Is the Iron Dome a hoax? Look into it
(www.bitchute.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (53)
sorted by:
There are loads of videos of interception. It does work, and very well. Possibly the best of its kind and it's had a lot of evolution. The problem is obviously the expense, all that funding, mainly patriots, and other munitions, keeping it operating. Hence laser alternatives are emerging, but are still largely prototypes.
Doubtful.
F.e. - https://www.ynetnews.com/article/4kemkv3z2
Five out of nine intercepted - sorry, but it is very poor performance. Better than Patriot, of course :), but still far from ones that are really best of its kind. Even very old S-300 have significantly higher efficiency.
Either Iron Dome designed for the interception of the very specific targets and due to design flaws could not be upgraded for another kind, either it is yet another example of Western weapons made for the sales and shows, not for the battles.
Possibly but it still stops a lot. None are 100%. They can be beaten, by tech. Such as Drones, balloons, more fire than any reload and sam stockpiles.
It's therefore not a hoax. As this topic suggests.
Yes for a lot of new threats emerging, lasers, as well as countined missiles.
There are a few others like perhaps decoys.
The problem also becomes, although the initial impact is shot down, any debris still damage density.
I don't think it is a hoax too. If you are not targeting top efficiency, anti-missile defence system is perfectly doable, and Israel have (had?) enough engineeres to create one, nothing exceptional, especially for the modern tech.
I think the main lie is in the advertised efficiency of that system. Trying to replace real advancements by ads and propaganda for citizens rarely ends nice.
Also, interesting moment - Israel refuse to sell Iron Dome to anybody even if asked, despite AD systems are popular and demanded goods around the world. Reasons for deniai, if any given at all, looks like joke.