Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 658 posts

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#501

Post by surgical_fire »

upcoming-sesame wrote: post #402
surgical_fire wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying other countries have to join in? Iran is only a threat because the US and Israel decided it was time to murder some Iranians. The US and Israel are more of a threat to the entire world.

let's not pretend this attack happened in a vacuum. Iran has been funding murderous militias like Hezbollah , Houtis and fighting a proxy war for years.

Let's not pretend that too happened in a vacuum.

The US started all this with the 1953 coup in Iran, and Israel was from its inception an extremely aggressive and expansionist country.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#502

Post by beedeebeedee »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #499
beedeebeedee wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is your friend To 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...

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 "coul…

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.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#503

Post by DoctorOetker »

beedeebeedee wrote: post #502
DoctorOetker wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 "coul…

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.

[flagged]

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#504

Post by arbuge »

jacquesm wrote: post #474
arbuge wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What it gave the US was an added incentive to take down what is unarguably one of the world's most evil and dangerous regimes. Would you attack the US because they "murdered" thousands of Germans to take down Hitler in WW2?

I you want to point at evil and dangerous regimes I have a list and Iran wouldn't even be in the top 3...

Obviously your list is different from mine.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#505

Post by Spooky23 »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #403
Spooky23 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 benefi…

one missile fails, the other is intercepted your conclusion: US will pull those resources back?

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.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#506

Post by roncesvalles »

chasd00 wrote: post #350
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

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

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

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#507

Post by jiggawatts »

jacquesm wrote: post #473
jiggawatts wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked into that one, because it was so outlandish but repeated by multiple sources and reported by reputable journalists. The original reporting was carefully phrased to make it sound like IDF soldiers were "sniping" little children, taking careful aim and deliberately shooting them in the head, which is... monstrous. Where this narrative starts to breaks down is that snipers don't aim for the head, because it's t…

Oh, that's ok then. /s ffs

War makes people angry, and angry people are trivially swayed by propaganda.

For example, there's thousands of people still screeching online that the US deliberately bombed little girls in Iran. No, they hit a girls school by accident, it used to be an IRGC military base building and is surrounded by IRGC buildings!

I don't condone Israel's actions in Gaza, nor do I condone the US/Israeli attacks on Iran.

Having said that, it's important in a war -- irrespective of what side one is supporting or opposing -- not to believe exaggerations or outright lies.

War is bad enough, we don't have to sprinkle imaginary horrors on top of the real ones!

In the worst case, if too many people spout transparently obvious propaganda, then that discounts the believability of the true horrors. This is most obvious today with the "that's just a fake AI video" retorts, but before it was "fake news", or whatever.

Diluting the truth harms it.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#508

Post by UltraSane »

gzread wrote: post #496
UltraSane wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really should make you want the Totalitarian Shia Theocracy running Iran to collapse.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Same logic - if correct - would give Iran the moral right to first strike the US.

I hate Trump also but he is a saint compared to the Iranian Shia Theocracy

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#509

Post by [deleted] »

roncesvalles wrote: post #506
chasd00 wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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

[deleted]

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#510

Post by pcthrowaway »

jiggawatts wrote: post #317
TheAlchemist wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I somewhat agree, you should also look at the results of those precision strikes. Usually, when they kill a senior Iranian officer sleeping in his appartment, they level the building or at lest blow up several adjacent units, probably killing at last 10 innocent people.

Which is not “carpet bombing”. Use words and phrases correctly, or expect an argument.

I agree that targeted strikes which miss or take out adjacent areas is not carpet bombing.

However, the above commenter suggested the U.S. has phased out carpet bombing, and while I'm suspect of that, we know with certainty that Israel will happily "carpet bomb" an area if it can string together a few words justifying it.

Even if it's true that what they've done isn't technically carpet bombing in the sense that they may not just dropping bombs out of planes indiscriminately, the same effect can be achieved with nominally "targeted" strikes now, especially with many of these being conducted by automated "targeting" systems.

Seriously, it's unlikely in this age of advanced weaponry that we'd see carpet bombing like we did in Vietnam, when the U.S. and Israel are capable of creating the same effect, but with thousands of supposedly tactical strikes over the entirety of some densely populated area.

Post reply on HN