Saudis sound warning on blocking Palestinian statehood

[Sofiyya 1,687]

That's why I come here

Cartoons are so much easier to understand than all that scholarly #######.

[luckytxn 2,264]

It's not at all as simple as it might seem. I hope you have the time or interest to read the report - it is from a military perspective, rather than a PR/marketing perspective (which is what you get from the IDF spokespeople and the Israeli Foreign Ministry.)

I have read this and read this before in a book that came out years ago. The IDF found out what it was like to go up against a well entrenched dedicated force. They were using tactics that were wrong for the type of mission they should have been going up against. They learned a lesson. A valuable lesson at that. In the report Hezbollah even said they never expected the reaction they received from the raid and the kidnappings they initiated and would have maybe not done it. They also miscalculated the response from Israel.

Now we get to the crux of what it would take to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. This time the combatants will have to go into Israel and fight a well entrenched dedicated force. They will have to do this without having command of the air as Israel will have command of the airways and be pounding you from artillery and the air. By the time you enter Israel with your depleted force then you will have to fight an entrenched dedicated focused force. If somehow you get through the perimeter with an ever depleted force then the fighting will become even more focused on any breakthrough force.

It is hard to fight any enemy by attacking yet alone a well trained and dedicated force within ones own country. Now we all know right now and for the foreseeable future that every surrounding country is having problems with their own survival and using their military to quell uprisings. None can hardly stand to fight a war. If these are quelled and are able to fight a war they will need to train and equip themselves for that war. This all takes time. Then each country will need to try to combine with a neighboring force and fight as one to defeat Israel. (The last time they fought they all went on their own way and Israel defeated them individually) They then need to somehow resupply all the way. And last but not least if they ever managed to penetrate and start to wipe Israel off the face of the earth they will have to contend with nukes being launched at their capitals and main areas of forces being wiped out. Israel has superior weapons to knock down their incoming ballistics so while their being annihilated Israel will be odds on favorite to survive still.

The report showed the deficiencies that Israel had in invading a entrenched force. The report never said that Israel could not handle being attacked themselves.

That's why I come here

I would have thought you would have known I was making a joke of the virgin thing.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

How successful have the Arabs been invading Israel? Let's see... 1948, 1967, 1973, ....umm they haven't.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

What I can count on is that you'd read the report. You're not among those who concern me. Disagreement is expected and fine, but it would be much less pedestrian if there were more who came to the threads armed and prepared to debate rather than dragging out the same old retorts. Frankly, I'm getting bored (that's why a new site is in the works). WOM is carrying most of the weight here.

I would have thought you would have known I was making a joke of the virgin thing.

[luckytxn 2,264]

What I can count on is that you'd read the report. You're not among those who concern me. Disagreement is expected and fine, but it would be much less pedestrian if there were more who came to the threads armed and prepared to debate rather than dragging out the same old retorts. Frankly, I'm getting bored (that's why a new site is in the works). WOM is carrying most of the weight here.

I read about every battle and warfare possible. I also read a lot on military in general. As it stands now and in the near future is that every country surrounding Israel collectively could not take Israel by invasion. You are right that saying ridiculous tired old jokes is non productive.

WOM is more than capable and a worthy to any here.

Edited September 17, 2011 by luckytxn

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yes and I am sure that Israel will take their nukes UNUSED with them.

It would be hard to call, "Danger! Close!" when lobby a nuke toward Gaza.

ETA: Or, Tel Aviv for that matter.

Edited September 17, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[luckytxn 2,264]

It would be hard to call, "Danger! Close!" when lobby a nuke toward Gaza.

ETA: Or, Tel Aviv for that matter.

Right after nukes would be raining down on every Capital and large city in the ME.(Also Rome I think for good measure)

[Sofiyya 1,687]

See, where I think you all are wrong is that 1. you don't really have a current idea about the total capability of nations in the region, and 2. you're only considering nations in the ME as part of the fight. If you knew more, you'd know better.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

I have read this and read this before in a book that came out years ago. The IDF found out what it was like to go up against a well entrenched dedicated force. They were using tactics that were wrong for the type of mission they should have been going up against. They learned a lesson. A valuable lesson at that. In the report Hezbollah even said they never expected the reaction they received from the raid and the kidnappings they initiated and would have maybe not done it. They also miscalculated the response from Israel.

Now we get to the crux of what it would take to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. This time the combatants will have to go into Israel and fight a well entrenched dedicated force. They will have to do this without having command of the air as Israel will have command of the airways and be pounding you from artillery and the air. By the time you enter Israel with your depleted force then you will have to fight an entrenched dedicated focused force. If somehow you get through the perimeter with an ever depleted force then the fighting will become even more focused on any breakthrough force.

It is hard to fight any enemy by attacking yet alone a well trained and dedicated force within ones own country. Now we all know right now and for the foreseeable future that every surrounding country is having problems with their own survival and using their military to quell uprisings. None can hardly stand to fight a war. If these are quelled and are able to fight a war they will need to train and equip themselves for that war. This all takes time. Then each country will need to try to combine with a neighboring force and fight as one to defeat Israel. (The last time they fought they all went on their own way and Israel defeated them individually) They then need to somehow resupply all the way. And last but not least if they ever managed to penetrate and start to wipe Israel off the face of the earth they will have to contend with nukes being launched at their capitals and main areas of forces being wiped out. Israel has superior weapons to knock down their incoming ballistics so while their being annihilated Israel will be odds on favorite to survive still.

The report showed the deficiencies that Israel had in invading a entrenched force. The report never said that Israel could not handle being attacked themselves.

Israel has initiated every single one of its wars except the 1973 war with Egypt (which was a direct response to the war Israel initiated in 1967.) More significantly, it has not been able to win a war ("achieve its military goals") since 1967. (I am including 1948 in that assessment and I've already discussed why in other threads - I don't want to get too off-track here. If someone wants to pick up that discussion, we can bump up the thread.)

But basically, it's pretty illogical to start wars to seize territory or to impose a political agenda and then try to claim victimhood when people fight back, and with everything at their disposal.

The point of the report - or the "lesson of Hezbollah" if you will - is that the IDF is not invincible when faced with well-organized, well-equipped (and strongly motivated) forces. In fact, it performed quite poorly against them, despite being one of the most technologically advanced and well-funded militaries in the world. From the US Army report:

For the last six years we were engaged in stupid policing missions in the West Bank. . . . Checkpoints, hunting stone-throwing Palestinian children, that kind of stuff. The result was that we were not ready to confront real fighters like Hezbollah.

- p. 49

And this one, even more perceptive:

“The point is, the IDF fell in love with what it was doing with the Palestinians,” he stated. “In fact it became addictive. You know when you fight a war against a rival who’s by all means inferior to you, you may lose a guy here or there, but you’re in total control. It’s nice, you can pretend that you fight the war and yet it’s not really a dangerous war...

- p. 63

There is a pervasive psychological phenomenon in Israeli society - the elevation of the military to near-worship status, and the need for constant "successful operations" against "enemies" to keep the hype going.

Just look at what the IDF did after its humiliating defeat in Lebanon - it dropped Hezbollah like a hot potato and turned to Gaza again, launching Cast Lead with all its spectacular firepower to pound a captive, mostly civilian population with a few poorly organized, poorly equippped irregulars. Honor regained.

It's like a video game set to a level you can always beat - victory is guaranteed, and it feels so good. This is how the modern IDF built its reputation - fighting scrubs.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I read about every battle and warfare possible. I also read a lot on military in general. As it stands now and in the near future is that every country surrounding Israel collectively could not take Israel by invasion. You are right that saying ridiculous tired old jokes is non productive.

WOM is more than capable and a worthy to any here.

The defender always has the advantage, by about four to one. The closest Israel got into trouble was during the Yom Kippur War against the Syrian armor. However, Syrian T-55's had problems fighting from prepared positions because of the limited elevation of the main gun. In open country, Syrians lost solely because of an unwillingness to maneuver. Israelis proved the superiority of shoot and scoot.

Edited September 17, 2011 by Crusty Old Perv

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

See, where I think you all are wrong is that 1. you don't really have a current idea about the total capability of nations in the region, and 2. you're only considering nations in the ME as part of the fight. If you knew more, you'd know better.

[luckytxn 2,264]

See, where I think you all are wrong is that 1. you don't really have a current idea about the total capability of nations in the region, and 2. you're only considering nations in the ME as part of the fight. If you knew more, you'd know better.

Well other than Janes there are other sites that do analyze the strengths and follow procurement's of every nation. I do know one thing and that is Israel has a far superior Air Force then all near countries combined. Israel will have command of the skies and that will mean victory over attacking forces. Air Forces are among the easiest of countries military arms to be able to analyze and read.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

America has touted itself as the premier military power on the planet. Yet, we lost in Viet Nam and we are not winning in Iraq or Afghanistan, which is why it is so hard to leave, and, when we do, the countries will revert back to the enemy. Our leaders acknowledge that.

To proclaim Israel the winner on the basis of what has been before, and barely by a margin, is folly. It presumes that no other nation in the region has learned anything from the past either, nor that they haven't improved.

The defender always has the advantage, by about four to one. The closest Israel got into trouble was during the Yom Kippur War against the Syrian armor. However, Syrian T-55's had problems fighting from prepared positions because of the limited elevation of the main gun. In open country, Syrians lost solely because of an unwillingness to maneuver. Israelis proved the superiority of shoot and scoot.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Well other than Janes there are other sites that do analyze the strengths and follow procurement's of every nation. I do know one thing and that is Israel has a far superior Air Force then all near countries combined. Israel will have command of the skies and that will mean victory over attacking forces. Air Forces are among the easiest of countries military arms to be able to analyze and read.

The IDF's reliance on its overwhelming air power was near the top of the list on the Top Ten Mistakes of Lebanon 2006.

[luckytxn 2,264]

The IDF's reliance on its overwhelming air power was near the top of the list on the Top Ten Mistakes of Lebanon 2006.

The IDF found out why their air power was inadequate and took steps to correct it that the report mentioned also. The cease fire robably enabled Hezbollah from being annihilated.