Israel has never lost a conventional war, or won a guerilla war

lord of the mark · March 30, 2002, 13:45

Israel has never lost a conventional war against the arabs - 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973, conventional phase of 1982.

Israel has never managed to succeed in a counter insurgency campaign in an arab population center. Lebanon (after the conventional phase), 1st intifada, 2nd intifada thus far.

Its time for Israel to play to its strengths rather than its weaknesses. Israel cannot win IN the West Bank cities and camps. Tanks are vulnerable in urban warfare, airpower of limited use. This fact is NOT altered by the lack of anyone to negotiate with, the current impossibilty of a political solution. The fact of war does mean that every tactic of war makes sense.

Israel can only win by shifting the conflict. This means WITHDRAWL, NOT for political reasons, (since the withdrawls involved would not satisfy even arab moderates) but for STRATEGIC reasons. Get out of the places hardest to defend. Then build a wall around the west bank. With barbed wire, mines, electronic sensors, watch towers, etc. Right wing israelis wont like this since it will mean giving up dozens of settlements. Tough luck. Arabs wont like it, since it will cut off the west bank from Jerusalem, and will likely leave Israel in control of places like Ariel,Maaleh Adumim, and Gush Etzion. Tough luck.

It will be argued that walls wont stop missiles or katyusha rockets. Air power can respond to those. It will never be perfect enough to stop all terrorist acts. No, but it will make the situation livable. On the Lebanese border there are still rocket attacks and occasional terr acts, but the situation is manageble.

It will be argued that this is giving in to the terrorists, and will encourage them, as in Lebanon. But an Israeli withdrawl that keeps all of Jerusalem, plus Ariel, Maaleh Adumim, and Gush Etzion in Israeli hands, and takes away terrorist leverage over Israel, will NOT be seen as a Palestinian victory, but as a defeat.

build a wall, withdraw, and crush the terrorists.

LOTM

chequita guevara · March 30, 2002, 13:47

Not true, they beat the British in a guerilla war.

Giancarlo · March 30, 2002, 13:48

Exactly. The US made the same mistake with Somalia. US Forces went into Somalia not knowing what to expect. Even though US forces literally smashed the **** out of Somali Rebels, they couldn't win it without having very, very large massacres on their hands. And that is the same thing for Israel. They could go in, and win but they would have to kill tens of thousands.

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 13:51

Israel is losing fast all the support it ever hoped to gain from the suicide missions.
Better thank god that its patron the US is protecting it.

EU Protests Israeli Attack
Fri Mar 29, 9:25 PM ET
By ANGELA DOLAND, Associated Press Writer

PARIS (AP) - The 15 European Union (news - web sites) nations collectively protested Israel's attack on Yasser Arafat (news - web sites)'s West Bank headquarters Friday, with Italy pressing Israel to guarantee the Palestinian leader's safety.

Photos

AP Photo

The EU also called on Israel to withdraw its troops from the town of Ramallah, where Arafat's complex is located.

At the same time, the EU urged the Palestinian Authority (news - web sites) to halt the current "spiral of violence" and punish those responsible for the recent string of attacks on Israelis.

Spain, which holds the rotating EU presidency, said Israel's fight against terrorism and its response to recent attacks must be compatible with safeguarding the Palestinian Authority and its president — "the legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people."

In France, President Jacques Chirac said "any attack on (Arafat's) ability to act, or on his person, would be extremely serious."

The French leader also urged Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) to "immediately take all measures to stop the violence."

"Nothing can excuse or justify blind terrorism against civilians," Chirac told France-Info radio. "Everyone knows there cannot be a military solution to the conflict in the Middle East."

French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine accused Israel of obsessing over Arafat and trying to "asphyxiate" him.

"It's a complete illusion to believe that, even with Arafat elsewhere or replaced by whatever Palestinian chief, the problem would be different," Vedrine told RFI radio.

Israel sent troops and tanks to break into Arafat's Ramallah compound, battling his security forces and shelling the buildings. Arafat took refuge in a windowless room, although Israeli officials said they were not trying to hurt him.

The operation was a response to the latest string of Palestinian attacks, including a Passover massacre that killed 22 diners at a seafront hotel in Israel.

Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi's government asked Israel to guarantee Arafat's security and respect his elected position.

"It is fundamental that deeds are not carried out which can prejudice the prospects for a resumption of dialogue," a government statement said.

Berlusconi's government also said it made a new appeal to the Palestinian Authority to prevent acts of terrorism against unarmed civilians and to dismantle terrorist structures.

Greek Foreign Minister George Papandreou condemned the Israeli military action, saying his country had "ties, both friendly and personal, with President Arafat."

"For us Arafat is not an enemy, and beyond this he is also a personal friend," said Papandreou, who also condemned the terror attacks on Israelis.

About 1,500 Greek and Palestinian protesters chanting, "Freedom for Palestine!" and banging steel drums gathered outside the Israeli embassy in Athens to protest the military action. Police riot squads kept the protesters from the building.

Giancarlo · March 30, 2002, 14:02

I hate to break this to you Paiktis, but Arafat is a backstabbing SOB who just causes problems. He has done nothing. And I hope Berlusconi understands this when he finds out that Arafat won't do anything. Because Israel already has and it is taking action against that long time terrorist, Arafat.

DinoDoc · March 30, 2002, 14:09

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
Israel is losing fast all the support it ever hoped to gain from the suicide missions.

I posted this in response to Imran but it looks like it will work for you as well.

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And then the terrorist bombings will be insufferable.

Relatively speaking, Isreal has suffered the equivilant of 56584 civilians killed or injured between September 29, 2000 - August 9, 2001 in comparison to the US. I think that the terrorist bombings have been insufferable for quite sometime.

Just for speculations sake, what do you think the US response would be if Mexico had purposefully killed or injured that many of its civilians in that same period of time and showed absolutely no signs of slowing down?

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 14:10

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
Israel is losing fast all the support it ever hoped to gain from the suicide missions.
Better thank god that its patron the US is protecting it.

Protecting them from what? European intervention?

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Protecting them from what? European intervention?

Protecting them from international intervantion of course.
As well as supplying weapons to them.

The only answer these people have now is attacks (call them terrorist if it helps you) against Israel and all those who support it. Which is one = the US.

Arrested Palestinians face a wall during an Israeli operation in the West Bank City of Ramallah, March 30, 2002. Israeli troops kept up their siege of a defiant Yasser Arafat in his battered presidential compound in Ramallah on Saturday as the U.N. Security Council demanded that Israel quit Palestinian cities. REUTERS/Laszlo Balogh

Eli · March 30, 2002, 14:21

Quote:

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Its time for Israel to play to its strengths rather than its weaknesses.

Read : surrender.

Quote:

Israel cannot win IN the West Bank cities and camps. Tanks are vulnerable in urban warfare, airpower of limited use. This fact is NOT altered by the lack of anyone to negotiate with, the current impossibilty of a political solution. The fact of war does mean that every tactic of war makes sense.

Israel can only win by shifting the conflict. This means WITHDRAWL, NOT for political reasons, (since the withdrawls involved would not satisfy even arab moderates) but for STRATEGIC reasons. Get out of the places hardest to defend. Then build a wall around the west bank. With barbed wire, mines, electronic sensors, watch towers, etc. Right wing israelis wont like this since it will mean giving up dozens of settlements. Tough luck. Arabs wont like it, since it will cut off the west bank from Jerusalem, and will likely leave Israel in control of places like Ariel,Maaleh Adumim, and Gush Etzion. Tough luck.
It will be argued that walls wont stop missiles or katyusha rockets. Air power can respond to those. It will never be perfect enough to stop all terrorist acts. No, but it will make the situation livable. On the Lebanese border there are still rocket attacks and occasional terr acts, but the situation is manageble.

Your main point is that the new borders will be more defendable, thus reducing the number of casulaties, and you bring Lebanon as an example.
First, air power cannot respond to missiles like in Lebanon. The Palestinians will shoot missiles from their cities, and fast Israeli response to stop the firing will cause hundreds of casualties and therefore immediate escalation to the most lethal level of the conflict, when the Palestinians use everything they have. But this is not really important, the main problem is the huge mistake you make, by wishing the situation in Judea and Samaria to be like in south Lebanon.
The withdrawal from Lebanon was the biggest mistake Israel made in the last decade, even bigger than not stopping the Oslo process during 96.
Yes, we no longer lose 100 soldiers every year but it is clear, if you try to listen to Nasralla, or Palestinian terror organization leaders that a situation like in South Lebanon is their goal. Nasralla is the first Arab leader that ever defeated Israel and caused the IDF to flee.
But, this is far from being the main problem.
Two years of quiet in south Lebanon gave Hizballah the time to arm itself with 8000-10000 rockets. Most of them are Katyushas, but at least 2000 are long range rockets that can get to Haifa and even Hadera. And, they still have a casus belli, just like the Palestinians will have if Israel withdraws.
The Hizballah is a terrorist organization, and it's leader is personally involved(his son was killed by Sayeret Egoz). Do you really think that eventually, tommorow or in 10 years those missiles will not be used. And when 2000 missiles will rain on Haifa, the mistake will be clear.
Do you want the same situation in the territories? This time, with Dimona, Tel Aviv, Beer Sheva and Jerusalem in the range of the missiles.

Quote:

It will be argued that this is giving in to the terrorists, and will encourage them, as in Lebanon. But an Israeli withdrawl that keeps all of Jerusalem, plus Ariel, Maaleh Adumim, and Gush Etzion in Israeli hands, and takes away terrorist leverage over Israel, will NOT be seen as a Palestinian victory, but as a defeat.

Will this be the final solution to the conflict? If not, the Pals will want all those areas too, and they will be only encouraged by the withdrawal.

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 14:22

Well, there can be no "international intervention" without the United States' support, period. You may think that the US is evil for supporting Israel, but I think the US is correct on this. You seem to think that terrorism is an excusable act that Israel must just sit back and take, but I think that Israel has every right to find and arrest the terrorists who are threatening the lives of Israel civilians with their indiscriminate attacks. No country on earth would put up with the kind of attacks that have been launched against Israel recently.

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Well, there can be no "international intervention" without the United States' support, period.

For the time being. Meanwhile things are adding up.

Quote:

You may think that the US is evil for supporting Israel, but I think the US is correct on this. You seem to think that terrorism is an excusable act that Israel must just sit back and take, but I think that Israel has every right to find and arrest the terrorists who are threatening the lives of Israel civilians with their indiscriminate attacks. No country on earth would put up with the kind of attacks that have been launched against Israel recently.

No. It's just that these attacks are the only thing these people have to retaliate with.
See, their country is occupied and they are being killed and humiliated in an every day basis. They face an american supplied army and they have but a few kalashnikovs.
With the blessings of the US which has just payed a price for that with the "strategic" buildings collapsing. WTC, Pentagon etc this will continue.

But hey do what you got to do.

Eli · March 30, 2002, 14:28

Explosion in Tel Aviv.

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:30

See what I mean?

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 14:33

If you are so weak that the only way you can fight back is by blowing up innocent civilians, then I would suggest that you are too weak to fight at all. The Palestinians would be much better off if they adopted a practice of non-violent protest like Gandhi adopted in India. This would be very effective considering the support the Palestinians already enjoy in Europe and the Middle East and would not give the Israelis any reason to make incursions into the West Bank or Gaza Strip. I doubt this will ever happen though, as Arab society seems to value suicide martyrs more than they do Gandhi-like proponents of non-violent protest.

Az · March 30, 2002, 14:36

good trolling , paiktis , good trolling

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
If you are so weak that the only way you can fight back is by blowing up innocent civilians, then I would suggest that you are too weak to fight at all.

Well, they are weak because of the US sponsoring Israel and keeping them with nothing but rocks. So it's not their choice they are weak or that their country is occupied. But they keep on fighting despite whether you think they shouldn't.

Quote:

The Palestinians would be much better off if they adopted a practice of non-violent protest like Gandhi adopted in India. This would be very effective considering the support the Palestinians already enjoy in Europe and the Middle East and would not give the Israelis any reason to make incursions into the West Bank or Gaza Strip.

I agree. Yet with them being humiliated and killed in their own country, emotions run high and they want revenge just like the Israelis do.
The difference is that they don't have the guns, thus the results.

Quote:

I doubt this will ever happen though, as Arab society seems to value suicide martyrs more than they do Gandhi-like proponents of non-violent protest.

As long as the US supports a fascist regime like the present on of Israel it will continue to be like this, yes. US is too far to pay for this as well but in a globilized world everyone is interlinked.

Giancarlo · March 30, 2002, 14:44

Paiktis put a sock in it. The Palestinians have plenty of guns sent over by Saddam Hussein. And Israel is a democracy, the Palestinian Authority is an autocratic regime.

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:48

Fine I stop.

May Peace reign supreme.

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 14:49

Quote:

I agree. Yet with them being humiliated and killed in their own country, emotions run high and they want revenge just like the Israelis do.
The difference is that they don't have the guns, thus the results.

So basically you're saying that revenge killings are all right for Palestinians. Yet, you won't support Israel's attempts to arrest terrorists. That makes a lot of sense.

Also, you claim that the Pals don't have guns?!? Where the hell are you getting your information? They have many guns, many explosives, and many other weapons. They just find killing civilians easier than fighting the IDF...

In conclusion, I'm sorry that I'm making you defend these stupid statements. This is just a troll, after all.

Az · March 30, 2002, 14:49

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22

Well, they are weak because of the US sponsoring Israel and keeping them with nothing but rocks. So it's not their choice they are weak or that their country is occupied. But they keep on fighting despite whether you think they shouldn't.

errm...what country?

Quote:

I agree. Yet with them being humiliated and killed in their own country, emotions run high and they want revenge just like the Israelis do.
The difference is that they don't have the guns, thus the results.

the difference is that we don't target civilians.

Quote:

As long as the US supports a fascist regime like the present on of Israel it will continue to be like this, yes. US is too far to pay for this as well but in a globilized world everyone is interlinked.

long live the free republic of turkish cyprus! we shall never forget!!!!!

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

So basically you're saying that revenge killings are all right for Palestinians. Yet, you won't support Israel's attempts to arrest terrorists. That makes a lot of sense.

I say why they happen.

Quote:

Also, you claim that the Pals don't have guns?!? Where the hell are you getting your information? They have many guns, many explosives, and many other weapons. They just find killing civilians easier than fighting the IDF...

They can't compare with the US backed Israeli army. It's like throwing rocks at tanks....

Quote:

In conclusion, I'm sorry that I'm making you defend these stupid statements. This is just a troll, after all.

Easily defendable still

Az · March 30, 2002, 14:53

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
Fine I stop.

May Peace reign supreme.

Bereta_Eder · March 30, 2002, 14:57

Have to go. I actually have a date tonight

(and no clothes to wear).

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 15:00

Quote:

They can't compare with the US backed Israeli army. It's like throwing rocks at tanks....

Very few guerrilla forces match up with the armies they are fighting. That's why they have to fight a guerrilla campaign. The Vietnamese couldn't compare to the US. The Afghans couldn't compare with the Russians. Yet neither of these groups resorted to terrorism. The Pals are just lazy, looking for easy kills instead of actually fighting. There's nothing brave about blowing up a bunch of people shopping for groceries.

Az · March 30, 2002, 15:03

I don't seem to understand.

clothes are just a phase . who cares?

chequita guevara · March 30, 2002, 15:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Yet neither of these groups resorted to terrorism. The Pals are just lazy, looking for easy kills instead of actually fighting.

Well, to be fair, guerilla wars are much harder on the civilian populace than wars of terorism. As bad as Israel is to the Pals now, if an actual guerilla war were being waged, they'd be ever so worse. The Pals would be rounded up and put in controled camps, if not simply expelled.

It's not like the Israelis were so nice when the PLO was trying to wage a guerilla campaign. Abuse and torture in the territories was rampant in the 70s and 80s, as well as indefinate detentionas and expuslions.

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 15:36

All I'm saying is that I would be a lot more supportive of the Pals if they either stopped violent opposition all together or switched to a guerrilla struggle that targetted the Israeli military. I can't abide the current tactics used by the Palestinians since they are solely and intentionally targetted at Israeli civilians. I completely understand that some civilians will be killed in any war, but to intentionally target civilians while avoiding any engagement with your opponent's military just seems wrong to me. Not to mention cowardly and counter-productive.

By the way, thanks for the input che. The discussions here are always a lot more interesting and intelligent when you're around.

edit: I didn't really address your post much the first time around. so I'll do it quick. I agree that any guerrilla campaign by the Pals would make the situation worse for them. As has been mentioned, they simply don't have the resources to fight the Israelis. That's why I think the best thing the Pals could do would be to adopt non-violent measures to push for independence. They can't win by fighting, so there is no point in doing so. The only thing they are accomplishing through terrorism is to anger Israel and ensure that there will never be a Palestinian state.

Velociryx · March 30, 2002, 16:15

Like throwing rocks at tanks?

Then the solution is simple. All they gotta do is abstract the warfare using the Civ3 combat engine and they'll win far more often than they do now....

-=Vel=-

Drake Tungsten · March 30, 2002, 16:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
Like throwing rocks at tanks?

Then the solution is simple. All they gotta do is abstract the warfare using the Civ3 combat engine and they'll win far more often than they do now....

-=Vel=-

The Israelis could use this principle as well. If they use the Civ2 combat engine, they could construct city walls around all the cities in the West Bank and could then bombard the cities at will without fear of civilian casualties! Magically, only the terrorists would be hit. The city improvements would even stay intact!

Sirotnikov · March 30, 2002, 16:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Velociryx
Like throwing rocks at tanks?

Then the solution is simple. All they gotta do is abstract the warfare using the Civ3 combat engine and they'll win far more often than they do now....

-=Vel=-

ROFL