War in the middle east, why oh why?

That doesnt mean the things told in the article are not true, it only shows that the title is typically journalistic, only to be corrected in the article after it did its job of attracting attention towards the article. I would've worried more if "wiped out" was kept in the text.

take care

Most tanks that were hit were damaged serious enough that at least a crew died. And the rest injured. Plus in combat a tank doesn't need to be destroyed. If you can disable it, its good enough. Killing the crew is a bonus.

A truce is on. What did Israel achieve?

1. The kidnapped soldiers are still kidnapped.

2. Hezbolah isn't destroyed.

3. Hezbolah isn't disarmed.

4. Hezbolah is still present in the south.

5. They can still shoot rockets at Israel. They shot 250 yesterday.

So what did Israel achieve?

157 dead, hundreds of wounded, and best of all they did keep their promise and turned back Lebanon 20 years. Thats the only thing they said they would do which they actually did.

And now the Shaba farms are back on the negociation table. Israel came out of this worst than it was during the status quo.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/750384.htm

Raw data:

IMPACT: 34 DAYS OF FIGHTING

Lebanon deaths:
About 1,000 - mostly civilians
No precise data on Hezbollah dead

Israeli deaths:
Soldiers: 114 (IDF)
Civilians: 43 (IDF)

Lebanon displaced:
700,000 - 900,000 (UNHCR; Lebanese govt)

Israeli displaced:
500,000 (Human Rights Watch)

Lebanon damage:
$2.5bn (Lebanese govt)

Israel damage:
$1.1bn (Israeli govt)

The huge Israeli damage must be because of all the damaged/destroyed tanks. The rockets didn't inflict much damage.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/750384.htm

Raw data:

IMPACT: 34 DAYS OF FIGHTING

Lebanon deaths:
About 1,000 - mostly civilians
No precise data on Hezbollah dead

Israeli deaths:
Soldiers: 114 (IDF)
Civilians: 43 (IDF)

Lebanon displaced:
700,000 - 900,000 (UNHCR; Lebanese govt)

Israeli displaced:
500,000 (Human Rights Watch)

Lebanon damage:
$2.5bn (Lebanese govt)

Israel damage:
$1.1bn (Israeli govt)

The huge Israeli damage must be because of all the damaged/destroyed tanks. The rockets didn't inflict much damage.

"1. The kidnapped soldiers are still kidnapped."

You're not watching Saving Private Ryan

"2. Hezbolah isn't destroyed."

How long before Hezbollah will be able to pull something like this again according to you?

"3. Hezbolah isn't disarmed."

In this case Hezbollah is not the problem. Try Iran and Syria.

"5. They can still shoot rockets at Israel. They shot 250 yesterday."

1 civilian died. and no one else injured from what I read. it was worth the rocket barrage.

as far isreal's tank losses show them. I want pictures not media bla bla.

only burning tanks I've seen are M113 and M60's (Magach 7), but not merkavas like the media claims.



unless I'm mistaken, the burning vehicle is a Magach 7. though the one next to it is indeed a merkava but what indication that it's destroyed? so what if there's smoke next to it? could be from smoke launchers.. and munition is usually packed with explosives so it's normal that there is smoke, regardless if the tank is killed or not

1. The fact that Olmert said he will negotiate with Hezbollah for their release is a major defeat. The whole war started with Olmert saying he wont negotiate with terrorists, bla bla

3. Are Iran and Syria disarmed?

5. Israel started the war saying any missile fired on its soil is an act of war and will be dealt with strongly. Now you seem to say they're saying as long as they dont kill many it's OK.

As far as Israel's tank losses - what, you think the IDF allows independent photographers roam through its lines? The photographs taken by the IDF wont be published in the media. Not yet.

IDF generals admited that about one half of their deaths were tankers. Now you can't kill the crew without damaging/destroying the tank.

And how do you think Israel sustained 1 billion $ in damages? Tanks cost a lot you know.

Like imperial said, its not like there was a reporter around every tank to take pictures when it gets hit.

In WW2, over 6 million russian died. I doubt there was a picture taken of each one of them to confirm their deaths

Hi Guys,

Israel has certainly lost the war of perceptions.

It stated its goals too openly too early, which is always a hostage to fortune. The fact that they weren't achieved by the time of the ceasefire will play like a victory on the Arab street, which is so used to humiliation that it accepts very low standards of evidence of success.

It is overlooked that Hisbollah has also failed in its stated goals. It has taken a military hammering and has accepted a ceasefire with Israeli troops still firmly on its soil. What is more, the Israelis and Americans now have hard evidence of Iranian and Syrian complicity and this might yet prove to have wider consequences.

The Israeli army is good. It has enormous experience and a great capacity to learn. I predict that if fighting breaks out again it will be much better prepared.

This may have been Hisbollah's high point.

Cheers,

Sid.

This link is an addition to what Sid Guttridge mentioned:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4792261.stm

PS: My personal opinion is that from the two sides Israel fell much, much further than its enemies from achieving its targets. Maybe because Israel set much more ambitious goals. All the "muscular" show off stated very clearly from the very beginning that Hezbolah will be wiped out from the south of Lebanon, and they kept this "wipe out" idea until the very late days, until the reality in the ground and the discovery that the U.S. is not the single player on this planet led to what we have now.
The reality now is not far from what "Stealth3" posted in his previous posts.
Honestly, I am still surprised about the Iranian ability to design all those various missiles, like the land to sea rockets which kicked the Israeli ship - and an Egyptian one, by mistake. I guess as somebody born in Europe I had the tendency to underestimate the engineers from Middle East (here I am not including Israel). The same way some people from Western Europe use to underestimate the engineers from Romania, or other countries. Or like the Germans used to underestimate the Russian engineers, and later the Americans.

This post has been edited by Florin on August 15, 2006 12:37 pm

http://www.debka-net-weekly.com/index.pl

Even though both sides claimed victory, obviously Hezbolah was not defeated the way the other side wanted. I mentioned previously that Israel set very ambitious goals. The reason I am adding this new post is the fact that Israel is still in Lebanon, and obviously it was in the moment the truce was signed. This is making some people to claim an obvious victory for Israel.
Being in enemy territory when the peace is signed does not make you victor always. I just remembered Germany at the end of World War One - still deep in France, when the peace was signed: the German soldiers had to march on foot for 3 days from frontline to the German border. In Russia, it was even better: the whole Ukraine was under German occupation. These did not make Germany a victor.
Victory is achieving the goals you set yourself.
Hezbolah is still in Lebanon.
In theory, Israel is still under the threat of the enemy missiles.
Also, Hezbolah never set the goal to end this war with its own fighters on the territory of Israel, so we cannot mark this as an objective they did not achieve.

This post has been edited by Florin on August 15, 2006 04:43 pm

"After five weeks it [Israel] was still struggling to occupy a few hundred meters."

"From a military perspective, it [the battle] was decided in favor of the resistance [Hezbollah]. Israel has been defeated from the beginning," Assad said. "They [Israelis] have become a subject of ridicule."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/750834.html

You're not watching Saving Private Ryan.

You are right, we are not watching Saving Private Ryan.
But it was quite close to that!

This post has been edited by Florin on August 15, 2006 06:35 pm

but that has nothing to do with israel's tactics or armament. if israel failed it's because of it's internal politics, UN and media. if everyone in israel backed Olmert in that hezbollah has to be defeated with whatever force necessary things would have turned out very differently imo.

Hallo Gentlemen,

all propaganda cries of "Victory" aside, the real losers in this war has been the civilians on both sides of the Israeli - Lebanon Border.

Hezbollah knew that by goading Israel into an armed response, the chances of civillian casualties would be high, hence the publicty value for them would be enormous.

Lets not be fooled that the action was to help take the I. D. F. preasure off their poor Palastine brothers in the south of Israel, in fact prior to this one side was calling the other "Infidels".

Pity the Lebanese cant see they are being used as pawns & influenced by the "Men In Black" who in turn opperate strictly according to the strings pulled by their masters in Syria and Iran.

Hezbollah remain a terrorist force, they want a fundamentalist world, if and when the day comes they manage to defeat Israel, we only have to wonder who will be next on their list of countries to be educated in the ways of Mohamed.

And I doubt if they (Hezbollah) will be publishing any true casualty figures of dead Hizbollah terrorists, better the world to think only "innocent civilians" were killed by the I. D. F.

The contributing factors that lead to the recent situation in my opinion were;

A Lebanese government so infiltrated by Syrians that there was never a possibility of Hezbollah being removed from the area.

A Lebanese army that was kept too small and ill-equiped, to maintain a presence against Hizbollah.

The Israelis for not anticipating the situation unfolding as it did, after the pull out of the Christian Militia in 2000, as well as a government who cut defense spending.

And the United Nations, who imediately in 2000 cut the U N I F I L force with such quickness to save money, despite the situation on the ground, being reported by
U N I F I L commanders that to do so would create a vacuam that Hezbollah would take advantage off.

The U. N. has commited a series of blunders in recent times from Jugoslavia, to the Ivory Coast, and the cost is born by the civilians in the affected areas.
Now Koffie Annan is back peddling to try and salvage something out of the situation, when he should hand in his resignation.

But I predict if it comes to a "Round II" Israel will not be found wanting and the civilian population will be in for more misery and hardship.

[B]Kevin A Ryan in Deva (ex "C." Company, 46th IRISH BATTALION U N I F I L.)[/B]

PS please excuse any spelling mistakes, they are all mine

This post has been edited by New Connaught Ranger on August 15, 2006 08:47 pm

Hi Imperialist,

The first quote, "After five weeks Israel was still struggling to occupy a few hundred metres" completely misses the point.

Israel was trying to extinguish the Hisbollah threat by indirect means without having to occupy territory. In this it failed.

Had Israel really wanted to occupy territory without self restraint it could probably have been in both Beirut and Damascus in five weeks. Israel can probably mobilise a million troops. Somewhere around 1% of that number have actually been committed to Lebanese soil at any one time, most in the last few days before the ceasefire.

Cheers,

Sid.

More than 80% of the Israeli citizens supported Olmert and his tough approach. That was better than what Hitler could hope for before the Munchen Treaty of 1938.

Now, media... What is media supposed to do? Do show the news like in America?
At least you have to accept that media had better access to damages incurred in Lebanon than to damages incurred in Israel. At least twice the Israeli arrested for short time the reporters of Al-Jazeera. If you want to play the victim role, allow the reporters from all networks to see what damages you have.

And UN... For weeks Israel and the U.S. tried to impose "on the green table" something which Israel failed to achieve in direct battles and airstrikes. As the Israeli army failed to achieve this in the ground, why they should get it in negociations?
Well, my last sentence is leading to something mentioned previously by another member: If the Arabs/Muslims are failing to achieve in fight their goals, why do they keep asking them? The end of this conflict, unfortunately, did not end the problem. This war was just another step... And we cannot see the end of the ladder.