They already proven twice it is not the case, they hit what they wanted to hit. Why do you people always have to take the US wars modus operandi as a standard, where an attack needs to wreck everything and kill as many civilians as possible? When is the attack "damaging", when it's doubletapping the rescuers?

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They hit (some of) what they wanted to hit, but didn't inflect significant damage. Which is why a preemptive strike would be meaningless; those only matter when they can seriously reduce the enemy's ability to wage war. Iran simply doesn't have anything that can seriously reduce Israel's ability to wage war in one attack.