Israeli Air Strike and Troop Movement In Gaza Right Now!!!

I've said it before and I'll say it again... we have a crisis fetish.

So Israel violated Syrian airspace. What could really come of it? An air skirmish between Syria and Israel? The Syrians know very well that wouldn't stand a chance, and they know equally well that Iran is powerless to help them without coming through Iraq, which would be no walk in the park, especially since this would be a war not initiated at the choosing of a prepared Arab coalition, but rather at Israels choosing, and responded to by an unprepared and hastily formed Muslim cluster****.

The worst case scenario that I would realistically worry about is that Israel bombs Syria, Syria retaliates on the ground in the Golan Heights and loses badly, Iran begins launching ballistic missiles at Israel, a good number of those get shot down, America starts airstrikes against Iran's missile sites, and in two weeks everyone's really mad at eachother but the shooting is over and everyone has decided that a ground war would be a bad idea.


Syria can't mount a serious ground war against Israel, Israel doesn't really want to invade Syria proper, Iran can't help on the ground without a lot of advanced warning and a lot of preparation (which they didn't get), and the Egyptians certainly aren't going to book passage on the Titanic and neither will the Jordanians.
As a ground war this thing is going to be a massive non-event.

The only contingency left to worry about really is Iran's willingness to try and shut down the Persian Gulf, and I doubt they'll do it without their nukes because the US won't let them ship to Russia and China then and nobody will have a leg to stand on in protest. So Iran can't screw us without screwing the security council members who are 1. keeping them safe. 2. arming them for the future.


Basically the apocalyptic panic here is based on the idea that the Iranians might be prepared to commit suicide for the benefit of a bunch of Sunni Arabs.



As for why Syria didn't make minced meat out of the IAF: In all probability they were firing SA-7s or ZSU-23-4s, which together make up the vast majority of Syria's air defense.

Why didn't Syria fire the vaunted SS-26 at the jets buzzing their capital? Because SS is a surface-to-surface designation! It's not an anti-aircraft weapon!
I got a great laugh out of this, so I read Debka's article to see if this was a reflection on Debka or merely on people who cite them as a reliable source. The mistake isn't Debka's. They repeatedly call it a surface missile.

Russia DID sell SA-10s to Syria, adding to the 55 launchers they have for SA-13s and SA-9s, but the vast majority of Syria's air defenses are fired from the shoulder or fire bullets rather than missiles.

Air defenses in general have fallen well behind airpower. The relatively unimpeded access that America has been able to gain in the skies of several nations in the past decade and a half make it pretty clear that at least in the low depth and density in which air defenses are normally employed by third world nations, they are not terribly dangerous.

So yes... Israel's F-16s have shields. lol

Thank you Vagabond! I love you. Many on this board are crisis junkies.

No sorry they do not have forcefields. I suppose I should have just mentioned the following:

SA-10 Grumble ground-to-air, and SA-18 Grouse (Igla 9K38) shoulder-launched anti-air missiles capable of hitting objects at an altitude of 3,600 meters and range of 5,200 meters.

Which was at the very end of it.

Of course given the SS-26's range of 400km, launched from the Golan Heights area thats puts all of Israel within range. If they decided to follow Israels example in a war, even with the limited number of SS-26's they could incapacitate all of Israels power plants. Or perhaps they would decide to attack and destroy all of the jets and airfields of the Israeli airforce. That would be irrelevant of course I am sure big brother would just donate another fleet of jets in a goodwill gesture.

The United States and NATO have code-named the Iskander SS-26 “Stone.” They have nothing in their missile arsenal to match its unique attributes.

Point being, F-16's do not have forcefields, war is bad, everyone has weapons to fight everyone. Civilians always suffer the worst of it. Israel does not need to be threatening Syria, especially at this time.

Israel is just using the excuse of the kiddnapped soldier to regain control over the Gaza Strip.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
So Israel violated Syrian airspace. What could really come of it? An air skirmish between Syria and Israel?

Consider though, what happens if that is going on and at the same time US forces on the vague Iraq-Syria border engage in fire with foreign insurgents.

If we are expereincing "crisis fetish" (i like that, I think its true to a degree too), then imagine what the average syrian will be thinking.

At the same time, there is a question of it turning into a 'war' between Israel and the Occupied Territories, which, is kind of an odd thing to say, since they're, well, occupied.

The Syrians know very well that wouldn't stand a

The iranian leadership seems to be rather apocalyptic in its thinking, and might not care if they don't stand a chance. Assad, however, is more unusual. He is not a fundamentalist muslim, by any means, infact, in many parts of the muslim world, his sect wasn't even considered to be truly muslim. They are called Al-awis, sometimes Nosairii, their religion is extremely esoteric, sort of like the sufis some have said.
Anyway, so, yes, we don't know what he'd do, and can't figure that he'd just 'press the trigger and shout Allahu Akbar!".

stumason
Why give them a "special" name? They're Israeli.

At this point, I really can't stop myself. I don't know where the heck I got it, but, its stuck.

and called on the United Nations to step in to prevent an escalation in violence.

Why the heck do they think that the UN is ever going to get involved? The last time the UN had muscles, it gave the land to the yehudis.

semiazas
I didn't know that the kidnapping of an Israeli was the same as attacking Israel.

Really, you didn't know that? I mean, clearly, attacking isreali civilians, israeli military outposts, and capturing israeli soldiers, is attacking israel.

also didn't know that offensively moving forces into Gaza Strip was a defensive move.

Really? The best defense is a good offense, its an old one, from the book. When someone attacks you, you don't stop fighting back merely because they've run back into their homeland. You invade their homeland.

TPL
i wonder when someone will hit the brakes.

Why should anyone try to stop this? The yehudis had the palestinians, the palestinians hate the yehudis, so let them go to war if they want too. The palestinians have the right to try to take that land back through war, and the yehudis have the right to control the territory they've come to occupy through conquest.

dyepes
. If they decided to follow Israels example in a war, even with the limited number of SS-26's they could incapacitate all of Israels power plants.

This ignores that fact that there wouldn't by any syrian government in damascus if the yehudis followed the palestinians example, they're be a yehudi one. From the nile to the jordan to the orontes to the tigris-euphrates.
The israelis reserve their force and cocentrate it on combatants, the palestinians are throwing everything they have at the israelis. Imagine if they did the same?

Point being, F-16's do not have forcefields

Point being, Assad's junta didn't try to shoot down the jets, because they couldn't, not because they were such pacifists that they figured it was best to let the jets fly over their offices and risk a bombing.

The only thing getting close to hitting any sort of tipping point is the basically unchecked hysteria of many posters in this thread...

It almost sounds like some of you guys want to see the various parties mix it up.

Ain't going to happen.



The only nation with any real muscle and currently semi-hostile intentions and launch areas are the Syrians. And they are still seriously smarting from the last time they got the butts kicked by the Israeli Air Force...

The so called Bekaa Valley conflict.

I'm not saying the Israeli Air Force is really good, but they took out the Syrian with F4s doing barrel rolls mit afterburner and lit the Migs up using cannon... As in up close AND personal... and of course, klank! klank!

Some of you guys are whining about the Israelis supposedly being SO dependent on the USA... You guys might want to update your info. The Israelis are seriously bleeding edge these days, not to mention net exporters of military hardware.

But here is the really relevant point... Russia is not in a position to basically write blank checks/supply entire mechanized divisions like in the good ole Soviet Union days.

This confrontation is so low grade, the 'news cycle' must be starved to rate anything more that a passing mention.

Originally posted by golemina
Some of you guys are whining about the Israelis supposedly being SO dependent on the USA... You guys might want to update your info. The Israelis are seriously bleeding edge these days, not to mention net exporters of military hardware.

Golemina
If it wasn't for the benevolence and tax dollars from the citizens of the USA as well as the jews of Europe, Israel would be nothing. Don't be so cocky as to think that Israel is so self sufficient that it achieved everything it did without the help of others.
If you actually think that small country got so rich on its own you are sorely mistaken. Like so many people like to say....when they got there it was nothing much more then Olive groves and dirt. Their main thing were Pilgrims from all religions in the tourist industry as well. I myself would like to see a big cutback in the 4Billion they recieve every year. It could go towards our Veterans or to our Pensioners for social security. Both of whom got big cutbacks this year. Especially since Israel is doing so well financially.

Don't you think it would be fair to say that no country is an economic island onto itself?

As 'countries' go in terms of having their hands out... How would you rate Israel vs 'Palestine'?

There are a lot of Israeli exports. Maybe you can correct me, but what is it exactly that 'Palestinians' export besides terrorism?

Late addition:

And one last thing... What relevance does Israel receiving foreign aid from the USA have to anything?

[edit on 29-6-2006 by golemina]

golemia, just so you know. unlike in the days of USSR, Russia actually has money, strating after 2000 ofcourse sine the 90's were a crisis. Please realize the fact that Russia is no longer a broken world power it was after the colapse of the soviet union. Plus it won't need to suply seria with cash or spend it's own cash for building them weapons. Russia's armory stock has built up to such hights during the cold war they literaly have divisions to spare. And that is where your relevent comment crumbles.

i'm not supporting a side but do understand that it's all about how you look at it; terrorist or freedom fighter. Example; during russian-afgan war the mujahadin were brave freedom fighters, now they are dangerous terrorists. Israel "retaliates by terminating terorist groups in palestine", palestine "commits acts of terror on Israely women and children on Israely soil". So weather it is terrorism they export or not is only your point of view.

It is true though that palestine is screwed and is probably not gonna get out of this one. I really doubt their will to fight for this goverment and we've seen what it was like in the past when the 2 countries met on the battlefield. As it was said befor, Israel has the back of the big brother. They're safe as ever right where they are even if palestine had a proper military.

[edit on 29-6-2006 by Spets]

Events in the last few years... such as in Chechnya... would seem to conflict with the views you expressed.

Do you have any visibility on the hardware the Soviets sent to the old Soviet 'client states'? I can flat out guarantee, Russia simply isn't capable of coming anywhere near matching those numbers.

If that wasn't bad enough... If you remember Gulf War I, the then Soviet state of the art hardware was simply shredded with ease by the then new generation of tech gear in the field by the US.

It was a huge loss of face to have their gear give such a dismal performance... Amounting to little more than target practice of 'Ally' aircraft.

Some people have speculated that it was the prospect of needing to retool its entire mechanized arsenals of the then worlds largest mechanized forces than was the straw that broke the Soviets financial backs.

The point being... where is Russia in that 'retooling' effort?

[edit on 29-6-2006 by golemina]

Originally posted by golemina

There are a lot of Israeli exports. Maybe you can correct me, but what is it exactly that 'Palestinians' export besides terrorism?

Late addition:

And one last thing... What relevance does Israel receiving foreign aid from the USA have to anything?

[edit on 29-6-2006 by golemina]

Well Palestine formed an Association of Free Trade Olive Oil distributors...which of course has been destroyed due to the fact that a huge wall just happened to land in between the groves and the farmers. Olive Oil happens to be a great commodity and is used in foods throughout the world. Israel is working on taking that away from them too though.
If they have survived almost 50 years of being underfoot of a band of tyrants, I am fully confident that once the World helps to free these people from the oppression of the israeli government and businesses that they will become self-sufficient even faster then their neighbors. Being that they are friendly with their Arab neighbors they will have easier and cheaper access to resources such as Petroleum and Gas once they are free from the grips of the Israeli thugs that force them to buy everything they need from them at double the price.


I dunno what the relevance is..you are the one spouting off about Israel not being dependent on the USA. Once the israeli government tells America we no longer need your financial aid,thanks for all the help, thats when you can say they are not dependent on the USA. Until that time, its an insult to say otherwise.

Originally posted by golemina

There are a lot of Israeli exports. Maybe you can correct me, but what is it exactly that 'Palestinians' export besides terrorism?

And one last thing... What relevance does Israel receiving foreign aid from the USA have to anything?

[edit on 29-6-2006 by golemina]

In answer to your first question, Palestine did have valuable exports of various fruits and foodstuffs. Made them alot of money until the Israelis pulled up all the groves and orchards. Tourism could be a big earner too if they stopped the fighting.

The relevance of Israel recieving foreign aid is that they too would have next to nothing without the money. Their army would be small and inneffective, their Government would be poor. Israel is hardly the land of plenty and without the USA paying them billions every year, they wouldn't be any better off than other countries in the region.

Golemina
I also wanted to add that Israel also has the luxury of American Jews visiting Israel merely to help out working on the Kibuttzim in order to grow and harvest those things they export...can you say the same thing for palestinians? Are the Palestinians outside of the country allowed to go back INTO palestine and help them to rebuild and grow things? I don't think so. You are trying to compare Israel versus a people who are being purposefully oppressed. It must be nice to be able to tell an ant that you are better then him while he sits under your foot.

I'm not trying to start anything...

The point I was making is that 'Palestine' is basically a beggar state and it's not even able to feed it's own population.

Do you have any numbers/sources on the actual exports? I don't have any credible sources for that type info. I know they supposedly took over some commercial greenhouses when the Israelis vacated Gaza.

It would be interesting to see if they were able to make a commercial success of an established agriculture business.

The answer to that question would be a good indicator of a future 'Palestinian' success.

As to Israel, drying up without USA aid... that is your basic fairy tale. The Israelis are simply the most enterprising people on the face of the planet.

In a happy face world... there would be more than enough money to go around/happy ending for all from tourism.

In a cruel cruel cruel joke... the 'Palestinians' think they are going to win some kind of war of attrition... The truth is they have to be the worst warriors ever seen on the face of the planet.

golemina, i totaly agree with you on chechnya first of all. And in general it was a retarted attemp by a nearly always drunk yeltsin to maintain the image of a world power that had vanished (the USSR).

however about the gulf war... I'd prefer to put it this way: I can give a monkey (not calling iraqi's monkeys) an ak-47 but weather he will use it properly or not is an obvious answer. The worst an M1A1 Abrams faced in the iraqi deserts was a burried T-72 used as a turret. WOW! that's a real tank batle, what a chalange. plus it wasn't the latest russian tech. The russian army had T-80s by then in it's ranks. The Iraqi MIG29 pilots had hardly (if any) flight exp. That was a big chalenge for the USAF wasn't it. Then there was the Iraqi morale, laughable compared to that of the russian soldier as previous global conflicts showed. "Shreded", yes, by the USAF, mind you the US never fought a conflict without having total air superiority, and as the latest air combat training showed in india; the legendary US F-15s against Indain (russian built) SU-30s was a huge disgrace for the USAF, the pentagon went on to declare they hardly had any fighters which could maintain air superiority against the SU series (there's your answer for "where is russia's retooling effort"). Yhea, that right there should sum it up about ally aircraft. And if you did your history homework it wasn't the mechanized funds that broke the Soviets backs, it was the space race.


edit* why do people always think that since iraq had "state of the art" russian technlogy it was stronger or had a chance? it's not like it's a self operating system in a tank that only requires you to flip the on and off switch.
[edit on 29-6-2006 by Spets]

[edit on 29-6-2006 by Spets]

Originally posted by golemina
I'm not trying to start anything...

The point I was making is that 'Palestine' is basically a beggar state and it's not even able to feed it's own population.

Do you have any numbers/sources on the actual exports? I don't have any credible sources for that type info. I know they supposedly took over some commercial greenhouses when the Israelis vacated Gaza.

It would be interesting to see if they were able to make a commercial success of an established agriculture business.

The answer to that question would be a good indicator of a future 'Palestinian' success.

As to Israel, drying up without USA aid... that is your basic fairy tale. The Israelis are simply the most enterprising people on the face of the planet.

In a happy face world... there would be more than enough money to go around/happy ending for all from tourism.

In a cruel cruel cruel joke... the 'Palestinians' think they are going to win some kind of war of attrition... The truth is they have to be the worst warriors ever seen on the face of the planet.

first of all, isreal won't be ther if it wasn't for the US, what happend when israel declared independance? wasn't that aid from US side? oh and yhea, ofcourse palestine is doing horribly with their econ, they had half their land stolen from them, and their homes taken away. After that whatever they tried to build up was constantly hammered on by Israel.

Forgot to say that the land taken from them took away their ports, and that my friend is a vital asset of economy for any country =)


By the way, you can talk about the palestinians being the worst warriors on the planet but their cause in this conflict is (in my opinion) much more justified then israels. If i came to your land with this huge strong guy standing behind me and told you to give me a part (if not all) of your land, wouldn't you fight for it? I know i would. I would give my life for my land and country.
[edit on 29-6-2006 by Spets]

[edit on 29-6-2006 by Spets]

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Golemina
I also wanted to add that Israel also has the luxury of American Jews visiting Israel merely to help out working on the Kibuttzim in order to grow and harvest those things they export...can you say the same thing for palestinians? Are the Palestinians outside of the country allowed to go back INTO palestine and help them to rebuild and grow things? I don't think so. You are trying to compare Israel versus a people who are being purposefully oppressed. It must be nice to be able to tell an ant that you are better then him while he sits under your foot.

Golden words pieman, well put.

Originally posted by golemina
The point I was making is that 'Palestine' is basically a beggar state and it's not even able to feed it's own population.

Yes beggars being fed upon by the Carrions that suck them dry.

I know they supposedly took over some commercial greenhouses when the Israelis vacated Gaza.

The few that the settlers didn't burn on the way out.

It would be interesting to see if they were able to make a commercial success of an established agriculture business.

Yeah it would be if only they had easy access to the farms AND if they had open access to roads, gas, machinery, electricity and money.

As to Israel, drying up without USA aid... that is your basic fairy tale. The Israelis are simply the most enterprising people on the face of the planet.

You are saying that now. I wish you would have tried saying that years ago before we built them up, and before they got all this weaponry and defensive things that cost lots of money for free or at surplus prices by the sweat of American laborers. Including hard working arab-americans (Palestinian Americans included).
I'd like to remind you of the old saying..never burn your bridges behind you.

Originally posted by DYepes
No sorry they do not have forcefields. I suppose I should have just mentioned the following:

SA-10 Grumble ground-to-air, and SA-18 Grouse (Igla 9K38) shoulder-launched anti-air missiles capable of hitting objects at an altitude of 3,600 meters and range of 5,200 meters.

Which was at the very end of it.

Gee you'd almost think that I'd missed that. But nope, I mentioned the SA-10s. I omitted Igla because it's just another shoulder-fired spitwad in Syria's vast arsenal of tactical spitwads; just a new version of the SA-7 that Syria already has about 4000 of according to GlobalSecurity. They're great for force protection but as a strategic air defense...?

How about a few threat assessments on the SA-18:
India Daily

According to international think tanks, these missiles are deadly but are not real threats against Israeli or US Air Force planes.

Global Security
It has a 24% Kill probability against electro-optic countermeasures.

It can engage targets within 5.2 kilometers- at maximum speed, an F-16 would be in range from the front and out of range from the back in roughly 20 seconds, but the missile has a setup time of 13 seconds.

It has a ceiling of 3,500 meters. The F-16 has a rate of climb of 255m/s, meaning it can be out of that missiles effective altitude in about 13.7 seconds, meaning that you get one shot at the F-16 even if you are johnny on the spot when he comes in range. F-16 Specs

SA-18 is for helicopters and transport aircraft, not jets.

That leaves the SA-10s; somewhat substandard (bigger and heavier) clones of the early Patriot. Too bad the story is so vague. I'd be fascinated to know how many of these they have, and exactly what version. Afterall, depending on what radar and what missile you're using, your tracking range is anywhere from 100-200km and your firing range can vary between 40 kilometers and 200. Big differences there.

The only real question, considering Syria's buying power, is how many shots the SA-10s will get off before Israel blows them all up, and the answer to that question is quite open since Debka put out a nice vague, ominous sounding story. China only bought 4 batteries, meaning 36 launchers. India bought 6. Considering Syria's financial standing and the low level of previous purchases, not to mention their decision to suppliment with SA-18, i think between 9 and 18 launchers is a safe bet. You can't effectively protect too much territory with two batteries, especially if they aren't the top-notch, longer ranged version.

Of course given the SS-26's range of 400km, launched from the Golan Heights area thats puts all of Israel within range.

300km or less for the export version actually. NTI

Granted they'd get a few shots in, fine strategic weapon, but it's not going to win a war for you. At the end of the day, Syria might blow up a powerplant here and a bridge there, but with the vast majority of their mechanized forces being 60s vintage, they haven't got a prayer in hell of fighting a manuever campaign with Israel, which means that their going to get butchered on the ground and end up paying Israel pretty much whatever reparations Israel sees fit to demand for those power plants.

Or perhaps they would decide to attack and destroy all of the jets and airfields of the Israeli airforce.

Um, do you have any idea how many 500kg warheads it would take to destroy the Isreali airforce? Syria doesn't even have wet dreams about owning that many Iskanders.

Point being, F-16's do not have forcefields

I strongly doubt that this monument to all no-duh statements is your point. You're one of those types that likes to be the doomsayer for just about anybody who thinks about going to war. You can't stand the notion that a war could be won, for any reason, so whenever somebody contemplates an attack you strain for bad news against all reality.

war is bad,

Ah, there's your point. I agree. And as I've already said, I'm just as down on Isreali citizens as I am on Palestinian ones for failing to beat that sensible notion into their government's head. That being said, since your bad news for Israel does stand in stark contrast to all reality, it would behoove the Palestinians to be the better men here and demand that their government be the first to remove the plank from its eye. Maybe then the religious right here in the US will nolonger find itself able to stomach the notion of supporting Israel's policies towards them. Hell, we may even step in and save theirs butts as a PR stunt if they'd just be big enough to make the first sincere move towards peace, and I'd think that was a great idea for everyone.