1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Israeli Troops Enter Gaza

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Berserker, Jun 28, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    There are a myriad of possible outcomes. I think what you said about Hezbollah returning the soldiers would be a smart move. Unfortunately, we aren't dealing with people who necessarily plan that far ahead.

    The potential for it to escalate into a full blown conflict increases every day that open warfare continues. There are numerous possible scenarios. They are now talking about putting US troops in Lebanon which I dont think would be a very good idea right now.

    A peace keeping force would be appropriate AFTER the fighting has died down. There is far too much potential for peace keeping troops to get involved in the fighting at present.

    I would expect Israel to dramatically expand its presence in Lebanon. This is potentially the most dangerous aspect of what is happening right now. The further Israel pushes in, the more likely the chance of wider conflict.

    As of right now, the situation could still be fairly easily resolved. It is not completely out of control yet. I fear that moment approaches swiftly however and I also feel that US attempts at diplomacy may be seen as far too one sided, too little too late.

    S
     
  2. bam0

    Soldato

    Joined: Oct 28, 2002

    Posts: 5,014

    We're talking Lebanon atm, maybe i've missed it but I'm not aware of any reports of Israeli soldiers shooting Lebanese children who were throwing rocks at tanks.
     
  3. i know nothing

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,294

    Location: Norfolk Broads

    I suspect you're right, I should imagine right now they're bunkered down. Do you think the Israeli soldiers are still alive?

    I think US troops anywhere in the ME would be a disaster! :p
    One of the Malaysian Ministers (can't remember which one) was on TV the other day talking about Malaysian troops filling the role, I think they would probably do a good job to be fair.

    Agreed.

    If Israel does push further into Lebanon, at what stage do you think the Lebanese army or Syria would step in? I note that Israel appears to have marked the Litani River as the northern most point of their buffer zone but do you think the Lebanese Army will sit back and let them do that?

    There was a lot of talk at the begining with TV pundits declaring that all the US had to do was to tell Israel to stop and the conflict would stop. I suspect that Israel has US backing to knock six shades of leather out of Lebanon and that even if the US were to withdraw their support at this stage, the Israeli's would press on.
     
  4. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    No, they are using cluster munitions there. Much more humane. :rolleyes:

    S
     
  5. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    S
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
  6. Indy500

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 7, 2005

    Posts: 17,509

    A Syrian minister says if Israel gets too close to the Syrian border during the incursion (20km) they will intervene.


    MADRID, July 23 (AFP) -- A Syrian minister warned Israel in an interview published Sunday that a major ground incursion into Lebanon would draw his country into the Middle East conflict.
    "If Israel makes a land entry into Lebanon, they can get to within 20 kilometres (12 miles) of Damascus," Information Minister Moshen Bilal told the Spanish newspaper ABC.

    "What will we do? Stand by with our arms folded? Absolutely not. Without any doubt Syria will intervene in the conflict." Bilal said Syria wanted above all a ceasefire "as soon as possible" combined with a prisoner exchange and indicated he was working to that end with Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos, whom he met in recent days in Madrid.

    But he added: "I repeat, if Israel makes a land invasion of Lebanon and gets near us, Syria will not stand by with arms folded. It will enter the conflict." Israel has said it wants to push Hezbollah militias 20 kilometres north of its border.

    Bilal criticised the United States saying that it was "unjustifiable" that "the superpower is not working for a rapid ceasefire." He rejected claims by Washington that Damascus has armed Hezbollah, saying that it offered "moral support" but adding that "we do not finance any resistance."
     
  7. ballistic

    PermaBanned

    Joined: May 15, 2006

    Posts: 2,278

    Syria talking themselves up in reality they are scared ****less of the IDF and they should be if you compare the armies
     
  8. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    Well, that may not be the best description of their sentiment, it would not be an even fight for the Syrian's. You must however, consider the fact that the Arabs have learned about a serious weakness in US/Israeli armed forces. They are p*ss poor at fighting any kind of Guerilla war.

    They rely on sledgehammer tactics like arty and air superiority. You only have to look at Vietnam to see that this particular model is not always effective. It will get rid of the inferior 60s - 70s era Russian armour but it fails to destroy the less obvious targets.

    The insurgency in Iraq has killed M1A1s with RPG-7s. Sure it took more than one rocket but a multi-million dollar tank killed by sub $100.00 1960s era rocket launcher is pretty impressive stuff to be honest.

    These people have been fighting for centuries. The odds have always been bad for one side or another. It's never stopped them. I doubt it will now.

    S
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
  9. i know nothing

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,294

    Location: Norfolk Broads

    There's an awful lot of public support in Israel at the moment for the action their government is taking, the Israeli government has made it quite clear what its objectives are (i.e. create a buffer zone), do you think that if US support faltered the Israeli push into Lebanon would also falter? I can't help but think that the Israeli's will push on regardless.
     
  10. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    Its very difficult to say. If the US completely withdrew its support, Israel would have to be cautious. Its one thing to stand against the whole region with US backing, its quite another to stand alone.

    Considering things like Hellfire's (AGM-114D), AMRAAMs (AIM-120) and many other weapons come directly from the US it would make it a lot harder to rearm their aircraft and vehicles.

    As well, other Arab nations would be far more likely to jump in knowing that there was no US backing behind Israel. Ultimately, it is very unlikely (almost impossible) that the US would withdraw its support of Israel.

    S
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
  11. i know nothing

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,294

    Location: Norfolk Broads

    Lol! I know bloody well from the time I spent in Damsacus what a load of rubbish that is, ok, times may have changed since I was there, but I can't see this leopard changing its spots. The Syrians support anyone who is anti-Israel, we had the PLO No.2 living in the house across the road from us protected by his Syrian Army guards and their AK47's. They used to block the roads to Lebanon (not far away from Damascus) when the convoys of trucks used to head that way. I've always found it interesting that they used to pass UN convoys returning from the Golan Heights and the UN knew exactly what was going on, yet it never stopped.

    What's he trying to say? Is he saying "don't look at us, we're not the bad boys it's the Iranians"? I wouldn't believe a word of that (to clarify, I think the Syrians are involved) .
     
  12. i know nothing

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,294

    Location: Norfolk Broads

    Going further with what you've posted above, what if a scenario arose whereby the US found themselves alone in their "political" support for Israel and withdrew that support? (< i.e. they continue to send bombs but do not defend them politically).

    It would be interesting to know how the US public views their governments support for Israel, I honestly don't have a clue, anyone know? Polls, that sort of thing?
     
  13. Indy500

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 7, 2005

    Posts: 17,509

  14. i know nothing

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,294

    Location: Norfolk Broads

    Interesting, the US seems to quite steadfast in its views. I also found it interesting to read how European attitudes changed when Hamas took power, the Europeans seem more easily swayed. I suspect they're more au fait with current events than their US counterparts though :p
     
  15. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    I think it also helps that Jews make a concerted effort to blend in. Arabs stand out with their alternatve dress styles etc. Jews are also far more visible than Arabs in the mainstream in the US. Jews are not regarded as "alien" or "not of America". I dont mean that as a slur on Arabs, just perception of the masses is all.

    S
     
  16. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    That is a difficult question to answer. As long as the US is perceived to be backing Israel, Israel can do what it wants. As long as the US supplies weapons that perception will remain. I dont really know that you can remove political support while continuing to supply weapons. As Von Klauswitz said, "War is a continuation of politics by other means".

    S
     
  17. i know nothing

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 6, 2004

    Posts: 3,294

    Location: Norfolk Broads

    Point taken.

    How about this proxy war business? I've seen reports that Iranians in Lebanon allegedly fired the missile at the Israeli warship, that the Israeli plane that was supposedly shot down over Beirut was in fact a failed Zelan (sp?) rocket from Iran etc. We know of course that the US supplies Israel with bombs, is there definitive evidence that the Iranians are supplying Hezbollah with weapons? I can believe Syria are involved somewhere along the line but what about Iran? I note you have more of an idea than I do about munitions and the like, where did Hezbollah get them from?
     
  18. Indy500

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 7, 2005

    Posts: 17,509

    Another explanation would be that the plane was only damaged and forced to eject a fuel tank that had burst into flames.
     
  19. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    Well, it was a Silkworm. Its originally Chinese although the Iranians developed the ability to manufacture them. My guess is that whoever fired that would have had to have some training if they were not actually an Iranian missile technician(s). That is purely speculation of course. It's very probable that Iran and Syria are supplying arms to Hezbollah in a significant capacity.

    As Israel attacking Hezbollah directly serves US interests in the region, sustaining Hezbollah's ability to strike directly serves Iran and Syria's interests in the region. It's a very complicated situation to be honest.

    S
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
  20. Sharkypal

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jun 22, 2005

    Posts: 836

    TBH, I saw footage of that and it did look like a plane. The US has a long standing policy of either blaming mechanical failure or total denial when it comes to aircraft shootdowns. There is no reason to believe that Israel wouldn't follow suit.

    Hezbollah do have SAMs. Yes, they are old and technologically inferior but if you put enough of them in the air, chances are you're gonna hit something. As well, AAA, as innacurate as it may be, could still have lucked out.

    Of course, speculation again.

    S

    ** EDIT **

    In July 2006, it was reported that Hezbollah guerillas fired a "Silkworm missile" at an "Israeli battleship" off the shores of Lebanon. However this seems to be a typical case of media confusion over the term "Silkworm" as Israeli sources have said that the missile used instead was a more sophisticated Chinese Yingji-82 (C-802). Notably, Syria employed "Styx" missiles against Israeli warships in the 1973 Battle of Latakia with no success at all.

    This makes sense as the Silkworm would more than likely have sunk a ship that size. It has a very large payload for a weapon of its size.
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.