I'm guessing that the intention is "If Israel can handle missiles from Lebanon and Gaza, why can't they handle 10 times the normal amount from Iran.
It's a numbers game , and w/o the US and Jordan helping to intercept them , the civilian damage would be much much much more extensive; and only one of these 2 can be true - Iran has terrible terrible terrible aim, or they targeted civilians.

[–] zakobjoa@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

You're right about saturation attacks eventually overcoming every air defense. But the ~200 missiles from Iran would have been manageable for Iron Dome, if they were the kind of missile Iron Dome was built for – slow, short range rockets and mortars.

These were much faster, at least some of them maneuvered during flight and a lot of them had a terminal booster, so they were much faster.

Israel has systems for that, namely Arrow 2/3 (the latter even intercepts exoatmospheric and it looks fucking dope) and David's Sling. But they are definitely not made for the sort of massed attack we saw. They're more like a Patriot system.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Iron dome not intended for ballistic defense, which is what the Iranians chucked at them