=))))))))))))))
Disclose.tv
@disclosetv
·
13 m
NOW - Trump says he may have forced Israel's hand to go to war with Iran, not the other way around: "I might have forced their hand."
https://www.euractiv.com/news/cyprus-fears-chaotic-terrorism-from-turkey-occupied-territory-as-eu-help-ramps-up/
Oy vey!
Disclose.tv
@disclosetv
·
46 m
NOW - Germany's Merz supports U.S. embargoing Spain, claims it's to "convince" them to increase NATO spending.
Patricia Marins
@pati_marins64
·
34 m
Will Iran maintain its launch capacity?
No, Iran will likely not sustain the same volume of missile launches as it did in the first two days of the war. This helps extend the lifespan of Air Defenses used by the US, Israel, and their allies.
Let me explain how this works.
During the previous 12-day war, Israel had already mapped many of Iran's launch sites.
This time, those sites were among the first to be bombed.
Every time Iran conducts a launch, Israeli and American drones equipped with sensors can detect smoke and heat signatures, pinpointing hidden sites. Coordinates are quickly passed on, followed by strikes.
This process steadily degrades Iran's capabilities, forcing them to clear debris, reopen tunnel entrances, resume patrols, and repair sites after each attack.
Iran is known to operate around 25 underground missile cities, plus about 65 bunkers and tunnels with launch capability (based on what has been publicly identified so far, the real number is likely higher).
Iran also operates hundreds of mobile launchers and at least 120 known silos (again, the actual total is probably significantly greater).
There is no such thing as a quick war against Iran.
Contrary to what some US and Israeli officials are claiming, I do not see evidence of an imminent shortage of Iranian launchers.
It would take weeks or even months to fully deplete Iran's stockpile of launchers, which have been built up and accumulated over the past 25–30 years.
What is more likely happening is that Iran is unwilling to risk exposing high-value assets while US and Israeli drones maintain full-spectrum surveillance over its territory.
Iran's arsenal remains robust, but its operations are being severely constrained by highly effective drone and LEO satellite monitoring from the US and Israel.
This massive surveillance effort is reducing Iran's launch rate, not primarily by destroying assets outright, but by making it extremely difficult to operate undetected.
Another key point: there has never been air superiority over Tehran itself. Israeli and American aircraft operate mainly by launching from Iraqi territory or western Iran border areas.
No B-2 bombers have overflown Iran either, as Iran still maintains operational MiG-29s and Yak-130s.
While these are not cutting-edge fighters, they would pose a sufficient threat to deter low-observable bombers like the B-2.
Regarding naval losses, Iran has demonstrably lost 8 ships, only 2 of which were modern vessels. Estimates suggest the Iranian navy still operates at least 30 ships overall.
The greater long-term threat, hundreds of missile-armed fast attack craft and 25–30 submarines, remains largely intact and unaccounted for in public reporting.
As I mentioned in my previous post, US–Israeli bombings will continue to inflict heavy damage on Iran, but they remain far from achieving the stated objectives: complete destruction of the nuclear program or regime change.
The trend now is for Iran to intensify efforts to shoot down or disrupt drones overflying its territory in order to regain its earlier launch tempo.
However, those drones are also a high priority for the US and Israel, especially since interceptor stocks are running low, making every incoming launch a critical concern.
In the end, the costs will reach tens of billions of dollars, global inflation will spike, and none of the primary objectives will have been met.
This aligns with the Iran-style model of warfare: make the conflict so expensive and protracted that the opponent eventually collapses under the strain, even if it can technically endure.
