A Skeptical View of Israel's Iron Dome Rocket Defense System

Lasrick (2629253) writes It isn't as if real analysis of Israel's "Iron Dome" isn't available, but invariably, whenever Israel has a skirmish the media is filled with glowing reports of how well the system works, and we always find out months later that the numbers were exaggerated. John Mecklin at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists looks at the coverage of Iron Dome in the recent exchanges between Israel and Hamas and finds the pattern is repeating itself. However, 'Ted Postol, an MIT-based missile defense expert and frequent Bulletin contributor, provided a dose of context to the Iron Dome coverage in a National Public Radio interview Wednesday. "We can tell, for sure, from video images and even photographs that the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all,"' Includes a good explanation of the differences between Iron Dome (a 'rocket defense system') and missile defense systems pushed by the U.S.

Comments

Re:Belief

[Uberbah]

Unguided missiles have no military value as they cannot be aimed at military targets, that is true. However, unguided missiles are best for terrorizing civilians, and of course those rockets have the range to hit major population centers.

Of course they're gloried roman candles, which is why your fellow racist colonialists are sitting on top garages and bluffs to watch bombs rain down on Gaza in spite of the scaaaaary rockets. Qassam's haven't killed anyone since 2012, as opposed to your typical IDF ordinance which wipes out a dozen or more people in a single shot.

We usually like it that way.

Yes, do you do like murdering 100 Palestinians for every lost Israeli.