On 5 March, a post appeared on the X account of Iran’s late supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, managed by his staff after he was killed in an Israeli airstrike on 28 February. The tweet featured a stark piece of propaganda: a gleaming, oversized missile arcing across the sky as a city below is engulfed in flames. The caption read: “Khorramshahr moments are on the horizon.”

The Khorramshahr missile, Iran’s most advanced ballistic missile, is believed to be capable of carrying a cluster warhead dispersing up to 80 submunitions. Since that post, it has come to loom large in Israeli threat assessments, a persistent concern for a country equipped with a multi-layered missile defence system that is widely regarded as the world’s most sophisticated.

The latest attack using cluster munitions occurred on Sunday, when an Iranian ballistic missile struck central Israel, injuring 15 people.

According to the Israel Defense Forces, roughly half of the missiles launched from Iran since the escalation have carried cluster warheads.

The Guardian, which reviewed the impact of dozens of Iranian strikes alongside statements from Israeli officials, has identified at least 19 ballistic missiles carrying cluster warheads that penetrated Israeli airspace and struck urban areas since the beginning of the war with Iran on 28 February. Those attacks have killed at least nine people and wounded dozens, reflecting a broader shift in Iran’s tactics that appears to have exposed a vulnerability in Israel’s air defences. Since the start of the war, Iran’s cluster munitions – which disperse dozens of bomblets mid-air – have tested Israel’s highly advanced, multi-tier missile defence network, including Iron Dome, which is designed to counter threats across ranges, altitudes and speeds, exposing gaps that interception alone has struggled to close.

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    What a load of one sided crap. Israel has been the aggressor in the region since the nakba. This nonsense started when the ottoman empire retreated in the early 1900s, and its always been the zionists pursuing terrorism, murder and land theft since day 1-- uninterrupted. Endless fountains of blood on their hands for their greed.

      • kreskin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        It is correct. Your own link for the incident you cite was after Balfour in british controlled palestine. The cause is unknown as your link states. or are ypou trying to blame zionism and the rejection of human rights of the palestinians on the british?

        • couldhavebeenyou@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          You claim that israel/zionists were the only ones that incited violence. My link is part of the more nuanced history of jews inside the dissolving Ottoman empire first escaping discrimination, then looking to create their own state, then being joined by refugee migrants from Europe, and then local muslim fundamentalists turning violent against them because they wanted to make sure islam remained the privileged religion on all of the land

          That’s a lot more nuanced than what you posted above, sadly in line with many other lemmings who choose to simplify all of that history into “the jews jumped from their boats guns blazing”

          • kreskin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            “then looking to create their own state”

            By stealing land beyond what Balfour had outlined. Yes. Can you tell us what the nakba even was?

            Also, Balfour ‘specifically promised to protect the “civil and religious rights” of the “existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.’ Which was immediately violated. and its been 8- years of solid violation since then.

            • couldhavebeenyou@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              The Balfour declaration was a statement from the British government, not some legal document sent down from god. The UN partition plan comes a lot closer, and also tried to outline a ‘clean’ 2-state solution (well, 3-state actually). But the muslims publicly (and the jews secretly) denounced it. It’s pretty ridiculous to go waving those documents in the face of just one of those parties.

              And I’m not disputing that they tried to get as much territory as possible and tried to expulse those with the wrong religion. Or that they were less than friendly in doing so. But then again: so did the other side.

              • kreskin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                But the muslims publicly (and the jews secretly) denounced it.

                And why did the locals population (you refer to them simply as “muslims”) who owned the land being taken denounce it? Were they wrong in their complaints? even a little?

                No. They denounced injustice.