Israeli ground tactics in S. Lebanon

[MikeyD]

Might as well jump in, myself.

"Lebanon has a formal military and does not recognize Hezbollah as a part of it."

This brings up the topic of outside contractors doing defense work in Iraq. If you've got a traditional military in need of extra assistance, and an outside group that's properly equipped and financed, and both with roughly similar goals the lines of demarcation start to blur. What's the difference between the Lebanese government turning a blind eye to Hezbollah dominating the southern border with Israel and the U.S. government turning a blind eye to Shiite factions in Iraq piling up suspected pro-insurgent bodies (the plan to "El Salvadorize" Iraq I think was one intelligence offical's term for it). In both cases the job's getting done, the politicians have a useful deniability fig leaf, and terror-intimidation tactics are invariably part of the repertoire. And what happens If these semi-autonimous outside groups stray off the reservation? To quote from 'Mission Impossible' - "The Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions."

[Battlefront.com]

Mikey,

This brings up the topic of outside contractors doing defense work in Iraq.

Indeed it does. This has been a topic of great interest for those who study international law and (in the US) Constitutional law. Fits right in with the other gray areas the Bush Admin continues to push into (prisoner transfers, indefinite detentions, military tribunals, electronic spying on own citizens, etc.).

There is a difference, however, between the military contractors in Iraq and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The US government (and others) does not disavow the existance and presence of the contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. The companies they represent reside in the open within the borders of the US (and other nations). Therefore, the ties with the government are extremely solid. Not so in Lebanon.

However poor and questionable the accountability of contractors may be, in theory it exists or can with a stroke of a pen exist. Not so with Hezbollah. In fact, that is at the root of the problem. Israel's demand is that Hezbollah be disarmed and/or expelled from (at least) southern Lebanon. I think the Lebanese government would like nothing less than that, especially now. But they lack the power to do it and therefore there is no accountability possible. Strokes of pens would mean nothing because Hezbollah is a power separate from the laws and wishes of the Lebanese government. Corporations, as corrupt as they may be, are not powers onto themselves. They survive only at the pleasure of their host nation and therefore, with a stroke of a pen, can be forced to change their behavior.

Steve

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

They survive only at the pleasure of their host nation and therefore, with a stroke of a pen, can be forced to change their behavior.

Unless of course the host nation is an oligocracy where the elite ruling class has a vested interest in seeing these corporations survive, continuing status quo until the people raise a big enough stink for the government to pretend to do something about it.

Cynical, me? Never!

I think we all agree that Hezbulla is a nasty organization. They've been putting the 'mental' in fundamentalist since 1982. Some of the tactics that they have been using are Terrorist in their nature, some of them military.

I condemn what they are doing, but at least I can understand how it fits in to their whole raison d'etre.

What business Isreal has targetting Lebannese civilians under the pretense of targetting Hezbulla is beyond me. I can understand reacting, going to the world stage to ask for assistance in clearing this mess up, maybe even moving in and securing the border area, but I would hope that they would act with consideration for peaceful Lebannese and act without anger or vengance. I have a good friend who is (now Canadian) Lebannese. He is a very good person and I would hate to think good people like him could be murdered by a sovereign state for the sake of revenge.

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and the whole world would soon be blind and toothless."

[Kilroy Lurking]

Hi JR.

"What business Isreal has targetting Lebannese civilians under the pretense of targetting Hezbulla is beyond me"

Herein lies one of the misconceptions of Israeli acrions in these ongoing conflicts:

Israel does not purposely target civilians as an act of policy.

Quite rhe contrary - Regard for civilians limits the effectiveness of the military

[Kilroy Lurking]

Post Continued!

Hizboula on the other hand deliberately targets civilians.

Civilian casualties in areas controlled by terrorists are problematic - Are they civilians or part time terrorists? Are they co-opted/coerced/Blackmailed into helping the terrorists etc.

How should the military reacts to terrorists who use civilians or civilian infrastructure as shields for their fighters/Weapons?

If one walks away (keeping the moral high ground) then the terrorist wins - if the target is engaged a degree of "colateral"

is very likely.

As an observation - Given an exrended time frame Israel could fight a Hi-Tech Air war in South Lebanon without high concentration of ground forces (and high casualties) but because of the perceived time limitation (Public opinion, Uncle Sam) the milirary objective seems to be to achieve as much as possible before the plug is pulled,

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Kilroy Lurking:

Israel does not purposely target civilians as an act of policy.

Ya, and no one in Germany knew the holocost was happening either...

I believe that there is a willful turning of a blind eye by the government and an impossible mandate for the IDF. This leads to the inevitable targeting of civilians, whether they are the intended tactical or strategic target or not. Whether this targeting of civilians is a distinct policy, or is a result of poor judjement and policy making doesn't matter when assigning guilt for the death of innocents.

Don't be foolish, everyone's hands are bloody with this conflict. We are seeing similar problems with civilian deaths in Iraq and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan. CMSF will likely ignore the fact that these three conflicts are representative of how a war in Syria would play out in reality. So long as we (the west) are seen as the aggressors, the disenchanted people of the middle east will have the fuel they need to sustain an organized 'terrorist' campaign against us (the west).

Hizboula on the other hand deliberately targets civilians.

Hezbulla members used to be a bunch of radicals and I agree it needs to be dismantled, disarmed, destroyed. I say used to be because many moderate young Lebannese are being pushed to service with Hezbulla by this conflict. But can you imagine where Northern Ireland would be if during the 1970s & 80s the English reacted like the Israelis are and bombed the crap out of theRepublic of Ireland? Kudo's to Isreal for not flattening Lebannon, but Hezbulla's taking up positions in highly defendable urban areas is a fact of war. The Dutch did the same in WWII and the population paid the price. The difference in Lebannon is that IMO, neither force has the moral highground.

Killing 2 year olds isn't the way to defuse a situation. I swear the whole region is going to go up like a powder keg, and guess who's going to be stuck in the middle? The Bantam Rooster that is the state of Isreal.

This whole discussion makes me physically ill. I'm signing off for a while. Dang politics! How come this thread wasn't locked?

Jim

[Cary]

Steve, and others as well: some very thoughtful posts, and I appreciate your forbearance as they began to veer from the topic.

Regards, and thanks for the thought.

Cary

[Battlefront.com]

J Ruddy,

Unless of course the host nation is an oligocracy where the elite ruling class has a vested interest in seeing these corporations survive, continuing status quo until the people raise a big enough stink for the government to pretend to do something about it.

Absolutely. Again, this is where theory and reality conflict. In reality the US could have better car emission, fuel consumption, and saftey standards. Also in reality, it does not simply because government has been bought off by industry. One doesn't have to be cynical to see it this way. One only has to have their eyes open (not even wide!).

What business Isreal has targetting Lebannese civilians under the pretense of targetting Hezbulla is beyond me.

Although much of the motivation of the attacks is probably to punish and send a message, there are military reasons for doing this. Many of Hezballah's forces and leadership infrastructure are not in souther Lebanon. They are in residential neighborhoods in Beirut or north and west of the city, including Syria. By taking out bridges, roads, power, and other items the Israelis are making it more difficult for Hezbollah to reinforce the south. So it would be incorrect to say all of the attacks are without sensible reason.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

However poor and questionable the accountability of contractors may be, in theory it exists or can with a stroke of a pen exist.

[snippety]

Corporations, as corrupt as they may be, are not powers onto themselves. They survive only at the pleasure of their host nation and therefore, with a stroke of a pen, can be forced to change their behavior.

It was once thus, but over the last 20 years or so, I've begun to woder if it is any more. The shift in power began over a century ago when the Supreme Court decided to award the same rights of personhood to corporations as to human individuals. Granted, they are still regulated, but then so are we. The important difference is that once that barrier was passed, corporations were then able to accumulate more power and influence than individuals could. That process has vastly accelerated over the last two and a half decades, mostly because we as voters and taxpayers have been complacent enough to allow it. But also because our elected officials have found it personally lucrative to allow it. The point, the crucial point, now is that I have to wonder if things haven't gone so far that even if the voters and their representatives had a miraculous change of heart that they would not be able to reverse the trend. I don't know what the answer to that is, but I fear to discover it.

Michael

[Bigduke6]

Steve,

On the VC, I share your grudging respect for some aspects of the organization. But at the time they were doing their thing, their opponents - the US and the RVN government - defined the VC as a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And there is little question I think, they certainly used terror.

Kind of makes you wonder whether the present US definition of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization is going to hold water 30 years down the line. Well, it makes me wonder, anyway.

And I think you are well-read enough to know quite well the Viet Cong guerllia movement was not directly controlled by the Ho government; at least if you asked the old VC cadre. There was a pretty violent purge of VC cadre by the Hanoi government after they kicked the Americans out; show trials, anonymous accusers, night time arrests, labor camps, the works. There's a good book on that: A Viet Cong Memoir.

Ultimately, it's kind of a wierd definition of terrorist you seem to have: it's not whether the person and organization uses terror.

Rather it's whether the organization has or doesn't have rules controlling the use violence, and whether or not the organization has a stated geopolitical goal, and whether or not the organization is fully subordinate to a legitimate government somewhere.

I think Hizbollah might well fail most of those tests. Their terror attacks are not random and for the heck of it. They have an organization. They are considered a legitimate political authority by a large group of people, in whose territory Hizbollah law and order (such as it is) prevails.

What's more, certainly some of Hizbollah are international criminal scum, but current events show us that at least some of Hizbollah are willing to fight and die as soldiers opposing a conventional force on a battlefield.

(This is leaving aside examples of people like Lenin, who through terrorist attacks on the political level undermined an existing regime, usually getting bazillions of people killed in an ensuing war, but since they won, hola! they weren't terrorists but revolutionaries.)

Be Lenin and his ilk as they may, tight now it's quite hard to deny that in South Lebanon, despite the laser-guided bombs, cluster munitions, UAVs, and MerkavaIV tanks, a bunch of Arab Muslim fighters are mostly standing their ground, and fighting and dying against a conventional assault. And if you asked any one of them who they were fighting for, the answer of those soldiers (personally, I don't think the word is worth capitalizing) would answer "Hizbollah" - an orgnization you say is morally evil, as it is terrorist.

Like the VC, Hizbollah have a clear geopolitical goal, and funnily enough they are remarkably similar: "Get the foreigners out of our homeland, we sould rule the country ourselves, this place has always been part of some one's empire and that needs to stop."

Even the foreigers the Hizbollah is irate at are backed by the same major country the VC was mad at 30 years ago: The United States.

*Rubs chin*

I'm having little trouble seeing the distinction here.

[Wisbech_lad]

And terrorist organisations can evolve to something that can be talked with. E.g. Ireland 1916-1923, with the IRA terror groups evolving into the Free State (and then having a brief civil war between the Free State and the IRA) Does anyone now refuse to deal with Eire due to their background in murder and religious cleansing?

Hezbollah don't seem to be that far removed from the canton militias of Switzerland in concept these days - just that it is religious based (Shia) rather than geographic based. Even the kidnap of the Israeli soldiers can be seen as almost rational - Hezb leadership have promised to try and free all their men held by Israel, and prisoner swaps are probably the only way to accomplish this.

I think they are being bloody stupid, and may have been suckered into it by third parties,

[John Kettler]

Here is a graphic showing the fraction of Israel coverable by different weapons known to be in Hezbollah service or potentially usable by it.

The graphic expands considerably for study.

http://www.kathryncramer.com/kathryn_cramer/2006/07/how_far_into_is.html

Bears sober consideration, eh?

Regards,

John Kettler

[edgars]

I had no idea about all the background this conflict has, so i found this BBC article very good.

History repeating itself, indeed.

[undead reindeer cavalry]

some months ago i used to talk about the merits of sufficiently trained light infantry forces regarding the Syria 2007 scenario. i trust BattleFront is evaluating how Hezbollah, basicly a light infantry force, is doing in the current conflict against modern 1st class combined arms force that is artillery-air-armour heavy and a bit casulty shy. or to put it the other way around, how the 1st class force is doing against the light infantry force. how would a shock & awe "god with us" thunder run mech force fare?

[FAI]

Originally posted by undead reindeer cavalry:

how would a shock & awe "god with us" thunder run mech force fare?

Against Kornett armed entrenched infantry?

Burning wrecks is my guess.

[Battlefront.com]

undead reindeer cavalry,

some months ago i used to talk about the merits of sufficiently trained light infantry forces regarding the Syria 2007 scenario. i trust BattleFront is evaluating how Hezbollah, basicly a light infantry force, is doing in the current conflict against modern 1st class combined arms force that is artillery-air-armour heavy and a bit casulty shy. or to put it the other way around, how the 1st class force is doing against the light infantry force. how would a shock & awe "god with us" thunder run mech force fare?

Actually, I am paying only a little attention to what is going on with Lebanon and Israel right now. Why? Because I already know this stuff Don't believe me, check back in the early threads of this Forum when people were complaining about the subject matter. It was our dear, beloved Forum members that had concluded "Syria would just be one easy Thunder Run cakewalk. How fun is that going to be to play? Not fun at all!!". To which I answered that it would not be a cakewalk and don't be so naive to think that a modern, army heavy force can't be defeated by a fairly small, light force of well armed and motivated individuals. History offers tons of examples of this and plenty of obvious reasons why.

So to wrap up...

FAI,

Against Kornett armed entrenched infantry?

Burning wrecks is my guess.

Yup!

Oh, and I don't think any of the US commanders who came up with, or were in involved with, the planning and execution of the Thunder Run would have undertaken it if they thought they were going to meet significant, organized resistance. Thunder Run came about because they sensed they would find the opposite and therefore decided to take a gamble. It is a gamble that paid off handsomely. Gambles are still gambles though.

Steve

[John Kettler]

Here is precisely the kind of provocative, penetrating analysis of the Lebanon situation neither U.S. nor Israeli citizens are getting from the TV news or the political commentary programs.

Found it while searching for data to answer a question in the asymmetric tactics thread. It sheds embarrassing and disturbing light on many things which are avoided like the plague by those "worthies" in an organized effort to prevent our seeing things for what they really are and confronts headlong the demonization and depersonalization visited on Lebanese, Palestinians and most Arabs alike in the mass media of Israel and mirrored significantly here in the States. Further, it addresses the psychological damage caused by the uncritical, ever increasing militarization of Israeli society

and rightly cuts through the diplospeak to show the killing of the UN observers was anything but a random event. A most worthwhile read!

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/cook.php?articleid=9436

Regards,

John Kettler

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

check back in the early threads of this Forum when people were complaining about the subject matter. It was our dear, beloved Forum members that had concluded "Syria would just be one easy Thunder Run cakewalk. How fun is that going to be to play? Not fun at all!!". To which I answered that it would not be a cakewalk and don't be so naive to think that a modern, army heavy force can't be defeated by a fairly small, light force of well armed and motivated individuals.

Well, to be fair, Hezbollah isn't quite the Syrian front line army, and you're drawing the line between that and more of an insurgency, so this falls between two stools.

[Battlefront.com]

Sirocco,

Well, to be fair, Hezbollah isn't quite the Syrian front line army, and you're drawing the line between that and more of an insurgency, so this falls between two stools.

Not really. The Iraqi Army was soundly defeated as a military force long before Thunder Run began. Some have said it was defeated years before. Therefore, the soldiers were not very motivated to fight in general, but especially during the final run into Baghdad.

The Syrian Army, on the other hand, has been in a program of upgrading and reorganizing for many years now. The program has not really done much, in our opinion, to change the Big Picture, but has to change CM sized battles here and there. Obviously the game will focus on the here and theres Like the opening phase of OIF, a determined stand in the right place at the right time can do quite a lot of harm. The fact that the Coallition forces had few of these moments, overall, in the campaign does not mean the potential for them wasn't there. Take a look at An Nasiriyah for example.

There is also something else you should be aware of. Guess where Hezbollah got much of its basic training from? It appears to have been the Syrian Special Forces. Tactics have been adjusted to leverage lessons learned from fighting the Americans in Iraq, just like the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan have started doing the same. The line between insurgency and conventional conflict is pretty thin at times.

Anyway... my point is that we feel that a modern, mechanized force can be countered with the right mix of circumstances. Grozny and other recent urban conflicts also show this to be the case. So expect us to model this reality and not some sort of fantasy best case turkey shoot expedition.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Tactics have been adjusted to leverage lessons learned from fighting the Americans in Iraq, just like the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan have started doing the same.

I don't follow the news as closely as I used to—it's too depressing these days—but I have noted that the Taliban seems to be fighting much more aggressively these days, since the Canadians took over the lead.

The line between insurgency and conventional conflict is pretty thin at times.

I get the feeling that it is shifting from insurgency to resurgency. :eek:

So expect us to model this reality and not some sort of fantasy best case turkey shoot expedition.

Aw heck, I was hoping for a turkey shoot.

Michael

[John Kettler]

Here's a nice writeup by Jim Dunnigan on the Hezbollah rocket arsenal, broken down by type, range and quantity. Some of the points he makes about concealability are borne out by Israeli strike imagery. BTW, the Strategy Page is full of useful things for the Lebanon fray and CM:SF.

http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/200672715419.asp

Bad things can happen when you don't clear ops with your sponsor first. Seems Iran has shut off Hezbollah's supply tap.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlog/articles/20060728.aspx

Regards,

John Kettler

[vincere]

BBC world news video that includes an Israeli MBT being hit by AT? and the crew bailing.

BBC world news

It's the '31st July Israel not ready for truce yet' video.

[Gpig]

Woah! Freaky.

3 MBTs in a line. On a road along a hill-side. All stationary.

Suddenly an explosion hit's the lead tank. (Actually, I can't tell if the tanks are lined up headed LEFT to RIGHT, or vice-versa. Apon repeat viewing, it looks like they are headed LEFT to RIGHT, so the explosion occurs on the REAR tank.)

Then you see 2 to 3 crewmen jumping off the tank.

Amazing.

[vincere]

It looks like they are stationary after moving left to right. I thought the shot hit the right side though I couldn't swear to it.

[flamingknives]

In a line heading towards the camera and to the right, definitely hit on the right side.

There's a full screen video option.