***Israel Planning Tactical Nuclear Attack***

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: palehorse74
Of course Iran will also give Hezbollah a kick in the arse and point them at Israel once again; but, Hezbollah can't march south... the most they could do is once again launch rockets from launchtubes parked in childrens' bedrooms; and then run off and hide in a hole.. annoying and potentially deadly on a small scale? yes... but Iran will never "beat" Israel unless they somehow march across the land uniting all of the Arab tribes and form them up on Israel's borders... and we can all guess the likelihood of that happening.

Give Iran time to finish its nuclear program, and the capability to "beat" Israel won't be a problem.

Iran would still "lose"... but yes, Iran must be stopped...and soon.

I guess I'm splitting hairs here but I don't think it's possible to "win" a nuclear conflict.

As for some alliance of Arabs marching on Israel, they've tried that a few times and have proven that they are militarily inept in just about every way possible, they can't coordinate themselves and generally are a joke on the battlefield. Israel is a lot stronger now than they were the last time and in any sort of conventional war they would crush such a force even without our help.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yes, U.S and Israel try to limit civilian deaths, but they do not go out of their way to stop it. If they get information on the dot that the enemy is at a certain location, they are not going to waste hours trying to calculate the civilian deaths. They are going to send in the bombers to bomb them.

I suggest you look up the Laws of War followed by both the U.S. and Israeli military. Do me a favor and study the LOW concepts of Distinction, Military Necessity, Humanity, and Proportionality. Then, once you have a grasp of those concepts, go study our targeting processes.

You obviously have no idea just how far we go to avoid and limit civilian casualties.

Yeah Im sure people follow laws when they are being shot at.
"rolls eyes"

You have no idea how Israel works so why are you talking for them?
They have bombed apartment buildings with civilians inside. So unless you can justify such acts go ahead cause I would love to see how someone justifies the bombing of an apartment building with people living there.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: palehorse74
Of course Iran will also give Hezbollah a kick in the arse and point them at Israel once again; but, Hezbollah can't march south... the most they could do is once again launch rockets from launchtubes parked in childrens' bedrooms; and then run off and hide in a hole.. annoying and potentially deadly on a small scale? yes... but Iran will never "beat" Israel unless they somehow march across the land uniting all of the Arab tribes and form them up on Israel's borders... and we can all guess the likelihood of that happening.

Give Iran time to finish its nuclear program, and the capability to "beat" Israel won't be a problem.

Iran would still "lose"... but yes, Iran must be stopped...and soon.

I guess I'm splitting hairs here but I don't think it's possible to "win" a nuclear conflict.

As for some alliance of Arabs marching on Israel, they've tried that a few times and have proven that they are militarily inept in just about every way possible, they can't coordinate themselves and generally are a joke on the battlefield. Israel is a lot stronger now than they were the last time and in any sort of conventional war they would crush such a force even without our help.

Arabs are a lot more advanced than they were back then.
I believe they have hundreds of thousands of artillery/rockets/missiles that could hit Israel and cause massive destruction.

Any war Israel and the Arabs face will be a deadly one for everyone.
Exactly why Israel built the bomb.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

Google it.

yes because Israel's tank have proven to be great against roadside bombs and Russian post-1989 RPGs.

Wait, no they haven't.
No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

You can go ahead and blame Russian tech.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
haha I can post to you hundreds of pictures of the destruction caused on Lebanon

That's the point -- you didn't.
One leveled multi-story building will produce a lot of rubble, but it doesn't mean that the whole block was demolished -- no matter how many times you tap your red shoes.

how many missiles did Israel use during the conflict? I'll give you a hint. It numbered in the thousands.
I am sure those missiles all hit the forest and didnt destroy a thing..

I see that your intel is yet again much more accurate than an army that had UAVs, planes, and even forces on the ground.

Exactly what Europe looked like in WW2.

Really? As bad as this?
or this? or this?

While I read about some blocks hit hard in Beirut, where Hezbollah had their offices and bunkers, I doubt that you have anything to show wholesale destruction of block after block.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yeah Im sure people follow laws when they are being shot at.

That must be the most ironic thing you've said so far!

Hezbolla open fires from civilian areas, and you put the responsibility on Israel. HRW and Amnesty tried to put the same crap in recent reports: they were blasting Hezbollah for employing human shields, yet said that Israel is reponsible for civilian casualties.

Yep, keep arguing that Israeli forces have to be extra careful when being shot it, or else they might violate some laws -- which you obviously know nothing about -- that the other side does not and will never adhere to.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
haha I can post to you hundreds of pictures of the destruction caused on Lebanon

That's the point -- you didn't.
One leveled multi-story building will produce a lot of rubble, but it doesn't mean that the whole block was demolished -- no matter how many times you tap your red shoes.

how many missiles did Israel use during the conflict? I'll give you a hint. It numbered in the thousands.
I am sure those missiles all hit the forest and didnt destroy a thing..

I see that your intel is yet again much more accurate than an army that had UAVs, planes, and even forces on the ground.

Exactly what Europe looked like in WW2.

Really? As bad as this?
or this? or this?

While I read about some blocks hit hard in Beirut, where Hezbollah had their offices and bunkers, I doubt that you have anything to show wholesale destruction of block after block.

Yes it looks just like that

Explain Mr.DNA since you think you are so smart.

wtf justifies an army bombing a city when they have no forces in the city?

Wtf can possibly justify Israel bombing an apartment building when they do not even have troops on the ground around that building.

Go on give me one possible reason that justifies bombing an apartment building.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yeah Im sure people follow laws when they are being shot at.

That must be the most ironic thing you've said so far!

Hezbolla open fires from civilian areas, and you put the responsibility on Israel. HRW and Amnesty tried to put the same crap in recent reports: they were blasting Hezbollah for employing human shields, yet said that Israel is reponsible for civilian casualties.

Yep, keep arguing that Israeli forces have to be extra careful when being shot it, or else they might violate some laws -- which you obviously know nothing about -- that the other side does not and will never adhere to.

I dont give a ****** what Hezbollah does.

I am talking about Israel. Do I have to bring up the BS hezbollah does and compare it to Israel to see which one is lesser of the two wrongs? NO.

****** what the other side does. If one side does wrong then hey lets do wrong back. Making the other side's actions justified.

& I never said they have to be extra careful. Learn to read.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yes it looks just like that

Less text, more aerial images.
EDIT: please provide shots without an old woman wailing over her real estate.

wtf justifies an army bombing a city when they have no forces in the city?
...

I'd like to know what are your intel sources to indicate that there was no reason to bomb this or that.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yes it looks just like that

Less text, more aerial images.

wtf justifies an army bombing a city when they have no forces in the city?
...

I'd like to know what are your intel sources to indicate that there was no reason to bomb this or that.

I said make a reason one.
go on. Make anything up.

What the hell justifies Israel bombing an apartment building far away from where their troops are?

I just gave you the benefit. You can make any reason you want up.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
haha I can post to you hundreds of pictures of the destruction caused on Lebanon

That's the point -- you didn't.
One leveled multi-story building will produce a lot of rubble, but it doesn't mean that the whole block was demolished -- no matter how many times you tap your red shoes.

how many missiles did Israel use during the conflict? I'll give you a hint. It numbered in the thousands.
I am sure those missiles all hit the forest and didnt destroy a thing..

I see that your intel is yet again much more accurate than an army that had UAVs, planes, and even forces on the ground.

Exactly what Europe looked like in WW2.

Really? As bad as this?
or this? or this?

While I read about some blocks hit hard in Beirut, where Hezbollah had their offices and bunkers, I doubt that you have anything to show wholesale destruction of block after block.

Yes it looks just like that

Explain Mr.DNA since you think you are so smart.

wtf justifies an army bombing a city when they have no forces in the city?

Wtf can possibly justify Israel bombing an apartment building when they do not even have troops on the ground around that building.

Go on give me one possible reason that justifies bombing an apartment building.

1) The opponenents were in the building and/or using it as a staging point.

2) Hezbollah fighters were everywhere, hiding in and among the civilians and firing weapons from within civilian areas. They were hoping that either
a) Israel would hold back from full retaliation because of the civilians
b) Israel would prodiuce civilian casualties so Hez could win the media/PR battle.

Israel miscalculated the method that Hez would fight with and was not prepared to scorched earth to remove them.

Note that it was the Arabs that insisted on the truce; not Israel.

Hez initiated the conflict and when they realized they miscalculated, chose to fight a war of attrition hoping for the media/PR to protect them from extermination like what happened with Arafat 20 years previously.

And Hez suceeded at the expense of the civilian population (which they knew would happen).

 

[Aimster]

I'm talking about areas such as this:
http://www.habeeb.com/images/lebanon.ph...rut.war.photos/beirut.war.2006.001.jpg

Israeli forces never entered that city.
There was never a single gun battle in that city between Hezbollah and Israeli forces.

Sure Hezbollah fighters could have been hiding there in the buildings, but how in the world did Israel know? They were not in the city to fight them.

The only thing that would justify the bombing of those buildings is if Hezbollah was launching some kind of attacks from it miles away hitting Israeli targets. The rocket launchers obviously were not stationed there and no rpgs could be fired from those positions.

Israel bombed them because they knew A) hezbollah and their supporters lived there. Supporters meaning the civilians who supported them B) they wanted to give Hezbollah a punch in the face along with everyone who supported them.

The question is , when is it right to kill civilians? Is it ok to kill civilians if they support your enemy? is it ok to kill civilians if there is a chance that they might join your enemy?
& when you think to answer that question, look at this picture:
http://www.habeeb.com/images/lebanon.ph...uthern.suburb.of.Beirut.08-28-2006.jpg

I dont think she had anything to do with Hezbollah, but obviously she has some kind of connection to that area which is in Beirut. Another area in which Israel never stepped foot in.

 

[lotus503]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
Are you blind?

Posting the links again doesn't make your cases stronger.
The pictures you linked to focus on the sites hit to amplify the sense of destruction, even though you can clearly see buildings nearby standing.

I suggest you actually click on the link I provided in order to see a bridview of several blocks decimated, not single buildings.

haha I can post to you hundreds of pictures of the destruction caused on Lebanon

how many missiles did Israel use during the conflict? I'll give you a hint. It numbered in the thousands.
I am sure those missiles all hit the forest and didnt destroy a thing..

And if you had eyes that could see, youd see that buildings have been demolished and destroyed. Look at the standing buildings. They are not in great shape.

Exactly what Europe looked like in WW2.

My sympathy gets lost int he fact that they were in fact firing rockets at Israel.

Im sorry but if the guy living next door to me started tossing grenades over my fence.
I wouldnt hold a whole lot back in trying to insure it doesnt happen again.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: S0Lstice

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
Are you blind?

Posting the links again doesn't make your cases stronger.
The pictures you linked to focus on the sites hit to amplify the sense of destruction, even though you can clearly see buildings nearby standing.

I suggest you actually click on the link I provided in order to see a bridview of several blocks decimated, not single buildings.

haha I can post to you hundreds of pictures of the destruction caused on Lebanon

how many missiles did Israel use during the conflict? I'll give you a hint. It numbered in the thousands.
I am sure those missiles all hit the forest and didnt destroy a thing..

And if you had eyes that could see, youd see that buildings have been demolished and destroyed. Look at the standing buildings. They are not in great shape.

Exactly what Europe looked like in WW2.

My sympathy gets lost int he fact that they were in fact firing rockets at Israel.

Im sorry but if the guy living next door to me started tossing grenades over my fence.
I wouldnt hold a whole lot back in trying to insure it doesnt happen again.

They were not firing rockets from apartment buildings.

Target the rocket launchers. Targetting civilians is the same barbaric act that your enemy is carrying out.

Who is the civilized nation. Israel or the make-believe nation of Hezbollah?

 

[lotus503]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: S0Lstice

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
Are you blind?

Posting the links again doesn't make your cases stronger.
The pictures you linked to focus on the sites hit to amplify the sense of destruction, even though you can clearly see buildings nearby standing.

I suggest you actually click on the link I provided in order to see a bridview of several blocks decimated, not single buildings.

haha I can post to you hundreds of pictures of the destruction caused on Lebanon

how many missiles did Israel use during the conflict? I'll give you a hint. It numbered in the thousands.
I am sure those missiles all hit the forest and didnt destroy a thing..

And if you had eyes that could see, youd see that buildings have been demolished and destroyed. Look at the standing buildings. They are not in great shape.

Exactly what Europe looked like in WW2.

My sympathy gets lost int he fact that they were in fact firing rockets at Israel.

Im sorry but if the guy living next door to me started tossing grenades over my fence.
I wouldnt hold a whole lot back in trying to insure it doesnt happen again.

They were not firing rockets from apartment buildings.

Target the rocket launchers. Targetting civilians is the same barbaric act that your enemy is carrying out.

Who is the civilized nation. Israel or the make-believe nation of Hezbollah?

1. Ok where were they firing them from exactly, and state the source of your info?
a) Hezbollah and other Islamic Militants have a deep history in using civilians for cover

2. Really depends on yoru answer to #1

3. Israel and lebanon, you know the country that allows said Islamic Militants to fire rockets on its Israel.


Look man your talking to someone informed that doesnt in any way think Israel is without faults or the US for that matter.

But the whole situation your up in arms about really is the fault of the lebanonese government for allowing Militants to fire rockets on its Israel.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/07/18/lebano13760.htm

http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde020252006

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...cle/2006/07/13/AR2006071300278_pf.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P60lOX2rUE0

http://notapundit.wordpress.com/2006/07...-hezbollah-for-hiding-among-civilians/

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/007656.php

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/797753.html

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/114911.html

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

Google it.

yes because Israel's tank have proven to be great against roadside bombs and Russian post-1989 RPGs.

Wait, no they haven't.
No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

You can go ahead and blame Russian tech.

And what does that have to do with the original statement?
Nice attempt at back pedaling.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

Google it.

yes because Israel's tank have proven to be great against roadside bombs and Russian post-1989 RPGs.

Wait, no they haven't.
No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

You can go ahead and blame Russian tech.

And what does that have to do with your original statement?
Nice attempt at back pedaling.

Because tanks are useless fighting masses of people, especially people hidden in apartment buildings.

Put a fleet of tanks in the middle of a city filled with an anti-tank teams and it will be easy target practice for them.

Insurgents are known for roadside bombs. They will fill the place up with them knocking out tank after tank.

Lucky for the U.S, the insurgency has ****** weapons. Not lucky for Israel that the insurgency/Hezbollah has weapons and stockpiles of them to take out their tanks.

Israel's tank is made to go against other tanks. It has a thick armor plate, but that isnt going to stop it from an rpg or a bomb. It is made to stop rpgs that groups such as the Palestinians have. Hezbollah was armed with weapons they were not supposed to have.
Israel's tank force is also perfect against an army of soldiers carrying the basic M16/A-47.

-
As far as where Hezbollah was firing their rockets from, all over. They were mostly firing them from inside the woods and then running away back into the cities. Sometimes they put the launchers on top of a hill so the rockets could go further.
Yes Hezbollah was hiding in the cities and this is why Israel surrounded the cities instead of entering them.
Israel occupied villages that were easy to grab. Israel did not enter the main cities because if you look at what I said above it would have been deadly.
Exactly why Israel bombed the living ****** out of the buildings I showed you.

Now the moral question is, did Israel do the right thing in bombing those cities to save the lives of their soldiers while risking/killing civilians in the process?

The main deaths for both Hezbollah and Israeli forces happened at the frontline. The frontline is mostly green areas. If you look at Hezbollah training videos you will see exactly what the front looks like. Filled with hills, grass, and trees. The areas that don't have the green have a lot of dirt.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yes, U.S and Israel try to limit civilian deaths, but they do not go out of their way to stop it. If they get information on the dot that the enemy is at a certain location, they are not going to waste hours trying to calculate the civilian deaths. They are going to send in the bombers to bomb them.

I suggest you look up the Laws of War followed by both the U.S. and Israeli military. Do me a favor and study the LOW concepts of Distinction, Military Necessity, Humanity, and Proportionality. Then, once you have a grasp of those concepts, go study our targeting processes.

You obviously have no idea just how far we go to avoid and limit civilian casualties.

Yeah Im sure people follow laws when they are being shot at.
"rolls eyes"

You have no idea how Israel works so why are you talking for them?
They have bombed apartment buildings with civilians inside. So unless you can justify such acts go ahead cause I would love to see how someone justifies the bombing of an apartment building with people living there.

When a rocket truck is parked outside the window of those apartments, then the truck becomes a valid target. The same is true for strategic targets such as HQ offices, modes of transport, staging areas, and storage facilities... even if those facilities are in a Mosque or Elementary School! If the rocket damages the building and kills civilians, then I blame the party who parked the truck there, or set up shop there, NOT the ones who take them out.

And yes, the U.S. and Israel both follow many laws when they are being shot at. In fact, that is one of the primary differences between us and our enemies. JAG plays a larger role in modern combat than you know.

Like I suggested earlier, you really should go study up on the Laws of Warfare that are taught and adhered to by most civilized nations, including the U.S. and Israel.

 

[Alistar7]

Now the moral question is, did Israel do the right thing in bombing those cities to save the lives of their soldiers while risking/killing civilians in the process?


Yes, it is their responsibility to protect their soldiers and citizens, not the nmes. Maybe Hez should stop using their own civilians as cover.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yes, U.S and Israel try to limit civilian deaths, but they do not go out of their way to stop it. If they get information on the dot that the enemy is at a certain location, they are not going to waste hours trying to calculate the civilian deaths. They are going to send in the bombers to bomb them.

I suggest you look up the Laws of War followed by both the U.S. and Israeli military. Do me a favor and study the LOW concepts of Distinction, Military Necessity, Humanity, and Proportionality. Then, once you have a grasp of those concepts, go study our targeting processes.

You obviously have no idea just how far we go to avoid and limit civilian casualties.

Yeah Im sure people follow laws when they are being shot at.
"rolls eyes"

You have no idea how Israel works so why are you talking for them?
They have bombed apartment buildings with civilians inside. So unless you can justify such acts go ahead cause I would love to see how someone justifies the bombing of an apartment building with people living there.

When a rocket truck is parked outside the window of those apartments, then the truck becomes a valid target. The same is true for strategic targets such as HQ offices, modes of transport, staging areas, and storage facilities... even if those facilities are in a Mosque or Elementary School! If the rocket damages the building and kills civilians, then I blame the party who parked the truck there, or set up shop there, NOT the ones who take them out.

And yes, the U.S. and Israel both follow many laws when they are being shot at. In fact, that is one of the primary differences between us and our enemies. JAG plays a larger role in modern combat than you know.

Like I suggested earlier, you really should go study up on the Laws of Warfare that are taught and adhered to by most civilized nations, including the U.S. and Israel.

so..... when you and your buddies are pinned from gunfire coming from an apartment bulding do you

A) call for an airstrike and kill everyone in there
B) retreat back and try another day

& those buildings were not hit as a result of rocket launches. Many sites in Beiruit were hit ... there were no rocket launchers there

By the way I would call for A .. cause I am a selfish individual who values my life more than others when I am being shot at.

But my whole point with those pictures is that nobody was firing from those sites.
They were hit for the fact that Israel classifieds Hezbollah areas of support as enemy sites. It assumed anyone sticking around was a fighter, but as well all know not everyone can leave their homes whenever they want.

So is it justified for a nation to strike the civilians of their enemy for the reason being that the civilians are most likely supporters of Hezbollah? Therefore, assuming that the supporters can be potential fighters. Also assuming that anyone walking outside a building that Hezbolah used is clearly a terrorist so striking the building in the heart of a major populated city is justified since anyone killed around the buildings would have to be a terrorist.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Yes, U.S and Israel try to limit civilian deaths, but they do not go out of their way to stop it. If they get information on the dot that the enemy is at a certain location, they are not going to waste hours trying to calculate the civilian deaths. They are going to send in the bombers to bomb them.

I suggest you look up the Laws of War followed by both the U.S. and Israeli military. Do me a favor and study the LOW concepts of Distinction, Military Necessity, Humanity, and Proportionality. Then, once you have a grasp of those concepts, go study our targeting processes.

You obviously have no idea just how far we go to avoid and limit civilian casualties.

Yeah Im sure people follow laws when they are being shot at.
"rolls eyes"

You have no idea how Israel works so why are you talking for them?
They have bombed apartment buildings with civilians inside. So unless you can justify such acts go ahead cause I would love to see how someone justifies the bombing of an apartment building with people living there.

When a rocket truck is parked outside the window of those apartments, then the truck becomes a valid target. The same is true for strategic targets such as HQ offices, modes of transport, staging areas, and storage facilities... even if those facilities are in a Mosque or Elementary School! If the rocket damages the building and kills civilians, then I blame the party who parked the truck there, or set up shop there, NOT the ones who take them out.

And yes, the U.S. and Israel both follow many laws when they are being shot at. In fact, that is one of the primary differences between us and our enemies. JAG plays a larger role in modern combat than you know.

Like I suggested earlier, you really should go study up on the Laws of Warfare that are taught and adhered to by most civilized nations, including the U.S. and Israel.

so..... when you and your buddies are pinned from gunfire coming from an apartment bulding do you

A) call for an airstrike and kill everyone in there
B) retreat back and try another day

& those buildings were not hit as a result of rocket launches. Many sites in Beiruit were hit ... there were no rocket launchers there

By the way I would call for A .. cause I am a selfish individual who values my life more than others when I am being shot at.

every single situation is different, but you might be surprised by the number of channels such a decision must go through before actions are taken. That is where JAG comes in with their role as advisers. Commanders often turn to their legal experts to assist them in such decisions.

I have first-hand experience in situations that took hours to sort out for this very reason. Yes, of course the Joes such as myself want to level the place and end the fight, but quite often we were asked to come up with alternative solutions to the problem that placed soldiers at more risk than necessary simply to prevent the death of innocent civilians.

I have taken courses in the US Army that required thorough knowledge and understanding of the Laws of Warfare. When JAG is unavailable, commanders on the ground will turn to "experts," such as myself, for advice. It is up to us to help them weigh the options and decide how much force is necessary to eliminate threats originating from sensitive targets.

Another example occurs during mission planning. One of the most important pieces of information for the ground-pounders is a description of civilians in the area of a target. That information is used to decide the best possible course of action; one that limits the number of civilians exposed to danger. (Time of day, foot traffic, religious or historic buildings, etc).

The irony is that all of our enemies know all of this and exploit it as a weakness. They know that staging their operations next to schools or mosques will limit our response capabilities, so they use those locations against us! This is a SOP for insurgents and terrorists everywhere, including Hezbollah!

That's the reality of modern combat, and the Israeli's operate in a very similar fashion. Believing otherwise is just plain ignorant.

Once again, go study the Laws of Warfare instead of assuming that you know anything about modern combat.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: blackllotus

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
Why would they need a tactical nuke? A "mother of all bombs" would do.

Do we actually provide our allies with the technology behind the MOAB?

What technology? It's just a big bomb. It's not advanced or anything.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Further comments:
I get the idea that Israel may discounting Iran?s anti-air capabilities. Or they may try to use the same tactics they used in 1982. (Fly close together so they look like one plane on radar)
.

That's a myth, and it wouldn't be smart anyway. One well placed missile would take out the whole squadron.

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
"People keep thinking Israel is a great military power that can go up against these insurgent groups, especially when these groups are armed with advanced weapons."

Hezbullah was launching rockets into civilian areas because that all they can use those rockets against. If Israel and the hezbullah would play by the same rules there would be no hezbullah.

...but just as a side note the Israeli's are the best at urban warfare. They have very few civilian casualties in regard to the circumstances.

...of course all this is irrelevant because Israel is not planning to have urban warefare with Iran they just want to drop bombs on specific sites. If that happens all Iran can do cry about it.

Did you not look at pictures of southern lebanon?

If you are going to defend Israel and make it sound great at least bring up something else.
Israel pounded the South of Lebanon and demolished all the buildings. Apartment buildings.

If your defense is "Israel told the Lebanese to leave" well then why is it not fair to say "The Israelis knew Hezbollah was going to pound them so they should have left too"?

Your claim that Israel is the best in urban warefare is based on Israel occupying Palestinians with weapons that suck when it comes to Israeli soldiers in their armored cars.
The United States is the best.
& If you honestly think Israel can occupy a country with a population of 70 million people then you are living in a fantasy world. For example, Egypt.

Israel did not bomb building randomly. They bombed the ones that were being used by the Hezbollah to store rockets launchers in underground parking lots. a lot of the buildings are constructed with underground paring lots where the Hezbullah can hide rocket launchers. They did this, you can find plenty of videos on YouTube.

I never said Israel could occupy Iran, it doesn't want to it just wants to bomb some specific sites and it can do this very easily.

I say Israel is good at urban warfare because they accomplish their task with minimal civilian casualties.

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

-smaller size means better ability to maneuver in tight streets.
-top-secret alloy armor to better withstand anti-tank missile attacks.
-Rear exit to allow easier troop deployment.

yes, I'm talking about the Merkava tanks. Israel actually launched a separate mission to retrieve a piece of Merkava armor that fell off in Lebanon - thats how important that secret is. The Merkava MK4 is the only tank in the world that is capable of shooting down helicopters