TBH, I think the Israel iron dome system is justified. Bombing Palestinians is not.
One is defensive and one is a genocide over land. Not really a hard choice for sane people.
It could be argued that Israel is free to unleash their campaign of genocide because the people in Israel do not experience the horrors themselves. There is no pressure to reach an agreement. Bringing the hostages back has been the only rallying cry by Israelis, but other than that, actually ending the genocide doesn’t have much support.
It’s similar to how so many consumer goods are produced through the use of slavery. That distance and lack of visibility mean there is little pressure from consumers to stop those practices.
The iron dome enables the genocide.
Not really a hard choice for sane people.
So basically, your perspective is that a system that protects Israeli civilians is immoral because every single Israeli is immoral? Yeah, that seems very sane. /s
There is zero justification for a colonial apartheid ethnostate. Over seventy years of crimes against humanity are not worth defending.
you say there is no justification for a colonial apartheid ethnosate, but if that were true, why “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for our children”
the scary thing is people who would otherwise be against fascism for some strange reason turn off their 1488 detectors when talking about the Nation state of Israel, and will gladly embrace the concept of the ethnostate as a moral good.
I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. It’s a messed up country, but it’s in an extremely messed up part of the world. All of their neighbors are nondemocratic ethnostates, and not even the apartheid kind, they’ve completely driven Jewish people out of their countries. I don’t think standing by and letting Isreal get overrun would be beneficial for the world. I don’t support their offensive military actions but that doesn’t mean I want to see what happens when Hamas/Hezbollah takes over their country.
There are plenty of places in the west where they would be safe, secure, and could flourish. Hell, many of them are citizens of these countries. My only concern would be letting such a large amount of fascists migrate when we’re already combating the rise of fascism in the west.
Cheap for a missile, but using soft power tends to be more effective, both economically and less destructive. You know, like not pissing off all your neighbors and taking folk’s land.
Allow me to introduce the G brothers - Gerrymandering and Gentrification.
That’s actually a very low price for an anti-air missile. For comparison, the Stinger shoulder-fired missile costs more than twice as much. A Patriot missile costs four million dollars (but is much more capable). Presumably minimizing cost was a high priority when this missile was designed. Nonetheless, the cost asymmetry is one reason why degrading the ability of Hamas and Hezbollah to fire missiles at Israel is important.
It’s expensive AF to operate which is why Israel has been working hard on “Iron Beam”, which uses lasers instead of missiles, to supplement it and reduce the cost of operation. Iron Beam is supposed to become active in 2025.
Ukraine doesn’t have Iron Dome because of cost and scale. Israel is 22,145 square kilometers while Ukraine is 603,628 square kilometers. It probably cost 10 Billion to build an Israel sized Iron Dome so a Ukraine sized one would cost upwards of $300 Billion and operating the thing would like be a billion dollars a month for active combat.
As an aside the United States also has ground based directed energy weapons. There’s even a 50KW mobile version built on the Stryker platform called DE M-SHORAD. 100KW+ versions are supposed to be rolling out next year.
That doesn’t sound like an unreasonable price for a missile interceptor; those things have to be fast and precise. If anything, it looks like they have reasonable economies of scale going for them.
