Slashdot Mirror
A Skeptical View of Israel's Iron Dome Rocket Defense System
Lasrick (2629253) writes It isn't as if real analysis of Israel's "Iron Dome" isn't available, but invariably, whenever Israel has a skirmish the media is filled with glowing reports of how well the system works, and we always find out months later that the numbers were exaggerated. John Mecklin at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists looks at the coverage of Iron Dome in the recent exchanges between Israel and Hamas and finds the pattern is repeating itself. However, 'Ted Postol, an MIT-based missile defense expert and frequent Bulletin contributor, provided a dose of context to the Iron Dome coverage in a National Public Radio interview Wednesday. "We can tell, for sure, from video images and even photographs that the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all,"' Includes a good explanation of the differences between Iron Dome (a 'rocket defense system') and missile defense systems pushed by the U.S.
This post (like the one with the Brazuca for the World Cup) is certainly subject bait. It works because it attracts lots of tangentially on topic comments but that doesn't have anything to do with the subject matter of the article.
...
So please, don't fall for it. Don't spend the whole comment section arguing about causes and consequences of the conflict, who started it, who deserves is, etc.
Stay on topic and discuss the technical aspects of the missile system, at least that is what should be discussed here.
On bizarro world Slashdot, maybe
The rockets being sent against Israel are small, sporadic, unguided, and mostly lack the range to hit major population centers (Tel Aviv). On the rare occasions it does hit a building, it won't destroy the building but will gut a room.
If the Iron dome is effective, great. If the belief of the people is it's effective, even better, especially for politicians in power. Pretty much what the article says.
It's difficult to find a technological solution to a combination of relatively minor disagreements as to the exact details of the God of Abraham, plus disagreement over land ownership.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Ted Postol cannot be, even from being from MIT be considered a realable source for opinion. Postol has a large bias against anti-missle systems, which is down right dumb. The rockets are almost the size of small airplanes, but we don't consider anit-aircraft missles to be completely ineffecitive.
It's important to understand why people claim things, instead of just taking them at face-value.
After reading the article, his reasoning is that the Iron Dome is mostly chasing the rockets from behind, and therefore cannot be effective, because a rocket cannot effectively be caught from behind, or from the side. Furthermore, previous anti-missile systems (the patriot) have had their success rate exaggerated.
I have no idea if that is reasonable, but it's why he thinks it.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Almost. They never finished it. The Nazis were able to around it.
Do you have a plan for ending the 'apartheid,' or are you just expressing generic dislike of the situation?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
So, you're spending your saturday anonymously posting to slashdot about "libtards" and the persecution you face from them every day. i don't really need to say much of anything else, do I?
The Iron Dome rockets work just as designed: the system selects those missiles that are likely to hit populated/industrialized areas, and explodes near them to change their route. That way, the Qassams and other missiles from Gaza join the rest that falls in un-inhabited areas.
Trying to detonate the warehead would be dangerous in the sense that it increases the likely hood of missing the projectile completely.
Traditionally these conflicts are resolved by one party eliminating the other.
You keep using that word. I don't think that it means what you think that it means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
http://allenbwest.com/2014/04/...
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
From TFA in the Bulletin: "Regular readers of the Bulletin are well aware of the long history of inflated claims of missile defense efficiency."
Regular readers are also well aware of the extreme and longstanding bias (running back to the 1960's) of the Bulletin's editors against missile defense (because even a partially effective defense weakens their case for nuclear disarmament, their true goal) and the long history of inflated "criticism" that purports to claim that it cannot possibly work. This... is just more of the same. They don't actually have any numbers or anything resembling hard data - just the opinion of expert(s) whose bias on the issue is well known.
Nuclear weapons are bad
Missile defense reduces the need for nuclear disarmament
Working rocket defense might be seen as strengthening missile defense
Therefore, working rocket defense it bad
Therefore, Iron Dome doesn't work
Well, really France's mistake was assuming that during war the Germans might actually respect international boundaries. Either that or they simply forgot what happened only 30 years earlier.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
They do that occasionally, and are universally condemned for it. Remember Israel is not allowed to defend itself. They have to just accept 100's or rockets a day lobbed at them and not react. If they do fire back, and go as far as to warn the targets, Hamas gathers their children and brings them to the target creating mini-martyr's and generating huge sympathy, especially from the west.
They have a standing offer: it Hamas stops the rockets, they stop theirs. Not difficult, unless your Hamas
Here's the promotional video from Rafael, the system's maker. If the Iron Dome launchers are in a position to hit incoming rockets when they're still in boost phase, they're clearly effective. When they hit, the ascending rocket's flare disappears. Israel has Iron Dome launchers both forward postioned near Gaza, for boost phase defense, and near cities, for terminal defense. For terminal defense, it's harder to tell if they worked. The incoming rockets are just falling at that point, and success requires blowing up their warhead, not their rocket engine.
Videos show the missile's warhead exploding. That's triggered by a proximity fuse. There's a spray of shrapnel from the warhead; it doesn't have to be a direct hit. Whether that sets off the incoming rocket's warhead isn't visible from the videos of terminal defense.The Patriot missiles used in the Gulf war were able to hit incoming Scud missiles, but often didn't detonate the warhead.
I live in Tel-Aviv. Even though we don't get as much heat as the Ashdod or Beer-Sheva dwellers, we do get our fair share of alarms and attacks. This is the second article I'm seeing in two days regarding the alleged ineffectiveness of the system, and how we're all just being bamboozled by our evil government (The second article was posted in a local Israeli newspaper, but its idea was mostly the same). Honestly, I find this utterly silly. I mean, we simply don't get any ruined houses or anything. You can't hide something like that. If the system works so bad, why is Tel-Aviv essentially unaffected by the attacks? All we get is debris falling out of the sky (Which is far from harmless, but at most it dents a car or something. That's not a rocket hit). This seems like some disgruntled "missile expert"s very lame attempt at solving some very unnerving cognitive dissonance.
Maybe he should simply come over and observe the system, get some ideas and stuff.
Sadly Israel really needs to be allowed to take more offensive action or else things will simply continue in this steady-state for the foreseeable future.
Their quarry is systematically marginalized and trapped in a small area. A concentration camp if you will. The only thing that can be done to "take more offensive action" is to ramp up the current extermination program.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
I don't know why Israel would try to exaggerate the success of Iron Dome. I think that the opposite is true - the less successful the system is, the more sympathy people will have for Israelis under bombardment.
They remembered too well what had happened 20 years earlier and prepared to fight WWI again. Right down to the incompetent leadership sitting in chateaus sipping brandy.
Plan B had a punchline: 'Table for 250,000 misure?'
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
It's not defense, it's a rampage. Almost a genocide.
You should remember that Israel (which have one of the best armies in the world) is fighting against a ethnical group without army.
If anyone else in the world did that, We could call it a massacre, a butchery or even a genocide.
Even mention conservatives and you get modded until oblivion.
As a moderate conservative, I think your post is stupid and ignorant. Stop watching Fox News, leave your mother's basement, and visit the big blue room with the yellow light bulb.
Neither.
I learned about the wall on a History Channel documentary.
Nobody was an idiot back then, everyone knew Hitler was a problem. The wall wasn't finished because France was exhausted in resources from WW I. French politicians and people simply didn't want to pay for it.
Critics do not like to assist in making things better.
seriously, this is just bullshit on par with fox news.
"We can tell, for sure, from video images and even photographs that the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all," Postol said. "It—my guess is maybe [it hits a targeted missile] 5 percent of the time—could be even lower. ... And when you look—what you can do in the daytime—you can see the smoky contrail of each Iron Dome interceptor, and you can see the Iron Domes trying to intercept the artillery rockets side on and from behind. In those geometries, the Iron Dome has no chance, for all practical purposes, of destroying the artillery rocket."
"for sure," really? how about some actual numbers instead of speculation?
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
I think at this point the Palestinians are rather like the Black Knight of Monty Python. There's nothing you can do short of killing every last one that won't result in the remainders claiming "we was robbed" and declaring Holy Jihad in the name of Muhammed and Allah.
This Allah character is a weird dude in Islam. He is supposed to be so other that he only communicates to humans through angels and them mostly in dreams...which of course is only tailor made for every two-bit Imam and Mullah to declare a visitation in a dream in which all the Jews were seen to be dead by the hand of...yadda, yadda, yadda.
Personally, I think if Allah had any balls he write in clear Arabic over the entire sky what the hell he's after. Short of that, he's just a figment of imagination.
Hmmm...so we are to attribute some sort of ethereal "values" to encouraging your kids to whacked on the basis that someone wrote down in a book over 1000 years ago that they'd go to Heaven for it? Sooooo...what's the point of the kiddies being here in the first place. How come Allah doesn't just whack their asses at birth and cut right to the chase?
This is why I have a tendency to dislike "skeptics".. from my experience they too often tend to commit same errors in reasoning as their opposition. Only by virtue of operating from a safer default position do they end up being on the right side of objective reality.
How does one ramble on about lack of data driving a position and concurrently while admitting ignorance and having no data yourself go on to commit the very same error?
If you want to point out news articles on the effectiveness of Iron dome are misleading public by invoking implicit assumptions not actually made...this would have been great if only you just stopped there.
Like I said, their values are different than yours and mine!
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
Palestinians have an army...
Not regular army but a terrorism/guerilla kind of army...
If you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians, to repair most of the buildings, to create medic centers, schools, ...
And they prefer to create martyrs than go to a safe place when Israelian raids come... They want to get the whole world destroying Israel... They want to use US against Israel...
They prefer to choose war, to kill the Jews that are thought about as worse than dogs by the Muslims. Quran and other clearly say "you may not trust a non-muslim"... If you're Christian, better be warned, we are the next target on the list... well, maybe after agnostics...
+5 inciteful!
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
I'm in Israel with my family this month. We've had to go to shelters several times over the past week (f- you very much, Hamas). You can hear the difference between successful Iron Dome intercepts vs. the rockets that land (most, presumably, in unpopulated areas). The system is working and saving lives; that's good enough for me.
Did you read that Wikipedia article you linked to? It makes a pretty good case that it's apartheid:
You know the old expression about "looking like a duck and walking like a duck and sounding like a duck"? Well, Israel has been quacking for quite some time now when it comes to it's treatment of Palestinians.
You are welcome on my lawn.
No, in recent history, these conflicts are resolved by pressure from the international community. It's how apartheid in South Africa ended, to a great extent.
I don't know if you're old enough to remember Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher referring to Nelson Mandela as a "terrorist" and his party as a "terrorist organization". It turned out they were dead wrong. Last year, the philosophical progeny of Reagan and Thatcher hailed Mandela as a hero.
History is not going to be kind to the government of Israel in the first decades of the 21st century (if not longer).
It didn't have to be this way.
You are welcome on my lawn.
In my book, if you believe something ridiculous, that is cause for ridicule.
Missile shields do not protect us. I sleep soundly at night knowing that the Almighty Creator of heaven and earth protects His people.
Yeah. And now South Africa has gone from being a nuclear power with a space program to a third world shit hole that's mostly known for it's murder rate. I don't think history is going to be very kind to the Enlightened(TM), either.
See Desmond Tutu's comments.
No, you're both wrong. In recent years, these conflicts are never resolved at all. They fester forever.
I think that's an excellent solution. Shame it's not really final, though.
@DerekLyon: "Regular readers are also well aware of the extreme and longstanding bias .. of the Bulletin's editors against missile defense" ..
"Poisoning The Wells: discrediting the sources used by your opponent. This is a variation of Ad Hominem."
According to yourself, you value an personal ancestral connection to the land. And you also said you think it's the same for Hamas. So please don't try to twist things into a "good vs. evil" or even "sane vs. insane" narrative. It's not.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Goliath is stomping ten Davids every time one David throws a rock, and a hundred if it's a credible throw (e.g. a rocket).
It seem more that they will blame "David" every time a rock gets thrown. Some of these rockets are being fired from Lebanon yet Hamas, rather than Hezbollah, being blamed. Co-operation between Shia and Sunni not being likely either. Those launcing the rockets are also being refered to as "Hamas supporters". Rather implying "With friends like these who needs enemies".
SCUD's are cheap, light, and do the job they're supposed to do. Wouldn't it be cheaper to design, and build a 50 cal with radar, and laser tracking? 3 taps, next; repeat as needed.
So, not investing in companies that support the Israeli government is exactly the same as the Holocaust?
That's reasonable.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Since when did Slashdot start caring about world politics?
Buck Feta. You know what to do.
There's really nowhere else to put this, so here goes:
Thank you dotancohen for all your comments. They are insightful, mature, and, perhaps most importantly, civil.
As a general on the discussion so far, I find it informative that the most vitriolic comments directed against Israel and Jews were posted anonymously; the posters are well aware that their remarks are defamatory and have no appropriate place in civil discourse.
Per the preceding discussion, the staggeringly different perspectives on life, the afterlife, martydom, etc. add a dimension to the conflict that is not easily resolved. As the product of a "modern", western civilation and education, I personally find it impossible to subscribe to any sort of notion of the promise of heaven, nor do I have any willingness to sacrifice myself for a religious cause. The asymmetric philosophy that enables suicide bombings, among other atrocities, has had an outsized influence on the conflict and global perception thereof.
Mark it as flamebait all you want:
"Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." - Golda Meir
f you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians, to repair most of the buildings, to create medic centers, schools, ...
Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
I dont read
How could they repair the buildings, when the Israelis won't let them import building materials?
Comment of the year
"and we always find out months later that the numbers were exaggerated" - it's war propaganda. Everyone does it. Wind back to Vietnam and WWII for obvious US examples if everything else is too soon.
However, all the previous major attacks by Israeli forces, despite plenty of provocation to point to, just happened to coincide with the run-up to an election. Is there an election due soon or am I getting too cynical about the bunch running Israel at the moment?
If you can find a way to convince the Saudis and Iranians to send free food instead of free missiles there's a Nobel peace prize waiting for you.
The strawman you are looking for is not at this address. How about we get back to discussing iron dome instead of pretending someone stupid enough to think Israel is not allowed to defend itself is reading just to make some sort of very labored political point?
Oh. Regarding "The fireworks display vs. strafe bomber war" thing in the middle east.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Politics can be utterly disgusting at times - in two weeks the newly elected President will be sworn in. Yet another pogrom coincided with an election.
You mean the nuclear program meant to repel other African nations if they got sick of Apartheid shit and invaded? Your racism is noted.
Anyway, Israel/Palestine is a minor problem in the middle east right now. The major action has moved elsewhere.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
On some other planet where the IDF isn't wiping out 100 Palestinians for every dead Israeli? Where the United States doesn't praise every cluster bomb dropped on Gaza as Israel "defending itself"? Where the Palestinians are on of the world's top military powers and the Zionists are a bunch of unarmed refugees?
Just another day in this alternate reality built on bald-faced lies you guys have constructed for yourselves....
Before the iron dome Hamas rocket were also sent in great quantity in Israel, but never had any devastating effect physically. The rocket are worthless as a destruction item both civilian and military, but because they hit at random they are a perfect tool for terror.
What you said does not vindicate or falsify the various contention of people that the iron dome is nowhere as effective as pretended by the current PR wave.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I guess you never heard of Neville Chamberlain.
Hitler could have been stopped before a world war happened if the Treaty of Versailles had only been enforced. It would have been minor to stop Germany when they reoccupied the Rhineland. France alone could have done that.
There was a lot of stupidity in hindsight.
There seems to be a bit of a disconnection here.
I simply pointed out the problem where some Iranians and Saudis are sending weapons just like that dickhead who used to run the NSA sent money to the IRA so that he could feel better about helping with "the struggle". It's a separate problem to the modern version of pushing the Indians into reservations and then settling the reservations.
That is true.
You are welcome on my lawn.
What you have to realize is that Brent Spiner (the "mad scientist" in Area 51 who related "we don't get out much") had been hacking the alien tech since the early 1950s so Goldblum didn't have to do that much.
Getting back on topic, the Rebels in St/ar Wars smuggled the plans to the Death Star, which the Grand Moff/Toff/Dufus thought would do the rebels no good because the Death Star was properly engineered.
The Rebel engineers studied those plans and found a weakness in that reactor exhaust port thingy. Maybe there were her flaws, but this is what they were able to find.
As to the WW-II style anti-aircraft, the whole attack on the Death Star was supposed to be the Battle of Midway and Waldron's Lost Squadron running their suicidal torpedo attack down to the last man with the tide of the battle reversing at the last minute (the dive bombers sinking the carriers of Kido Butai at Midway, Luke using The Force to guide his last blaster shot to the exhaust port after Han Solo drove off his pursuers in "Star Wars").
This telling of the tale resonanted with the audience in the late 70's, whose parents of The Greatest Generation told the stories of the WW-II battles. When I first told a friend at work "The whole Star Wars ending scene is just the Battle of Midway", there was this recognition on his part, where he related his father being a Navy submarine combat veteran. Stories of how WW-II was fought from different vantage points was what our generation grew up with.
Regarding Hamas bringing children to the buildings designated for destruction: you should realize that their values are different than yours and mine. We value life, they value heaven.
So you actually believe you are doing them a favour by killing their children? That's why you do it?
I've heard some low-grade racism in my time, but this takes the cake. I'd like to see you offer a source for this "Palestinians bringing children into buildings designated for destruction" that doesn't come from the IDF's propaganda division.
Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
This reasoning, on the face of it, is absolutely ridiculous.
Because one side is very advanced militarily and the other side is not, then the side that is very advanced needs to let the other side have a fairer fight? No. Not at all.
A mugger comes at you with a knife. If you have a gun, that's not fair, you need to let the mugger with the knife stab you a few times before you pull the trigger?
Or let's say the other side has a stone, and is perfectly happy to hit you over the head repeatedly with it until you are dead. You have a M240 light machine gun. Very asymmetrical. You can take out the guy with the stone and a few of his buddies with a burst. But no! Unfair! They should be given machine guns too to make this fair. You should wait until they are given machine guns. Matter of fact, you can watch them get machine guns. So you wait to make sure they get all set up with their new donated machine guns, make sure they get the right training so that they know how to kill you with it, since it is only fair, right? No. If this were you, you would kill them if they are trying to kill you, no matter what weapons they possess, no matter how asymmetrical the military technology.
We are in very twisted times, as Hamas knows it can't really hurt Israel militarily with these tactics, but is very willing to provoke the situation such that they get pummeled. Each time Hamas provokes a pummeling, they get more funding and better weaponry from outside sources and more sympathy from both within and around the world. In the short term, Hamas has no hope of winning militarily. However, they hope that in the long term, they can grow strong enough to take on Israel militarily and wipe them out.
I remember in the "run up" to the First Iraq War (the "Gulf War') about an interview with some high-ranking Saudi dude being concern-trolled "what about Iraq attacking the oil fields (with Scuds)?" The Saudi official smiled somewhat patronizingly at the news dude and responded, "We are equipped with the Patriot" at the time when the US public didn't know a Patriot from a Tory or that anyone was mad enough to use an ack-ack missile against a Scud rocket.
War is always about PR (i.e. deception). Everyone knew the Scud couldn't hit anything (except in some lucky for the enemy, unlucky for us shots). The Saudi leaders were just too happy to go along with "the Patriot is a Scud defense shield" because they knew that strategically, the Scud was of no consequence and this way they could tell their people to "just chill, bro, the Americans shared with us the Patriot" as the Scuds rained down. The US hurredly gave the Israelis the Patriot to get them to "just chill, bro", but everyone was coming out of the woodwork about how the Patriot was just a sham defense against an incoming missile not aimed at anything.
The "Patriot works" fit Saudi propaganda interests, but went against the Israeli propaganda at the time because they Israelis were itchy to get into the fight of "Scud hunting", where air attacks against this mobile platform that couldn't hit anything in the first place were regarded as futile by the U.S.. The Israelis argued that their pilots would press futile attacks against the Scud more aggressively because they were defending their women and children against the largely ineffective Scud attacks, but the US argued this was Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti's war aim, to lob Scuds to draw the Israelis in to fracture the coalition.
As for Palestinians and the war fighting power they have, suicide bombing are perhaps the most effective thing they have to inflict Israeli casualties, but it really works against them propaganda wise. The singularly most effective thing they had going was the First Intifida, where they were using rock-throwing young people as rubber-bullet sponges. From a propaganda standpoint, that was devastating in its effectiveness of portraying the Israeli troops as hateful goons, whether this was true or not, but the optics on TV were rapidly undermining Israel as a just cause. Why the PLO gave up on a tactic that was working I have no idea, but this may speak to why the conflict has dragged on so long when the Palestinians have demographics and world sympathy in their corner. The Palestinians may simply have bad leaders.
The rocket attacks are a kind of middle ground tactic in sacrificing your own guys. It is not the casualties inflicted by the rocket attacks, it is the 100:1 casualties of your own people that is a feature-not-a-bug, of rallying your own people and of getting Americans to pray in their Christian churches "for an end to the violence."
As to why the Israelis are playing along be inflicting so many casualties, maybe that is a feature-not-a-bug. For one thing, they are targeting "the leaders" and trying to be creative in a tactical sense with their tech for giving telephone warnings. Maybe the Israeli calculus is "the leaders talk tough but they are not that keen on being blown up themselves."
Also, on one hand, Israel is a "Western" country where people get all hand-wringy about the "violence" (I use scare quotes because what is taking place is a war between two sides with irreconcilable national interests and not some unexplained "violence"). On the other hand, Israel is a Middle Eastern country with a substantial Oriental Jewish population displaced from Cairo, Baghdad
Wrong.
Israeli airstrikes are a response to Palestinian aggression. Were it not for the rocket attacks, Israel would not have launched air strikes.
The entire thing started because Israeli teenagers were kidnapped and murdered.
Hamas is committed to the death of all Jews - it's right in the Hamas charter.
Israel may not be perfect, but let's not pretend that the Palestinians are just innocent victims in all this.
So the iron dome gets about 90% of the rockets, and the rest get though. And the missiles used for the iron dome cost nearly 10X as much as the Hamas rockets.
Is the iron dome "working" or not?
I followed the link past the Mecklin article - which is short on detail - to the Theodore Postel interview and was surprised to find that his "expert" opinion consisted of the claim that "the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all" followed by the "guess" (his word) that "maybe" (his word) it was "working 5 percent of the time." This rigorous and scholarly analysis was in turn followed by the very scientific words "could be" prefixing the statistically precise "even less." He then went on to claim - in response to a leading question - that in order to work, the intercepting missile has to hit the rocket head on. He offered no evidence of this, nor any explanation of why this should be the case, nor any evidence of rockets hitting targets in populated areas. Again, He offered no statistics of his own nor did he state whether "WORKING 5% of the time" means failing to intercept 95% of the time after being launched or being launched only in a small sub-set of cases and thus intercepting only 5% of the rockets with the others being perrmitted through because they are not heading towards populated areas. Finally neither the Postol interview nor the Mecklin article says anything about the opinons of other academic military experts or whether there is support for Postol's conclusions amongst his peers.
As a long term opponent of US Star Wars expensive & mediocre results, Postol may fear the succes of Iron Dome could revitalize US efforts. Star Wars is still a multi-billion dollar annual project a quarter century after its inception. I do have to compliment Postol for poking holes in the over optimistic propaganda of both systems, even if I think he is too skeptical.
I remmeber US Star Wars detractors said the system would be considered a failure if it allowed a single nuclear missile to strike the US. On the other hand supporters said it would be a success if it created uncertainty in the attacker and was partially succesful. Well, seeing Iron Dome in action after a couple couple battles now, it seems to be pyschologically beneficial to the Israeli population. This is whether you belive it has been 25% or 90% successful in knocking out rockets. Then I would say the "hal-full" side has won the debate.
To find out if it works you either need to have a comparison to without the shield or you need records of the attacks actually stopped.
If stopping Germany would have been a minor effort at that point the French could have done it themselves.
I meant would.
Its not like Germany was really disarmed after WW1 and without occupation the limits on their military could hardly be relied upon. They simply left Germany far too powerful after WW1.
Regarding Hamas bringing children to the buildings designated for destruction: you should realize that their values are different than yours and mine. We value life, they value heaven.
So you actually believe you are doing them a favour by killing their children? That's why you do it?
I've heard some low-grade racism in my time, but this takes the cake. I'd like to see you offer a source for this "Palestinians bringing children into buildings designated for destruction" that doesn't come from the IDF's propaganda division.
It was in Al Jazeera just a few days ago. The Al Jazeera journalist seems to be as disgusted with the practice of bringing neighbours (not specifically children) to the buildings warned for destruction as you and I am.
It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
Ah, right, it was on a web site a few days ago but you can't provide a link? Are you sure you didn't make it up?
Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
History is not going to be kind to the government of Israel in the first decades of the 21st century (if not longer).
History is not going to be kind to the only liberal democracy in the middle east?
Boy, your future sounds like a complete horror-show.
You should remember that Israel (which have one of the best armies in the world) is fighting against a ethnical group without army.
If anyone else in the world did that, We could call it a massacre, a butchery or even a genocide.
Maybe in your special little universe. Here in the real world, Israel isn't fighting against "a ethnical group", it's fighting against a bunch of primitive fanatics who insist on constantly trying to kill Israeli citizens.
If Israel actually wanted to carry out a genocide Palestine would be devoid of life in a week; instead the Palestinian population continues to grow at a rate far higher than the population of Israel.
Worst. Genocide. EVER.
Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:
Seriously? Let's think about this:
He says if Hamas stops with the rockets, they can use the money to make repairs to buildings.
You say "but they can't fix stuff because they can't get concrete".
Israel says they can't import concrete because they keep launching rockets.
Hrm. I don't know about you, but I think I see a solution somewhere in there.
Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:
Seriously? Let's think about this:
He says if Hamas stops with the rockets, they can use the money to make repairs to buildings.
You say "but they can't fix stuff because they can't get concrete".
Israel says they can't import concrete because they keep launching rockets.
Hrm. I don't know about you, but I think I see a solution somewhere in there.
Even during the last ceasefire the blockade was still in effect so it is not as simple as you suggest.
I dont read
That's correct. A "liberal" democracy the same way South Africa was a "liberal democracy" during apartheid.
Now that I think about it, the Weimar Republic was also a "liberal democracy", as was the United States during the genocide of Native Americans and it's promotion of slavery.
Atrocity in a country that is otherwise supposedly "enlightened" stands out more, doesn't it? And make no mistake: the current government of Israel is perpetrating an atrocity right this minute.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Even during the last ceasefire the blockade was still in effect so it is not as simple as you suggest.
You mean the ceasefire where Hamas stopped attacking for like a day?
Well, you know, it takes more than 24 hours for the memo to be drafted and sent out.
Atrocity in a country that is otherwise supposedly "enlightened" stands out more, doesn't it? And make no mistake: the current government of Israel is perpetrating an atrocity right this minute.
Oh yeah. You're right; I completely forgot that only civilized countries can perpetrate those kinds of atrocities. I mean who cares that a backwards-ass country like Palestine wants to completely exterminate the Israelis - what matters is that Israel are refusing to be exterminated! That's the real atrocity, and I'm sure your version of history will not look kindly upon it.
Israel developed it on their own budget. The uS bought in when it was demonstrated to work.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
I don't know if you're old enough to remember Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher referring to Nelson Mandela as a "terrorist" and his party as a "terrorist organization". It turned out they were dead wrong.
They were? Did you read the Truth & Reconciliation Commission reports on ANC activities? A lot of it reads like textbook terrorism to me. Numerous intentional massacres of civilians (in churches etc) to make a political point.
I'll grant you that the end of apartheid was a good goal, but that doesn't mean that terrorist acts committed to further it stop being terrorism.
Oh, and as for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict this way... the big difference is that ANC's goal, as elaborated in their platform and preached by their leaders, was equality in South Africa, and a real democracy. The goal of Hamas, on the other hand, is the complete destruction of the State of Israel and Jews as people - basically, genocide - again, as elaborated in their official platform documents, and made clear by their preachers. So, what common ground does Israel have to even begin negotiating with these guys? What compromises can they do to make the other side agree to peace (rather than a ceasefire)?
A compromise, like the two-state solution, was possible 30 years ago. But it was not acted upon by Israel, and now Palestinians are too radicalized to accept any such. You can argue with nationalists like Arafat - in the end, what they want is for their nation to prosper, and they'll make pragmatic choices to make that happen, even conceding their ideological goals. But you can't argue with religious fanatics like Hamas - people who are willing to make children into suicide bombers clearly don't have any concern for the future of their nation; all they care about is to fight because "God told them so".
Qassam rockets are nothing more than gunpowder rockets straight out of medieval China. No guidance, no ordinance, which is why it's years since they've actually killed anyone.
It doesn't matter. They're aimed squarely at civilians, with shrapnel-heavy warhead that is designed specifically to cause death to as many unarmored "soft" targets in the area as possible - basically, to maximize civilian casualties.
Go fuck yourself, racist land thief.
Hamas is a race now? That's funny... last I checked, they are internationally recognized as a terrorist organization.
I suppose saying "fuck Taliban" is racist too, seeing how it's mostly Pashtun?
Nope. The French saw two possible invasion routes: over the Rhine, which was to be stopped by the Maginot Line, or through the Belgian plains, where the mobile parts of the French army, as well as the British force, were supposed to meet them. The part between was covered by the great Ardennes forest, which the French considered impractical for a major attack.
As we found out in the Battle of the Bulge in 1944, the Ardennes is a really difficult area to attack through. It has good roads, and isn't all that bad to advance through if you don't intend to fight until you get out of it. Thing is, no Ally had significant forces in it. It was Belgian territory, so the French couldn't deploy in it, and the Belgians didn't really care about it, and so had two battalions in it which were supposed to go north and help defend the important Belgian territory. Had there been significant Allied forces there, the campaign might have gone much differently.
So, while the main fighting seemed to be north on the Belgian plains, large German mobile forces advanced through the Ardennes and defeated the weak French screening forces around Sedan, on the other side of the forest. From then on, they advanced too fast for the unwieldy French command structure to react. They reached the English Channel, driving most of the British off the Continent and destroying the most of the mobile part of the French army.
The defeat wasn't the fault of the Maginot Line, which held strong. It was bad strategic planning by the French that lost France.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
And currently running the government.
Prime Minister Netanyahu is someone who has benefited from and promoted death his entire career. And not just beginning with leading a parade which carried a mock coffin of Yitzhak Rabin, who was murdered by one of Netanyahu's followers shortly thereafter.
When Netanyahu called for generalized violence against Hamas in response to the crimes of the few who were involved in the death of those three teens, he knew exactly what he was starting. It's his goal to "cleanse" Gaza, once and for all, and he's been itching for this opportunity. It's as if the United States had responded to the assassination of President Kennedy by bombing and invading Texas.
Just go read Netanyahu's series of statements and tweets following the discovery of the deaths of the teens. Look at the timeline of his incitement of violence against Palestinians, the subsequent murder of the 15 year old Palestinian, the severe beatings of others and the burning death of a Palestinian child. And finally, his use of so-called "DIME weapons" against Palestinian civilians. Committing war crimes to stay in political power is pretty despicable.
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Or so we are told by Israel.
The only thing is, the very existence of Hamas and their stance on recognizing Israel is a product of Israel's double-dealing with Fatah, and before that the PLO.
I'm convinced that the government of Israel wants this conflict to continue, because it guarantees them political power, support from the US and each time there is a flareup, there are more Palestinian houses bulldozed to make way for settlements. It's a classic expansionist/eliminationist game plan.
My entire view of the situation has changed over the past 10 years from absolute support of Israel in their struggle against their hostile neighbors to questions about Israel's unorthodox way to seek peace through expansion to horror over the Israeli concentration camps where Palestinians are held and the cage they have made of Gaza to my current inability to believe anything that comes from the Israeli government or the Zionist press. It has not been a willing or comfortable transition. I had to undergo the conversion from hasbara tourist (as a non-Jew) to someone who has seen the horror in Gaza with his own two eyes.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Or so we are told by Israel.
We are told so by Hamas program documents. The question is to which extent those claims are up to date. On one hand, Hamas did suggest something akin to a two-state solution (in 1967 borders), but the problem is that their offer used words like "truce" instead of "peace" to describe what they would be signing up for. That, combined with their seeming lack of desire to amend the written documents of the party, cast the honesty of their intentions in doubt. There is even more doubt given their radical Islamist ideology that seems to have strong Salafi influence - if you've read Qutb, you know that for those guys, the existence of Israel in any shape or form is plainly unacceptable, and its destruction, on the other hand, is a divine prophecy.
The only thing is, the very existence of Hamas and their stance on recognizing Israel is a product of Israel's double-dealing with Fatah, and before that the PLO.
That is true, but does it really matter for any purpose other than assigning blame (mind you, it's a useful purpose and it would be nice to see it carried through all the way - but it's orthogonal to the peace process)? Either way, Hamas is now running things, and their propaganda is effected on new generations of Palestinian kids... which doesn't bode well at all for any sort of compromise to be achievable in the foreseeable future. I just don't see how they could "reboot" the whole thing and get people who can be negotiated with back in charge, even if they wanted to.
Wait, did you just imply that it's security via obfuscation?
Given what happened to Fatah for using words like "peace", I'm not sure why any other words should be used with Israel.
I'm just afraid that "assigning blame" is something only Israel is allowed to do.
I wouldn't want to be the person tasked with solving this problem. It's way hard. But I do believe that pressure should be applied to the combatants a little more evenly. As you say, Hamas may not be a party that can be negotiated with, but it's pretty clear that Netanyahu most certainly cannot be negotiated with. He has said so both with words and actions. There is a right wing in Israel that is holding the whole region hostage, and the current administration does not appear willing to put them in their place, because they are the "base".
You are welcome on my lawn.
Thank you for acknowledging that they are a country. Maybe you can convince the government of Israel to do the same.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"Terrorism" is a word that only the winners are allowed to use, apparently.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Except the ANC "won", and they were still labeled as terrorists afterwards. That doesn't sound like "winners writing history" to me. That sounds much more like "the truth will prevail".
Ezekiel 23:20
You may have noticed how with the death of Nelson Mandela, the only mention of "terrorist" came in the form, "I can't believe that monster Margaret Thatcher called Mandela a terrorist way back in the bad old days".
Today, "terrorist" is what you call the other guy. It has no meaning any more.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Every racist colonialist nazi shitbag motherfucker throughout history has excused their aggression and genocide by pretending to be the victim. English colonialists did it to the Peqout indians, the Dutch did it to the Zulu tribes, and European Zionists have been doing it to the Palestinians for over 70 years.
Not when the IDF straight up murdered two Palestinian kids the month before? But okay, lets start your timeline with the three Israeli teens kidnapped in the West Bank. Why then, did Israel start arresting people and bulldozing homes in Gaza? Speaking of, why aren't you demanding that Hamas be allowed to arrest anyone they want in Tel Aviv as well as bulldoze hundreds of Israeli homes for the Palestinian kid that was burned to death?
Why don't you try reading it some time, as no such stipulation exists. The propaganda you tried to whip out is calling for the end of the Zionist regime, which the victims of land theft and occupation are entitled to do. But while you're reading the Hamas Charter, read the Likud Charter while you're at it, which lays claim to all of the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Serves them right for being on Zionist land before they got there, right? You are supporting racist colonialism and Apartheid.
Disproportionate response is a war crime.
No guidance systems. And by Israeli logic, any target near anyone who works for any part of the government, or any kind of "militant", is fair game.
So maximized they hadn't killed a single person in almost three years. Try again.
Hamas is trying to steal land from people on another continent now?
That's funny, since Hamas was created by Israel to oppose Fatah. Like the wingers that complain about Iran's theocracy, racist Zionists and their supporters need to start with the nearest mirror.
Disproportionate response is a war crime.
The problem with this is that no-one seems to be able to coherently explain what a proportional response should look like. Every time I ask people, they immediately go into rant mode about "Israeli fascist" and "they've had that coming" etc. But no-one is willing to actually lay out the proper response to the rockets step-by-step.
No guidance systems.
They're still aimed, it's just that the target area is very wide. But in most cases, those target areas are city centers.
So maximized they hadn't killed a single person in almost three years. Try again.
Not for the lack of trying. It's one of the reasons why I consider Hamas leadership basically insane - it's clear that what they're doing is just plainly not working, and is only making things worse for them, but they're doing it anyway.
Sounds more like willful obtuseness. If the poor bastards in Gaza can afford some gunpowder and tubes, methinks one of the world's top five military powers could manage it.
There would be no rockets if Israel hadn't responded to kidnappings in the West Bank with a rampage in Gaza, bulldozing homes and arresting people that could have had nothing to do with the three missing teens.
And so deadly that they hadn't killed anyone in over two years. Give Hamas some guided munitions and I'm sure they'll happily aim them at the military planes sitting at civilian airports. Any civilians dying from those attacks would be the fault of the Israeli government, for making them human shields.
Fast death vs slow and brutal strangulation. And the fast deaths draw attention to Israel's war crimes, whereas the U.S. can cover up the slow strangulation with it's Security Council veto pen.
Sounds more like willful obtuseness. If the poor bastards in Gaza can afford some gunpowder and tubes, methinks one of the world's top five military powers could manage it.
Er... are you implying that what Israel should do is fire its own Qassam-style rockets back at Gaza, using the same targeting principle (i.e. aim where the concentration of people is highest)?
Simple answer for a simple question: how could Israel poooosibly make a proportionate response?
i.e., not killing a single person until late in 2016. As opposed to the current round of mass slaughter that you're endorsing, one that is wiping out entire families at a time.
The reason why Hamas rockets "didn't hit a single person" is because of a combination of interceptor systems, early launch detection, and well-developed civil defense in Israel. If rockets were fired in the same manner at Gaza, given the population density there, almost every single one would have found a target. Yet that would be exactly a tit-for-tat response.
You seem to be arguing that if a guy attacks me with a knife on the street, I can't use any force to defend myself until he actually manages to land a stab on me. If that's your notion of "proportional response", it's bullshit.
Those helped, but nowhere near close to them being primitive gunpowder rockets based on the finest 14th Century hardware available. Even the IDF dismissed Qassams as any kind of military threat before Iron Dome was rolled out:
"Clearly everyone wants to be surrounded by concrete block, but we need to remember that Qassams are more a psychological than physical threat. Statistically they cause the fewest losses, and therefore we must develop prevention systems but not invest all the money in this aspect."
There's the willful obtuseness again, as flatly ignoring the fact that the person with the knife here would be the IDF rampaging through Gaza in response to kidnappings in the West Bank. And if anyone is defending themselves, it's Hamas defending the Palestinians from the latest round of slaughter from the IDF.
Seriously, how do you manage to compare with the straight face of the killing of a single person (first qassam death since 2012) with 500+ deaths with a straight face?