• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

14 Nov 12: Israel Launches Operations in Gaza

Nemo888 said:
44% with 55% voter turnout.  So 24% of eligible voters. Not a good argument for collective punishments.

An insurgency is an armed rebellion against a constituted authority. If is not that then what is it?

So, sticking to your hyperbolic reasoning, we can assume that the other 76% agree with the status quo and don't approve of the terrorist methods and reasoning.

Terrorist attacks should not be confused with armed rebellion.
 
Infanteer said:
Is Israel the constituted authority in Gaza?
They were physically for most of the conflict. They only withdrew ground troops to the territorial edges in 2005. They still have complete control over the air, sea, all trade and traffic in and out. They decide who is a resident and who is a foreigner. They also still control taxation and levies. They even built walls around the Occupied Territories to better control them. Considering they are "guests" of the Israeli state I would still say yes they do have authority over the Palestinians.
 
Nemo888 said:
They were physically for most of the conflict. They only withdrew ground troops to the territorial edges in 2005. They still have complete control over the air, sea, all trade and traffic in and out. They decide who is a resident and who is a foreigner. They also still control taxation and levies. They even built walls around the Occupied Territories to better control them. Considering they are "guests" of the Israeli state I would still say yes they do have authority over the Palestinians.

However, that just sounds like your opinion.

What does the UN say? (I don't know, I'm asking)
 
Infanteer said:
The situation in Gaza is not an insurgency, so why mention COIN?  All this indicates to me is that you do not know what COIN is and you do not have a real understanding of the situation.
I believe you need to read this so you can have a real understanding of the situation.
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - A Case Study for the United States Military in Foreign Internal Defense
A Monograph
by
Lt Col Reid M Goodwyn
U.S. Air Force

"Drawing primarily from academia, this monograph analyzes insurgencies using the familiar METT-TC format to understand an insurgency’s motivations, strategies, tactics, targets, and means. It then uses the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a case study against which the reader may test the theoretical knowledge presented on insurgencies."
 
E.R. Campbell said:
Walter Russell Mead opines that the big winner is the Israeli defence industry because its missile defence technology will be in global demand.

Mead again, in is blog ViaMeadia, quotes a Boston Globe report which says:

"Israel’s ability to shoot down hundreds of rockets fired by Hamas militants this past week has been hailed as a breakthrough in missile defense. But, military analysts warn, the real challenge is only beginning ... unlike the homemade, rudimentary rockets used by Hamas, thousands of sophisticated missiles with greater ranges and payloads are being stockpiled in Lebanon by Hezbollah ... [Isreal is developing] the next-generation interceptor missile ... a critical test of the system, called the Stunner, is set for Israel’s Negev Desert in coming days ... Israelis are counting on the missile to become the centerpiece of their defense shield, known as David’s Sling."

Mead says: "American financial support for Israeli efforts to develop missile defense systems should not be seen simply as aid to an ally. If Americans and Israelis working together come up with systems that work against increasingly sophisticated threats, American security will be substantially enhanced. The prospect of defensive systems that could protect North Korea’s neighbors is also appealing and would help stabilize a volatile region of the world ... let’s hope those Negev tests go well."

Amen to that!
 
Nemo888 said:
Obedient Zelum,

I did not say the rocket attacks were not evil. The attacks are primarily at the settlers who have whittled away their territory. It is an act of desperation after having their entirely legitimate grievances ignored for decades. Like why did you steal all our land and throw us in a defacto prison camp for fifty years?

Agreed you did not say it wasn't evil.  The contexts of your message reminded me of a few other opinions I've seen on forums which basically suggests the rocket attacks weren't really a big deal since not many Israel's have died.

For example,
Pictures-Tell-the-Story-Aftermath-of-Hamas-Rocket-Attack-Compared-to-Israeli-Airstrike.jpg


I think the attacks could be an act of desperation. I also think it's more simple- they just want to kill Israeli's and fuck with them.  Or, the people firing the rockets KNOW exactly how Israel will react and not giving a shit whom amoung their own die in the counter attack, fire the rockets so Israel will fire back killing them allowing them to play the victim card.

The Palestinians are the poorest people in the Middle East and as poor as South Saharan Africans.

Perhaps they could spend money or resources on food instead of making rockets.


I gave up on Israel after the murder of our UN observer as well. My dad was a peacekeeper there in the 50's.
Didn't we let Israel go unpunished for this attack?  As long as countries like Canada and the US let Israel get away with that kind of behavior they're going to keep doing it.
 
Nemo888 said:
They were physically for most of the conflict. They only withdrew ground troops to the territorial edges in 2005.

Ahh, but we are not talking about 2005, we are talking about now - read the thread title.  The rest of your stuff is just fluff, and does nothing to support the statement that Israeli government constitutes the state in Gaza; embargoes of all sorts have long served as a form of interstate activity.

As for your source, don't hang your hat on an 8 year old Staff College dissertation.
 
Ok. If you are right the insurgency has been a success and driven the IDF out of the occupied territories. Proof of a COIN failure. I still consider it an ongoing insurgency for my above stated reasons. They have  been successful enough to hold a little territory now, but this is definitely not over.

 
The main driver of this long term conflict is the Arabian capacity for disillusionment. Despite at least 6 attempts to destroy the Jews (several of them with the full support of a major super power) they have failed miserably to do so and have worsen their situation everytime. Despite this they persist in a military conflict, rather than take a purely political and economic approach. In fact really the only success they have had is the removal of soldiers and settlers from Gaza and more or less self -autonomy in the West Bank. Both are a result of political action. A fact totally lost on the current leadership in Gaza. Meanwhile the international community is acting as an "enabler" to the Palestinians and Hamas has already said they intend to rebuild using donor money, which of course begs the question what do they intend to rebuild? Likely their military capacity first followed grudgingly with basic infrastructure to keep the supply of potential martyrs content till the next round.
 
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/11/24/david-frum-who-won-and-who-didnt-in-gaza/

David Frum: Who won, and who didn’t, in Gaza

Who stands where after this week’s fighting in Gaza? Let’s tally the list, from the biggest winners to the biggest losers.

1) Egypt’s President Muhammad Morsi scored big for himself and his Muslim Brotherhood movement. On Wednesday, Morsi issued a new “constitutional declaration” that further consolidated his own power. Article VI confers on Morsi the power to rule by decree. Article II immunizes him from legislative and judicial scrutiny.

This week’s authoritarian actions move Egypt rapidly along the way to one-party Muslim Brotherhood rule. They occurred without a murmur of protest from the United States. More than that: On Wednesday, Egypt signed an agreement to borrow $4.8-billion from the International Monetary Fund, at a concessionary interest rate of 1.06%. As the largest shareholder in the IMF, the United States could have stopped the loan had it wished. Instead, the loan proceeded — almost as if it were the price of Egypt’s good offices in Gaza.

2) The Obama administration. President Obama has suffered from a perception that he was not a reliable friend of Israel’s. The events of last week will quiet those concerns, at least for a time. The President publicly endorsed Israel’s right to defend itself. The administration may have privately urged restraint; if so, none of those urgings were heard in public. The Obama administration allowed “no daylight” between itself and Israel on this issue — gaining new credibility for any future time it opts to apply pressure on the Netanyahu government.

Moving now to the mid-point of the tally — those who both gained and lost — we come to:

3) The Netanyahu government. Israel suffered human and economic losses from this utterly unnecessary conflict. However, it did put an end to the missile barrage without the need for a bloody ground war, and without provoking international odium. Benjamin Netanyahu continues his record as the most militarily cautious of Israeli prime ministers. He proceeds now to Israel’s January elections in a very strong position.

4) If Israel gained more than it lost, the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank lost more than it gained. Yet it still gained something. Its reputation for weakness and irrelevance may have been reinforced in Arab and Muslim eyes; its importance as a superior alternative to Hamas was enhanced in American and Israeli eyes. Look for measures in the months ahead to build up the Palestinian Authority’s prestige and support its economy.

Finally we come to the losers, plain and simple.

5) Iran. Iran has relied on Hamas and Hezbollah to retaliate against Israel should Israel ever strike Iran. The effectiveness of Israel’s “Iron Dome” missile-defence system opens questions about how potent the Hamas-Hezbollah second strike would be. It’s very doubtful that Israel does intend to attack Iran. But suddenly it seems more unlikely than ever that Iran would be able to fire back upon Israel if Israel did attack.

6) Hamas itself. Hamas fired one last rocket barrage as it signed the ceasefire, a symbolic act of defiance. Those Hamas leaders still alive may now do some chest-thumping about “resistance.” But the fact is, Hamas miscalculated this war in every possible way. Hamas expected to mobilize Egypt to support them. It did not. Hamas expected to do more damage to Israel. They failed. Hamas expected to compel the international community to do business with them. They are more of a pariah than ever.

Most serious of all for Hamas: They started this war when they attacked an Israeli mobile patrol, inside Israeli territory, on Nov. 10. This was a conflict of Hamas’ own choosing. It achieved absolutely nothing for them, while doing painful damage inside Gaza. If the scale of the damage was much less in 2012 than in 2008, that reflected Israel’s decision-making, not Hamas’ capabilities.

And now Hamas must worry about being upstaged and out-flanked by even more militant ultra-Islamist groups, which will accuse them of the same weakness and incompetence that they charge against the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas.

All of this makes them the war’s biggest loser — aside, that is, from the Palestinian people, who always lose as a result of their leaders’ bloody and reckless machinations.

Bringing things back to the most recent Gaza conflict, here is an interesting opinion piece by David Frum to which I largely agree with (shared with all the usual caveats).  To wit, Israel employed violence to meet its ends, which were aimed at neutering Hamas.  It seems that they may be on their way to achieving that.  Hamas, who hid out in Operation CAST LEAD as the Israelis killed the more radical Salafist groups, looks impotent to its more moderate opponents in the Palestinian Authority as well as to the die-hards in the more militant groups.

If the "Jews into the Sea" crowd within Gaza is fragmented amongst smaller factions while those seeking any sort of political solution begin to gravitate to the PA, then Israel is likely better off than it was at the beginning of the month.
 
I don't think Hamas is the loser here. The latest BBC article I read indicates Hamas got some serious concessions from Israel regarding to border Patrol. This could be playing right into Israel's hand since any violence on Israeli/Gaza border may come back to hunt Hamas.

Egypt can also put alot of pressure on Hamas now. I do think that for the next few years, we're going to see a period of peace between Israel and Hamas.  Not because they want it, but because they're both now under spotlight should either party attempt a cross border incursion. Hamas is likely going to align itself more with Egypt (the logical ally), and depart away from Iran/Hezboallah. Israel on the other hand may have gained some concessions from the US in regard to Iran.

In my opinion, Egypt came back as the only victor from this short conflict. Egypt president's latest power grab is a consequence of the saying to the victor goes the spoils. In all cases, I think this is the last such incident we will witness in some time. Nations are busy with regime changes, and there is no time or patience for Israel/Palestine skirmishes.
 
Part of the deal is for US special forces to go after the terrorists operating in the Sinai,which is supposed to cut the land routes to Gaza for arms smuggling.I havent seen any open source confirmation of this other than Debka. If true it would be something the Egyptians want as well as these terrorists have caused them serious problems and even threaten the Sinai Peacekeeping Force.
 
Everybody should prepare themselves for tomorrow.

We're either going to have a complete failure of the Israeli / Palestinian cease fire in Gaza and eruption of the West Bank and maybe Lebanon

OR

An awakening of the foretold Zombie Apocalypse.

Either way, we will soon know if Yasser Arafat was poisoned or not. They are going to dig him up tomorrow to run tests.

Prepare to bug out.
 
According to the Washington Post, Prime Minister Netanyahu will get some political support from an unlikley source: former foreign minister Tzipi Livni who has announced that she will return to politics and contest the upcoming elections as leader of a new party which, according to the article, "would aggressively pursue peace with the Palestinians ...[and add] ... another name to what already is a fractured centrist opposition."
 
Just a little factoid on Israel:




According to the CIA World Factbook:

Non Jews (mostly Arabs) make up 23.6% of the Israeli population.

Islam is practiced by 16.9% of the population
 
The world needs to tell Hamas, no more aid till you stop the rockets. hamas does not need to pay for the rockets or the cleanup so why would they stop?
 
Good opinion piece from Jonathan Kay over at the National Post (shared with the usual caveats):

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/11/20/jonathan-kay-how-israels-iron-dome-won-the-war/

Jonathan Kay: How Israel’s Iron Dome won the war
Jonathan Kay | Nov 20, 2012 11:06 AM ET

Egypt, the United States, the UN and various other international actors have been pushing hard for a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu is looking for a way to avoid a ground invasion, and likely would stick to a deal that puts an end to both Hamas rockets and Israeli air strikes on a simple quid pro quo basis. But Hamas is in a more complicated position: Its only currency in the region comes from its ideologically inflexible, openly terroristic opposition to the existence of the Jewish state. And so, in its rivalry with the Palestinian Authority, Hamas needs to show that its addiction to violence is bearing fruit.

But despite the spasm of Arab cheerleading that predictably has flared up during the actual fighting, Hamas hasn’t done much with its hundreds of launched rockets except kill three people in Kiryat Malachi — a rounding error on the number of Hamas fighters that Israel has killed. A mere ceasefire, at this point, will be seen, once the dust settles, as a Hamas defeat.

That is not the narrative that has dominated in the Western media, of course. Reporters have highlighted the “changing face” of the Middle East — what with Turkey, Qatar, Egypt and other Muslim nations expressing some measure of support for Hamas. Then again, reporters always like to recast this or that event as a watershed in the march of humanity. And it’s questionable how much really has changed. The million-strong pro-Palestinian marches in the vaunted “Arab Street” that we always are promised never seem to materialize. Moreover, the Hamas brand will continue to be problematic for Arab leaders, especially since Gaza is a spawn of terror in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula, not just in Israel.

During Gaza’s brief Palestinian civil war, recall, Hamas thugs killed pro-Fatah activists by throwing them out of windows. And this week, Hamas gunmen summarily executed a half dozen men alleged to be Israeli “collaborators” — with one of the bodies chained to a motorcycle and dragged through Gaza City. All of Hamas’ major weapons systems come through Iran, which has become a despised entity in the Sunni Arab world thanks to its support for Bashar Assad, the butcher of Damascus. Sound like the sort of fellows Mohammed Morsi wants to be surrounded with in a photo-op?

The 2006 Lebanon War, in which Hezbollah militia were able to inflict significant casualties on an Israeli invasion force, also was billed as a “victory” for Arab militants. Yet in hindsight, it was nothing of the kind. Much of Lebanon was smashed to smithereens, and many Lebanese citizens asked the simple question: “For what?” Hezbollah has been relatively well-behaved ever since, and has set off nary a firecracker during the current fighting. Deterrence sometimes works, it seems, even with terrorists. (At least, it sometimes works in the case of terrorists who control their own geographical enclave, seek out a popular constituency among local residents, and therefore have something to lose by initiating a nihilistic military confrontation that they have no hope of winning.)

In the war’s aftermath, Hamas will be left to survey a scene of wreckage in the Gaza Strip — all for nothing. Worse than nothing, because Hamas will have seen its missile stock either destroyed on the ground or squandered in largely useless attacks against Israel. Hamas munitions factories that took years to build were destroyed by Israeli bombs in days. The war will heighten Israel’s determination to prevent more Iranian missiles from entering Gaza, a project that already seems to have taken a muscular turn in Sudan.

One theory is that Hamas has won merely by demonstrating its ability to “strike fear” in the hearts of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem through its Fajr-5 missiles. But even this propaganda “victory” arguably was turned on its head by Israel’s deployment of Iron Dome — a mobile, locally-developed short-range air defense system. Iron Dome did not, and probably cannot, stop all incoming threats. But it did a good job stopping the missiles that were aimed at the most important urban targets. Indeed, it likely was thanks to the capabilities of Iron Dome that Israel has (thus far) been able to avoid a Gaza ground war: Had just one large missile landed in a populated portion of a major Israeli city, the pressure for an invasion would have been irresistible.

In Tel Aviv, in particular, the spectacle of Iron Dome intercepting an incoming missile actually created a massive morale boost for residents, many of whom truly were paralyzed by fear at the time. In some ways, it duplicated the inspiring experience that Londoners had when they saw British planes knocking Messerschmitts out of the air 72 years ago.

Iron Dome is a product of Israeli genius (Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, to be more precise). But it is also a fitting symbol of the Israeli spirit itself — being a groundbreaking work of high-tech engineering designed to save lives and protect property in one of the world’s most dangerous corners.

In Gaza, meanwhile, mothers and fathers are championing the Gaza spirit by encouraging their sons to go out and kill Jews any way they can.

Funny how people are different that way.

National Post
jkay@nationalpost.com

Students of strategy can draw a lot from this.  Hamas tried to use force to achieve its policies.  However, Hamas failed politically because it had a bad strategy that was easily countered by Israel.  Israel, on the other hand, used enough force (in a mostly defensive strategy) to achieve its ends.

In the end, all Hamas has to show for its efforts is a bunch of dead leaders, a stunted military capacity, Egypt giving it a bit of a cold shoulder and the world seeing your guys dragging corpses around the streets with motorcycles....

 
Infanteer said:
In the end, all Hamas has to show for its efforts is a bunch of dead leaders, a stunted military capacity, Egypt giving it a bit of a cold shoulder and the world seeing your guys dragging corpses around the streets with motorcycles....

They seem to be, however, blind to this perspective from what I've read of reaction and stories emanating from Gaza.  They seem to believe, they won more than they lost. 
 
Back
Top