Saudis sound warning on blocking Palestinian statehood

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

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:

And this one, even more perceptive:

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.

You keep mentioning that the IDF was defeated in Lebanon. I'm curios as to what you consider a "victory".

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Lebanese_rivers_litani.jpg <---- That's the Litani River. It took the IDF less than a day to reach that river.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Locations_bombed_Aug13_no_fact_box.jpg <---- There's your so called "victory".

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Let me say this, there is information that sites don't publish because they can't. I know that there are military exercises in the region by countries you don't even include in the equation, that don't get much notice in this conflict and that do get training and support from the US that are very capable and willing to enter into a military conflict against Israel, if it comes to that.

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.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Let me say this, there is information that sites don't publish because they can't. I know that there are military exercises in the region by countries you don't even include in the equation, that don't get much notice in this conflict and that do get training and support from the US that are very capable and willing to enter into a military conflict against Israel, if it comes to that.

Yes we do know that Iran and Turkey has deployed Naval forces. Good luck against Israels air force to the sitting ducks.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I said these nations are not talked about.

Yes we do know that Iran and Turkey has deployed Naval forces. Good luck against Israels air force to the sitting ducks.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Let me say this, there is information that sites don't publish because they can't. I know that there are military exercises in the region by countries you don't even include in the equation, that don't get much notice in this conflict and that do get training and support from the US that are very capable and willing to enter into a military conflict against Israel, if it comes to that.

Turkey is the game changer. Without Turkey as an ally, Israel's options are limited. As Egypt takes a new direction, and Jordan is showing some signs of recalcitrance, Israel may be satisfied just to return back to the 1967 borders, and forgetting about, "establishing more facts on the ground."

[luckytxn 2,264]

I said these nations are not talked about.

All nations are talked about in the military community.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Turkey is the game changer. Without Turkey as an ally, Israel's options are limited. As Egypt takes a new direction, and Jordan is showing some signs of recalcitrance, Israel may be satisfied just to return back to the 1967 borders, and forgetting about, "establishing more facts on the ground."

You don't know the Jews. I'm telling ya now they have no plans of going back to the '67 borders no matter what Turkey decides to do. They will never give up Jerusalem without a fight.

If there's war over there, it only gives the Jews a green light to end Palestine once and for all.

Edited September 17, 2011 by Why_Me

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Then, something significant is missing. Maybe you'll find it.

All nations are talked about in the military community.

That would be smart.

Turkey is the game changer. Without Turkey as an ally, Israel's options are limited. As Egypt takes a new direction, and Jordan is showing some signs of recalcitrance, Israel may be satisfied just to return back to the 1967 borders, and forgetting about, "establishing more facts on the ground."

[luckytxn 2,264]

Turkey is the game changer. Without Turkey as an ally, Israel's options are limited. As Egypt takes a new direction, and Jordan is showing some signs of recalcitrance, Israel may be satisfied just to return back to the 1967 borders, and forgetting about, "establishing more facts on the ground."

Turkey can bring their pretty good air force in. That would prove interesting.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

If you knew the Jews, you'd know many of them don't want this. They support a two-state solution.

You don't know the Jews. I'm telling ya now they have no plans of going back to the '67 borders no matter what Turkey decides to do. They will never give up Jerusalem without a fight.

If there's war over there, it only gives the Jews a green light to end Palestine once and for all.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

If you knew the Jews, you'd know many of them don't want this. They support a two-state solution.

"Two state solution" doesn't mean they have any plans of giving up the eastern part of Jerusalem. Anyone that thinks they do is apparently clueless about the Jews.

Edited September 17, 2011 by Why_Me

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

You keep mentioning that the IDF was defeated in Lebanon. I'm curios as to what you consider a "victory".

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Lebanese_rivers_litani.jpg <---- That's the Litani River. It took the IDF less than a day to reach that river.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Locations_bombed_Aug13_no_fact_box.jpg <---- There's your so called "victory".

Isn't Wikipedia great ?

Now, back to reality. Page 1-2 of the report I just linked for you:

By the time the United Nations (UN) cease-fire went into effect on 14 August 2006, many military analysts were convinced the IDF had suffered a significant defeat. One source held that Hezbollah’s military and political victory was absolute and irrefutable.3 Even more revealing were the comments by Mossad Chief, Meir Degan, and the head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, during a meeting with Prime Minister Olmert in the immediate aftermath of the war. Both men pointedly told Olmert “the war was a national catastrophe and Israel suffered a critical blow.”

or on Page 61:

As IAF campaign planner Ron Tira noted:

Israel failed on the strategic, operational, and tactical levels. Israel did not succeed in generating decapitation, paralysis, blindness, or any other effect that substantially harms the will or functioning of the organization’s command and control echelon. Nor did it succeed in suppressing the operational effectiveness of Hizbollah’s combat groups and light surface-to-surface rocket formations. At the end of the day, Israel did not upset the equilibrium of Hizbollah’s system and did not create a sense of helplessness and distress, nor did it push the organization towards cognitive-strategic collapse and a drive to end the war immediately on Israel’s terms.

Or read the Winograd Report (the Israeli government-appointed investigation of the IDF's failure against Hezbollah.) You can read a synopsis in English online, but it's Final Report press release is conveniently attached to Appendix A in the report I just linked for you:

Israel did not use its military force well and effectively, despite the fact that it was a limited war initiated by Israel itself. At the end of the day, Israel did not gain a political achievement because of military successes; rather, it relied on a political agreement, which included positive elements for Israel, which permitted it to stop a war which it had failed to win.

...

All in all, the IDF failed, especially because of the conduct of the high command and the ground forces, to provide an effective military response to the challenge posed to it by the war in Lebanon, and thus failed to provide the political echelon with a military achievement that could have served as the basis for political and diplomatic action. Responsibility for this outcomes lies mainly with the IDF, but the misfit between the mode of action and the goals determined by the political echelon share responsibility.

p. 84-85

The link again:

http://carl.army.mil/download/csipubs/matthewsOP26.pdf

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Isn't Wikipedia great ?

Now, back to reality. Page 1-2 of the report I just linked for you:

or on Page 61:

Or read the Winograd Report (the Israeli government-appointed investigation of the IDF's failure against Hezbollah.) You can read a synopsis in English online, but it's Final Report press release is conveniently attached to Appendix A in the report I just linked for you:

The link again:

http://carl.army.mil/download/csipubs/matthewsOP26.pdf

Do you want me to use another link showing the Litani River or what cities in Lebanon were bombed by the Israeli air force? You can post all the links you want, it's a fact the IDF marched to the Litani River in a matter of hours and it's a fact the Israeli air force bombed any target in Lebanon they chose to bomb.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Then, something significant is missing. Maybe you'll find it.

That would be smart.

Forget Iraq entering a war against Israel as long as Iran is their main threat.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

You don't know the Jews. I'm telling ya now they have no plans of going back to the '67 borders no matter what Turkey decides to do. They will never give up Jerusalem without a fight.

If there's war over there, it only gives the Jews a green light to end Palestine once and for all.

That was hideously ignorant.

#1. The state of Israel is not "The Jews," and it does not officially represent "The Jews"

#2. Israel's illegal settlers do not represent "The Jews" either, although they have an inordinate amount of influence over Israeli government policy

#3. Not all Jewish people live in Israel (not even half of the world's Jewish population lives there)

#4. Not all Jewish people support Israel or its behavior - most of them didn't in the early days of Zionism, and more and more of them are not supporting it now

#5. Many Jewish people (both in Israel and outside) actively support the Palestinians in their struggle for justice and strongly support their right to self-determination NOW under a two-state model, based on the 1967 armistice lines and including East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital

#6. More and more Jewish people are supporting a single, secular state with equal rights for all people who live in historic Palestine