Israel plans using mini nukes to blow up Iran nuclea facilities

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Air Force? Do you still have the suicide bomber force codenamed Sea King?

Already made that joke. You're too slow. We have just over a hundred CF-18s

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Ah, more useless speculation comparing one first world army to another.

BTW, does Israels defense budget reflect that its army is mainly conscripts, who dont get paid market wages?

Does it reflect that its conscripts are considered the joke of the industrialised world?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Does it reflect that its conscripts are considered the joke of the industrialised world?

cite please. Not your opinion or analysis - a cite.

and referring to the abilities of the Israeli conscripts, NOT to the strategic mistakes made in Lebanon.

[KrazyHorse]

Seriously, do you think that a conscript force has a chance against a much smaller professional force?

I rate the IAF and whatever professional core the Army has as much more important than the conscripts

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


No, we wouldn't. Subs are expensive. To play the sub game you need dozens of them. The USN could (and probably does) track every sub we have.

Well, during the summer's joint exercises, the Yanks had trouble keeping a Swedish attack sub away from the carrier battle groups. Their surveillance can't be all that impressive.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Rasputin
oh why oh why cant we all love eahc other !!!


Islamics and Jews share a common history ....

..... of murder, betrayal, genocide, war, and persecution.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

Well, during the summer's joint exercises, the Yanks had trouble keeping a Swedish attack sub away from the carrier battle groups. Their surveillance can't be all that impressive.

Not the same thing.In those exercises whatever defending subs there are maintain some sort of perimeter around the battle group. The attack subs come in on whatever approach vector they want and hit where they want. It's not the same as long term tracking where you pick up the scent and then shadow for weeks at a time.

[Last Conformist]

It's not the same, but whatever flaws make it possible should make it possible to shake a tracker too.

[KrazyHorse]

I don't think they're "shaking" when they attack; I think they're attacking too quickly for the defender to pick them up.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Seriously, do you think that a conscript force has a chance against a much smaller professional force?

I rate the IAF and whatever professional core the Army has as much more important than the conscripts

Most Israeli conscripts (the men) serve for three years, which overcomes the problem of limited time for training, which is the main issue with conscripts in western armies.

The least motivated manage to evade the draft, from what I understand.

Now Im not saying an Israeli conscript is man for man, as good as Israels long service volunteers (though at the present time those latter are mainly non-coms, IIUC), or that Israel isnt contemplating shifting away from conscription, nor am I even saying that an Israeli conscript is the equal of a long service volunteer from the US or Canada. I am challenging "the joke of the industrialized world" And I am suggesting that evaluating military capabilities by comparing cahs budgets between a state with an all vol force and one with conscription tends to understate the resources devoted to military uses of the conscript force, even IF the decision to use an AVF is wise.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Most Israeli conscripts (the men) serve for three years, which overcomes the problem of limited time for training, which is the main issue with conscripts in western armies.

The least motivated manage to evade the draft, from what I understand.

Now Im not saying an Israeli conscript is man for man, as good as Israels long service volunteers (though at the present time those latter are mainly non-coms, IIUC), or that Israel isnt contemplating shifting away from conscription, nor am I even saying that an Israeli conscript is the equal of a long service volunteer from the US or Canada. I am challenging "the joke of the industrialized world" And I am suggesting that evaluating military capabilities by comparing cahs budgets between a state with an all vol force and one with conscription tends to understate the resources devoted to military uses of the conscript force, even IF the decision to use an AVF is wise.

I think it actually tends to seriously overstate the capability of the conscript-using force. It's a point which I didn't bother making, but which I thought about when posting earlier.

Pay is only a small part of what a soldier costs. Training, equipment, food, housing, transport etc are all huge costs which have to be accounted for. Not to mention the fact that you waste a significant number of your real soldiers babysitting the conscripts. Paying our soldiers is a significant, but not overwhelming part of the Canadian military budgets. E1-E5 get paid **** money. The pay for these men might constitute 10% of the Canadian military budget.

The conscripts may be good for low-intensity warfare. The kind where you need thousands of people sitting on their asses guarding ****, going door-to-door etc.

If there's anything military history has taught us, it's that conscripts suck when it comes to mobile, combined arms warfare.

I'm not saying that the conscript part of the IDF is cowardly or stupid or whatever. I'm not saying they'd break and run, or refuse to patrol (though some would). I'm saying that they cannot maneuver or fight like a professional force does. Israel would use them as static defense. Speedbumps.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

I'm not saying that the conscript part of the IDF is cowardly or stupid or whatever. I'm not saying they'd break and run, or refuse to patrol (though some would). I'm saying that they cannot maneuver or fight like a professional force does. Israel would use them as static defense. Speedbumps.

The Israeli army that won in 1956, and in 1967, and that recovered from surprise (the fault of the generals and pols, not the conscripts) to win tactically (lets not debate war aims) in 1973 was conscripts. Not just conscripts, but heavily reservists as well.

I dont think you understand the structure of the IDF. Maybe its changed the last few years, and Siro can correct me if hes still reading this, but there are NO distinct all volunteer maneuver units. Dont exist. Everyone who enters the army does so as a conscript. Women for 1 year (or is it 18 months? I forget) and men for 3 years. Men who want to stay after 3 years normally do so as non-coms. Or if they qualify get training as officers. I dont think they have any non-conscript privates. Certainly no units of them (im not sure about the special forces)

Even the younger reservists, IIUC, are used as maneuver forces. The only guys who are used only for static defense and occupation duty only are the older reservists (Israel retains men in reserves till age 45, IIUC)

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

If there's anything military history has taught us, it's that conscripts suck when it comes to mobile, combined arms warfare.

Nope. Im sure the Canadian AVF during WW2 did just fine, but the US, Russian and German conscript forces did quite as well in mobile combined arms warfare. Of course thats cause the conscripts were trained as long as the volunteers. The distinction is length of training.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


The Israeli army that won in 1956, and in 1967, and that recovered from surprise (the fault of the generals and pols, not the conscripts) to win tactically (lets not debate war aims) in 1973 was conscripts. Not just conscripts, but heavily reservists as well.

And the people they fought against were the standard 3rd world **** armies, bloated with inefficiency, poor training, poor leadership, poor morale.

Not a professional first world army. Such a force would have carved through the Israeli conscripts like a hot knife through butter.

Come on, LOTM. You know better than to try to make that comparison.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Nope. Im sure the Canadian AVF during WW2 did just fine

The difference is between conscript and professional, not conscript and volunteer. Volunteer and conscript forces have much more in common than volunteer and professional forces do.