The Future of War?

[Kuciwalker]

Was the US in any danger of being conquered?

Was Israel?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Was the US in any danger of being conquered?

Was Israel?

No. Hezbollah has no chance of achieving it's goal using the tactics proscribed in this thread.

[Drake Tungsten]

Hezbollah achieved its goals. It got Israel to invade Lebanon, embarassed the Israeli army and gained a great deal more power and prestige for itself in the Lebanese political environment.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Was the US in any danger of being conquered?

Was Israel?

Israels problem was its rhetoric. They went around saying they were going to 'destroy' Hezbollah. Yet they didnt fully mobilize or begin to use ground forces in sufficient number till the war was almost over. When you say youre going to destroy hezb, and then youre reduced to saying "Well we killed X gunmen, and destroyed Y missiles, and got the UN to pass resolution Z, which will slightly inconvenience Hezbo" it sure LOOKS like a defeat.

But I agree (somewhat) with geronomo, that was more mishandling the politics, and overreliance on Air power in a situation where the politics places real limits on what can be done with air power, than it was brilliant new discoveries by Hezbo in the art of urban warfare.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Hezbollah achieved its goals. It got Israel to invade Lebanon, embarassed the Israeli army and gained a great deal more power and prestige for itself in the Lebanese political environment.

I think part of the problem is that I believe hezbollah still thinks of itself as in a state of war with israel and that as such it's goals for that war have not been met. IE that hez has not won it's war with israel and cannot win it using the tactics seen so far.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Hezbollah achieved its goals. It got Israel to invade Lebanon, embarassed the Israeli army and gained a great deal more power and prestige for itself in the Lebanese political environment.

actually theres some evidence that they didnt think Israel would invade. Its also not clear how much stronger they are politically. Israel definitely lost politically, but that doenst automatically translate into Hezbo gains, this not being quite a zero sum game (too many other actors)

[Bosh]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
A true student of Pyrrhus I see!

Are you saying that Hezbollah is in a weaker position than it was a year ago? I think it has more political and military power than its had in a looooooooooooong time.

Israel wasn't beaten. The zionist entity remains.

So? Israel won the Six Day War and Egypt, Syria and Jordan are still countries. Hezbollah tactics were rather creative and effective in defending ground against a 1st world military power. I think we'll see a lot more like them in the future.

None of this means that I support Hezbollah in any way whatsoever. I just think that we'll see a lot more of their style of tactics in the future since they seem to be quite effective.

Hezbollah successfully hid from israel until israel lost the political will to continue to hunt them down.

Israel's complete inability to root Hezbollah out of its holes is rather interesting.

The rockets and other attacks they launched at israel had negligable to zero effect on israels fighting capability.

Indeed. But the tactics they employed during the fighting in southern Lebanon seemed quite sound.

This 'victory' is almost totally useless for hezbollah in it's goal of destroying israel.

But spectacularly successful in its goal of staying relevant and powerful in internal Lebanese politics.

My point actually is that these tactics will only be the last word in defensive war.

That's exactly what I was claiming. They are very effective defensive tactics of a sort we really haven't seen before. I think that they are tactically sound and will be widely emulated.

Hezbollah achieved its goals. It got Israel to invade Lebanon, embarassed the Israeli army and gained a great deal more power and prestige for itself in the Lebanese political environment.

Exactly.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Bosh
Are you saying that Hezbollah is in a weaker position than it was a year ago? I think it has more political and military power than its had in a looooooooooooong time.

Is Hezbollah an indigenous movement resisting the occupation of Israel or is it the cat's paw of Syria and Iran? If it is the indigenous movement it claims to be, I fail to see how the comparison to Pyrrhus doesn't apply based on the shear amount of damage Lebanon suffered.

[Kuciwalker]

Why couldn't it be an indigigenous movement resisting the occupation of Israel to keep itself in power?

[DinoDoc]

Then it was still a massive waste of resources for little gain (They were already a powerful force in the South). It was only somewhat mitigated by the incompetence of the Olmert government.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Is Hezbollah an indigenous movement resisting the occupation of Israel or is it the cat's paw of Syria and Iran? If it is the indigenous movement it claims to be, I fail to see how the comparison to Pyrrhus doesn't apply based on the shear amount of damage Lebanon suffered.

Physical damage can always be repaired, and it is simpler to rebuild that prestigue, or political capital.

Besides, while the infrastructure damage was immense, the human toll was relatively light, at least, as far as Israeli attacks into Lebanon go.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Then it was still a massive waste of resources for little gain (They were already a powerful force in the South). It was only somewhat mitigated by the incompetence of the Olmert government.

You are confusing the aims of each side.

Hezbollah's raid to capture the two soldiers was certaionly not a move on their part for total war - they probably sought to gain greater leverage on the endless discussion about Lebanese prisoners, plus show some solidarity with the Pals, and gain some general browny points in the Arab world.

It was the Israeli government that decided that the raid by Hezbollah was a sufficient causus belli for them to try to implement obviously opre-existing plans to really hurt Hezbollah, to make up for what many in Israel had come to see as the mistake of pulling out of southern Lebanon.

In that respect, the fight Hezbollah got itself into was far bigger and nastier than what they planned, but they are a militia with 6000 troops, and for over a month they survived attacks by the military beheamoth of the ME, and while their neighborhoods got blasted, they maintained the ability to bomb Israel, no matter how ineffectually, a huge psychological blow. They certainly did not suffer irreparable human loses in terms of trained men, they are probably having few problems replacing their material loses, and until the Shia-Sunni rift began to widen in the last few months, they gained immensely politically, and even today they are a stronger political voice in Lebanon than before.

[DinoDoc]

I don't think the damage suffered to Lebanon was as light as you seem to be making out and I think it is a mistake to under-emphasise it. IMO, the impression of "victory" for Hezbollah comes from the foolish claims by Israel of destroying its enemy yet being unwilling to do what needed to be done. What did the Shia population of Lebanon gain from the capture of those soldiers?

Let's just say that I doubt the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict has any deeper lessons than the fact that air power doesn't win wars.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I don't think the damage suffered to Lebanon was as light as you seem to be making out and I think it is a mistake to under-emphasise it.

In economic terms, not light. IN human terms, little compared to 1978 or even the first few months of 1982.

IMO, the impression of "victory" for Hezbollah comes from the foolish claims by Israel of destroying its enemy yet being unwilling to do what needed to be done. What did the Shia population of Lebanon gain from the capture of those soldiers?

First, if Israel could not destroy Hezbollah for 15 years when they actually had boots on the ground 24/7 in South Lebanon, what chance did they EVER have of actually being able to do it now? And since when is this about what the Shia (as a group) gained?Its about Hezbollah. I guess that is the basic judgement difference. You judge by possible material gains for the people. I say in terms of warand peace, most of the time those terms are secondary to more idea-based goals.

Let's just say that I doubt the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict has any deeper lessons than the fact that air power doesn't win wars.

Actually, it has some good lesson in it about the abilities of well trained irregular forces in a well prepared battlefield.

[Sirotnikov]

In that respect, the fight Hezbollah got itself into was far bigger and nastier than what they planned, but they are a militia with 6000 troops, and for over a month they survived attacks by the military beheamoth of the ME, and while their neighborhoods got blasted, they maintained the ability to bomb Israel, no matter how ineffectually, a huge psychological blow. They certainly did not suffer irreparable human loses in terms of trained men, they are probably having few problems replacing their material loses,

this is somewhat inexact, while I do agree with the first part of your post.

You give hezbullah more credit than it deserves.

Hezbullah has much less regular troops than 6000, and having Israel killed 500-700 troops is a significant blow.

Israel also destroyed the medium and long range munitions hezbullah had.

It is also important to notice, that while Israel is a military behemoth - it has not utilized beyond 5% of its ground power. Only the last 3 days of the war saw about 2 infantry divisions dive deep into southern lebanon - also in a poorly connected effort. Only then did our might began showing itself.

Israel talked too much and then refused to use the necessary force to back it up, trying to use firepower against a well disguised enemy, which was stupid.

and until the Shia-Sunni rift began to widen in the last few months, they gained immensely politically, and even today they are a stronger political voice in Lebanon than before.

I disagree that they are stronger.

I think the war has seriously polarized the lebenese society, and they are in much less consensus. Their supporters like them more, and the rest like them much less.

Iran however did see it as a validation of their concept for having a proxy to fight Israel with - and is thus pushing Hezbullah even further, hoping to capitalize the political instability and weakness, and convert Lebanon to an Iran puppet regime.

This is the real source of the increased Hezbullah confidence IMO. Not a major spike in popular support.