☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.ml to World News@lemmygrad.ml • 7 months agoOnly 25% of US interceptors succeeded in Iran attack 😂external-linkmessage-square8 fedilinkarrow-up141cross-posted to: newsworldnews@lemmy.ml
arrow-up141external-linkOnly 25% of US interceptors succeeded in Iran attack 😂☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.ml to World News@lemmygrad.ml • 7 months agomessage-square8 Commentsfedilinkcross-posted to: newsworldnews@lemmy.ml
minus-squarebobs_guns@lemmygrad.mlhexbear16·7 months agoThat's not too bad for interceptors. Much more believable than the previous figures linkfedilink
minus-squarebobs_guns@lemmygrad.mlhexbear12·7 months agoHitting a very fast missile is not easy! linkfedilink
minus-squareREEEEvolution@lemmygrad.mlhexbear12·7 months agoTrue, but if you take the cost of the inteceptors into consideration and compare it to the cost of the missles and drones, then you go from "not to bad" to "another of these and we're out of money". linkfedilink
minus-squareHello_Kitty_enjoyer [none/use name]hexbear3·7 months agoDo the interceptors cost that much more than missiles? link
minus-squareHello_Kitty_enjoyer [none/use name]hexbear3·7 months agowas it ballistic missiles that they were shooting down? link
That's not too bad for interceptors. Much more believable than the previous figures
Hitting a very fast missile is not easy!
True, but if you take the cost of the inteceptors into consideration and compare it to the cost of the missles and drones, then you go from "not to bad" to "another of these and we're out of money".
Do the interceptors cost that much more than missiles?
Vastly more, yes.
was it ballistic missiles that they were shooting down?