Israel's air defense systems, explained and visualized
Iran has retaliated against Israel, following Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear targets Friday morning local time. When tensions escalate in the Middle East, Israel turns once again to its extensive air defense system — which includes the Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow System — to protect its citizens.
The missile defense system is one of the most important tools in Israel's arsenal and has saved countless civilian lives over various conflicts in the last decade, analysts say.
Development on the Iron Dome first began in 2007. After tests in 2008 and 2009, the first Iron Dome batteries were deployed in 2011. The system has been upgraded several times since.
The Iron Dome is designed to shoot down incoming projectiles. It is equipped with a radar that detects rockets and then uses a command-and-control system that quickly calculates whether an incoming projectile poses a threat or is likely to hit an unpopulated area. If the rocket does pose a threat, the Iron Dome fires missiles from the ground to destroy in the air.
To those on the ground, a direct interception sounds like a loud bang and can sometimes be felt from the ground.
There are 10 Iron Dome batteries across Israel, each of which includes three to four launchers, according to Raytheon and the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The system is highly transportable and requires just a few hours to set up, and the missile interceptors themselves are highly maneuverable. They are 3 meters (almost 10 feet), long; have a diameter of about 6 inches (15 cm); and weigh 90 kilograms (198 pounds) at launch, the security analysis group IHS Jane's said in 2012.
The warhead is believed to carry 11 kilograms of high explosives, IHS Jane's said. Its range is from 4 km to 70 km (2.5 miles to 43 miles).
During times of war, the cost to operate Iron Dome can rise quickly. Each missile costs around $40,000, so intercepting thousands of incoming rockets adds up.
The US government has spent over $2.9 billion on the Iron Dome program, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Memo: Trump grapples with prospect of all-out Israel-Iran war
President Trump faces a volatile, fast-moving global crisis as Israel and Iran teeter on the brink of all-out war. The situation is shifting by the moment in the wake of Israel's attack on multiple sites in Iran in the early hours of Friday, local time. Iran launched a retaliatory barrage against Israel later on Friday. Iran's ambassador to the United Nations said that Israel's initial attacks had killed 78 and injured more than 320. Iranian officials have said they regard Israel's actions as a declaration of war. There has been no such explicit declaration from the Israeli side, but clearly the two nations are in the middle of a grave clash that could easily spiral even further. Such a confrontation has the potential to scramble American politics, too. In some ways, it already has. The price of oil spiked as soon as the Israeli attack happened, rising by more than 8 percent at one point on Friday. An elevated oil price for any significant length of time could feed inflation and dampen economic growth. That unpleasant combination is one reason why the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by roughly 1.8 percent on Friday. The broader based S&P 500 declined by more than one percent. To be sure, a cooling of tensions between Israel and Iran could happen, calming oil prices and producing an instant rebound on the financial markets. But such a de-escalation is far from certain. The more negative scenario — military actions by two foreign nations causing economic trouble in the U.S. — would be an especially galling development for Trump. Then there are the intertwined issues of Trump's general attitude toward Israel, his pursuit of a fresh nuclear deal with Iran, and his broader skepticism of interventionist military policies overseas. Trump is on one level a fervent support of Israel. He often boasts to pro-Israel crowds about the actions he took in his first term, including moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and facilitating agreements to normalize relations between Israel and two Gulf nations, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. But Trump has had a checkered relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump reportedly took umbrage at Netanyahu accepting former President Biden's victory in the 2020 presidential election. In a 2023 speech, Trump complained that Netanyahu had 'let us down' by backing out of what Trump said was a planned joint action to kill Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani. The U.S. went ahead and killed Soleimani. In Trump's second term, the president pressed Israel to agree to a ceasefire in the first couple of months of his term. But he also outraged Palestinians and their supporters by suggesting Gazans could be pushed out of the strip of land that is home — which Trump proposed could be redeveloped as a tourist destination. Similar complexities surround Trump's suggestion that there could be a new nuclear deal with Iran. He had excoriated the 2015 deal that was made during former President Obama's tenure, withdrawing the United States from it in 2018, during his first term. But he has recently been pursuing a new agreement, and at one point it was reported that the U.S. might be willing to countenance some element of uranium enrichment on Iranian soil. Trump has more recently said that is not the case. The latest round of talks involving Trump's negotiator Steve Witkoff and Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, had been set for Sunday. Trump, on Thursday at the White House, responded to what were then rumors of an Israeli attack on Iran by saying, 'I don't want [Israel] going in, because I think that would blow it.' When the attack went ahead, there was instant speculation that Netanyahu was seeking to vaporize any hope of a U.S.-Iran deal. This thesis was strengthened in the immediate wake of the attack when Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement emphasizing that 'Israel took unilateral action against Iran.' But that all changed by the next day. Trump, always sensitive to any suggestion that he has been outflanked or sidelined, seemed to take exception to a Wall Street Journal reporter's question about whether the U.S. had been given a 'heads-up' by Netanyahu, insisting that the White House knew all about the attack in advance. Some of his allies also advanced the idea that the earlier expression of misgivings had been a tactical sleight-of-hand intended to make the Iranians think an Israeli attack would not come. In any event, the Iranians have now pulled out of the talks. Trump, on Truth Social, posted that he had offered Iran the chance to reach a new deal in recent months 'but they just couldn't get there. Now they have, perhaps, a second chance!' In the short term, it appears extremely unlikely that Iran would sign onto a deal on Trump's terms in the wake of an Israeli attack. Such a move would surely look to many in the Islamic Republic and the rest of the Middle East like a humiliation. Trump is also navigating between his instinctual backing of Israel and his more isolationist tendencies. Both impulses have their advocates in different parts of the Republican universe. Among office holders, the views expressed in recent days by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) were typical. Graham said that if Iran continued to balk at a nuclear deal, the U.S. should 'go all-in to help Israel finish the job.' Cruz said, 'Israel is acting to defend itself. I stand with Israel.' But in the broader MAGA universe, prominent figures including Tucker Carlson and Matt Walsh are exponentially more skeptical. Carlson inveighed against 'warmongers' who wanted 'direct US military involvement in a war with Iran,' on X on Friday. Walsh, on the same platform, wrote, 'Israel is its own country and perfectly capable of taking care of itself. We do not need to be involve in this and should not be.' While some dismiss Carlson and Walsh as mere media figures, they have a combined X following of roughly 20 million people. The political impact of the current crisis is impossible to predict at this point. It is certainly possible that it could rebound to Trump's advantage, especially if the intensity of the confrontation wanes quickly. In the very short term, Friday's escalating crisis in the Middle East saw a big story from the previous day that was to Democrats' advantage – the handcuffing of Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) after he sought to question Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem – fade toward the margins. But there are dangerous waters churning, and any missteps by Trump could cost him dearly. The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Israel-Iran conflict poses new dilemma for Democrats
Democrats on Capitol Hill can't catch a break. Just as Sen. Alex Padilla's (D-Calif.) physical clash with Trump administration security officials had given them cause to unite on the otherwise divisive issue of immigration, Israel's attack on Iran has shifted the national gaze onto yet another radioactive topic that has long split the party. While many Democrats quickly condemned conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for launching Israel's assault on Thursday night, many others hailed the decision as a necessary step to put a halt to Tehran's nuclear expansion. The disagreement is an unwelcome one for Democratic leaders, who had rallied forcefully behind Padilla on Thursday afternoon and were hoping to take that unified front into the weekend, when President Trump is staging an elaborate military parade, and then into next week's holiday, when the House is on a long recess and lawmakers will be back in their districts to confront voters. Instead, Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear program — a mere coincidence of timing — has dragged Democrats back into the quarrelsome discussion over Netanyahu's aggressive military strategy, which has already been a topic of internal strife amid Israel's demolition of Gaza in search of the Hamas terrorists who attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. On one side of that debate are Israel's closest congressional allies, who quickly cheered Netanyahu's preemptive attacks as an imperative effort to make the region, and the world, a safer place. 'The October 7 attacks showed that Israel can leave nothing to chance — the threats they face are real, and inaction can cost lives,' Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), a former head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said in a statement. 'The strikes that began last night in Iran targeted military leaders and nuclear facilities that posed a clear risk for Israel and for future peace in the region.' Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) sounded a similar note, warning that allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons 'would place Israel, the United States, and partners in the region under direct and constant danger.' 'Iran could have prevented this. They chose this path,' Moskowitz said in a statement. 'Democratic and Republican administrations have all agreed that Iran should never obtain a nuclear weapon, and this will help that bipartisan goal.' Many liberal Democrats have a decidedly different view. Those voices have long criticized Netanyahu, especially as the death toll in Gaza has soared beyond 50,000 people, including thousands of children. And they wasted no time blasting the Israeli government's latest foray into Iran. 'Israel's reckless, escalatory strikes on Iran risk igniting a larger regional war, & undermine planned negotiations for a potential new nuclear deal,' Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the former head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, wrote on X. 'Netanyahu must not be allowed to pull America into another forever war. Instead, we must immediately push for negotiated de-escalation.' Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, piled on, warning that 'Israel's alarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran is a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence.' 'These strikes threaten not only the lives of innocent civilians but the stability of the entire Middle East and the safety of American citizens and forces,' Reed said in a statement. 'While tensions between Israel and Iran are real and complex, military aggression of this scale is never the answer.' The Democratic divisions are not mirrored on the other side of the aisle, where Republicans — with a very few exceptions — are united in lockstep behind Netanyahu's attacks. 'What Israel's preemptive strike ensured tonight is that Iran's next attack will not be with a nuclear weapon,' said Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Keeping the issue in the headlines, Iran responded on Friday by launching a series of retaliatory ballistic missile strikes, some of which targeted Tel Aviv. Tehran also backed out of its plans to meet with U.S. officials in search of an elusive nuclear deal. Those talks had been scheduled for Sunday in Oman. The conflict — both abroad and within the Democratic Party — was not what Democratic leaders had in mind as Congress was leaving Washington on Thursday afternoon. Hours earlier, Padilla had confronted Kristi Noem, the secretary of the Homeland Security Department, at a press conference in Los Angeles, where residents have been facing off against law enforcers to protest Trump's immigration raids. Noem's security detail grabbed Padilla and pushed him into an adjacent hallway, where he was shoved to the ground and handcuffed. The scuffle sent alarm bells through the Capitol, where Democrats have been scrambling to locate a unified response to Trump's aggressive enforcement crackdown in Los Angeles, which has featured the activation of the National Guard without the governor's consent, and the deployment of hundreds of Marines. Some Democrats have leaned into the conflict, hoping to keep the focus on Trump's controversial actions, including some who have called for impeachment. Others have used it to revisit Trump's role in the Capitol attack of Jan. 6, 2021. Still others have warned against highlighting a contentious topic — one that had helped propel Trump to the White House — for fear of alienating voters in battleground districts. And party leaders have sought a delicate balance, condemning Trump's tactics in L.A. while fighting to shift the conversation back to the president's legislative agenda, including Medicaid cuts and tax cuts for the wealthy. 'He sees the protests in Los Angeles as an excuse to unleash more chaos and distract the American people from the failing economy and his plans to cut Medicaid and food assistance,' Rep. Pete Aguilar (Calif.), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said earlier in the week. The Padilla affair, in contrast, became a rallying cry. And Democrats in both chambers quickly united in defense of their colleague, accusing the administration of abusing its powers and demanding an investigation into how a sitting U.S. senator could be knocked around by officials of the same government he represents. Many called it an assault. 'The Trump administration is a disgrace. Secretary Noem is a disgrace. The manhandling of Senator Alex Padilla was a complete and total disgrace,' House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters on the steps of the Capitol on Thursday afternoon. A short time later, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) organized a march from the House chamber across the Capitol, to the office of Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), demanding a response. When Thune wasn't there, they retraced their steps and marched into the office of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who declined to see them. While the effort was led by the CHC, many other Democrats participated, including top figures like Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), the Democratic whip; Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee; and the heads of the Black and Asian Pacific American caucuses. 'I want to really emphasize that this is an all-caucus-wide movement and outrage against the authoritarian, violent behavior of this administration,' Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.), a former head of the Hispanic Caucus, said outside the Speaker's office. Hours later, after the Capitol had emptied and lawmakers had headed home, Israel launched its strikes on Tehran. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mubi Responds to Backlash Over New Investor's Ties to Israeli Defense-Tech Startup
Mubi, the upstart distributor, streaming platform and production company that was recently valued at $1 billion and guided 'The Substance' to box office success and into the Oscars, has responded to backlash over its latest source of investment. At the end of May, it was announced that the company — which went on a buying spree at the recent Cannes Film Festival, snapping up rights to eight films in competition (including a $24 million splurge on the Jennifer Lawrence-Robert Pattinson starring 'Die My Love') — had secured a $100 million investment from Sequoia Capital. More from Variety Jim Jarmusch's 'Father Mother Sister Brother' Starring Cate Blanchett, Adam Driver Confirmed for Venice Competition, Says Mubi Boss Mubi Expands Theatrical Operations to Italy With Former Lucky Red Exec Gabriele D'Andrea in Charge Mubi Acquires Oliver Laxe's Cannes Competition Entry 'Sirât' for Italy, Turkey and India The Silicon Valley-based Sequoia has invested in a wide range of companies, including the likes of Apple, Google, ByteDance, Cisco, and Nvidia. Mubi marks a rare foray into entertainment. But Sequoia is also closely tied to Israelo defence-tech startup Kela, founded in July 2024 by four veterans of Israeli intelligence units in response to the terror attacks of Oct. 7 and more than six months into the invasion of Gaza. Kela is currently developing a battlefield operating system enabling militaries to integrate AI and commercial tech. According to Sequoia's website, it led Kela's $10 million seed funding round last year. In May of this year, Kela secured an additional $60 million in investment in a funding round also backed by Sequoia (alongside Lux Capital and In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA). Kela's total investment now stands at $100 million. 'The vision is two-fold: in the short term, to upgrade Israel's internal defense capabilities,' wrote Sequoia in a lengthy article about its business with Kela posted in March of this year. 'The company's initial focus is border protection, an urgent priority post-October 7th. In the long term, the ambition is to convert Israel into a defense tech hub for Western militaries—a source of strategic advantage for NATO and the U.S. as they seek to deter their adversaries.' Mubi receiving investment from a company with ties to the Israeli defense sector in the midst of Israel's deadly war in Gaza has fallen foul of some online critics. Several on social media have called for Mubi to be boycotted and have claimed that they've already canceled their subscriptions. A widely shared post on X said it was 'time to add @mubi to the BDS list,' referring to the Palestinian-led Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement that looks to boycott Israeli products and encourage investors to divest from companies implicated in Israeli policies. A group called Film Workers for Palestine later said it was 'horrified' by Mubi's decision. 'This is unacceptable, and we demand that Mubi return the investment,' it wrote in a well-circulated Instagram post. In a statement posted to its social media channels on Saturday, Mubi said the rationale to seek investment from Seqouia was to 'accelerate our mission of delivering bold and visionary films to global audiences,' adding that the venture firm had a '50-plus year history of partnering with founders to help turn their ideas into world-changing businesses.' 'Over the last several days, some members of our community have commented on the decision to work with Sequoia given their investment in Israeli companies and the personal opinions expressed by one of their partners,' it said. 'The beliefs of individual investors do not reflect the views of MUBI.' First founded 18 years ago by CEO Efe Carakal, Mubi has evolved from a niche streaming service to a full-fledged studio, cultivating a major following in the art-house crowd along the way. While it has largely remained politically muted, last year it cancelled an entire festival it had planned in Turkey after local authorities banned a screening of Luca Guadagnino's 'Queer' over what they described as 'provocative content.' As has been pointed out online, Mubi has numerous Palestinian films and features by Palestinian filmmakers about Gaza in its library. Best of Variety New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts? 25 Hollywood Legends Who Deserve an Honorary Oscar
