?
by DoctorOetker
3/24/2026 at 3:13:42 AM
No, you first tell me. Why shouldn't Europe want to completely eliminate and contain Israel when Israeli government and Israeli agents say deranged things like this. Iran hasn't said they want to nuke every single European country. An Israeli did. Israel is engaging in Lebensraum. You accused Iran of Lebensraun. Iran never did Lebensraum. Israel does. You accuse Iran of threatening Europe with nukes. Iran never threatened Europe with nukes. Israel has threatened Europe with nukes. It is very clear who Europeans should neutralize.by donkeybeer
3/24/2026 at 12:19:06 PM
A historian is not the government?If European countries had to justify every utterance by European historians they'd be busy for a long time...
You just keep ignoring how non-proliferation works, if you find evidence that Israel is approaching nuclear weapons capabilities, approaching mature ICBM capabilities, and if you have evidence that they are not quite there yet, then YES nuclear powers should collaborate on neutralizing the threat. There is disagreement if we are or are not too late on North Korea, hence why many oppose attempting to disarm it. But in the case of Iran it's not too late yet.
All the nuclear superpowers essentially developed their capabilities in sufficient stealth to attain those powers.
This is basic real politik.
by DoctorOetker
3/24/2026 at 5:22:36 PM
As I have stated elsewhere I find Iran and Israel not particularly better than either, and Israel worse in terms of psychotic unprovoked violence to others and things which the other parties they attacked have never done to Israel (poisoning other countries crops via plane!!). In that light, I will be frank, I don't mind Iran getting nukes. If Iran getting nukes puts a balance in the power differential and silences Israel's belligerence that would be a great achievement.by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 12:47:11 PM
The Germans attacked Poland. It was only then the allies got involved.by phs318u
3/21/2026 at 10:15:06 PM
So you are embarrassed that your leaders don't want their soldiers to die in a war started by another country without providing any semblance of justification?...I'm just glad that European politicians take their soldiers' lives more seriously than the court of public opinions. Well, at least some of them. That's the mark of being an adult.
by yongjik
3/21/2026 at 10:47:29 PM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 1:11:01 AM
> I think many in the Pentagon are relieved that they were finally able to convince a president of what needed to be done a long time beforeLike your other comments, this is abjectly false. Our generals and admirals specifically warned against going to war with Iran.
by beedeebeedee
3/22/2026 at 1:21:03 AM
I am willing to hear you out on this, but the Pentagon employs a lot of personnel, can you demonstrate that the sentiment you describe was actually representative?Clearly those who do believe in this intervention don't have the same incentive to speak up as those that disagree with it.
It is also rather vague to conflate warnings with disagreement:
They can believe in the validity of an approach but still have the legal obligation to not just inform the president of the values and benefits of such a mission, but also warn him of any potential negative outcomes.
Warning someone about a path of action, is not equivalent to disagreeing with that path of action, it can be their job description to provide such warnings.
That said, I would like to read more about what you are referring to, to make sure we are talking about the same things.
by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 1:30:27 AM
Google is your friendTo get you started: https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington...
https://www.axios.com/2026/02/23/iran-strike-trump-gen-dan-c...
by beedeebeedee
3/22/2026 at 1:55:06 AM
From your own source:> Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine has been advising President Trump and top officials that a military campaign against Iran could carry significant risks, in particular the possibility of becoming entangled in a prolonged conflict, according to two sources with knowledge of those internal discussions.
"that a military campaign against Iran could carry significant risks, "
specifically
"could carry"
Sounds like people doing their job, and informing a president of potential outcomes, precisely what I predicted above. The media always makes things seem more adversarial than what it turns out to be.
by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 2:05:31 AM
Your comments make it clear that you are a propagandist and maybe even a bot. I assume that you can comprehend English, but are choosing to be obtuse. If that is not the case, and you still cannot understand the warnings, ask Claude or some other AI to help you.by beedeebeedee
3/22/2026 at 7:11:00 AM
[flagged]by urikaduri
3/22/2026 at 2:12:14 AM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 8:59:11 AM
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47471826Iran doesn't have nukes and had agreed to never build any, they fully complied with all audits.
You seem extremely confused, its really strange why you aren't demanding completely bombing and destroying the actual nukes in the only Middle Eastern country that has illegal nukes.
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 7:08:14 AM
Hah, I'm so used to thinking about these missiles as conventional that I forgot it actually means Iran was building the capability to nuke Europe. Or more accurately - to deter Europe with nukes while they export terrorism globally.by urikaduri
3/22/2026 at 8:56:25 AM
The only Middle Eastern country that has illegal nukes and doesn't deny the theories that they would nuke the whole world, including innocent countries when they felt "threatened" and they feel threatened by anything and everything, is not Iran.by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 10:26:39 AM
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't really believe the nonsesne you are writing, and just trolling.by urikaduri
3/22/2026 at 4:08:46 PM
It's not just about Iran, there are videos of some Israeli people bragging about how they throw rocks and fire grenades and rockets at Palestinian settlements, its quite clear that some people including elements of government and military have become quite deranged, which is all the more concerning given their lack of comment clarifying they don't believe in Samson option. Obviously if it was a question like "Do you think Jews control the world and own all the banks?" would be ridiculous question unworthy of an answer, but asking if the Samson option is real or false is a perfectly reasonable question especially given Israeli elements like Pollard are claiming that more extreme version of the option as true. The modern Israeli government has a policy of declaring anything and everything antisemitic, and obviously, the next step after "knowing" something is sufficiently anti semitic is some kind of military action as evidenced by the events of past few years.Iran has always obliged with inspections of its nuclear program. It has never built any nukes. It had agreed to stop refining nuclear materials in negotiations, and then America and Israel backstabbed it and attacked Iran during the negotiations, to also speak nothing of the various times Israeli military action killed negotiators in progress.
In light of all this, it is now upon you to tell me which is false and which is "trolling".
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 2:31:22 PM
Which part do you think is wrong?Do you believe Israel doesn't have illegal nukes? Or are you thinking Israel hasn't yet clarified or denied the extreme version of the so called Samson policy?
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 8:51:29 AM
Why would wanting to die for a war caused by America and Israel be a "show of strength", that'd instead be a show of being fucking chumps esp after America continually insulted and threatened them. I do think Europe has a potential good role they can commit, and that would be in solving the major nuclear threat in the Middle East: to make public and decommission or transfer in safe keeping all the illegal nukes Israel has.by donkeybeer
3/21/2026 at 10:37:28 PM
[flagged]by beedeebeedee
3/21/2026 at 10:45:15 PM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/21/2026 at 10:57:35 PM
[flagged]by beedeebeedee
3/22/2026 at 12:17:12 AM
> Wow, it is clear that you are trolling and acting as a propagandist.Asking a question about how Mahsa Amini died is not trolling or propaganda, its not even a statement, but a question.
> You do know that you can be against violence, hatred and bigotry in general, and not just that of your ‘enemies’, right?
I know that, but can you please answer the question, it is you who brought up the matter of critical thinkink skills after all.
by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 12:33:13 AM
> I know thatDo you? Your whataboutism and dismissing concerns about this war as being butthurt is the dumbest and most morally bankrupt response anyone can make. I absolutely condemn the Iranian regime for what they have done, but that in no way excuses what the Israeli and US regimes have done. This was an unnecessary, unprovoked, world-destabilizing and ultimately counterproductive war. Please stop
by beedeebeedee
3/23/2026 at 2:01:11 PM
LMFAO I had tried to engage him since he was insisting so much I thought he might have something of substance. This is what I got at the end of that hole:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47482420
Another fun interaction:
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 12:39:29 AM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 8:53:28 AM
Obviously, I heartily condemn all attempts by Iranian government to execute peaceful civilians in foreign countries just like I heavily condemn Israel's illegal assassinations of peaceful civilian scientists in Iran and worldwide. In both cases, the perpetrators must be brought to a neutral country and punished.by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 4:17:05 PM
> I am not asking you if you condemn what happened to her, I think everyone condemns the fact she died in the hands of the regime,to which you respond:
> Obviously, I heartily condemn all attempts by Iranian government to execute peaceful civilians in foreign countries
So you change the question from "what actually happened to Mahsa Amini?" to "would you condemn?" even though I predict that any responder already agrees with me and condemns her death in the hands of the regime.
Mahsa Amini was not in a foreign country from the perspective of Iran.
by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 4:23:28 PM
That's nothing, Israelis happily kill their own Prime Ministers. But obviously I condemn Iran and I condemn Israel killing peaceful civilians, the law and the morality applies to all. I mentioned killing civilians in foreign countries as it is strictly worse, as bad as killing innocent people in your own country is, at least it also does not involve the violation of sovereignty and peace of random foreign countries.It is well known that IDF also uses civilians as human shields, so it is quite strange that you only mention the evils and immoral acts committed by one country and not both. None of the countries in that region are very nice by Western standards.
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 5:30:51 PM
But what if the Mahsa Amini's case is not just a sad death in the hands of the regime, but also a violation of a treaty which Iran has signed?by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 5:56:12 PM
If it is the ICCPR, then it appears Israel is also a signer and as I said Israel is equally prone to violations of human rights on and off of its territory. So again I do not see what was the point of specifically calling out Iran for it.by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 7:31:39 PM
I am referring to a different treaty, which you would realize if you took over from beedeebeedee to look up the video of Mahsa Amini's death and analyzed it critically.by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 9:35:42 PM
All I can see is a video of a woman supposedly fainting and then this being declared her death.If you are trying to insinuate some absurd nonsense like this is evidence of chemical weapons, then be straight. I don't see anything about her cause of death other than speculating police brutality.
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 10:26:02 PM
chemical weapon is precisely what it isdid you see the longer multi-segment video, or just the single scene where she collapses?
by DoctorOetker
3/23/2026 at 3:38:22 AM
You tell me, you are saying something which literally no news website is saying.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_schoolgirls_mass_poiso...
This doesn't mention Mahsa and claims this was done without the state's knowledge by random actors. And that it's most probably some random household agent not nErVe gAs.
Again, you tell me what is the significance of all this to the Iran-Israel war which Israel started not Iran. Both countries are shitholes, I don't have any particular love for either.
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 1:57:35 PM
Since we are doing wild theories, let us add some more of our own.Mossad and its private arms are doing covert operations to corrupt European elections, oh wait, they are already doing so. Israel is spraying chemical weapons on neighboring countries crops, oh wait they are already doing so. Israel has 400 nuclear warheads, oh wait they already do.
Strange, I didn't seem to need to go to even speculations and unverified theories to get to these. I wonder how far we can get the tally if go into speculations.
by donkeybeer
3/22/2026 at 7:02:23 AM
> Asking a question about how Mahsa Amini died is not trolling or propaganda, its not even a statement, but a question.Indeed, it is trolling, even if you think it's not.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF
3/22/2026 at 4:27:48 PM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/22/2026 at 7:33:34 PM
> By such definition, all of science is "sealioning"You are taking an overly literal interpretation of my comment and offering more sophistry in response. Apologies for the short reply but none of the rest seems relevant.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF
3/22/2026 at 8:31:00 PM
Definitions are to be taken literally yes, otherwise its not a good definition.by DoctorOetker
3/23/2026 at 2:29:53 PM
That is true, but I did not use your comment to define sealioning. Instead, I offered a definition and said that it matches a particular behavior. To claim that I am including scientific research in that definition is to claim the behavior in question as such. Hence, why I disregarded the rest of that comment as further sophistry: you seem to be arguing because you want to appear smart or correct more than you want to be so. As I said in my initial comment, you do not need to intend to troll in order to troll.by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF
3/21/2026 at 7:15:26 PM
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.
by hshdhdhj4444
3/21/2026 at 7:31:25 PM
> 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.
by bigfatkitten
3/21/2026 at 7:36:23 PM
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.
by srean
3/22/2026 at 12:18:45 PM
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.
by machomaster
3/22/2026 at 1:01:09 AM
There are unfortunately plenty of idiots in Europe who learned nothing from accompanying the USA on their previous illegal adventures abroad.by jacquesm
3/21/2026 at 9:51:55 PM
[flagged]by DoctorOetker
3/21/2026 at 7:20:37 PM
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.
by big-and-small
3/21/2026 at 5:35:44 PM
> * This seems to reveal previously-unknown range of Iranian ballistic missiles and, if true, could touch basically all of Europe?The Wikipedia article has said they had missiles that can range 4300km since 2019 (as in the article was updated in 2019) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shahab-5&oldid=91... . If Wikipedia has known about it for 7 years, surely military planners were already aware.
by bawolff
3/21/2026 at 6:16:01 PM
US intelligence had assessed that this was possible a long time ago. It was one of the motivations behind the installation of long-range missile defense capabilities in Poland and Czechia in the late 2000s. Obama killed that program to appease Russia.Of course, there is a significant gap between Iran possessing the capability, having the temperament to use it, and actually doing so.
by jandrewrogers
3/21/2026 at 8:47:15 PM
> It was one of the motivations behind the installation of long-range missile defense capabilities in Poland and Czechia in the late 2000s. Obama killed that program to appease RussiaThis was sidestepped by allowing the Poland-SK defense partnership to kick off in 2013 [0] which was further entrenched in 2022 [1], and itself acted as a message against North Korea for acting in a similar manner with Iran [2]
[0] - https://www.president.pl/archives/bronislaw-komorowski/news/...
[1] - https://www.irsem.fr/storage/file_manager_files/2025/03/nr-i...
[2] - https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/middleeast/29missil...
by alephnerd
3/21/2026 at 5:24:57 PM
> This seems to reveal previously-unknown range of Iranian ballistic missiles and, if true, could touch basically all of EuropeTrue but they have also literally launched multiple orbital satellites from iran on iranian rockets. Eg. The Noor 2 spy satellite and before that the Noor 1 series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noor_2_(satellite)
These are in orbit to this day. They regularly post images it takes of US military bases. Essentially it’s similar to how sputnik was a demonstration of icbm capability. Iran can launch a first generation ICBM right now. Pointless if they use a conventional payload (too small payload to be cost effective militarily) and a non manoeuvrable warhead (would just be intercepted) and so these aren’t used militarily but essentially everyone acting shocked they can hit 4000km range was not paying attention.
I think one of the problems we are having right now is that we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilities. It’s one thing for the common civilian to think the enemies missiles are made of cardboard and tanks of paper but it’s another when the leader of a nation believes it. Now here we are with a war that’s stalemated and no way out.
by AnotherGoodName
3/21/2026 at 7:09:32 PM
> we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilitiesIran has done precisely nothing unexpected in the entire course of this war. Closing Hormuz has been mooted since the 70s. And its IRBM stockpile has been known. This is more a case of something between political leaders and possibly the media being ignorant of even open-source intelligence.
by JumpCrisscross
3/21/2026 at 7:29:19 PM
I thought the US president said they didn't expect a number of things that happened.It also expected a quick intervention, 2 weeks max.
by hirako2000
3/21/2026 at 7:42:40 PM
> the US president…The President is a political leader.
by JumpCrisscross
3/21/2026 at 8:49:52 PM
To be fair Trump admins most optimistic timeline was “4-6 weeks maybe longer”. We’re at the end of week 3.by chasd00
3/22/2026 at 11:34:26 AM
I recall it was 12 days, or 4 weeks. Perhaps I missed an early prediction from the state that it could be 4 to 6 weeks.The 12 days, and 2 weeks is what I recall most. But reality is what we want to see and hear. Some would say we are at week 4. Some that we are ending week 3.
Reason would be to accept we are taken for fools anyway. Or worse, run by fools.
by hirako2000
3/21/2026 at 6:52:29 PM
The downplaying of Iran’s capabilities is a weird kind of racism IMHO. In the modern view, Iranians have been categorized as “brown” so people lump them together with Somalians and Afghans. But Iran is a technologically and politically sophisticated country. In terms of the Civ tech tree, it’s higher than any middle eastern country except Israel.by rayiner
3/21/2026 at 7:45:17 PM
> The downplaying of Iran’s capabilities is a weird kind of racism IMHO.Agreed, but it’s not at all surprising to me. Propaganda means that people will project fictitious motives and capabilities on their opponents, even if they are internally inconsistent (e.g. Iran must be attacked because they will threaten the USA mainland vs Iran’s missiles are very inaccurate and barely hit anything).
by oa335
3/23/2026 at 4:40:43 AM
I thought Iranians were white? I've met many Iranians that were white.by mikrotikker
3/23/2026 at 11:52:34 AM
That’s what I thought, but in the modern discourse I think all Muslims are classified as non-white.by rayiner
3/21/2026 at 7:08:52 PM
>Iranians have been categorized as “brown” so people lump them together with Somalians and Afghans.Even from a racist perspective that's completely wrong; Iranians are white, the name "Iran" literally means "Land of the Aryans".
by logicchains
3/21/2026 at 7:38:42 PM
> Iranians are white, the name "Iran" literally means "Land of the Aryans".The Indians were also Aryan according to race theories. I wouldn't put much sense into racism
by breppp
3/21/2026 at 8:14:59 PM
Leaving the 'aryan' and 'white' bit aside there are mountains of things that are common between Indians and Iranians -- the system of classical music, musical instruments, mythological characters, food, and of course language.by srean
3/22/2026 at 9:40:26 PM
Wow you just sent me through a fascinating journey through Wikipedia for a while there.The history (and pseudoscientific justification) of racism is mind-boggling as ever.
by sebastiennight
3/21/2026 at 5:29:45 PM
> is that we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilitiesWe've been hinting about these capabilities for decades [0]. A lot of what is being brought up now is stuff a number of us touched on during the Obama years.
None of this is really hidden either - it would be brought up in think tanks and even undergrad classes if you attended a target program.
Civilian leaders have always had a hands-off approach to Defense and NatSec policy - once you show them how close to a polycrisis everything is they quickly defer responsibility. It's actually pretty similar to working in a corporate environment - it's all about managing upwards.
[0] - https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/middleeast/29missil...
by alephnerd
3/21/2026 at 6:09:26 PM
> it's all about managing upwardsThat might not work with the current administration. Which probably a/the problem.
by jopsen
3/21/2026 at 6:39:01 PM
It still does/is. Most of what I'm seeing with Iran is similar to what was discussed back in the early 2010s.There hasn't been significant churn in the NatSec space aside from political appointees, and core policymakers like Doshi, Maestro, Allison, Colby, and even Hill have worked with administrations irrespective of party affiliation.
by alephnerd
3/21/2026 at 8:18:36 PM
The outcomes is very different from 2010, how so?by jopsen
3/21/2026 at 8:35:36 PM
> The outcomes is very different from 2010Not really. What we're seeing today is similar to what was being discussed in 2010 [0]. Heck, this failed missile attempt confirms capabilities that were being discussed in 2010 [1].
[0] - https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2010/4/22/us-iran-strike-stil...
[1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/middleeast/29missil...
by alephnerd
3/21/2026 at 5:29:05 PM
> a non manoeuvrable warhead (would just be intercepted)Intercepted? In the UK, by what? London has no missile defence system that I am aware of.
by zabzonk
3/21/2026 at 6:23:09 PM
Probably by the Sea Viper system from a destroyer parked in the Dover Strait. Now, the UK probably doesn't have enough interceptors or destroyers carrying them to be confident they'll be able to stop a proper all out attack, but that seems to be a common problem with every Western country right now with a peacetime military budget in an increasingly unpeaceful time.by kenhwang
3/21/2026 at 10:52:33 PM
Sea Viper can defend against short / medium-range BMs impacting in its vicinity, not IRBMs passing overhead in mid-course to a distant target.by dingaling
3/21/2026 at 5:38:48 PM
A missile would need to fly all the way over Europe before reaching London. It would be noticed, jets would be scrambled and it would be shot. Just like what happened here.by chatmasta
3/21/2026 at 5:55:34 PM
These were ballistic missiles. They are only vulnerable during the terminal phase, when they are moving at hypersonic speeds. Standard fighter jets aren't going to do it. It would take ground based THAAD, Patriot, or ship based Aegis systems. London might want to budget for that.by delichon
3/21/2026 at 6:54:11 PM
or take (less) of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAMP/T 8^)by polotics
3/21/2026 at 7:31:51 PM
They can fly well above any commercial and military aircraft.by hirako2000
3/21/2026 at 6:59:39 PM
> I think one of the problems we are having right now is that we have leaders who actively believed the downplaying of Irans military capabilities.Was that the problem?
The US handling of the situation seems the elephant in the room.
by lostlogin
3/21/2026 at 6:34:37 PM
Why does it matter if they have some capabilities to hit whatever targets in Europe or America? They’re not crazy, it would still be suicide for them to do it. It would just give them leverage, which I can’t think of a fair reason to prevent them from having.by pfannkuchen
3/22/2026 at 1:03:51 AM
> It’s one thing for the common civilian to think the enemies missiles are made of cardboard and tanks of paper but it’s another when the leader of a nation believes it.It's just another case of history - endlessly - repeating.
by jacquesm
3/21/2026 at 5:29:44 PM
[flagged]by breppp
3/21/2026 at 6:02:51 PM
> Iran's missiles are used as a terror weapon against civilian populationClassic. An advanced tech US missile hits a school and kills 200 schoolgirls? "A tragic mistake, it happens in war". A much less advanced Iranian rocket hits a building? "Terrorists! They point their weapons at civilians!"
Since Iran was attacked and it has a right to defend itself, we should give it more precise weapons so it can hit directly the military headquarters in central Tel Aviv.
by throw310822
3/21/2026 at 6:27:47 PM
Did you protest when they killed 40,000 unarmed civilians in early January?by dastuer
3/21/2026 at 7:42:00 PM
No need to downplay the IRGC's brutal murder of 60000 civilians.by ta8903
3/23/2026 at 7:12:55 AM
Them killing 100 000 protestors will not be forgotten.by AlexeyBelov
3/25/2026 at 8:39:08 AM
LLM comment history.by hrmtst93837
3/22/2026 at 1:06:41 AM
Temptation... but no, let's keep HN clean.by jacquesm
3/21/2026 at 6:12:07 PM
Intent is literally the difference in terrorism though. The US hitting 500 targets in Iran and one of them being a school is the exact opposite of a strategy of terrorism. With terrorism you explicitly target civilians to drive fear.Trying to hit the Burj Khalifa without targeting any military or high political office is terrorism.
When Iran launched at military bases or tried to shoot at planes, it was not called terrorism.
by kortilla
3/21/2026 at 7:11:34 PM
>Trying to hit the Burj Khalifa without targeting any military or high political office is terrorism.It's really not credible to claim that Iran has made any serious efforts to hit the Burj Khalifa, they would have succeeded if they wanted to do this.
by JasonADrury
3/21/2026 at 6:22:12 PM
[dead]by golemiprague
3/21/2026 at 6:57:44 PM
Its a mystery how "the terrorists" have launched 1000's of missiles & drones, in 70+ (and counting) waves, across 3 weeks, spanning across the region, and yet they have ABJECTLY FAILED to:* hit any hospital
* blow up any school
* nor murder any journalists.
Yet, despite this stunning lack of accuracy from ... "the terrorists", they have somehow managed to hit EVERYTHING ELSE they were aiming at.
On the other hand, the "West", who are absolutely NOT terrorists, have managed to blow up schools, slaughter hundreds and hundreds of school children, smash multiple hospitals, take out as many health workers & first responders as possible with double tap strikes ...
and let's not even mention the number of journalists deliberately targeted & killed, nor the families of journalists, deliberately targeted & killed
And to answer the "but they killed 25 million of their own civilians just weeks ago", it would be almost churlish to point out that the MASSIVE pro-Iran public sentiments expressed by ALL sectors of Iranian society would, to a logically thinking person, lead one to conclude that perhaps, just perhaps, the media campaign behind those riots was just pushing a complete LIE. Because those reports don't fit in a reality where, under direct bombardment and personal risk, those same civilians are supporting their state, their government & their leadership.
As always, the simplest explanations which fit observable facts are usually closest to the actual truth. And the simplest explanation is that the "definitely NOT terroristic" West has been lying about Iran, consistantly, for decades.
Either that, or the Mango Mussolini is the new Oracle of Delphi.
Go pick the hill you want to stand on ...
by isr
3/21/2026 at 7:06:56 PM
Actually Iran has hit the Soroka hospital in Israel in the previous war and the Weizmann Institute, a research universityby breppp
3/21/2026 at 8:01:09 PM
[dead]by s5300
3/21/2026 at 7:11:33 PM
Iran literally hit a preschool in Israel today, with an MRV which is solely designed to terrorize the population (and is a war crime btw). Plus a 12 year old is in critical condition alongside 40 civilians from a single Iranian missile hitting a residential building later today. And in June Iran hit a hospital in Israel with a ballistic missile.> Its a mystery...
Not a mystery, though, is it? Israel has excellent air defense which is why the damage isn't x10 worse. But Iran is definitely making a huge effort to hit the civilian population for maximum damage.
Unlike Iran which is literally aiming statistical weapons at population centers, the US has high accuracy weapons - the school was hit because intelligence wasn't up to date (it used be an IRGC building).
Your comment is absolutely misinformed, or worse, spreading disinformation on purpose.
by magic_hamster
3/22/2026 at 12:19:24 AM
No, everything I said was true. The entire world knows who deliberately targets and murders children, by the tens of thousands. "Disinformation" is one of the Zionist colony's biggest exports, but its effect (like all drugs) has waned over time.People who have unyoked from Zionist mental-control have dozens, if not 100s of independent journalistic outlets, mostly online, where they can (and ARE) following to get some sense of what's really happening. Hence your frustration.
Its not for nothing that "every accusation is a confession" is now a phrase which has spread across the globe, in relation to the Zionist entity and its hasbara. So, your "spreading disinformation on purpose" accusation is really your confession.
by isr
3/22/2026 at 1:59:36 PM
> Zionist mental-controlDropped your tinfoil hat.
I recommend visiting the middle east for yourself.
by magic_hamster
3/23/2026 at 4:14:23 AM
What's tinfoil hat about it? The antisemitism card has been overused, it's a common tactic by the Israeli government and its agents. People who have been able to pull themselves out of being affected by these false claims can think more clearly on the matter.by donkeybeer
3/21/2026 at 5:34:30 PM
> Iran's missiles are used as a terror weapon against civilian populationThey've also sucessfuly been used against energy and military infrastructure.
by sofixa
3/21/2026 at 5:45:43 PM
Those were mostly UAVs, you can see the abysmal aiming ability in Israel, where they have largely stopped aiming at facilities and moved to cluster warheads to maximize civilian hit ratio in large metropolisby breppp
3/21/2026 at 9:22:23 PM
I wonder if they consider it a payback for Israel targeting civilians.by subscribed
3/22/2026 at 6:31:57 AM
their targeting of Jews worldwide or Israeli citizens wildly predates this war and into the 90s.Examples being the AMIA bombing or their mercenaries in Hezbollah firing rockets at Kiryat Shmona well through the 90s
by breppp
3/21/2026 at 5:37:28 PM
that would be stupid and their regime is not stupidby bdangubic
3/21/2026 at 5:46:53 PM
Hardly, after attacking all their friends in the region, which would leave them even more isolated after the war, I would not attribute careful strategic planning eitherby breppp
3/21/2026 at 6:09:46 PM
“Better to be feared than loved” - Niccolo Machiavelliby cjbgkagh
3/21/2026 at 6:13:00 PM
They were not mutual friends. They were mutually hostile.And the friends are hosting american soldiers and bases.
by watwut
3/21/2026 at 6:17:25 PM
Qatar and Oman were mutually hostile? that's a very unique interpretation of Middle Eastern politicsby breppp
3/21/2026 at 7:26:56 PM
Their regime is made up of hardline Shia Twelvers that believe that if they kill enough people the Twelfth Imam will appear and lead them to global victory.Only problem is the Twelfth Imam has been dead for a thousand years.
They may not be stupid, but they consistently act based on counterfactual beliefs.
by PixyMisa
3/21/2026 at 6:06:49 PM
Do you think launching a dumb ICBM at New York would make the US put boots on the ground.I kind of doubt it's enough. This wouldn't be another 9/11, it would be merely be retaliation.
by jopsen
3/21/2026 at 7:13:33 PM
> This wouldn't be another 9/11, it would be merely be retaliationThe Japanese and Al Qaeda framed their attacks defensively. An attack on the homeland is an attack on the homeland. I wouldn’t put it past Iran. But you’d rapidly see political consensus to ensure the regime is destroyed at all costs, including and up to leaving a power vacuum and humanitarian crisis.
by JumpCrisscross
3/21/2026 at 6:13:01 PM
It already looks like the US is sending marines over. Any excuse to make it more politically palatable would be latched onto.by kortilla
3/21/2026 at 6:15:39 PM
the war is wildly unpopular in the US (rightfully so) - attacking US would rally the country (rightfully so) and regime would fall within a week (with significant casulties on our side)by bdangubic
3/21/2026 at 6:44:08 PM
Probably all true, except for the "within a week" part. We don't have nearly enough there yet to do that, and buildups take time.by AnimalMuppet
3/21/2026 at 8:51:57 PM
9/11 was retaliation for US imperialism.by Hikikomori
3/21/2026 at 7:11:52 PM
> their regime is not stupidIt’s pretty fucking stupid. Convening the top brass above ground, failing to scatter the navy, bombing Azerbaijan and Qatar and Oman. I’m not saying the individual actors are dumb. But the result of the competing centers of power between the IRGC, military proper, clerical establishment and god knows who else produces a stupid strategy.
by JumpCrisscross
3/21/2026 at 7:35:11 PM
what would be a non-stupid strategy?by bdangubic
3/21/2026 at 7:41:43 PM
Broadly, taking American and Israeli threats seriously. And not overestimating how easily their neighbors would capitulate if bombed.Tactically, this would mean not concentrating senior leadership above ground. Scattering their navies out of port. Targeting U.S. military bases and not the civilian infrastructure around them.
by JumpCrisscross
3/21/2026 at 6:07:40 PM
They're Muslims. You can debate whether that means 'stupid', but they've come to totally erroneous opinions on the structure of reality.by 9991
3/21/2026 at 6:43:23 PM
Equal to any other religion?by BLKNSLVR
3/21/2026 at 9:41:53 PM
No, not equal. They're all varying amounts of stupid.by 9991
3/22/2026 at 9:06:23 AM
About the same amount of stupid as the other Abrahamics I'd say.by donkeybeer
3/21/2026 at 7:25:03 PM
I disagree heavily with them too but that doesn't mean we should eradicate them. We can't expect the whole world population to be aligned.But once we start shooting they will obviously shoot back and we're many steps further away from the desired "agree to disagree and live together anyway" outcome that is the only way to peace.
I mean the US tried this too with Afghanistan. Many lives lost, trillions of dollars wasted and everything was back to 'normal' in two weeks.
Change has to come from within and the thing is this was actually happening in Iran. Now with military law and the regime uniting people against a common enemy this is much further away.
by wolvoleo
3/21/2026 at 6:17:38 PM
first, what does it matter whether they are Muslims or not? second, what is the structure of reality?! you may have some notion you know what “reality” is given what your media allows you to think - the actual reality is vastly different than you think it is - that is a certaintyby bdangubic
3/21/2026 at 6:19:57 PM
It's a message toward the west don't think you're safe further away. Iran is pushing the west out of west Asia. Time will tell what USIS and EU will do to combat this.by dragonelite
3/21/2026 at 6:24:02 PM
> Time will tell what USIS and EU will do to combat this.Diplomacy was working fine, per high-ranking diplomats: https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2026/03/18/americas-...
by ignoramous
3/21/2026 at 7:19:35 PM
Mandy Rice-Davies Applies.by PixyMisa
3/21/2026 at 6:44:13 PM
[flagged]by rayiner
3/21/2026 at 6:50:50 PM
Yes, war is bad. Unless you're from the Complex. No big insight here, Mr. Rayiner.by ignoramous
3/21/2026 at 7:01:53 PM
Anyone thinking they can talk their way into controlling Iran, a fundamentalist fanatic country with a very loud and visible doctrine literally calling to destroy the west, is delusional. The western "avoid conflict at all cost" approach is extremely detrimental.by magic_hamster
3/21/2026 at 7:17:31 PM
> Iran, a fundamentalist fanatic countryUnited States, a fundamentalist fanatic country: https://bsky.app/profile/gregsargent.bsky.social/post/3mhgag...
by JasonADrury
3/21/2026 at 7:43:24 PM
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47469696by srean
3/23/2026 at 3:53:00 AM
Of course Israel and the current US government are violent religious fanatics who are using made up crap like the Bible and Torah to motivate the war.The nuclear armed violently psychopathic state in the Middle East that still lies about nukes is the one that must be attacked not the country that allowed all audits of their nuclear program. We should conduct an operation to decommission or transfer in safe keeping to a neutral power all of Israel's illegal nukes and impose crippling sanctions on them for their lying on this extremely serious matter.
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 5:42:27 AM
> lies about nukesSuch as? Ambiguity (or not sharing information) isn't a lie.
by dlubarov
3/23/2026 at 6:47:40 AM
Lying about nukes until Mordechai Vanunu outed the program. Iran has been cooperative in letting its nuclear program being audited, your country like the countless "execptions" it claims for itself does not permit any audits.You tell me, if Iran, Hamas, and (insert other groups you hate) played games about nukes and told you they "don't" have nukes despite having hundreds how would you feel?
Israeli nukes must be brought under audit and transferred or decommissionied urgently by neutral third parties, it is a very grave matter.
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 3:12:04 PM
> LyingAgain do you have some sort of example or evidence?
> your country
I'm not Israeli
> the countless "execptions" it claims for itself
What exceptions? They don't need an exception to an agreement that they never consented to.
> played games about nukes
It's not much of a game, they just don't divulge sensitive information about their capabilities.
> transferred or decommissionied
Why would Israel give up a means of defending itself, while several of its neighbors continue trying to wipe it off the map? The only way this becomes plausible is if Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis stop trying to destroy Israel.
by dlubarov
3/23/2026 at 5:02:46 PM
Who said anything about the NPT? The exceptions are to such things as audits of nukes which the other party here, Iran has had no problems with. Israel also claims exception and offense to the ICCPR which was one of the examples I had in mind of how Israel always seems to want "exceptions" for perfectly normal things.>It's not much of a game, they just don't divulge sensitive information about their capabilities.
Nobody is expecting them to divulge any intelligence about its nuclear weapon systems. Why do Israel supporters always exaggerate and invent things not said by anyone? We ask Israel to simply be subject to similar audits of its nukes as Iran was, being like Iran and several other countries in that region a volatile and violent country. Illegal nukes in such a country should be a subject of concern.
And suppose Iran walks out of NPT, I have a feeling you'd still want to interfere and bomb their attempts at making nukes. So please do not lie that it is anything about the NPT.
>Why would Israel give up a means of defending itself, while several of its neighbors continue trying to wipe it off the map? The only way this becomes plausible is if Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis stop trying to destroy Israel.
Who said I want Israel to give up its means of defence? I only wish for them to be subject to standard audits and inspections.
>Why would Israel give up a means of defending itself, while several of its neighbors continue trying to wipe it off the map? The only way this becomes plausible is if Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis stop trying to destroy Israel.
Israel's origin is a long and complex story. No entity in that region is blameless, Israel included.
Again, you tell me, if Iran, Hamas, and (insert other groups you hate) played games about nukes and told you they "don't" have nukes despite having hundreds how would you feel? Obviously they would not wish to divulge sensitive information about their capabilities.
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 5:44:24 PM
> Illegal nukesWhat would be illegal about them? Israel never agreed to the NPT.
> Nobody is expecting them to divulge any intelligence about its nuclear weapon systems.
Even if Israel could trust a group of foreign auditors not to leak any military secrets, what information would you hope to gain from the exercise? Confirmation that Israel does have nuclear weapons, which we already know in practice anyway?
> you'd still want to interfere and bomb their attempts at making nukes
Only as long as a regime with an official stance of "Death to America and Israel" is in charge.
by dlubarov
3/23/2026 at 9:33:38 PM
Why not. If we take words as violence, how about the dreams of violent annexation to achieve the so called Greater Israel. Or statements by Israeli's of threatening to nuke Rome and the entirety of Europe. I have very little trust in Israel or Iran, both are crappy countries high on fumes of religion and nationalism and constantly belligerents. Though funnily this war was started by Israel and America unprovoked while pretending to negotiate with Iran, after of course a series of murders of negotiators. Actions are louder than words. It shows far more who is more unpredictable, violent and backstabbing liars. I trust Israel today even less than I trust Iran, thus we should treat them just like any other untrustworthy and volatile entity such as by conducting thorough and 24x7 audits of their nuclear programs.I am neither Israeli nor Iranian. They can bomb and kill each other all they want as long as they don't involve anyone else. And they will continue bombing and killing each other as they are both driven by the classic cause of endless wars: religion and nationalism. I do not think one side better than other. I considered Israel mildly better but I had to change my stance. Being that I am not a fan of either country, I would prefer either Israel's nuclear capabilities be incapacitated or Iran develop nuclear capabilities as a balancing factor.
by donkeybeer
3/24/2026 at 4:27:56 AM
> statements by Israeli's of threatening to nuke Rome and the entirety of EuropeI take it you’re quoting some random individual? Certainly no Israeli leaders said anything of the sort. The Iranian regime’s leaders on the other hand are quite explicit about their ambitions of destroying the US and Israel.
> this war was started by Israel and America unprovoked
Israel has been attacked with over a hundred thousand Iranian rockets and drones in recent times. If that isn’t a provocation, what is? How many Iranian rockets do you expect Israel to tolerate before finally responding?
by dlubarov
3/24/2026 at 6:40:03 AM
It may be random, but I didn't hear any Iranian saying they want to nuke the entire Europe if they feel threatened. I can already tell who I feel more threatened by. Even if we assume the Iranian govt truly means that, its still countries that have bonbed, hurt and destroyed Iran, and this begins far before the Islamic republic itself such as toppling Irans just and honorably elected government to install a dictatorial puppet monarch. Whereas that Israeli is threatening the entirety of Europe who never hurt Israel and even against all common sense and justice and fairness have been giving billions of euros to the Israeli entity, and this is how the ingrates respond. Being neither Israeli nor Iranian and not having my brain clouded by the stupidities of religion, nationalism or racialism there is a certain clarity of mind that arises in these matters.by donkeybeer
3/24/2026 at 6:37:45 AM
Greater Israel expansionism is something Israeli leaders including Bibi constantly say. Israel wants Lebensraum. If that's not a statement by thr government, what is?Are you sure about the timing, who started shooting who first?
by donkeybeer
3/24/2026 at 3:13:10 PM
Have you talked to an actual Israeli before? They just want to not suffer constant rocket attacks. If Hezbollah stopped attacking, there would be ~zero interest in any sort of military action in Lebanon.by dlubarov
3/24/2026 at 5:25:17 PM
Israeli's are people like anyone else. However they are a peoples who are heavily propagandized to be fearful and hateful of everything since birth by their government, a peoples who have in my view become somewhat pathological as a reaction to the Holocaust. It is not wholly their fault. There are good people and bad people like in any country or group. But what I have seen of them has been more than enough for me, I have seen them laugh about throwing rocks and launching rockets at a peaceful Palestinian settlement for example. What do you say of that? Is that an example of they will stop violence if they are left alone?I am not a big fan of basically any country in that region, Israel while better in some respects eg lgbtq is also more paranoid and psychotic in other aspects.
by donkeybeer
3/24/2026 at 6:47:35 PM
There's no need for anyone to "propagandize" Israelis into fearing attacks; they personally experience enemy attacks all the time. So much so that a lot of Israelis are just sleeping in bomb shelters at this point, so they don't have to jump out of bed and run whenever there's yet another nighttime attack.by dlubarov
3/24/2026 at 6:58:25 PM
You don't want to go into "who fired the first shot". The terrorist group who did the King David Hotel bombing yielded one of Israel's prime ministers. The formation of the country itself was a series of violent terroristic attacks by self proclaimed zionists. I do not say the arab countries around them are innocent, but that who fired the first shot does not leave Israel innocent either. Israeli's are just experiencing for the first time the fun of bomb shelters that all their neighbors felt due to them for years.by donkeybeer
3/25/2026 at 3:57:06 AM
I didn't say anything about who fired the first shot. I was just responding to> Greater Israel expansionism is something Israeli leaders including Bibi constantly say. Israel wants Lebensraum.
The reality is that Israelis don't care about ancient maps, they care about the terrorists operating in Lebanon that have been bombarding them for years.
> Israeli's are just experiencing for the first time
Not at all. Israel was attacked by five armies the day after it declared independence, and has been attacked many times since, including regular rocket attacks over the past ~25 years.
by dlubarov
3/25/2026 at 5:19:16 AM
What's not to care about who fired the first shot? I am not talking about 3000 year old maps, though Bibi is. I am talking about events in the late 1940s where jewish terrorists constant bloodsoaked violence and terror led to rhe states foundation, including prime ministers being extracted from one of these terror outfits. It's all a direct continuation of that.by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 5:06:46 PM
>Again do you have some sort of example or evidence?There is discrepancy between what Vanunu said and what the government of Israel said. Evidence points to Vanunu being truthful, thus naturally, the Israeli government are liars.
by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 5:20:02 PM
> and what the government of Israel saidAgain do you have a particular statement in mind?
by dlubarov
3/23/2026 at 5:39:31 PM
"We neither confirm nor deny" then prosecuting the man who "confirmed" by illegally kidnapping him from a neutral foreign country.by donkeybeer
3/23/2026 at 6:02:37 PM
You claimed something about "lies about nukes". There's really no way to construe "we neither confirm nor deny" as a lie, whether or not someone else leaks the information.by dlubarov
3/21/2026 at 7:06:51 PM
> Anyone thinking they can talk their way into controlling Iran, a fundamentalist fanatic country with a very loud and visible doctrine literally calling to destroy the west, is delusionalYeah, what's it about peoples of the third world that they're always fanatical, that they're always out to destroy the first world... https://theconversation.com/orientalism-edward-saids-groundb... / https://archive.vn/HoEk5
by ignoramous
3/21/2026 at 7:56:27 PM
If US takes down their democracy and downs their domestic passenger jets, fight a proxy war with chemical weapons through Saddam Hussein that alone kills 20~30 thousand, no country is going to respond to that with flowers in their hair.Loved your link, but I doubt it is going to change anyone who thinks Israel and US are doing the god's work here.
by srean
3/21/2026 at 7:15:08 PM
Once you simply kill all the leaders, there is no one left to negotiate with.Iran is also oddly moderate from the region (beyond the whole death to America thing).
by seanmcdirmid
3/21/2026 at 7:17:22 PM
I don't think they had any reason to destroy us until trump decided to kick the hornet's nest. In fact they were quite reasonable and agreed to inspections of their nuclear programme which is also something Trump broke before, and now with his petty war.I mean they hate Israel way more than us and they never attacked them either (until this war obviously). And regime change was already happening there slowly. They would have become more moderate, the public opinion inside Iran was more and more against them especially since what they did to the protesters.
This war was unnecessary and only cemented the regime's hold on their people by giving them an external enemy.
by wolvoleo
3/21/2026 at 7:33:49 PM
You are just uninformed.Iran has sponsored, built and trained organizations all over the middle east so they could destroy Israel: Hamas, the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and groups in Iraq are all proxies propped up by Iran.
Iran was the first to attack Israel, this happened in 2024 when Israel killed Nasrallah (Hezbollah) and Iran fired hundreds of ballistic missiles directly at Israel.
Iran hates the US way more than Israel, but Israel is closer so obviously they are directing their efforts according to what's plausible. Iran calls the US and Israel "the big satan" and "little satan" in almost all internal communication. Just a couple of weeks ago the entire Iranian parliament chanted "death to America" and "death to Israel" (you can see the videos online). Iran had US flags laid out on the floor of their facilities so that anyone going by will walk over the US flag.
Despite being very uncomfortable, the war is probably necessary because as seen by Iran's attack on Diego Garcia, they have way longer range than previously thought, they have a deposit or military grade uranium enough for 10-12 bombs, they were completely dishonest about their nuclear programs, and waiting until Iran had nukes meant you couldn't ever stop them. You'd have another North Korea but ten times worse, as the Iranian regime is truly a fundamentalist insane leadership. Trump may be unhinged but he's right about Iran using nukes if they had them.
by magic_hamster
3/21/2026 at 7:43:40 PM
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47469696by srean
3/21/2026 at 5:02:31 PM
Iran have boats.by madaxe_again
3/21/2026 at 5:19:55 PM
Obviously they have boats. The question is, do they still have boats which are capable of serving as a launch platform for ballistic missiles? And could those boats meaningfully close the distance between Iran and its adversaries.This launch demonstrates that if the answer to both of those questions is still no, they can still place them at threat.
by derektank
3/21/2026 at 5:22:46 PM
The question is do they have a launcher that fits in a shipping container...by zer00eyz
3/21/2026 at 5:07:43 PM
[flagged]by myth_drannon
3/21/2026 at 5:10:38 PM
They’ve been preparing for this day for 5 decades, and I wouldn’t believe this administrations propaganda if they claimed the sky was blue.by fnordpiglet
3/21/2026 at 6:17:38 PM
>They’ve been preparing for this day for 5 decades...So have the USA & Israel I suspect.
by 1over137
3/21/2026 at 5:27:11 PM
Five decades doesn't seem to mean much when most of their leadership, military and air defenses can be laid prostrate by the US and Israel in a couple of days. I don't ever take Trump for his word, but neither do I think there's wisdom in believing that a technologically superior force couldn't easily wipe out Iran's ballistic-capable navy just because they've been preparing for a long time.Edit: am I wrong? Can copium in fact save inferior boats from a vastly superior military force?
by nozzlegear
3/21/2026 at 10:17:57 PM
You’re wrong in a few ways -- Iran has structured the functioning of its government and military to be highly resilient to decapitation. Every function has redundancy and every military unit can exercise autonomy. Their goal is to build a theocratic revolution around an ideology and not a personality, and intentionally built a system to survive a hostile environment.
- You have to find what you want to destroy and quantity can out last highly sophisticated and expensive systems. They have been aware of satellite imaging for some time and almost certainly have planned for closing the straight against the US navy for decades. What they have going for them is asymmetric warfare that relies on mass and surprise. For instance, the $20,000 drone that requires multiple $4mm interceptors to stop. They can just keep dropping those randomly indefinitely on their time table and burn a steady supply of interceptors that are increasingly spread out then roll out the hypersonic missiles they have but haven’t even used yet knowing the defenses have been spread thin across an ever increasingly wide region as they demonstrate the radius of attack they have. Ground warfare would be against an enemy who has fortified and prepared for decades with full awareness of our capabilities as we demonstrated them globally.
- the idiocy of a talk show host leading a military commanded by a real estate developer turned reality tv show host with delusions of megalomaniacal grandeur can self defeat any military against any foe
by fnordpiglet
3/21/2026 at 11:17:45 PM
Thanks, I appreciate the reply. My contention was only about Iran's navy and their ability to field ships that can launch ballistic missiles. I believe the GP or GGP was implying that Iran still has "boats" with which they could extend the range of their ballistic missiles even further. That's what I think is a far cry from reality – the US and Israel surely know where those ships would be and would be more than capable of destroying them.Regarding the substance of your comment: I'm not sure I agree about being resilient to decapitation, as the US and Israel have apparently become very skilled at locating the people they want to kill. But I agree with all the rest, especially regarding that bloviating ass, Hegseth.
by nozzlegear
3/21/2026 at 11:57:41 PM
The thing is, as I understand it, is every function has four designated replacements and a process for the replacements replacement in the scenario all four people are lost. Every military unit has autonomous instructions they carry out without central command.Israel has been assassinating people for decades. They’re aware that the strategy would be this one. They’ve designed an organizational structure that’s not dependent on individuals. That’s why you see a lot of the senior leaders have had very varied roles over the years - like wildly so. No one in their organization is indispensable, and the supreme ayatollah is a title not a person. They elected his son in coma as a message that the person isn’t relevant, it’s a symbolic role with invested power in the role not the person.
There’s no reason to believe assassinating individuals will achieve very much. It has not seemed to slow them down an iota so far, and I think at this point we have done enough personal damage to their leadership that there is no way to end the war. Even if we stop, it will go one through terrorism and proxy wars at a greater clip than ever before. Only an invasion will work, and I suspect that would be next to impossible to succeed at.
I do not think the US will win this. If we had had a plan, had enlisted allies, had prepared perhaps. But Trump just thought this was like Venezuela and YOLO’ed not realizing it’s not a dictatorship there.
by fnordpiglet
3/22/2026 at 1:20:18 AM
Think Hydra, not lion.by jacquesm
3/21/2026 at 5:17:54 PM
Large surface and mini subs, yes. They still have many small boats for laying mines. These are indistinguishable from a typical motor boat.Look at how Ukraine has denied Russia access to most of the Black Sea. It's going to be real hard to stop Iran from creating enough uncertainty to ease the worries of the shipping world. Iran will have to say they are done threatening the straight.
by verdverm
3/21/2026 at 5:21:45 PM
We're losing the plot here. What use are small motor boats for launching ballistic missiles?by nozzlegear
3/21/2026 at 5:37:33 PM
Comments and threads typically digress into related topics, so I don't see the plot lost, rather the context expanded in a subthread.by verdverm
3/21/2026 at 5:21:46 PM
The haven’t even started using these yet, curious who wins this game of chess: https://www.usff.navy.mil/press-room/news-stories/article/31...by irishcoffee
3/21/2026 at 5:41:42 PM
Many experts think Iran has already won. They don't have to lay mines to seed doubt, they don't need boats to close the straights, shaheds are sufficient. One does need to define what it means to "win"For Iran, it seems the regime will stay in power, you can't remove them from the air. The geography and population size of Iran will prove more challenging than Iraq or Afghanistan. There is very little support for Trump's War. They never sought to persuade the people, it appears they have no plan b (which they wish to be illegal /s)
Hubris is an apt way to describe Trump's approach to Iran. One evidence to this is that they thought Venezuela was the model for Iran. A SA dictator is nothing like a religious movement that has taken root for ~50 years.
What does winning look like for the US & Israel? Trump has already claimed they won, but have more winning to do. What they have said changes daily and between who's talking. I imagine this will continue after hostilities end, they will backfill their goals to claim they "won", like so many other things they do this with.
The real winners from this? Probably Russia and China more than others.
by verdverm
3/21/2026 at 6:07:20 PM
I was just talking about winning the “plant-bombs” vs “detect and-blow-up-bombs” chess game. I have no comment on the rest of what you said, nor do I care who “wins” here, I have no say in the matter and have chosen zero emotional investment.by irishcoffee
3/21/2026 at 6:40:15 PM
Similarly, there are new laser guided hydra pods starting to roll out.https://en.defence-ua.com/news/ukraine_could_equip_its_f_16s...
by verdverm
3/21/2026 at 5:13:15 PM
Don’t believe Hegseths obvious buffoonery. They still have boats.by spiderfarmer
3/21/2026 at 5:02:36 PM
Yep. Hence why I posted it.> previously-unknown
It was implied by Iran's space program.
There's a reason most regional powers also invested in a space program as well as a civilian uncles program. The name of the game is dual-use technologies.
The Biden admin also warned about Iran-NK collaboration on building these kinds of capabilities [0]
[0] - https://www.janes.com/osint-insights/defence-news/us-officia...
by alephnerd
3/21/2026 at 8:07:49 PM
> civilian uncles programI know its just a typo but lol'ed so hard
by arkensaw
3/21/2026 at 10:14:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RejrrkrRShMby alephnerd
