Incredible Footage

[Vark]

If I was to say to my son, don't worry, a casual observer might infer that my son was worried about something and I was offering reassurance. Hence the question, why do you need to reassure me? Do you think I have a personal connection to Israel? I don't, just worked their for under a year. Though having worked with both Arabs and Israelis I see why Israel used to be included in the Eurovision song contest, it has little to do with the ME, which is part of the problem.

I'd have though whipping boy and ME fixer was historically self-evident, and perhaps why the US supports her politically and financially, unless you subscribe to other more traditional reasons.

As for provably false statements regarding US policy that is only true if those public statements reflect the reality of the situation, and from my understandings of foreign policy that often is not the case. Though in the US case her policy goals are so unrealistic, given the lack of engagement and effort spent in the region, one wonders if they do have a specific policy, other than a Micawberish hope. If that is true, a two to three year delay of Iran's project, crippling of Hamas and defanging of Hezbollah, where Israel takes the flak, might seem quite tempting.

If you have the time, this debate might help.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/can-israel-live-with-a-nuclear-iran.premium-1.495432

Bottom line, Israel will act the way she historically always has done, her armed forces are just an extension of that society. The conflict with Iran is, as the article said, just a continuation of the War of Independence, where the Arabs have not come to terms with their disastrous decision to attack Israel in 48. Because of that I cannot see how they will accept Iranian nukes. I might be wrong, but I still don't see it myself, as it would be the death of any hope of her surviving long term.

[Vanir Ausf B]

If I was to say to my son, don't worry, a casual observer might infer that my son was worried about something and I was offering reassurance. Hence the question, why do you need to reassure me?

Because you seemed upset over what you apparently perceived as poor and unjust treatment at the hands of the US, e.g. "publically kick them around about settlements, disrespect their leader". I felt a little perspective was in order.

Do you think I have a personal connection to Israel?

I don't care either way. Your connection or lack thereof does not make your statements any more or less accurate.

I'd have though whipping boy and ME fixer was historically self-evident, and perhaps why the US supports her politically and financially, unless you subscribe to other more traditional reasons.

Israel acts in it's own self interest. Like all countries it attempts to fix problems that threaten it to the extent it is able to do so, which are primarily within its own borders and to a lesser extent the nations bordering it. It is not the fixer of the wider Middle East to any significant degree.

As for provably false statements regarding US policy that is only true if those public statements reflect the reality of the situation

They do.

U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site

WASHINGTON — President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran’s suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials.

White House officials never conclusively determined whether Israel had decided to go ahead with the strike before the United States protested, or whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was trying to goad the White House into more decisive action before Mr. Bush left office. But the Bush administration was particularly alarmed by an Israeli request to fly over Iraq to reach Iran’s major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country’s only known uranium enrichment plant is located.

The White House denied that request outright, American officials said, and the Israelis backed off their plans, at least temporarily.

Of course, policy can change and there is no guarantee the US may not decide at some point in the future that military action is necessary. But even in that scenario don't expect the US to look to Israel to do it because the US can do it much better.

Bottom line, Israel will act the way she historically always has done, her armed forces are just an extension of that society. The conflict with Iran is, as the article said, just a continuation of the War of Independence, where the Arabs have not come to terms with their disastrous decision to attack Israel in 48. Because of that I cannot see how they will accept Iranian nukes. I might be wrong, but I still don't see it myself, as it would be the death of any hope of her surviving long term.

Iran is not an Arab country. Setting that aside, it would not be surprising at all for Israel to launch an attack on Iran. But that doesn't mean they won't have to accept a nuclear Iran anyway. If Iran wants the bomb bad enough to endure the economic and possibly physical pain to get it, they will get it absent removal of the government via internal revolution or foreign invasion, which the US is not willing to do and Israel cannot do.

[Vark]

I'm well aware of the difference between Persians and Arabs, talking to Iranians makes that distinction perfectly clear. In fact it's why the Arabs are waiting for action, they fear a nuclear Iran, and its why the Iranians want it, to once more be the regional superpower. Iran, although not Arab, exploits their unwillingness to face the consequences of their self-inflicted nakba and seeks to position itself as the scourge of Israel, hence the rhetoric directed about 'her ceasing to exist'.

The Israelis, and Jews as a whole, have been treated unjustly, period, all through history. What is remarkable, is that they have accepted and internalised this fact (running through the Torah is constant realisation of this injustice) to drive themselves forward, not lurk in the comfort of perpetual 'victim'. Again, unless you have lived in that country, it's hard to explain, the never again comment reflected a feeling which always lurked below the surface, and drove people forward. I would find it hard to reconcile those experiences in Israel with a belief they would just become supine because or the Wests perception of real politik. We in the West, especially politically, tend to be quite solipsistic, and this is one of those moments, I fear.

As for ME fixer, its interests seem to remarkably coincide with that of the Wests, stopping regional nuclear proliferation recently and being an essential intel conduit during the Cold War and GWT. My original soubriquet was wet boy, which would have been more accurate than fixer, as that has wider political connotations, again, I think recent history bears me out.

If you are quoting US policy from open sources, and I notice the classic word 'secret' meaning both sides wanted it revealed then it's not official US policy as understood by those who made it.

If the US attacked Iran it would have no separation from the event, no political cover to hide behind and look what direct intervention, in the ME, did to the US recently. Plausible deniability is the phrase I think.

To the Israelis, delaying the programme intermittently will stop the programme in the long term. The financial cost of continuing to try to continue the programme, whilst absorbing the additional costs of repair, will eventually cause that revolution so indirectly they might. The regimes hold on power is not as strong as some would like to think, or choose to believe, and the failed opportunity to give moral support to the 'Green Revolution', was a missed opportunity, a bargaining chip that turned out to be a dud.

As for the inevitable nuclear Iran, ask Iraq and Syria about that inevitability.

[agusto]

As for the inevitable nuclear Iran, ask Iraq and Syria about that inevitability.

Operation Orchard (Iraq) and Operation Opera (Syria) both targeted nuclear reactors that were still under construction and not underground facilities. AFAIK Iran already has an operating nuclear power plant in Bushehr and several more are currently under contruction. We could conclude from this 1) that Israel hasnt attacked Irans nuclear reactors yet becuase they dont believe they would scuceed in doing so or that they dont believe this would be decisieve in preventing Iran from getting nuclear weapons and 2) that there is no benchmark Israeli Air Srike that serves as proof that Israel has the capabilities to destroy underground uranium enrichment facilities.

[Vark]

Agree, both those operations were against more vulnerable structures, though Orchard stretched the IAF's capabilities considerably, but the intent is clear to see. They cannot allow Iran to get nuclear weapons, and that window is slowly closing, when it is, military solutions become redundant.

I only watched part of the debate I linked, but it was interesting to note the first Israeli speaker mentioned the 'existential threat' such weapons posed. That is the point, hence my reference to the Wests solipsistic foreign policy, the Iranians never need to use them, directly, for them to have a huge impact on Israel. Saying they must accept the reality is pointless, a delay, however slight, to our self-interested perceptions, could mean saving the country to them.

Good article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21768360

[Vanir Ausf B]

If you are quoting US policy from open sources, and I notice the classic word 'secret' meaning both sides wanted it revealed then it's not official US policy as understood by those who made it.

Do you have any actual evidence to back up your claim that the US wants Israel to attack Iran? You can choose to believe what you want, but the undeniable and un-secret fact is that Israel has not attacked Iran, and the truth of the matter can be inferred from that alone.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Good article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21768360

"When we were planning Osirak, we believed the operation would put back [iraq's nuclear programme] by three or four years," says Dr Shmuel Bar, Director of Studies at the Institute of Policy and Strategy in Herzliya.

"Actually it put it back by 10 years - so you never really know when you shuffle cards what the results are going to be. So from the point of view of criticism that Israel won't do it because Israel can only do so much damage, I think that's a misconception."

One of the men who actually worked in Iraq's nuclear program would disagree with that assessment.

Contrary to popular belief, it appears that Israel's attack on Osirak in June of 1981 did nothing to hinder Iraq's nuclear aspirations. Although it temporarily set back its capabilities, it served rather to reinforce and increase Saddam's desire for a nuclear arsenal. In fact, Iraqi nuclear scientist Imad Khadduri claims that Israel's preemptive strike against the French-built Tamuz Iraqi nuclear reactor, which was not really suitable for plutonium production anyway, had the exact opposite effect of the one intended: it sent Saddam Hussein's A-bomb program into overdrive and convinced the Iraqi leadership to initiate a full fledged nuclear weapons program immediately afterwards.[28]

Khidir Hamza, another Iraqi nuclear scientist and one of the leading proponents of Operation Iraqi Freedom and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, gave a near identical assessment. He told Mike Begala on CNN's Crossfire on February 7, 2003:

Israel -- actually, what Israel [did] is that it got out the immediate danger out of the way. But it created a much larger danger in the longer range. What happened is that Saddam ordered us - we were 400... scientists and technologists running the program. And when they bombed that reactor out, we had also invested $400 million. And the French reactor and the associated plans were from Italy. When they bombed it out we became 7,000 with a $10 billion investment for a secret, much larger underground program to make bomb material by enriching uranium. We dropped the reactor out totally, which was the plutonium for making nuclear weapons, and went directly into enriching uranium.... They [israel] estimated we'd make 7kg of plutonium a year, which is enough for one bomb. And they get scared and bombed it out. Actually it was much less than this, and it would have taken a much longer time. But the program we built later in secret would make six bombs a year.[29]

http://cns.miis.edu/stories/040812.htm

[akd]

One of the men who actually worked in Iraq's nuclear program would disagree with that assessment.

http://cns.miis.edu/stories/040812.htm

Very poor source.

However, since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, most, if not all of his information on the Nuclear Weapons program have been widely discredited, and former UNSCOM inspectors insist that he was never part of the Nuclear Program at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khidir_Hamza

[Vanir Ausf B]

Perhaps true with regards to Khidir Hamza, but to the best of my knowledge Imad Khadduri is well respected. So the point stands.

[Vanir Ausf B]

In 1980 I shared the worries of the Israelis described by Claire and mentioned them, in person, to Dr Yuuval Neeman of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission. But as I studied the matter I realized that I was wrong. The nuclear research reactor OSIRAK was NOT like the DIMONA reactor, which was a heavy water cooled reactor and a near copy of the French OSIRIS reactor but was a light water cooled reactor explicitly designed to be unsuited for making plutonium. This view was held by many authorities. Jafar had written a report on the subject which confirms this view. I was convinced when I visited the bombed reactor in 1982. This point should not be a matter of dispute for any nuclear physicist or engineer who can easily do the calculations for him(her)self. Indeed, I know of no calculation, accurate or otherwise, that claims differently. Moreover, the IAEA was planning to place full time inspectors in Iraq once the reactor was operational, which would have made any plutonium production impossible.

There is general agreement, for example in the book by Obeidi also reviewed in Nuclear News, that the atomic bomb program really got moving in the late 1980s. Indeed it seems that Iraq was not in explicit violation of NPT (by separation of uranium isotopes) till about 1988. The OSIRAK reactor was destroyed by an unprovoked air raid in June 1981. It was not until early in September 1981 that Saddam Hussein personally released Jafar from house arrest and asked him to start and head the clandestine nuclear bomb program. This fact supports the suspicion of many of us. That the destruction of OSIRAK did not stop an Iraqi nuclear bomb program but actually started it. Worse still, the Israelis were so pleased with themselves that it appears that neither they nor the CIA looked for and understood the real direction of the Iraqi nuclear bomb program.

Richard Wilson

Department of Physics

Harvard University

[agusto]

I found some vids of the FSA using truely medieval weaponary:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6d6_1366572893

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4c_1366575109

[Nidan1]

I found some vids of the FSA using truely medieval weaponary:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6d6_1366572893

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4c_1366575109

http://youtu.be/VtAZeHYmO20

Young American Cubscouts test "Non-Lethal Aid" US plans to send to the FSA.

[__Yossarian0815[jby]]

I found some vids of the FSA using truely medieval weaponary:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6d6_1366572893

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4c_1366575109

LOL, Trebuchets vs Tanks, that is so Civilisation!

[agusto]

Some really good footage of SAA tanks and infantry working togather:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mBngMh7LVw

[Nidan1]

Again, as they continue to turn their country into a moonscape. The buildings in this latest video look as if they were recently constructed and are still unfinished.

Decent housing that the average Syrian will probably never get to live in as this civil war drags on.

[akd]

Further to previous, more of the battle in a Daraya construction site:

http://youtu.be/UBdAJ0Qrrjc

http://youtu.be/p30p4pxUQFU

[Erwin]

That was one of the most interesting cips as it showed an entire operation from start to finish like in the CMSF game.

Inf trying to run from building to building gets WIA. They bring in a "Tanky" and an APC to rescue him. Then more "Tankies" come in and make smoke and provide covering fire the rest of the inf unit can run between the buildings. Then the "Tankies" withdraw and refuel. Great stuff.

And I will start calling my oppo's armor "Tankies" from now on just to irritate him (or her).

[akd]

4th Part, now with ZPU cam (@3:10):

http://youtu.be/YgCzrVTxK9g

[agusto]

Lucky rebel camera man films a SAF aircraft dropping slowly descending parachute bombs at his position and stays until they impact just to get us some great HD footage:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3ea_1367229422

T72s lurking around and shooting stuff in the ruins of a rural area around Darayaa:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkfxRSB0JKg

Note the brick at 00:08 that is used to replace a destroyed ERA pack.

[agusto]

Further to previous, more of the battle in a Daraya construction site:

http://youtu.be/UBdAJ0Qrrjc

http://youtu.be/p30p4pxUQFU

More of the battle of the construction site (parts 5 & 6, english subs, 1080 HD):

SAA artillery and aircraft prepare rebel positions for the assault:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz3HhwBPS30

The assault:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_oKe_JXKPM

[Schmoly War]

Here is something that could be the other end of that ^

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPG7HbOtY8c

[Erwin]

Wow. Now, THAT looked "realistic"!

[Alan8325]

Here is something that could be the other end of that ^

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPG7HbOtY8c

What do you think it is that hits the shooter at 0:38? Definitely bigger than a 7.62mm round but definitely smaller than a 125mm tank round. I'm guessing 12.7mm or 30mm. The final explosion is probably 125mm.

[agusto]

Something that looks like a 9K111 Fagot or a 9M113 Konkurs ATGM vs T-72, long range shot.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=df4_1367599643

[George MC]

I don't think this one has been posted. Syrian rebels engaging what looks to be BMPs with RPGs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNR5OTZZQTE