2008-2009 Gaza Conflict: Discussion & Analysis

[Pathfinder-X]

Before going anywhere, I will remind everyone this thread will be heavily moderated. You are allowed to express your politicial opinion regarding the matter, but keep it respectful. If you're going to talk about "zionist r teh evil" or "palestinians r teh terrarist", there are plenty of other forums on the internet for that.

Now that we got that out of the way, I've think in the past week we've heard both sides of the argument. Palestinians claims the Israelis' been blockading them off in violation of ceasefire agreement and the rockets are a response to that blockade. Israelis claim they are acting in self-defense because of rocket attacks, and maintain the blockade is neccessary to stop Hamas from smuggling weapons into Gaza. Either way, I'm not interested in the "who-did-what-to-whom" debate.

My aim for opening this thread is to debate what tactical and strategic objectives each side is attempting to accompolish and their motivation behind it. It is in my opinion that the Israeli operation is largely influenced by the fact that a general election is coming up in Israel in about a month. A strong showing of force in response to Hamas rocket attacks could be key to winning more votes for the coalition government. It could also be possible that Israel no longer wishes to deal with Hamas. By using military force, it is likely that Israel wants to topple or at least curb Hamas' influence considerably in order to reinstate the PLO under Abbas, which would make negotiations in the future presumably easier.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/08/01/gaza.html

Another important factor is the fact that Israel wishes to wipe the memories of its less-than-satisfactory performance against Hezbollah in 2006. An acquaintance of mine who was recently discharged as a sniper from the Golani Brigade informed me that IDF high command made some adjustments since the 2006 conflict. They hope to give ground troops, especially the infantry corps, combat experience without exposing to dangerous opponent such as Hezbollah.

Unlike 2006, the Gaza operation seems to be well planned in advance with as Israeli jets concentrated on Hamas headquarters and police stations for their bombing efforts. IDF themselves are very familiar with the terrain of Gaza, since they occupied the territory until 2005. The High Command also seemed to have learned their lesson from 2006, and this time stated they aim to reduce the amount of rocket fire instead of halting it.

Despite heavy rhetorics from Hamas about destroying Israel, I think we can all agree that they are nowhere as well armed, organized and trained compared to Iranian backed Hezbollah. While Hezbollah are trained and supplied by Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Hamas do not seem to have any to formal instutionalized training for its militants. There is little to suggest that Hamas has the same access to the latest anti-tank weapon arsenal available to them. Given the fact that rockets fired into Israel are little more than homemade bottle rockets with warheads, Hamas is unlikely to be able to inflict the same amount of damage to IDF as did Hezbollah.

In my view, civilian casualties caused by Israeli air and ground operations actually works to the benefit of Hamas, since international pressure on Israel will increase as the number of death and wounded mounts. Hamas could also be hoping to draw Israeli ground forces deep into urban areas where they could even the playground a little and inflict damage with small arms and RPGs. Hamas' objectives, IMO, is to inflict enough casualties to IDF to make the Israeli public turn against the government and prevent Fatah from retaking power in Gaza.

The former Golani that I mentioned earlier expects that ground operation would be over in less than 2 weeks. That's it for my political analysis, and I will write one about Israel airstrikes tonight.

 

[Todjaeger]

IMO, the situation unfortunately is not unlike the paradox, "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" And therefore, a long-term solution to the Gaza situation (as well as the larger Israel-Palestinian problem) is equally elusive.

In addition to the possible reasons Pathfinder-X mentioned behind the current actions, there is another significant one which comes to my mind. On January 20th, a new United States President will be sworn into office. The current operations, conducted just prior to his taking office could be for any, some or all of the following reasons.

On the part of Israel:
Done before the current president leaves, as he might be viewed as more sympathetic to Israel than the incoming president is/will be/might be... And therefore the current administration might be more inclined to provide diplomatic cover than the upcoming one.

It could also be done to remind the incoming US administration that Israel is a threatened ally of the US in the Mideast.

If I choose to be cynical, it could also be a test to attempt to determine how much influence Israel will have with the incoming administration, prior to taking office.

On the part of Hamas:
The above rationales Israel might have also apply to Hamas/the Palestinians, only the participants are different.

The rocket attacks could have been done deliberately to evoke a response by Israel, which Hamas could hope to make the international community, or more importantly the incoming POTUS/administration view as disproportionate.

As for the actual reason (or more likely reasons) behind the actions taken by both sides, the only thing which is clear to me, is that the non-combatants are clearly the losers in the current conflict.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Moving on to Israeli air operation

This is the largest Israeli deployment since the end of 2006 Lebannon War, and bloodiest week in Israel-Palestinian conflict since the founding of Israel. Once again, Israeli airforce is the tip of the spearhead to accompolish the state's strategic objective. I'm not going to talk about the news since you can find plenty of news sources reporting on it.

First, the selection of targets is a reflection of Israel's political aim. Since the 1990's, Hamas has grown both in size and power considerably. Instead of having to face just Fatah, Israel is now forced to also deal with Hamas. In recent years, Fatah had lost much of its popular support due to corruption, but gain more foreign backing due to its more moderate stance towards Israel. It was driven out of Gaza by the much more militant Hamas, after losing an election earlier.

The airstrikes are centered around Hamas military outposts, training camps as well as residence of its leaders. The operation has three aims IMHO. One, to weaken Hamas directly and reduce its will to fight in the future. Two, increase the internal friction between Fatah and Hamas in order to curb Palestinian resistance in general. Third, divert pressure from the current coalition government ahead of an election. In essence, Israel is hoping to kill three birds with one stone.

Israel has already demonstrated its military supremacy in conventional warfare against its neighbors in the past. As a result of its inability to match Israel pound for pound in the conventional war department, Palestinians resorted to asymmetric warfare to compensate for its shortcomings. The 2006 Lebannon War was a prime example of asymmetric warfare fought in hills and small towns. In that conflict, the Israeli airforce's performance was questioned due to not having clearly defined targets and objectives. More importantly, Israel entered into the war without having clear intelligence. This time around they've learned their lesson.

Israel concentrated its air power on Hamas military and political targets. Hamas on the other hand, is quite powerless to respond to Israeli airstrikes as their forces are composed mostly of militants with small arms.

Lastly, Israel has achieved surprise in its campaign. Omert warned Hamas on Dec. 25th regarding the rocket attacks, and its possible consequences. The very next day Israel government issued a statement they were willing to negotiate a truce, which caused Hamas to drop its guard. The bombing campaign started on the 27th and more than 100 targets were hit within the first hour, which seemed to have caught Hamas by complete surprise.

Large amount of precision ammuntion was used due to the urbanized terrain of Gaza, as Israel seeked to reduce collateral damage in order to avoid too much negative press thrown at them. In pure military terms, Israel achieved speed, surprise and violence of action. However, we all know military force would only suppress the problems between Israel and Palestine for a short period of time, and may be counter-productive in the long run.

Next analysis in a few days: Ground campaign

 

[Feanor]

A few quick but key differences. Hezbollah is possibly one of the only truly effective irregular militaries in the world. It's supply chains come from more then just Iran. I might remind you that a Hezbollah weapons depot captured by Israel in the 2006 war was found with iirc AT-14 Kornet ATGMs with the stamp Tula - Rosoboroneksport on them. Naturally a flurry of official denials came, and it's quite possible they were not acquired from Russia directly, but the point remains that had such an advanced ATGM fallen into Iranian hands they would hardly be in a rush to hand it over to Hezbollah. I suspect that there are multiple additional sources, including the black market, and possibly even some under the table support from countries (like Russia) that would stand to benefit from a destabilized middle east, disruption of oil prices, etc.

Hamas has none of the above. It's essentially little more then a rudimentary militia. It should come as no surprise that they simply can't fight against Israel. Not on any level. They have neither the supplies, nor the training, nor the depth in which they can actually face the Israeli's. Israel undoubtedly tried to adjust for the factors that caused problems in the 2006 war, but the truth is that even if they didn't Hamas would hardly be able to put up any real fight.

 

[OPSSG]

Moving on to Israeli air operation...

Pathfinder-X, interesting comments. I just wanted you to share with you an interesting blog by an Israeli, Isaac Ben-Israel (see the graphs provided by Isaac Ben-Israel to illustrate his points), which a UK based commentator has said is a better guide to Israeli strategy in Gaza than anything else that he has seen lately. The gist of it is this:

In general, the underlying idea is: each system has its own critical point. If I know where it is, I hit this point and destroy the whole system. If I do not know this, I will have to go on hitting different components of the system until I accidentally hit the critical point. The more components I damage, even without hitting the critical point, the closer is the moment when the system disintegrates.

And there is a certain connection between “q” - which is the percentage of component interconnection - and “Q” which describes the probability of the whole system collapse.

* When the rate of component failure q is 11%, the probability Q(q) for total system collapse is 50%
* When q=25%, Q=81%
* When q=50%, Q=100%

Fig. 4. The Probability of System Collapse

So what does this formula tell us? In case the damage level of the components (q) within the system is 50%, the system will definitely stop functioning. There are simply no systems capable to withstand the malfunctioning of half of its components. In case q is 25%, there is still an 80% probability of its falling apart.

I find this interesting. The population-centric counterinsurgency view generally holds that attacks on leadership targets are unproductive at best and very counterproductive at worst. The logic of this is that since the conflict is political it has to be solved politically. Which means that you have to have someone with authority to talk to at the end of the day. Which means that killing all the leaders is unhelpful. There are also important consequences for the perception of legitimacy. Moreover, in general, the principle of insurgent organization is that everyone is replaceable. This is considered to be particularly the case with networked insurgencies which are thought to be extremely resilient to attacks: eliminate one node in five in a complex network and there will still remain enough links to keep the network viable.

Obviously the IDF is not engaged in population-centric COIN in Gaza–I find it hard to conceive of any meaningful way in which such a campaign could be conducted at this point. They would seem to have adopted the idea that HAMAS, as a functioning network, can be made non-functional (for a while, in Gaza) if about a quarter of its leadership is wiped out. It seems to me that this is at least plausible.

I am a fan of using systems theory in certain circumstances and the above seems to an intelligent application of a theory to understand the current situation. The appropriate links are provided if you are interested in further reading.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Pathfinder-X, interesting comments. I just wanted you to share with you an interesting blog by an Israeli, Isaac Ben-Israel (see the graphs provided by Isaac Ben-Israel to illustrate his points), which a UK based commentator has said is a better guide to Israeli strategy in Gaza than anything else that he has seen lately. The gist of it is this:



I am a fan of using systems theory in certain circumstances and the above seems to an intelligent application of a theory to understand the current situation. The appropriate links are provided if you are interested in further reading.

You know even if they crippled Hamas, the problem still remains. Organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah exist because they have breeding ground, so they're simply a symtom of the problem and not the actual problem itself in my mind. That issue will require a whole new thread on its own and is within the realm of politics. DT is not a suitable place to discuss it. I'm just rating the Israelis on their performance in this war.

 

[nevidimka]

I have an Israeli friend, but its becoming increasingly hard for me to see his point of view nor justification of Israeli's actions. Over 500+ dead, n all those Hamas? Regardless of how accurate PGM's are if its an Air strike its gonna leave a huge civilian casualty, hence Israeli claims of fighting Hamas instead of Palestinians or only targeting Hamas discriminately is naive. If Israel planned for a ground assault eventually, then why go with that air strike that killed hundreds of Palestinians? I believe it is to reduce the trap they fall into b4 they send their troops in there. This is becoming increasingly a common tactic. It mirrors the 2nd chechnya war and Georgian attempts at S.Ossetia b4 they moved in.

Also I dont believe Hamas will replicate the victory of Hizbollah of 2006. Lebanon is a hilly area with terrains, Israel walked into a trap by a very prepared army. Gaza is a plain Desert, and they know the place like the back of their hand. Hamas has also shown how irresponsible hey are to provoke Israel into this actions. It doesnt show that they have the Palestinians goodwill at heart.

The other day a psychiatrist spoke on CNN an he gave a gloomy look. He said he witness how during the 1st intifada? the children of Palestine who threw rocks at Israeli soldiers grew up to be today's suicide bombers. He is worried of what may become of todays Palestine children who are made to witness these ghastly actions, as tomorow they may follow those suicide bomber footsteps or even worse.
Whether knowingly or unknowingly Israel is laying the groundwork for a steady stream of terrorists for the future.

 

[Feanor]

Gaza has a limited population, and that population is probably decreasing given the violence and poverty. I suspect that eventually the population may become small enough to render the situation a non-issue.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

The stakes have just been raised.

At least three rockets have been fired into northern Israel from Lebanon, raising fears that the current Israeli offensive in Gaza may spill over.

Israel's army responded with artillery. It is not clear who fired the rockets, and no-one has yet said they did it.

The exchange came as Israel reportedly launched 60 air strikes on the Gaza Strip overnight, targeting facilities used by the militant Hamas group.

Correspondents say this is a very dangerous moment in Israel's conflict.

The fear in the past few days has been that the violence in Gaza could spread to northern Israel and the Lebanese border area, says the BBC's Mike Sergeant in Jerusalem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7817135.stm

 

[Stryker001]

I have an Israeli friend, but its becoming increasingly hard for me to see his point of view nor justification of Israeli's actions. Over 500+ dead, n all those Hamas? Regardless of how accurate PGM's are if its an Air strike its gonna leave a huge civilian casualty, hence Israeli claims of fighting Hamas instead of Palestinians or only targeting Hamas discriminately is naive. If Israel planned for a ground assault eventually, then why go with that air strike that killed hundreds of Palestinians? I believe it is to reduce the trap they fall into b4 they send their troops in there. This is becoming increasingly a common tactic. It mirrors the 2nd chechnya war and Georgian attempts at S.Ossetia b4 they moved in.

Also I dont believe Hamas will replicate the victory of Hizbollah of 2006. Lebanon is a hilly area with terrains, Israel walked into a trap by a very prepared army. Gaza is a plain Desert, and they know the place like the back of their hand. Hamas has also shown how irresponsible hey are to provoke Israel into this actions. It doesnt show that they have the Palestinians goodwill at heart.

The other day a psychiatrist spoke on CNN an he gave a gloomy look. He said he witness how during the 1st intifada? the children of Palestine who threw rocks at Israeli soldiers grew up to be today's suicide bombers. He is worried of what may become of todays Palestine children who are made to witness these ghastly actions, as tomorow they may follow those suicide bomber footsteps or even worse.
Whether knowingly or unknowingly Israel is laying the groundwork for a steady stream of terrorists for the future.

48% of the population in Gaza Strip is 15 years and under. When the Hamas came to power they radicalized all the education facilities. The Israeli offensive will have little impact on the ideology of the followers of Hamas. If anything it has a psychological deterrent of what Israel will do to those who attack Israel.

The decision to launch Op Cast Lead was not taken lightly by Israel due to the collateral damage. It is not true that Israel is targeting children as the Hamas and UN have claimed in the media.

There was allegedly complicity between the UN and Hamas in regards to the propaganda to the targeting of children to force a ceasefire that will not be in Israels favor. To give the perception that Hamas has been victorius in this conflict. Hamas controls Gaza Strip with an iron fist so the UN will be given the benefit of the doubt in relation to siding with Hamas.

However Israel knows that the strategy to propagate the public image that Israel was targeting children came from UN headquarters, with many senior officials involved with conspiracy. Given that fact that Israel leaked the matter to the UN in the first place via a proxy, which the UN leaked to Hamas to establish the UN and Hamas relationship prior to entering into any ceasefire negotiation. The UN was caught out.

The fact that three UN schools were target after the fact is solely coincidental.

 

[wimpymouse]

Now that we got that out of the way, I've think in the past week we've heard both sides of the argument. Palestinians claims the Israelis' been blockading them off in violation of ceasefire agreement and the rockets are a response to that blockade. Israelis claim they are acting in self-defense because of rocket attacks, and maintain the blockade is neccessary to stop Hamas from smuggling weapons into Gaza. Either way, I'm not interested in the "who-did-what-to-whom" debate.

My aim for opening this thread is to debate what tactical and strategic objectives each side is attempting to accompolish and their motivation behind it. It is in my opinion that the Israeli operation is largely influenced by the fact that a general election is coming up in Israel in about a month. A strong showing of force in response to Hamas rocket attacks could be key to winning more votes for the coalition government. It could also be possible that Israel no longer wishes to deal with Hamas. By using military force, it is likely that Israel wants to topple or at least curb Hamas' influence considerably in order to reinstate the PLO under Abbas, which would make negotiations in the future presumably easier.

As you've mentioned, the Israelis have an upcomming election and 1-2 days ago I heard on the news that Ehud Olmert had gained 6% during the last few days (or was it during the last few weeks?). Obviously playing a tough game has its gains.

As for speculations, an alalysis I've heard was that the Israelis never wanted for the truce to be extended and that is why they attacked on the November 4th (?), but I can't remember if he gave another reason but for the election (I belive he did).

For the rest, I agree with the analysis above on what could be parts of the Israelis motives, but I like to ad that I belive that the Israelis have allowed, or rather closed they're eyes to, the weapons smuggling. -Why you ask.

Well, the blockade has obviously not worked, it is a mean of warfare from the Israeli side and it has mostly, or only, hampered civilian life while simultainiously refusing Hamas to do their duty as the elected Palestinian Government. This is out of two reasons:

1) It's a part of the Israeli game to play to the gain of their today favoured part, Fatah, just like they some decades ago played Hamas against Fatah in similar way.

NEWS YOU WON'T FIND ON CNN



Hamas history tied to Israel

By Richard Sale
UPI Terrorism Correspondent

06/18/02 "UPI" -- --- In the wake of a suicide bomb attack Tuesday on a crowded Jerusalem city bus that killed 19 people and wounded at least 70 more, the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, took credit for the blast.

Israeli officials called it the deadliest attack in Jerusalem in six years.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon immediately vowed to fight "Palestinian terror" and summoned his cabinet to decide on a military response to the organization that Sharon had once described as "the deadliest terrorist group that we have ever had to face."

Active in Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas wants to liberate all of Palestine and establish a radical Islamic state in place of Israel. It is has gained notoriety with its assassinations, car bombs and other acts of terrorism.

But Sharon left something out.

Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.

Israel "aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization)," said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies.

Israel's support for Hamas "was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative," said a former senior CIA official.

According to documents United Press International obtained from the Israel-based Institute for Counter Terrorism, Hamas evolved from cells of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928. Islamic movements in Israel and Palestine were "weak and dormant" until after the 1967 Six Day War in which Israel scored a stunning victory over its Arab enemies.

After 1967, a great part of the success of the Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood was due to their activities among the refugees of the Gaza Strip. The cornerstone of the Islamic movements success was an impressive social, religious, educational and cultural infrastructure, called Da'wah, that worked to ease the hardship of large numbers of Palestinian refugees, confined to camps, and many who were living on the edge.

"Social influence grew into political influence," first in the Gaza Strip, then on the West Bank, said an administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

According to ICT papers, Hamas was legally registered in Israel in 1978 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the movement's spiritual leader, as an Islamic Association by the name Al-Mujamma al Islami, which widened its base of supporters and sympathizers by religious propaganda and social work.

According to U.S. administration officials, funds for the movement came from the oil-producing states and directly and indirectly from Israel. The PLO was secular and leftist and promoted Palestinian nationalism. Hamas wanted to set up a transnational state under the rule of Islam, much like Khomeini's Iran.

What took Israeli leaders by surprise was the way the Islamic movements began to surge after the Iranian revolution, after armed resistance to Israel sprang up in southern Lebanon vis-�-vis the Hezbollah, backed by Iran, these sources said.

"Nothing provides the energy for imitation as much as success," commented one administration expert.

A further factor of Hamas' growth was the fact the PLO moved its base of operations to Beirut in the '80s, leaving the Islamic organization to grow in influence in the Occupied Territories "as the court of last resort," he said.

When the intifada began, Israeli leadership was surprised when Islamic groups began to surge in membership and strength. Hamas immediately grew in numbers and violence. The group had always embraced the doctrine of armed struggle, but the doctrine had not been practiced and Islamic groups had not been subjected to suppression the way groups like Fatah had been, according to U.S. government officials.

But with the triumph of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, with the birth of Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorism in Lebanon, Hamas began to gain in strength in Gaza and then in the West Bank, relying on terror to resist the Israeli occupation.

Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One U.S. intelligence source who asked not to be named said that not only was Hamas being funded as a "counterweight" to the PLO, Israeli aid had another purpose: "To help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Hamas members who were dangerous terrorists."

In addition, by infiltrating Hamas, Israeli informers could only listen to debates on policy and identify Hamas members who "were dangerous hard-liners," the official said.

In the end, as Hamas set up a very comprehensive counterintelligence system, many collaborators with Israel were weeded out and shot. Violent acts of terrorism became the central tenet, and Hamas, unlike the PLO, was unwilling to compromise in any way with Israel, refusing to acquiesce in its very existence.

But even then, some in Israel saw some benefits to be had in trying to continue to give Hamas support: "The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the others, if they gained control, would refuse to have any part of the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place," said a U.S. government official who asked not to be named.

"Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with," he said.

All of which disgusts some former U.S. intelligence officials.

"The thing wrong with so many Israeli operations is that they try to be too sexy," said former CIA official Vincent Cannestraro.

According to former State Department counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson, "the Israelis are their own worst enemies when it comes to fighting terrorism."

"The Israelis are like a guy who sets fire to his hair and then tries to put it out by hitting it with a hammer."

"They do more to incite and sustain terrorism than curb it," he said.

Aid to Hamas may have looked clever, "but it was hardly designed to help smooth the waters," he said. "An operation like that gives weight to President George Bush's remark about there being a crisis in education."

Cordesman said that a similar attempt by Egyptian intelligence to fund Egypt's fundamentalists had also come to grief because of "misreading of the complexities."

An Israeli defense official was asked if Israel had given aid to Hamas said, "I am not able to answer that question. I was in Lebanon commanding a unit at the time, besides it is not my field of interest."

Asked to confirm a report by U.S. officials that Brig. Gen. Yithaq Segev, the military governor of Gaza, had told U.S. officials he had helped fund "Islamic movements as a counterweight to the PLO and communists," the official said he could confirm only that he believed Segev had served back in 1986.

The Israeli Embassy press office referred UPI to its Web site when asked to comment.

Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10456.htm


2) Israel needs some type of attacks (guess only Qassam attacks are the only thing possible through the other side of a prison wall) to have an excuse towards the international community to continue the occupation of the W.B. and E.Jerusalem.

Another important factor is the fact that Israel wishes to wipe the memories of its less-than-satisfactory performance against Hezbollah in 2006. An acquaintance of mine who was recently discharged as a sniper from the Golani Brigade informed me that IDF high command made some adjustments since the 2006 conflict. They hope to give ground troops, especially the infantry corps, combat experience without exposing to dangerous opponent such as Hezbollah.

Despite heavy rhetorics from Hamas about destroying Israel, I think we can all agree that they are nowhere as well armed, organized and trained compared to Iranian backed Hezbollah. While Hezbollah are trained and supplied by Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Hamas do not seem to have any to formal instutionalized training for its militants. There is little to suggest that Hamas has the same access to the latest anti-tank weapon arsenal available to them. Given the fact that rockets fired into Israel are little more than homemade bottle rockets with warheads, Hamas is unlikely to be able to inflict the same amount of damage to IDF as did Hezbollah.

In my view, civilian casualties caused by Israeli air and ground operations actually works to the benefit of Hamas, since international pressure on Israel will increase as the number of death and wounded mounts. Hamas could also be hoping to draw Israeli ground forces deep into urban areas where they could even the playground a little and inflict damage with small arms and RPGs. Hamas' objectives, IMO, is to inflict enough casualties to IDF to make the Israeli public turn against the government and prevent Fatah from retaking power in Gaza.

Giving the infantry combat experience like that is too cynical for my imagination, but non the less interesting view from the Golani (or had it been leaked all the way down to a sniper?)

My personal belief is that Hamas' rethorics are only for 'pepping' their own people, and all the surrounding psychology around such an act, and that they realize that those are pure dreams. On a second thought, these people are deep religious and could be of another conviction due to faith.


The motive behind the Qassam attacks are primarily:
* the blockade,
* the 12.000 Palestinians imprissoned without charge,
* the imprisonment of all the legislative Hamas members to the Palestinian parliament,
* the continuation of the occupation of the West Bank (including the settlements) and East Jerusalem.

The civilian casualties and the massively damaged infrastructure is definately one of Hamas' cards, but there has also been voices stating that they could be deliberate tactics of the Israelis so that they will quench the future fighting spirit of the Gazan's.

I belive that the above stated points are reasons big enough for them to continue the bombardment, no doubt they also see their actions as a means of solidarity with those in the W.B., and that their elections are a bit too far away for them to have that as a major reason (or a reason at all today). I belive that the blockade is their greatest threat for not being reelected, and not Fatah, as there's a great possibility that a majority of the population won't be able to bare another term under these conditions.

It doesn't seem like the Israelis are willing to go into urban fighting out of that very reason.

 

[Stryker001]

As you've mentioned, the Israelis have an upcomming election and 1-2 days ago I heard on the news that Ehud Olmert had gained 6% during the last few days (or was it during the last few weeks?). Obviously playing a tough game has its gains.

As for speculations, an alalysis I've heard was that the Israelis never wanted for the truce to be extended and that is why they attacked on the November 4th (?), but I can't remember if he gave another reason but for the election (I belive he did).

For the rest, I agree with the analysis above on what could be parts of the Israelis motives, but I like to ad that I belive that the Israelis have allowed, or rather closed they're eyes to, the weapons smuggling. -Why you ask.

Well, the blockade has obviously not worked, it is a mean of warfare from the Israeli side and it has mostly, or only, hampered civilian life while simultainiously refusing Hamas to do their duty as the elected Palestinian Government. This is out of two reasons:

1) It's a part of the Israeli game to play to the gain of their today favoured part, Fatah, just like they some decades ago played Hamas against Fatah in similar way.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10456.htm


2) Israel needs some type of attacks (guess only Qassam attacks are the only thing possible through the other side of a prison wall) to have an excuse towards the international community to continue the occupation of the W.B. and E.Jerusalem.





Giving the infantry combat experience like that is too cynical for my imagination, but non the less interesting view from the Golani (or had it been leaked all the way down to a sniper?)

My personal belief is that Hamas' rethorics are only for 'pepping' their own people, and all the surrounding psychology around such an act, and that they realize that those are pure dreams. On a second thought, these people are deep religious and could be of another conviction due to faith.


The motive behind the Qassam attacks are primarily:
* the blockade,
* the 12.000 Palestinians imprissoned without charge,
* the imprisonment of all the legislative Hamas members to the Palestinian parliament,
* the continuation of the occupation of the West Bank (including the settlements) and East Jerusalem.

The civilian casualties and the massively damaged infrastructure is definately one of Hamas' cards, but there has also been voices stating that they could be deliberate tactics of the Israelis so that they will quench the future fighting spirit of the Gazan's.

I belive that the above stated points are reasons big enough for them to continue the bombardment, no doubt they also see their actions as a means of solidarity with those in the W.B., and that their elections are a bit too far away for them to have that as a major reason (or a reason at all today). I belive that the blockade is their greatest threat for not being reelected, and not Fatah, as there's a great possibility that a majority of the population won't be able to bare another term under these conditions.

It doesn't seem like the Israelis are willing to go into urban fighting out of that very reason.

The goal of Hamas has been to get the blockade of Gaza lift, any ceasefire agreement that includes the opening of the crossings will be a victory for Hamas regardless of how many people have been killed or infrastructure and munitions destroyed.

For the record the firing of missiles by Islamic Jihad and other Hamas proxies during the previous ceasefire and the tunnel to kidnap IDF personnel under the security fence where the key aspect of launching an operation as it was the Hamas junta that controls the 365 sq meters.

Aid will be allowed but opening it is the UN and other agencies as well as Israel that supply the aid if one looks at the contribution of those agencies and the UN the amount is quite small especially during a conflict.
The fact is in the original planning mid intensity timeframe was 35 days before moving to a lower intensity operation.

The ground operation stage 2 ground operation was delayed by a few days to allow targeted killings to be conduct on senior Hamas figures as the intelligence became available.

People are say that the operation have become bogged down due to the quick advance when spliting Gaza Strip into two sectors encircling part of the Gaza sector. The majority of the 35,000 operatives are in that sector.

Stage 3 is in operation as announced by Defense Minister Barak.

Hamas are really not in a position to make demands on how OP Cast Lead is concluded. In regards to Casualties 200 KIA and 1500 wounded was allocated on the IDF side before launching the operation.

Israel is willing to have diplomatic talks, on proposals inline with the aspect of what Cast Lead is aimed at achieving, if those objectives can be achieved without further stages being introduced then it is a win.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Giving the infantry combat experience like that is too cynical for my imagination, but non the less interesting view from the Golani (or had it been leaked all the way down to a sniper?)

There is an official directive from IDF High Command to do so and it's no secret. Since 2006, active duty infantry brigades will be deployed to a combat zone regardless of which command the region falls under. All regular brigades of the Israeli Infantry Corps have arrived in Gaza to reinforce the Givati, Golani from Northern Command, Tzanchanim and Kfir from Central Command. The guy I know held the rank of sergeant in the Golani and served as a sniper during the 2006 war against Hezbollah.

The way I look at it, they might want to take another crack at Hezbollah sometime in the future. It's not entirely impossible to imagine they want to give the troops some combat experience against Hamas in preparation for that.

 

[fltworthy]

Well Coordinated

Unlike 2006, the Gaza operation seems to be well planned in advance with as Israeli jets concentrated on Hamas headquarters and police stations for their bombing efforts. IDF themselves are very familiar with the terrain of Gaza, since they occupied the territory until 2005. The High Command also seemed to have learned their lesson from 2006, and this time stated they aim to reduce the amount of rocket fire instead of halting it.

I tend to agree. This operation appears to have been meticulously planned in advance. In 2006, the Israeli leadership operated under the mistaken assumption that they could achieve all of their strategic goals using airpower alone. This time, the infantry and armour were rolled-in after the first week of fighting. Likewise in 2006, there were a lot of complaints regarding the lack of coordination between the different branches of Israel's armed forces. This time, armour, infantry, naval and air force firepower appear to be well in alignment.

 

[fltworthy]

Human Shields as a Policy

I have an Israeli friend, but its becoming increasingly hard for me to see his point of view nor justification of Israeli's actions.

What is so difficult to understand? Hamas has fired over 10,000 rockets and mortar rounds into Israel since 2001. In the month of November alone, prior to the official expiration of the "cease-fire" scheduled for December 19th, Hamas and Islamic Jihad fired 126 rockets into Israel.

Does anyone believe that if Cuba were to fire 126 rockets into Miami, that we would be arguing about whether the American response was somehow "disproportionae"? If 126 rockets had landed on American soil, there would be so many US Army uniforms swarming across Havana you'd swear it had become an annex to Fort Benning.

The reality is that civilian casualties can and do occur in war - particularly in a built-up, urban environment. This has been exacerbated, however, by an official Hamas strategy which calls for using human shields to protect themselves from reprisal, and to win propaganda points with the media:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTu-AUE9ycs"]YouTube - Hamas admits it uses human shields[/ame]

The civilian casualties are not entirely accidental: they are part of Hamas' strategy - however twisted that might be. We are not talking about a band of wayward boyscouts here. We are talking about an organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel, which sadisticly uses its own civilians as human shields to win a propaganda war.

 

[wimpymouse]

There is an official directive from IDF High Command to do so and it's no secret. Since 2006, active duty infantry brigades will be deployed to a combat zone regardless of which command the region falls under. All regular brigades of the Israeli Infantry Corps have arrived in Gaza to reinforce the Givati, Golani from Northern Command, Tzanchanim and Kfir from Central Command. The guy I know held the rank of sergeant in the Golani and served as a sniper during the 2006 war against Hezbollah.

The way I look at it, they might want to take another crack at Hezbollah sometime in the future. It's not entirely impossible to imagine they want to give the troops some combat experience against Hamas in preparation for that.

Muy interesting and it sounds very probable.




On the theory of that the Israeli Nov 4th attack was meant so that the truce wouldn't be prolonged for a second half year I have found some info:

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/mal...hamas_e017.pdf

One can clearly see taht Hamas did everything within their power to stop the bombardment, and considering the Palestinians haven't been had the possibility to orginize without being constantly targeted, and that there are other factions except for Hamas, like Islamic Jihad and what not, the single two shellings during October must be seen as remarkable.

Still, two shellings is a breach, but considering that they were on a constant decrease, one could rightfully assume that there was a great possibility that during the last two months of the Lull agreement there wouldn't be any shellings at all. The reasons to why the Israelis wouldn't want that to happen have already been mentioned.

 

[wimpymouse]

The goal of Hamas has been to get the blockade of Gaza lift, any ceasefire agreement that includes the opening of the crossings will be a victory for Hamas regardless of how many people have been killed or infrastructure and munitions destroyed.

For the record the firing of missiles by Islamic Jihad and other Hamas proxies during the previous ceasefire and the tunnel to kidnap IDF personnel under the security fence where the key aspect of launching an operation as it was the Hamas junta that controls the 365 sq meters.

Aid will be allowed but opening it is the UN and other agencies as well as Israel that supply the aid if one looks at the contribution of those agencies and the UN the amount is quite small especially during a conflict.
The fact is in the original planning mid intensity timeframe was 35 days before moving to a lower intensity operation.

The ground operation stage 2 ground operation was delayed by a few days to allow targeted killings to be conduct on senior Hamas figures as the intelligence became available.

People are say that the operation have become bogged down due to the quick advance when spliting Gaza Strip into two sectors encircling part of the Gaza sector. The majority of the 35,000 operatives are in that sector.

Stage 3 is in operation as announced by Defense Minister Barak.

Hamas are really not in a position to make demands on how OP Cast Lead is concluded. In regards to Casualties 200 KIA and 1500 wounded was allocated on the IDF side before launching the operation.

Israel is willing to have diplomatic talks, on proposals inline with the aspect of what Cast Lead is aimed at achieving, if those objectives can be achieved without further stages being introduced then it is a win.

I fail to see that anything in your post is directed towards mine, that you've quoted, and still is on topic.

 

[fltworthy]

The Path They Chose

One can clearly see taht Hamas did everything within their power to stop the bombardment

Actually, the charts prove the opposite point. Hamas halted rocket and mortar attacks until November (125 rockets in November - according to the charts you provided). The ceasefire officially expired on December 19th.

The decision to end the ceasefire was made by Hamas - even though the Egyptians warned them that this was a foolish path to undertake:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5roptSbO3GQ"]YouTube - Egyptian Foreign Minister blames Hamas[/ame]

Hamas was urged by their Arab neighbors, across the region, to extend the ceasefire - and refused. Their genocidal fantasies have brought nothing but misery to the Palestinian people. The sooner that these religious fanatics loose their grip on power, the better it will be for all parties.

 

[wimpymouse]

Actually, the charts prove the opposite point. Hamas halted rocket and mortar attacks until November (125 rockets in November - according to the charts you provided). The ceasefire officially expired on December 19th.

The decision to end the ceasefire was made by Hamas - even though the Egyptians warned them that this was a foolish path to undertake:
YouTube - Egyptian Foreign Minister blames Hamas

Hamas was urged by their Arab neighbors, across the region, to extend the ceasefire - and refused. Their genocidal fantasies have brought nothing but misery to the Palestinian people. The sooner that these religious fanatics loose their grip on power, the better it will be for all parties.

Actually the charts clearly prove that the rockets were contiously decreasing and were almost a non issue; 2 in October. Then came November 4th...

From a tactical point of view one can hardly argue the point of extending a ceasefire if it's not kept by the Israelis, but most of all that the blockade wasn't going to be lifted. A blockade is in it self an act of war and therefore a cassus belli.

The rest is OT.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Okay if you guys need to play the blame game on who started the war, go somewhere else to argue about it. This thread is to evaluation tactical performance by both sides, their strategical aim and motivation behind it. Next person to keep arguing who started it will have his post deleted without notice.