# Israeli Defence Force



## DeepThaut (20 Mar 2004)

I just wanted to know you people‘s opinions about the Israeli Defence Force (IDF). I respect the men and women of the IDF for being on the doorsteps of terrorism and having to deal with suicide bombers all the time. It is a very professional army but the downside is that they deeply hate their enemies and are not too merciful and don‘t have much respect for the Palestinians(and vise-versa). They are in one of the longest wars and it will probably never end because we‘re talking about a religious war mixed in with a territorial one. But the IDF is an army who knows what they are doing and do it well when it comes to war. They captured the Sinai, more than once I believe. They got the Golan Heights and went into Lebanon. They are always having raids in the West Bank but have to pull back since the States don‘t want all **** to break loose. So I‘m just wondering about what your thoughts are about the IDF, if you support their actions and so on. Don‘t worry I‘m not Israeli myself, I‘m Nova Scotian born and raised with no Israeli relatives. But my father went to the Golan and said he talked to Syrians and Israelis and said both sides had interesting stories.

Cheers, Nordwind


----------



## jutes85 (13 Aug 2004)

(I was going to start a similar thread, but i found this one.)

I for one have the outmost respect for the IDF. They are operating in the most dangerous region in the world with people trying to kill them left and right. They have won almost every war that they have fought in, even when it seemed they were heavily out numbered. I believe that they are the most highly trained and most proffessional military in the world. If I was still in Israel, there would be no doubt that I would join-up. (Make it my full-time job after manditory service.)


----------



## ramy (14 Aug 2004)

idf forces are the best trained in the world. They have a tough job seem do it it well. Do I support what they are doing ? Partly.

Every country needs to protect their citizens but the way they kill terrorists is wrong.

Why use apaches to blow em up and kill 5 civilians when u can kill that terrorist leader with just one bullet ?


----------



## Lance Wiebe (14 Aug 2004)

Where does all of this "IDF is the best trained in the world" come from?

"Highest motivated", I could live with.

"Among the best equipped", I could live with.

"Best trained", I cannot live with.  I have observed their training, well, their armour training, and I totally disagree with "best trained" at least as far as armour training goes.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Aug 2004)

Don't get yer knickers in a twist, Lance. Just another interloper giving his unqualified opinion on someting he knows nothing about.  : :boring:


----------



## Redeye (14 Aug 2004)

Anecdotally (from friends who have served in the IDF) and from a variety of things I've read, the references for which of course escape me, they lack a good NCO cadre, have severe discipline problems, and lack depth of training.

They do have a pretty good warfighting record, and some pretty good equipment, though.


----------



## Lance Wiebe (14 Aug 2004)

To paraphrase senior Canadian Army Officer, after we had witnessed their armour training and watched a gun camp

"A second rate army, with first rate equipment, with fourth rate enemies".

Hey, he said it, not me, although I was in general agreement.  I could not totally agree, as I had not witnessed the training of the so-called "fourth rate enemies".  (Even though we have all read about them, I have had no personal experience to base such a comment on)


----------



## Infanteer (14 Aug 2004)

Funny, those commenting on Israel having the "best trained Army" have no idea what military training is....Like virgins studying sex, eh?


----------



## jutes85 (14 Aug 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Funny, those commenting on Israel having the "best trained Army" have no idea what military training is....Like virgins studying sex, eh?



You don't have to be through military training physically to know what its all about. Take the Russian Spetznas, I can tell you that their training is far more rigorous then any US special forces.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Aug 2004)

> You don't have to be through military training physically to know what its all about. Take the Russian Spetznas, I can tell you that their training is far more rigorous then any US special forces.



Okay there son... :

You can keep on saying that, but no one here is going to take you seriously.


----------



## Scott (14 Aug 2004)

jutes said:
			
		

> You don't have to be through military training physically to know what its all about. Take the Russian Spetznas, I can tell you that their training is far more rigorous then any US special forces.



And you offer what for proof?


----------



## Infanteer (14 Aug 2004)

Jutes:

Furthermore to your post, I hope you have read the following post in the Admin forum:

http://army.ca/forums/threads/17343.0.html

This is board policy.   If you are going to post information on the quality of both Russian Spetsnaz training and US Special Forces training you better be able to offer some valid evidence to back your claims up.   

If you don't you may be in violation of the stated policy and deserving of a formal warning for using up bandwidth with useless hearsay.


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Aug 2004)

:blotto:


----------



## jutes85 (14 Aug 2004)

scott1nsh said:
			
		

> And you offer what for proof?



http://www.spetsnaz.com.br/training.htm

Their training is F*cking CRAZY. It makes the Navy Seals look like a picnic, more or less.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Aug 2004)

Perhaps you didn't read the bottom of the thread here:

_Some of the information in this web site was based on the book :

Viktor Suvorov - Spetsnaz. The Story Behind the Soviet SAS. - Hamish Hamilton Ltd, 1987._

If you had any sense, you would have realized that the page was an amateur one done by someone much like yourself that has absolutely jack-shit for any real, first-hand knowledge about the military in general.

As for the Navy SEALs remark, again, what proof do you have that it is like a picnic, more or less?

You are rapidly exausting my patience Jutes.  I would advise you to read through my earlier post regarding official board policy again.


----------



## jutes85 (14 Aug 2004)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Perhaps you didn't read the bottom of the thread here:
> 
> _Some of the information in this web site was based on the book :
> 
> ...



Take it as you wish.


----------



## Slim (14 Aug 2004)

_Take it as you wish._

Jutes

Let me spell it out for you.

1. Have you ever been a member of the Russian Spetznaz or other special operations group?

2. Have you ever been or even trained with the U.S. Navy Seals?

3. Have you ever even been the member of an armed force and gone through the training that a soldier does?

No, you haven't...

Why are you qualified to start saying some of the things you have said? How can you compare anything without first-hand knowledge? 

You can't.

You're wasting our time and bringing the quality of the forum down. There are probably people who have served in the organizations you have mentioned reading posts and threads here from time to time. What do you think they think when they read crap like yours?!

Please stop wasting our time...


----------



## jutes85 (14 Aug 2004)

Slim said:
			
		

> _Take it as you wish._
> 
> Jutes
> 
> ...



Have you been qualified or trainined with either of these organizations? Since when do you have to be through it to know whats it all about? I've never been through Pilot training, but I know how hard it is, and which Acadamy offers better training. 

*How can you compare anything without first-hand knowledge?*

So according to you, we are not allowed to debate about ANYTHING unless we have first-hand experience.   :


----------



## McG (14 Aug 2004)

Can you compare experiences that you have never had?  I would think not.

Can you compare academic opinions that you have studied?  I would think you can.

You are doing the first and calling it the second.


----------



## Scott (14 Aug 2004)

Jutes, there are not a whole bunch of sources on the organizations you are so determined to prove your expertise on for a reason, are you picking up what I am laying down?

I wouldn't hesitate to guess that any SEAL reading this would get pretty hot at your comments, the reason is simple:

THEY'VE DONE IT, YOU HAVEN'T

Going further, who gives a rat's backside if the Bolsheviks can spank the Yanks or my Dad can beat up yours, I fail to see the relevance to the original post on the thread and don't see how it matters in general. 

To the experience thing. I have gone through the training, therefore I feel qualified to comment on it. I feel more than comfortable talking about it's difficulty, etc because I was there. Infanteer has been as well and do you see us hijacking threads to discuss the tactics/toughness/underwear colour of various units within the CF? 

So, tell me how tough Basic Training is, I am interested to hear your educated opinion.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Aug 2004)

"First-hand experience" is not necessarily actual service with a particular unit.   By being in the a specific branch of the military, one has experience in working with other trades; this is why all soldiers can debate issues regarding branches that they are not a member of, but have some sort of experience in dealing with due to their duties.   As well, official information that a soldier is privy to will come down the pipeline regarding JTF-2 and other topics.   There is a body of common knowledge that is available to those who serve through a variety of sources that allow them to speak with some degree of authority.   

As well, belonging to a military gives one a common background with others in with the same duties, allowing them to communicate about each others experiences.   I have in some extent encountered members of some Special Operation Forces in my time such as the JTF-2, Navy SEALS, etc.   Although the information is second hand and must be treated as such do to the fact that it is related by someone else, it can be taken as pretty accurate do to the qualifications of the source.

As well, academic sources may have varying degrees of authenticity due to the fact that they will (try to) make objective studies of readily available official facts and information

Do your claims meet any of the above criteria?   If they don't (which I am quite sure of) then all they accomplish here is a waste of everybody's time in having to correct misinformation and explain why your posts are pure BS.


----------



## Goober (14 Aug 2004)

I'm going to jump in this one...



			
				jutes said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> So according to you, we are not allowed to debate about ANYTHING unless we have first-hand experience.   :



The problem is, you simply said "Their training is F*cking CRAZY. It makes the Navy Seals look like a picnic, more or less." and posted one web page with one persons opinion in favour of Spetsnaz training. You offer nothing else to back up your claim, and this is why your words have no credibility. You can debate anything you want, but when you lack credibility, I'm sure you'll find you will also soon lack fellow debaters.


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Aug 2004)

I think Jutes would crap his pants after 10 minutes in the real world.

 :

Wes


----------



## jutes85 (14 Aug 2004)

> Going further, who gives a rat's backside if the Bolsheviks can spank the Yanks or my Dad can beat up yours, I fail to see the relevance to the original post on the thread and don't see how it matters in general.



I don't give a rats ass which Special Forces is better or which one is better trained. But what I will tell you is my opinion on a certain issue, whether I've had experience or not. If you wish to dismiss it as BS, let it be, I don't need to prove to someone in a Mickey Mouse Organization that happens to call itself the Canadian Army that I was right.



> THEY'VE DONE IT, YOU HAVEN'T



I can tell you that Toyota's are more reliable then Ford's without even haven driven one.



> So, tell me how tough Basic Training is, I am interested to hear your educated opinion.



If you come with a bad attitude and out of shape, you will find it harder if you would've come fit and ready to help your buddy. I've been to enough Junior and WHL hockey camps and dry-land sessions to know what physical training is all about.



> Do your claims meet any of the above criteria? If they don't (which I am quite sure of) then all they accomplish here is a waste of everybody's time in having to correct misinformation and explain why your posts are pure BS.



There are plenty of sources and opinions that I can find, internet or otherwise, that will state the toughness or degree of difficulty that either the Seals or Spetsnas. After reading that, I can tell you my opinion on the matter. If you just dismiss it as pure BS, as you have done so without giving me your opinion, which a forum is all about, then let it be. 



> I think Jutes would crap his pants after 10 minutes in the real world.



Oh brother. :

Anyways, this thread was about the IDF and its effectiveness and strength, until someone lost a head-gasket. I for one am proud to be an Israeli Citizen and what the IDF has done for the country of Israel. Without it, Israel would not exist.


----------



## muskrat89 (14 Aug 2004)

> I don't need to prove to someone in a Mickey Mouse Organization that happens to call itself the Canadian Army that I was right.





> I for one am proud to be an Israeli Citizen and what the IDF has done for the country of Israel. Without it, Israel would not exist.




Then go hang out at an IDF Message Board. 

Don't fret - with your new status, the Ninja Snipers will be falling all over themselves to recruit you.....


----------



## Ian_M (14 Aug 2004)

jutes said:
			
		

> Anyways, this thread was about the IDF and its effectiveness and strength, until someone lost a head-gasket. I for one am proud to be an Israeli Citizen and what the IDF has done for the country of Israel. Without it, Israel would not exist.



I rarely try to get involved with posting here, mainly because I don't know enough to make claims or whatever, or have enough solid proof, however Jutes, you really should calm down. These people know how tough their basic training is or know a bit more about various special forces for the reasons that Infanteer said, also I wouldn't instult their military like you did when you said. "I don't need to prove to someone in a Mickey Mouse Organization that happens to call itself the Canadian Army I was right.", Really really really smart of you to insult more than likely half the members of the board.

Enough on that, I say you should calm down because of the bias you would have naturally in this thread, since you are a citizen of Israel and we are discussing, or attempting to discuss the military forces of your country. Some people here have biases for and against, you seem to have hijacked the thread in a way (Of course what I'm claiming here is grasping at straws since it seems that the whole discussion went totally off track when you made a claim about not having to be in the military). If I'm wrong with this, I'm sorry. Simply put, as a piece of advice Jutes, try not to insult members of the board who serve in said 'Mickey Mouse Organization' as you call it, or to refuse to take their advice.


----------



## jutes85 (14 Aug 2004)

> I rarely try to get involved with posting here, mainly because I don't know enough to make claims or whatever, or have enough solid proof, however Jutes, you really should calm down.



I'm done with this thread unless it gets back on topic.



> also I wouldn't instult their military like you did when you said. "I don't need to prove to someone in a Mickey Mouse Organization that happens to call itself the Canadian Army I was right.", Really really really smart of you to insult more than likely half the members of the board.



Didn't mean it. I'm just pissed off at the current state of my application. Sorry If I offended anyone. I'm now considering on whether I should accept a job offer from the Air Force or just go to college.

Edited for spelling.


----------



## Michael OLeary (14 Aug 2004)

Jutes,

what you need to understand is that there has been an ongoing struggle on this forum to maintain a degree of credibility such that it is a reliable resource for visitors interested in the military, primarily the Canadian Military. And it's a struggle that has been won but requires aggressive maintenance. Healthy, and even spirited, debate is encouraged. When people have credentials or experience to back up their statements, we like to see them presented as well. When they are simply expressing an opinions, they should declare that openly.

The regulars on the boards have a wide variety of military experience, and they are very quick to identify holes in the logic or content of posts. Frankly, few things hi-jack a board thread faster than an eager teenager exercising his on-line 'voice' and then getting defensive when his statements are challenged and supporting data is requested.

This board is a popular source for young Canadians seeking information or guidance at the outset of, or while considering a, military career. We accept that that gives us a role of responsibility and leadership not unlike the primary duties in the Canadian Forces that we do, or have, enjoyed.

Similarly, we know that others, both in our own and other militaries, occasionally visit and read the threads. And the posts do get indexed to the major search engines and show up there as well.

Don't fault the board members for protecting their intellectual and professional turf. A few poorly behaved correspondents can (and have in the past) created conditions such that sometimes good members leave, temporarily or permanently. In truth, many of the regular posters would rather chastise an innocently ignorant newbie in the hopes that poor initial behaviour can be corrected than to tolerate poor forum etiquette at the cost of the entire forum's atmosphere.

Please sit back, relax, and reconsider your approach.


----------



## Jungle (14 Aug 2004)

jutes said:
			
		

> If you wish to dismiss it as BS, let it be, I don't need to prove to someone in a Mickey Mouse Organization that happens to call itself the Canadian Army that I was right.


LOL... is that the reason you can't get a job offer with the CF ??? Strangely, there are approx 100 persons joining the CF every week, yet you can't get a job... maybe you're too serious for us clowns... :
Enjoy this period of your life where you know everything... it doesn't last long !!!


----------



## Shec (15 Aug 2004)

Hi Guys,

I'm going to jump in here because I have experience with both the CF and the IDF and quite frankly I find this whole argument childish.   

Its true that the Canadian Army is better disciplined than the IDF which has no patience for spit and polish.     I"ve seen things that would make my old RSM cardiac - boots that have never been polished, NCO stripes held on with safety pins, and Coca-Cola baseball caps.     It is also arguably true that the Canadian Army is better trained.      That is because they have the luxury of time to train and develop professionals with a wider breadth of skill sets. By the way, that hardly makes the Canadian Army a "mickey mouse organization".     Remember the Canadian Army is an all-volunteer predominantly professional force.

The IDF on the other hand reflects the fact that the army is the people and the people are the army.   They are citizen soldiers in the truest sense of the word.   In fact I will be so bold as to venture that the ratio of draftees/reservists to professionals in the IDF is the inversely proportional to the Canadian Army. They are fighting for their homes in a land where there is no defence in depth and no room to manuever.   That is the motivatator that makes them   leaner, meaner, and audacious.   Furthermore,   the time that Canucks have to train is something that the IDF does not have which is why the IDF has so many specialized units.

So in summary you are comparing a all-volunteer largely professional force with a force composed largely of non-professional national servicemen and women.   So we are talking apples vs. oranages (no pun intended given crops in both countries).  And that essential difference invalidates any silly little "my cojones are bigger than yours" comparisions.   Which is why, and with all due respect to my old comrade Lance Wiebe, the officer he referenced who called the IDF a "second rate army" is just as ignorant as the member who called the Canadian Army a "mickey mouse organization".


----------



## jutes85 (15 Aug 2004)

Shec said:
			
		

> Hi Guys,
> 
> I'm going to jump in here because I have first hand experience with both the CF and the IDF and quite frankly I find the whole argument childish.
> 
> ...



The original purpose of this thread was not to compare the Canadian Armed Forces or anyother Military to that of the IDF. They are totaly the opposite to each other, one peacekeeps when deployed, the other is in constant allert and readiness to fight for the safety and security of Israel. Perhaps if the US was kicking on our door everyday, our Military would be in a different state that it is today.



> Its true that the Canadian Army is better disciplined than the IDF which has no patience for spit and polish.



IMO, I don't see why the CAF are so stringent with the spit and polish aspect of training. But then again, when you don't participate in any active wars or conflicts, there isn't much to do.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Aug 2004)

jutes said:
			
		

> IMO, I don't see why the CAF are so stringent with the spit and polish aspect of training. *But then again, when you don't participate in any active wars or conflicts, there isn't much to do.*



You're really trying to push the buttons aren't you assclown.


----------



## D-n-A (15 Aug 2004)

Jutes, you say Canada doesn't go on combat deployments? Um.. what about Afghanistan, the first ROTO with 3PPCLI was a combat deployment, and Canadians fought there.


----------



## muskrat89 (15 Aug 2004)

Thanks Shec - an interesting post...

Jutes - keep it up.  :

You mentioned frustration "at the system" as the reason for you lipping off about the Canadian Military. That just kinda reiterates what we've been saying - the disconnect bewteen your "theories" and the practical application of real life. Self-control and self-discipline are cornerstones of success in the Military. You indicate lots of "knowledge" reagrding the various levels of training in different Militaries, yet, you supposedly blow up here (relatively speaking) based on frustration. How are you going to handle military courses where instructors are *trying* to push your buttons...???

I think you just need to chill, for a bit..


----------



## Shec (15 Aug 2004)

Jutes,

Get some time in.


----------



## Infanteer (15 Aug 2004)

Time to lock this one up as well, what do you guys think....


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (15 Aug 2004)

Shec said:
			
		

> Jutes,
> 
> Get some time in.



Agreed...although my bet is he won't make it through his first BE.


----------

