The Middle East Continues...

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
How does anything that you said prove that they weren't planning a ground offensive originally?

I refer you to the first ME thread of this last crisis, in which I stated that this would only end after Israel carried out a large ground invasion and re-occupied the south of Lebanon, and Eli went on to explain the hopes of Israeli planners of achieving their aim with air power alone.

I refer you to nearly four weeks of Haarets analysis (I don't know if they have archives). The columns of Ze'ev Schiff are the most illustrative.

I also would implore you to, I don;t know, actually read the news, with extra attention to statements by the Israeli government, over the last 4 weeks.

Beyond that I doubt there is anything I could say to show you where you are in error.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by GePap


You suppose wrong.

The government set out to win with air power alone, they did not mobilize more reserves until well after the air campaign began, and it has only been in the last two weeks that the Israeli government has began to expand the role of ground forces, based on the failure of air power to achieve what they wanted to achieve.

Why should they start to mobilize before it was nessecary ? An army sitting idle while the airforce are doing their job is costly. Both to maintain and in production losses.

If they were to defend them against the syrian army, it would make sense to make an all out mobilization, but not against hizbollah. Despite their potential force, they are in no way comparable with an regular army.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I'm still at a loss to explain why they didn't launch a ground campaign with air support rather than relying on a strategic air campaign concept that has been discredited time and again. What the hell are the Israelis good for if they screw up an opportunity such as this to damage an Iranian proxy when we go out on such a limb for them?

Either they seriously underestimated Hezbolla or they simply had no plan beyond the need to strike out. The idea of somehow convincing the Lebanese that they were bombing them for their own good was stupid if they actually believed that they could. Airstrikes are effective but only up to a certain point. After awhile you run through your list of targets and you start making stuff up and in a crowded area with civilians, that is bound to lead to bad PR. Ground occupation at this point seems half hearted and desparate. Unless something drastic happens this is becomming a big waste. What Hezbolla lost in men and rockets will be more than made up for the bad PR Israel is getting.

[chequita guevara]

The air campaign drove out the vast majority of civilians, which means they can declare a free fire zone, and kill anything that moves south of the Litani. They never intended for it to be solely an air campaign. The air campaign was just to create the conditions for an invasion.

[notyoueither]

Maybe the whole point has been to damage Hezbollah and get the rest of Lebanon and the rest of the world involved in S Lebanon?

[chequita guevara]

Given that they've destroyed the rest of Lebanon, I doubt it.

Also, if Israli sources are to be believed, the U.S. has been pushing Israel to overthrow the Assad regime. Given the attack on Lebanon, Israel could hardly get away with just invading, so they may be trying to get Syria to intervene so Israel can claim to be attacked.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292032964&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/743733.html

And then there's this idiocy:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=74423

[notyoueither]

I'm sure you do.

[notyoueither]

'destroyed the rest of Lebanon'

[Barnabas]

Israel bombed the catholic radio? why?

Are radios strategic during war?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by notyoueither
'destroyed the rest of Lebanon'

Have you paid no attention to the news?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The air campaign drove out the vast majority of civilians, which means they can declare a free fire zone, and kill anything that moves south of the Litani. They never intended for it to be solely an air campaign. The air campaign was just to create the conditions for an invasion.

QFT.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Have you paid no attention to the news?

Yes. And you?

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Sprayber


Either they seriously underestimated Hezbolla or they simply had no plan beyond the need to strike out. The idea of somehow convincing the Lebanese that they were bombing them for their own good was stupid if they actually believed that they could. Airstrikes are effective but only up to a certain point. After awhile you run through your list of targets and you start making stuff up and in a crowded area with civilians, that is bound to lead to bad PR. Ground occupation at this point seems half hearted and desparate. Unless something drastic happens this is becomming a big waste. What Hezbolla lost in men and rockets will be more than made up for the bad PR Israel is getting.

Good post

[Elok]

Originally posted by dannubis
undoubtadly rightgeous people as yourself continue to defend the use of these weapons (but not in their neighbourhood)

I would actually prefer that no weapons at all be used in my neighborhood. But that's just me.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The air campaign drove out the vast majority of civilians, which means they can declare a free fire zone, and kill anything that moves south of the Litani. They never intended for it to be solely an air campaign. The air campaign was just to create the conditions for an invasion.

As inciteful and likely as incorrect as your earlier analysis of Iran's nuclear program, I refer you to GePap's post to Kuci on the same subject.