***Israel Planning Tactical Nuclear Attack***

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster

It is easy to kill civilians when you are giving the order behind a desk. Just sign off on it. It is also easy to give the order when your troops are being fired on from an apartment building and the only way to take out the enemy is to bomb it. The only thing that goes on in one's head during a conflict like that is to live. Why risks your lives when you can just call in an airstrike?

remember both sides used weapons that were not guided. Israel used artillery to pound villages. Hezbollah used rockets. Nobody is > than anyone in this battle. They both acted in the same manner.

The blame on civilian casualties lies with the party that borough them into the war by using civilian infrastructure for military operations. That means if Hezbullah launches Mortars from a schoolhouse roof, Israel has every right to return fire in that direction. If school children are killed it is Hezbollah's fault. Given this Israel still fights wars very precisely.

Israel used guided weapons specific structures. On the contrary the Hezbollah launched rockets into civilian areas.

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Did you realize if Israel even tried that, it wouldve had a handful of countries declaring war on it?

Do you realize that they tried this many times before and failed.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2006/060725-israeli-airpower.htm

Israeli Air Power Dominates Middle East
In-Depth Coverage

By Jeffrey Young

Israel's air force is second to none among the countries in the Middle East, enabling the state to project power throughout the region.

When a nation is small and surrounded by states that have waged war against it in the past, a sharply honed air force is a vital security asset and a means of deterrence. In major conflicts like the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israeli Wars, Israel's air force demonstrated daring and capability. And today, many analysts say Israel's air power can be projected far beyond the skies of Lebanon, where it is currently operating nearly without challenge.

Technical Superiority

Jane's Information Group is a leading source of information on nations and their military power. One of its divisions is Jane's Country Risk, whose Middle East Editor, David Hartwell, puts Israel's air force at the top.

"The Israeli air force is certainly the best in the region. It's one of the best in the world. They have the equipment. They have the technical know-how. They have the tactics. Israel possesses a full range of guided weapons. They certainly have radar-guided missiles, laser-guided missiles and TV-guided missiles as well. So they possess a full range of capabilities," says Hartwell.

Hartwell and other military analysts say that this edge has enabled Israel's air force to engage and defeat much larger adversaries. It has also emboldened Israel to take dramatic actions.

Lessons of Operation Opera

One such mission took place in June, 1981. Eight Israeli F-16 attack jets, protected by six F-15 fighters, streaked eleven-hundred kilometers across Jordan and Saudi Arabia to bomb Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in Operation Opera. The strike foiled Baghdad's efforts to develop nuclear weapons, which Israeli leaders considered to be a deadly threat.

Alex Bigham at the non-governmental Foreign Policy Centre in London says that today, Israel remains willing to act decisively.

"Clearly, the experience of the bombing of Osirak in Iraq, the nuclear program there, shows that Israel is prepared to take unilateral action against what it sees as threats to its security," says Bigham.

The Israeli warplanes that flew the 1981 Osirak mission operated close to the limits of their range. John Pike, head of the Washington-based military analysis firm GlobalSecurity.org, says Israel now has special aircraft that can reach another country with nuclear weapons ambitions.

"The Israeli F-15 and F-16 fighter-bombers have one important difference from their American counterparts. They're fitted with very large fuel tanks that enable both of these aircraft to fly unrefueled all the way from Israel to Iran and back. So it's clear that the Israelis have been laying the groundwork that would enable them to strike W.M.D. [i.e., weapons of mass destruction] facilities in Iran," says Pike.

Iran has repeatedly defied calls by the United Nations and the international community to stop trying to build an atomic arsenal. Additionally, Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for Israel's destruction.

The Sunday Times newspaper in London reported last year that because of these factors, then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon gave preliminary approval for a military strike against Iran if it did not end its nuclear program. Israel denied that such approval had been given. In the United States, former C.I.A. Director James Woolsey is one of several analysts calling for the destruction of Iran's nuclear facilities.

Targets in Iran

But David Hartwell at Jane's Country Risk says taking out Iran's nuclear program would be far more complicated than the 1981 attack on Iraq.

"Osirak was very, very simple. It was a very clear-cut target [and] very easy to knock out. To do that in Iran would be very, very difficult given the number of targets. You've got something like 20 [targets] all over Iran. So the Israelis would have to inflict enough damage in one strike to disable the Iranian nuclear program," says Hartwell.

Many analysts say Iran's nuclear reactor at Bushehr on the Persian Gulf coast and Esfahan, where uranium enrichment is believed to be taking place, would be top targets. Many military analysts say Iran is putting its nuclear weapons research facilities in hardened underground bunkers. But those analysts say that Israel has deep penetration "bunker buster" bombs capable of destroying such targets.

While Israel may have the aircraft and weapons to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, Michael O'Hanlon at The Brookings Institution in Washington says getting there would be anything but simple.

"It's not a question of just measuring the mileage from Israel to Iran. They're not going to get permission from Saudi Arabia, I don't think. Going over Jordan is complicated. They can try to sneak through Syrian airspace and then go through Iraqi airspace, and perhaps they would be prepared to do that. But when you think through all of the specifics here, I believe the Red Sea route would be the best. But it would be a huge detour," says O'Hanlon.

While such a route would be through international airspace, the long distance over the Red Sea, around the Arabian Peninsula and up into the Persian Gulf would require aerial refueling of attack aircraft to complete the mission. But such a route would provide the greatest measure of surprise, reducing Iran's ability to defend itself.

And Ivan Ulrich at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington says Tehran could not mount much of a defense.

"On paper, the Iranians have a lot of advanced fighter planes. But they're having problems with spare parts [i.e. to keep those planes flying]. So I don't think that there would be a robust defense from aircraft. They do also have surface-to-air missiles. Most of them are out-of-date, and probably could be jammed with modern technology," says Urlich.

Israel's ability to project its air power is the greatest it has ever been. And many analysts say the Israeli air force has become an even stronger deterrent to aggression by other states, as well as a means to strike pre-emptively in the face of what Israel sees as grave threats.


Hope that clears things up. If they did it ti Iraq They'll do it to Iran

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster


Uhm.. I clearly pointed out how they cannot strike Iran without the help of the U.S.

You are clearly wrong

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2006/060725-israeli-airpower.htm

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster
[
Arabs are a lot more advanced than they were back then.
I believe they have hundreds of thousands of artillery/rockets/missiles that could hit Israel and cause massive destruction.

Any war Israel and the Arabs face will be a deadly one for everyone.
Exactly why Israel built the bomb.

Actually, they are not. They are armed with soviet scrap metal that can merely scratch Israeli equipment. The rockets they have are usless against military targets. They can only use them on civilians.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

Google it.

yes because Israel's tank have proven to be great against roadside bombs and Russian post-1989 RPGs.

Wait, no they haven't.
No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

You can go ahead and blame Russian tech.

And what does that have to do with your original statement?
Nice attempt at back pedaling.

Because tanks are useless fighting masses of people, especially people hidden in apartment buildings.

Put a fleet of tanks in the middle of a city filled with an anti-tank teams and it will be easy target practice for them.

Insurgents are known for roadside bombs. They will fill the place up with them knocking out tank after tank.

Lucky for the U.S, the insurgency has ****** weapons. Not lucky for Israel that the insurgency/Hezbollah has weapons and stockpiles of them to take out their tanks.

Israel's tank is made to go against other tanks. It has a thick armor plate, but that isnt going to stop it from an rpg or a bomb. It is made to stop rpgs that groups such as the Palestinians have. Hezbollah was armed with weapons they were not supposed to have.
Israel's tank force is also perfect against an army of soldiers carrying the basic M16/A-47.

-
As far as where Hezbollah was firing their rockets from, all over. They were mostly firing them from inside the woods and then running away back into the cities. Sometimes they put the launchers on top of a hill so the rockets could go further.
Yes Hezbollah was hiding in the cities and this is why Israel surrounded the cities instead of entering them.
Israel occupied villages that were easy to grab. Israel did not enter the main cities because if you look at what I said above it would have been deadly.
Exactly why Israel bombed the living ****** out of the buildings I showed you.

Now the moral question is, did Israel do the right thing in bombing those cities to save the lives of their soldiers while risking/killing civilians in the process?

The main deaths for both Hezbollah and Israeli forces happened at the frontline. The frontline is mostly green areas. If you look at Hezbollah training videos you will see exactly what the front looks like. Filled with hills, grass, and trees. The areas that don't have the green have a lot of dirt.

I said Merkava tank is more adept at urban warfare than an M1 Abrams tank.
I never said tanks in general are effective in urban warfare.

Learn how to read plz.
k thx.

Reading Wiki (for basic knowledge) and Jane's Defense Weekly on how much more effective a Merkava is over an Abrams would certainly be a good start for you since it appears your knowledge on this area is limited.

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster

No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

Wrong again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62jzAupr044

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Originally posted by: Aimster
I The rocket launchers obviously were not stationed there and no rpgs could be fired from those positions.

...and you know this how?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster

No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

Wrong again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62jzAupr044

to be fair, they're still not "unstoppable".... but, they will be very damn close to unstoppable against standard AT weapons! That TROPHY system is incredible!

I just wish our hummers had that system...

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
I'm talking about areas such as this:
http://www.habeeb.com/images/lebanon.ph...rut.war.photos/beirut.war.2006.001.jpg

Em........ still, a shot from the ground of what? A single building taken out?
I already said that one multi-story building will yield lots of rubble, but that doesn't mean the entire block was taken out; as we can see, the buildings in the area are still standing.
Seems pretty surgical to me.

You should really let go all that talk about ground fighting and RPG -- that happened mostly in the south. You aren't proving anything by claiming that since there was no ground fighting in Beirut, then that means there weren't any valid targets there.

So, any aerial photos of wholesale destruction?
Images with cute girls don't lend your arguments much credibility.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster

It is easy to kill civilians when you are giving the order behind a desk. Just sign off on it. It is also easy to give the order when your troops are being fired on from an apartment building and the only way to take out the enemy is to bomb it. The only thing that goes on in one's head during a conflict like that is to live. Why risks your lives when you can just call in an airstrike?

remember both sides used weapons that were not guided. Israel used artillery to pound villages. Hezbollah used rockets. Nobody is > than anyone in this battle. They both acted in the same manner.

The blame on civilian casualties lies with the party that borough them into the war by using civilian infrastructure for military operations. That means if Hezbullah launches Mortars from a schoolhouse roof, Israel has every right to return fire in that direction. If school children are killed it is Hezbollah's fault. Given this Israel still fights wars very precisely.

Israel used guided weapons specific structures. On the contrary the Hezbollah launched rockets into civilian areas.

uhm artillery is not guided ... and Israel used plenty of that

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster
[
Arabs are a lot more advanced than they were back then.
I believe they have hundreds of thousands of artillery/rockets/missiles that could hit Israel and cause massive destruction.

Any war Israel and the Arabs face will be a deadly one for everyone.
Exactly why Israel built the bomb.

Actually, they are not. They are armed with soviet scrap metal that can merely scratch Israeli equipment. The rockets they have are usless against military targets. They can only use them on civilians.

uhm ...

Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Jordan?

They are not armed with soviet crap.

UAE has the same aircraft Israel has.

I am sure Kuwait and Qatar have advanced weapons as well.

So stop BSn around.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

Google it.

yes because Israel's tank have proven to be great against roadside bombs and Russian post-1989 RPGs.

Wait, no they haven't.
No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

You can go ahead and blame Russian tech.

And what does that have to do with your original statement?
Nice attempt at back pedaling.

Because tanks are useless fighting masses of people, especially people hidden in apartment buildings.

Put a fleet of tanks in the middle of a city filled with an anti-tank teams and it will be easy target practice for them.

Insurgents are known for roadside bombs. They will fill the place up with them knocking out tank after tank.

Lucky for the U.S, the insurgency has ****** weapons. Not lucky for Israel that the insurgency/Hezbollah has weapons and stockpiles of them to take out their tanks.

Israel's tank is made to go against other tanks. It has a thick armor plate, but that isnt going to stop it from an rpg or a bomb. It is made to stop rpgs that groups such as the Palestinians have. Hezbollah was armed with weapons they were not supposed to have.
Israel's tank force is also perfect against an army of soldiers carrying the basic M16/A-47.

-
As far as where Hezbollah was firing their rockets from, all over. They were mostly firing them from inside the woods and then running away back into the cities. Sometimes they put the launchers on top of a hill so the rockets could go further.
Yes Hezbollah was hiding in the cities and this is why Israel surrounded the cities instead of entering them.
Israel occupied villages that were easy to grab. Israel did not enter the main cities because if you look at what I said above it would have been deadly.
Exactly why Israel bombed the living ****** out of the buildings I showed you.

Now the moral question is, did Israel do the right thing in bombing those cities to save the lives of their soldiers while risking/killing civilians in the process?

The main deaths for both Hezbollah and Israeli forces happened at the frontline. The frontline is mostly green areas. If you look at Hezbollah training videos you will see exactly what the front looks like. Filled with hills, grass, and trees. The areas that don't have the green have a lot of dirt.

I said Merkava tank is more adept at urban warfare than an M1 Abrams tank.
I never said tanks in general are effective in urban warfare.

Learn how to read plz.
k thx.

Reading Wiki (for basic knowledge) and Jane's Defense Weekly on how much more effective a Merkava is over an Abrams would certainly be a good start for you since it appears your knowledge on this area is limited.

It appears you lack common sense.

There is ZERO advantage a Merkava tank has in a city filled with anti-tank teams over a M1 Abram tank.

What the Merkava is invisible? Amazing.

If you want to share what advantage it has then share it. Otherwise stop rambling on without posting a single fact or scenario.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: Aimster
I'm talking about areas such as this:
http://www.habeeb.com/images/lebanon.ph...rut.war.photos/beirut.war.2006.001.jpg

Em........ still, a shot from the ground of what? A single building taken out?
I already said that one multi-story building will yield lots of rubble, but that doesn't mean the entire block was taken out; as we can see, the buildings in the area are still standing.
Seems pretty surgical to me.

You should really let go all that talk about ground fighting and RPG -- that happened mostly in the south. You aren't proving anything by claiming that since there was no ground fighting in Beirut, then that means there weren't any valid targets there.

So, any aerial photos of wholesale destruction?
Images with cute girls don't lend your arguments much credibility.

So if there is no fighting coming from an apartment building , it is OK to bomb it.

Excellent.
You already said you wish all Arabs dead in a previous thread where someone quoted you so your view is not important to me.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster
I The rocket launchers obviously were not stationed there and no rpgs could be fired from those positions.

...and you know this how?

Because no Israeli forces were in that city fighting?

What were they doing? Sitting in their bedroom pointing a rocket launcher outside their window at Israeli forces miles away? Did they somehow guide that missile around all the other buildings and give it wings to fly further?

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

-smaller size means better ability to maneuver in tight streets.
-top-secret alloy armor to better withstand anti-tank missile attacks.
-Rear exit to allow easier troop deployment.

yes, I'm talking about the Merkava tanks. Israel actually launched a separate mission to retrieve a piece of Merkava armor that fell off in Lebanon - thats how important that secret is. The Merkava MK4 is the only tank in the world that is capable of shooting down helicopters

Yeah I am sure a Merkva tank is going to survive if it is hit directly head on by a post-soviet era RPG.
Sorry to hurt your feelings but if the insurgents hit it that special spot it will destroy the tank and the crew.

If a roadside bomb hits any tank, well good-bye.

You make it sound as if the Merkva is some unstoppable tank.
There is no such thing as an unstoppable tank.

Look at what happened inside Lebanon. There are pictures of Merkva tanks destroyed.
They were hit by that Soviet crap you like to talk about. In fact the technology was developed in 1989.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz
"People keep thinking Israel is a great military power that can go up against these insurgent groups, especially when these groups are armed with advanced weapons."

Hezbullah was launching rockets into civilian areas because that all they can use those rockets against. If Israel and the hezbullah would play by the same rules there would be no hezbullah.

...but just as a side note the Israeli's are the best at urban warfare. They have very few civilian casualties in regard to the circumstances.

...of course all this is irrelevant because Israel is not planning to have urban warefare with Iran they just want to drop bombs on specific sites. If that happens all Iran can do cry about it.

Did you not look at pictures of southern lebanon?

If you are going to defend Israel and make it sound great at least bring up something else.
Israel pounded the South of Lebanon and demolished all the buildings. Apartment buildings.

If your defense is "Israel told the Lebanese to leave" well then why is it not fair to say "The Israelis knew Hezbollah was going to pound them so they should have left too"?

Your claim that Israel is the best in urban warefare is based on Israel occupying Palestinians with weapons that suck when it comes to Israeli soldiers in their armored cars.
The United States is the best.
& If you honestly think Israel can occupy a country with a population of 70 million people then you are living in a fantasy world. For example, Egypt.

Israel did not bomb building randomly. They bombed the ones that were being used by the Hezbollah to store rockets launchers in underground parking lots. a lot of the buildings are constructed with underground paring lots where the Hezbullah can hide rocket launchers. They did this, you can find plenty of videos on YouTube.

I never said Israel could occupy Iran, it doesn't want to it just wants to bomb some specific sites and it can do this very easily.

I say Israel is good at urban warfare because they accomplish their task with minimal civilian casualties.

Ok,
Hezbollah parked their rocket launchers inside Beirut.

When they wanted to use them they took them out of the parking garage and then honked their horn in traffic for people to move so they could send the launchers to the south

thanks for the information.

Tehran is 2000km away from Israel. Explain to me how Israel is going to get there.
FLY? Fly what? An alien spaceship?

 

[KurskKnyaz]

I know artillery is not guided. I said they used guided weapons also.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster
[
Arabs are a lot more advanced than they were back then.
I believe they have hundreds of thousands of artillery/rockets/missiles that could hit Israel and cause massive destruction.

Any war Israel and the Arabs face will be a deadly one for everyone.
Exactly why Israel built the bomb.

Actually, they are not. They are armed with soviet scrap metal that can merely scratch Israeli equipment. The rockets they have are usless against military targets. They can only use them on civilians.

uhm ...

Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Jordan?

They are not armed with soviet crap.

UAE has the same aircraft Israel has.

I am sure Kuwait and Qatar have advanced weapons as well.

So stop BSn around.

Of those countries that are listed only Jordan might be involved in any potential conflict with Israel. UAE is more interested in being a vacation destination, Kuwait and Qatar are US allies, ditto with the Saudi's and Egypt.

Really we're only talking about Iran and Syria and Iran by proxy perhaps in Lebanon, the rest won't attack Israel period.

 

[KurskKnyaz]

Read the Global Security report. Israel dominates the air in the middle east. When you own the air you won the ground. The entire middle east could join in and they would not be able to invade Israel. I can dig you up the Global Security report that says this.

"There is ZERO advantage a Merkava tank has in a city filled with anti-tank teams over a M1 Abram tank."

Then you missed my last post. Here it goes again:


-smaller size means better ability to maneuver in tight streets.
-top-secret alloy armor to better withstand anti-tank missile attacks.
-Rear exit to allow easier troop deployment.

Israel actually launched a separate mission to retrieve a piece of Merkava armor that fell off in Lebanon - thats how important that secret is. The Merkava MK4 is the only tank in the world that is capable of shooting down helicopters

"So if there is no fighting coming from an apartment building , it is OK to bomb it."

No fighting. They were just used to store rocket launchers which makes them legit targets. There is a video on YouTube that shows the Hezbollah storing weapons in a hospital.

"What were they doing? Sitting in their bedroom pointing a rocket launcher outside their window at Israeli forces miles away? Did they somehow guide that missile around all the other buildings and give it wings to fly further?'

Rockets shoot UP they don't need to be guided around buildings. Once again see YouTube. There is video to back up everything I am saying.

"Yeah I am sure a Merkva tank is going to survive if it is hit directly head on by a post-soviet era RPG."

You make it sound as if the Merkva is some unstoppable tank.
There is no such thing as an unstoppable tank.

Look at what happened inside Lebanon. There are pictures of Merkva tanks destroyed.
They were hit by that Soviet crap you like to talk about. In fact the technology was developed in 1989

actually most modern tanks can easily survive a hit from any RPG. Tanks are taken out with Anti-Tank missiles not RPGs. Those tanks were hit with Anti-Tank shoulder fired rockets not RPGs that were not soviet crap and may actualy have been American made weapons that Hezbollah got through Iran. Merkava is not unstoppable but is can take alot

When they wanted to use them they took them out of the parking garage and then honked their horn in traffic for people to move so they could send the launchers to the south

thanks for the information.

Tehran is 2000km away from Israel. Explain to me how Israel is going to get there.
FLY? Fly what? An alien spaceship?

No, they slipped the rocket launchers out of the underground parking garages, fired rockets, and slipped them back in. Rockets shoot UP, there is no need to move traffic.

Who said anything about attacking Tehran. That is not where enrichment is taking place. You ever heard of Air Craft carriers, BTW.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: Aimster
urban warfare means fighting in cities ...

so tell me the advantage a tank has over another tank when fighting an army hiddden in a city.

Please

Google it.

yes because Israel's tank have proven to be great against roadside bombs and Russian post-1989 RPGs.

Wait, no they haven't.
No tank is unstoppable as we saw in the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

You can go ahead and blame Russian tech.

And what does that have to do with your original statement?
Nice attempt at back pedaling.

Because tanks are useless fighting masses of people, especially people hidden in apartment buildings.

Put a fleet of tanks in the middle of a city filled with an anti-tank teams and it will be easy target practice for them.

Insurgents are known for roadside bombs. They will fill the place up with them knocking out tank after tank.

Lucky for the U.S, the insurgency has ****** weapons. Not lucky for Israel that the insurgency/Hezbollah has weapons and stockpiles of them to take out their tanks.

Israel's tank is made to go against other tanks. It has a thick armor plate, but that isnt going to stop it from an rpg or a bomb. It is made to stop rpgs that groups such as the Palestinians have. Hezbollah was armed with weapons they were not supposed to have.
Israel's tank force is also perfect against an army of soldiers carrying the basic M16/A-47.

-
As far as where Hezbollah was firing their rockets from, all over. They were mostly firing them from inside the woods and then running away back into the cities. Sometimes they put the launchers on top of a hill so the rockets could go further.
Yes Hezbollah was hiding in the cities and this is why Israel surrounded the cities instead of entering them.
Israel occupied villages that were easy to grab. Israel did not enter the main cities because if you look at what I said above it would have been deadly.
Exactly why Israel bombed the living ****** out of the buildings I showed you.

Now the moral question is, did Israel do the right thing in bombing those cities to save the lives of their soldiers while risking/killing civilians in the process?

The main deaths for both Hezbollah and Israeli forces happened at the frontline. The frontline is mostly green areas. If you look at Hezbollah training videos you will see exactly what the front looks like. Filled with hills, grass, and trees. The areas that don't have the green have a lot of dirt.

I said Merkava tank is more adept at urban warfare than an M1 Abrams tank.
I never said tanks in general are effective in urban warfare.

Learn how to read plz.
k thx.

Reading Wiki (for basic knowledge) and Jane's Defense Weekly on how much more effective a Merkava is over an Abrams would certainly be a good start for you since it appears your knowledge on this area is limited.

It appears you lack common sense.

There is ZERO advantage a Merkava tank has in a city filled with anti-tank teams over a M1 Abram tank.

What the Merkava is invisible? Amazing.

If you want to share what advantage it has then share it. Otherwise stop rambling on without posting a single fact or scenario.

Where did I say the Merkava tank is invincible?
Did you fail english in Primary/elementary school?
It appears you lack any sort of reading comprehension.

Like I said, it only takes a few seconds to dig Wiki on the advantage of a Merkava Mark IV vs an Abrams.
If you don't know how to use google, I can't teach you that one.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Aimster

Israeli jets can have air-air refueling done.
This is what the US did against Libya when they leapfrogged KC135 and FB111 from England down the Atlantic coast and through the Med. (France did not give overfly permission). Certain tankers (label T1) were designated for refueling the Vampires, other tankers (labeled T2) were to refuel the Vampire tankers (T1).
Only one Vampire was lost.

The Israeli may choose to fly over land; or loop around via the Red Sea.
What air force the Iranians have has not been tested in combat - the F14s are worthless due to lack of maintenance and spare parts. They may have surface-air defenses - however, unless they are a better quality than Syria has and are mobile, Israel will have plans that take the fixed sites into account.

Israel could also send in covert teams that have refueling bladders at isolated airstrips.
This would allow refueling capability on the ground and also preposition weapons that would not have to come on the strike aircraft.

If Israel targets Iran; because of the distance, the Iranian manpower advantage is nullified in terms of retaliation. Iran does not have a viable long legged strike capacity and their A/C would have to have the same logistical impediments that Israel faces. Iran's only retaliation solution would be to goose their proxies (Hamas, Hezbolla & Syria) or attempt to use long rang missiles (I do not know if they have such verified capability or their accuracy - See SCUD damages in GWI).

At present Hamas has their own issue with retaining their control of the Palestinians and Israel has shown that they can fairly well neutralize that theater. Hezbollah is presently licking their wounds and there is a buffer zone protecting from the North. Syria at present has been shown to be incompetent in terms of military capability; they could not even challenge the IAF last year when the palaces were buzzed. Syria has gotten onto Israeli land only via coordinated first strikes and has been unable to hold onto what land they initially entered.

Jordan, Egypt & Saudi will stay out of the fray. Jordan has nothing to gain and everything to loose by tangling with Israel. Egypt and Saudi are worried about Iran potentially going nuke and the threat/trouble Iran can stir up.

Iran can shut off it's oil and cut their own economic throat. If they try to close the Straights, the same situation will happen as did in the Iraq/Iran conflict. The oil dependent nations will intercede to keep that lifeline open at what ever cost it takes; include pummeling Iran.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: KurskKnyaz

Originally posted by: Aimster
[
Arabs are a lot more advanced than they were back then.
I believe they have hundreds of thousands of artillery/rockets/missiles that could hit Israel and cause massive destruction.

Any war Israel and the Arabs face will be a deadly one for everyone.
Exactly why Israel built the bomb.

Actually, they are not. They are armed with soviet scrap metal that can merely scratch Israeli equipment. The rockets they have are usless against military targets. They can only use them on civilians.

uhm ...

Egypt? Saudi Arabia? Jordan?

They are not armed with soviet crap.

UAE has the same aircraft Israel has.

I am sure Kuwait and Qatar have advanced weapons as well.

So stop BSn around.

Of those countries that are listed only Jordan might be involved in any potential conflict with Israel. UAE is more interested in being a vacation destination, Kuwait and Qatar are US allies, ditto with the Saudi's and Egypt.

Really we're only talking about Iran and Syria and Iran by proxy perhaps in Lebanon, the rest won't attack Israel period.

Aimster seems to be living in an illusion if he thinks Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar would rally behind Iran.

I don't expect Jordan to rally behind Iran either considering they are Sunni and also Israel's 2nd best friend in the middle east right after Turkey.
Even if they do, they don't have much military equipment of particular importance.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: Aimster
So if there is no fighting coming from an apartment building , it is OK to bomb it.

I see you're playing the "obtuse" card; carry on.

You already said you wish all Arabs dead in a previous thread where someone quoted you so your view is not important to me.

Heh...
I'd like to see you provide a quote or link to that. Then again, I'd like to see you provide an aerial shot from all those "hundreds" of images at your fingertips.
I guess neither one will happen.

 

[tealk]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Israel doesnt have the means or the weapons to attack Iran.

A) their range is too far
B) their aircraft are not stealth
C) they do not have enough manpower to attack all of the sites unless they decide to send in a major wave which would be easily picked up.

The U.S is going to attack Iran with stealth aircraft and cruise missiles.
Iran cannot do a thing to stop those.

You are actually wrong, beleive it or not. It is widely suspected that Isreal has the best "unknown" airforce in the world. And it's true. They have never had to use it. And from someone I know, personally. This is very much the case. Stealth planes is like an AMD K6 CPU in compared to what they have, remember they are very patient people.....
and I beleive in the near future you will see these things come to past and be used.

Belive me, don't beleive me.....I really don't care...but remember what I said....when the day comes....when you will say...WOW.....how the heck did they do that?

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: tealk
You are actually wrong, beleive it or not. It is widely suspected that Isreal has the best "unknown" airforce in the world. And it's true. They have never had to use it. And from someone I know, personally. This is very much the case.

If you don't add F-22 Raptor, B-2 Stealth bomber, and refueling aircraft to the US inventory, then your statement would be correct.