It cost Israel more than $1bn to activate its defence systems that intercepted Iran’s massive drone and missile attack overnight, according to a former financial adviser to Israel’s military.

“The defence tonight was on the order of 4-5bn shekels [$1-1.3bn] per night,” estimated Brigadier General Reem Aminoach in an interview with Ynet news.

“If we’re talking about ballistic missiles that need to be brought down with an Arrow system, cruise missiles that need to be brought down with other missiles, and UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles], which we actually bring down mainly with fighter jets,” he said.

“Then add up the costs - $3.5m for an Arrow missile, $1m for a David’s Sling, such and such costs for jets. An order of magnitude of 4-5bn shekels.”

  • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Christ dude I literally “cited” the campaign of Sanders that put out an idea as a platform and backed it with research and examples from the rest of the world.

    The studies were not done by Bernie Sanders himself but even had they been I’d dare you to refute them intelligently.

    You talk as if we ought to respect you but that also informs your opinion has no credibility.

      • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I cited nothing.

        I quoted the word because you used it incorrectly in a myriad of ways.

        Here’s one, it’s not by their campaign so maybe you might be able to throw that bias of yours out.

        Sorry it came from Lancet and not Cato. These studies are literally EVERYWHERE it’s honestly hard work to truly believe what you do.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8572548/

        ^ the article was published in Lancet.

          • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The Abstract ALONE claims the opposite.

            You’re using words hoping people will believe you because you’re saying them like an asshole talking down to children.

            To your “lower pay” point that’s not necessarily true and the article explains the how.

            The savings to providers alone would be double the “decrease” in pay, again pay would only go down through a grift.