world
Political Scientist Discusses US and Israel Strikes on 13,000 Iranian Targets
Political scientist David N. Gibbs stated that the United States and Israel targeted 13,000 sites in Iran. He explained that above-ground structures were destroyed using satellite location. Gibbs noted that such firepower did not result in a US victory over Iran.
MA
middleeasteye.netAudio version
Tap play to generate a narrated version.
Political scientist David N. Gibbs discussed a military operation in which the United States and Israel struck 13,000 targets in Iran. According to Gibbs, the operation focused on above-ground infrastructure.
These targets were identified through satellite imagery and destroyed without reported difficulties. Gibbs, a professor, provided analysis on the operation's outcome. He stated that despite the scale of the strikes, the United States did not achieve victory against Iran.
The discussion highlights limitations of aerial and satellite-based targeting in military engagements. The targets included various above-ground facilities across Iran. Satellite technology enabled precise location of these sites.
Gibbs emphasized that the ease of targeting surface structures did not translate to overall success in the conflict.
his explanation, Gibbs pointed to factors beyond firepower that influenced the operation's results.
Underground or hardened facilities may have remained intact, according to his assessment. This underscores challenges in comprehensive military operations against fortified adversaries. The strikes involved coordination between the United States and Israel.
No specific dates or timelines for the operation were detailed in Gibbs' remarks. The analysis serves as an academic perspective on modern warfare tactics.
operations affect regional stability in the Middle East.
Affected parties include Iranian infrastructure and civilian areas near targets. Future military engagements may consider Gibbs' points on the need for strategies addressing subsurface threats. Gibbs' commentary draws from political science research on international conflicts.
It provides insight into why extensive targeting does not guarantee strategic wins. Ongoing discussions in policy circles reference similar historical operations.
