• BigFig@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    1 year ago

    This has been my main question these few days, the ever hyped and ‘perfect’ Iron Dome. And Mossad, an Intelligence agency considered one of the best in the world. Where did the failure happen?

    Don’t get me wrong. This attack was a tragedy. But what happened to the security infrastructure that Israel is so proud of

    • empireOfLove@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      76
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But what happened to the security infrastructure that Israel is so proud of

      Sometimes things need to magically “fail” so leaders can get the war that they want, but can’t openly start.

    • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Iron Dome is there to stop rockets, not cars and paragliders. (The latter could potentially change.)

      Any air defense system is vulnerable to saturation.

    • Ghyste@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      The best educated, non conspiratorial guess I can offer is that the sheer number of projectiles overwhelmed the system.

      That’s accepting that the reports of thousands of rockets launched is accurate, mind you.

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      The dome is pretty great but hamas claims 5k missiles launched and other sources say at least 2k. There’s no way they’re going to intercept them all. As for the intelligence failure, who knows.

    • M500@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. It’s the first question my wife asked when I told her about it. Neither of us believe that this could have happened without Mossad knowing about it.

        • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          To be fair, it’s possible for an intelligence agency to know of a possible attack, and not have anything done about it, without a conspiracy to let it happen, if issues with communication between parts of said agency or between it and the government as a whole lead to warnings not being properly shared with the right people or not being properly acted upon.

          • PapstJL4U@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the world is full of secret agencies, that are less competent than they claim.

            Mossads public image was to neither deny or acknowkledge. It is not hard to imagine, that the world and the mossad itself were misjudging. Hybris is a hell of a problem.

    • ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m just gonna put a tinfoil hat on and guess some of the top secret documents Trump let Saudis / Iranians peruse had relevant Intel to these events

      But I’m just guessing

      • Evie @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think you need a tin foil hat, to believe that Trump compromised intelligence on many levels to many people he shouldn’t have…

    • TheProtagonist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would say the agency dealing with homeland terrorism (I guess this is the way Israel looks at this) would rather be Shin Bet than Mossad.

  • Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wasnt pearl harbor an attack on a military base? So a totally valid target for a war. This was an attack on civillians so the comparision is bad.

    • qdJzXuisAndVQb2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not the point of the comparison. The point of similarity is that it was a significant blow that struck without the defenders anticipating it.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I thought it was to go to war? Before that the US pubic was super anti-joining WWII (like 80+%), then all of a sudden, for the first and last time in history of logic, in the middle of a world conflict no less, they put all of their navy eggs in one lil basket & announced that very publicly to everyone.

        • it was actually done to prevent a war, as weird as it may sound.

          1. It was meant to intimidate the Japanese and prevent them from attacking the US. kind of a “look at us, we put our fleet closer to you, we are ready to fight you, so don’t even try to attack us!” move. didn’t really work out as planned though.
          2. It was also done to intimidate the Japanese into stopping committing their Atrocities in China.

          So no, it was most certainly not done to enter a war.

          • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I know what was the formal rhetoric, yet nobody can explain how grouping ships (that Japanese already knew about & their numbers didn’t suddenly increase) in a very defenseless way helps intimidate anyone that does not come for a guided tour - which wasn’t really needed as they intentionally posted detailed photos in papers & sent the seamen on vacation.

            Not to mention that you can’t intimidate someone with a bad tactical decision, this isn’t a split second decision-making, all of it takes months of planning. And all the documented warnings within the military were just ignored as false positives.

            And US didn’t really give a damn about China at that time (no political pressure either), but they owned quite a lot of debt and other interests towards various European countries. But the public was still full of veterans from previous wars & Nazi propaganda was hitting strong in US (eg rich manufacturers & exporters like Ford, but also “common folk” responded to their, em, “racial theories”).

            But above all that, everytime since the civil war when US arms industry didn’t get a big hike in spending seemingly extremely provoked preventable attacks happen that saway the public option in a big way for the next two decades (then hippies come, get criminalized, a few years of peace, etc).

            So in about 10 years or so US will rig live nukes (in a random city like Las Vegas) & connect them to a big red bottom, pay Hollywood to make action movies about it … then sad times of money over mass tragedy continue.

            On January 27, 1941, Grew secretly cabled the State Department with rumors passed on by the Peruvian Minister to Japan: “Japan military forces planned a surprise mass attack at Pearl Harbor in case of ‘trouble’ with the United States.” – wiki/Joseph_Grew

            Edit: Oh, my bad, US did go beyond politics & actively blockaded resources to Japan.

  • Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    War has changed. Drones, internet and new MANPADS have eroded Israel’s technological supremacy as shown in Ukraine vs Russia. Now it is more risky for Israel to go against their enemies. Already there’s footage of the vaunted Merkava tank blown to pieces. Also, this was the perfect storm:

    1. The US is preoccupied with political infigthing (thanks, Republitards!)

    2. The Israeli government was busy oppressing it’s own Jewish people because they drunk too much rightwing koolaid (thanks, Trumpettes!)

    3. Item no. 2 made Israel lose a lot of support from the West.

    4. Technological weapons breakthroughs in Ukraine (thanks, Putin!)

    They made their bed, and now they have to sleep in it. The balance of power has shifted. I forsee Israel using nukes in the next 5 to 10 years out of desperation but it will backfire spectacularly.

  • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reading books by CIA folks over the years, Mossad has benefitted from Arabs that feel this violence isn’t reasonable, and provide intel to help stop raids. I can guess that Iran has helped with signal intel over time to determine who’s calling in tips, and left those people in place while cutting them out of the loop on this attack. Probably Mossad was getting false traffic from normal moles while all this was planned.

    Sadly there’s not a good end for those informers post attack, they served their role to keep Mossad complacent, and likely died just after the strike.

    All conjecture (I have no intel sources on this), but bad for Mossad if true. This would leave them back to square one on human intel if it happened.

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because it’s an expensive propaganda tool. Insanely expensive against cheap and plentiful Scud missiles.

    Plus, there’s not much incentive to stop 100% of the missiles because that would make it harder to justify military aid. Though in this case it could easily be that the system just isn’t as effective as it likes to tell the people it’s encouraging to move into Palestinian homes.