MIT's Ted Postol Presents More Evidence On Iron Dome Failures 454
Lasrick (2629253) writes In a controversial article last week, MIT physicist Ted Postol again questioned whether Israel's vaunted Iron Dome rocket defense system actually works. This week, he comes back with evidence in the form of diagrams, photos of Iron Dome intercepts and contrails, and evidence on the ground to show that Iron Dome in fact is effective only about 5% of the time. Postol believes the real reason there are so few Israeli casualties is that Hamas rockets have very small warheads (only 10 to 20 pounds), and also Israel's outstanding civil defense system, which includes a vast system of shelters and an incredibly sophisticated rocket attack warning system (delivered through smart phones, among other ways).
Yes, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA is very interesting & I'm smarter for having read it...
I'm glad people are looking at this kind of thing...it is *one* way to get some unbiased information
So, "5% effective"...
As TFA description reads, the number of Israeli casualties is mostly due to a combination of factors, including bomb shelters and early warnings...
I think the "Iron Dome" people would respond to TFA thusly:
"Yes, but **the program** is effective. "Iron Dome" is our missile defense system, which is one part of our civil defense, which is an entire program of things to keep people safe...if you look at the program in its entirity it's a success"
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
TFA is very interesting & I'm smarter for having read it...
I'm glad people are looking at this kind of thing...it is *one* way to get some unbiased information
So, "5% effective"...
As TFA description reads, the number of Israeli casualties is mostly due to a combination of factors, including bomb shelters and early warnings...
I think the "Iron Dome" people would respond to TFA thusly:
"Yes, but **the program** is effective. "Iron Dome" is our missile defense system, which is one part of our civil defense, which is an entire program of things to keep people safe...if you look at the program in its entirity it's a success"
There's only one problem with that "whole package" sales tactic.
You can get other countries to pointlessly waste billions of dollars trying to re-create this same kind of defense system, including the insanely expensive part that pretty much doesn't work for shit.
Re:Yes, but... (Score:4, Informative)
Given how incredibly lame this missile's fuse is, you could literally defeat it by sticking a broomstick on the front end of your missile and rebalancing. That is, if the system even worked in the first place.
I had no idea that's how they triggered the Iron Dome warheads. Just a broken, angled light field triggering a central explosive a short time later on the premise that it'll be near the warhead at that point? That's so incredibly stupid. I don't know whether this guy's data about how effective the system is or not is accurate, but I can clearly see the glaring theoretical problems with such a system.
And this is ignoring the fact that they're using $50k missiles launched from $55 million systems to shoot down $800 rockets launched from pieces of drainage pipe. Even as poor as Palestinians are compared to Israelis, those are some pretty awful ratios. The Palestinians might as well save money and skip the warheads altogether, just shoot off as many empty rockets as they can to waste Israel's money.
Re: (Score:2)
but it is specifically one part of the system.
mostly it works because the rockets never get to hit it(due to being diy rockets of dubious quality), but it is morale booster.
and as morale booster it works. fuck, some tourists are tweeting from over there "good day on the beach thanks to the iron dome ha" which .. is fucking insane. could choose somewhere better, even cypros for fucks ake..
"Patriot Missiles" (Score:2)
Remember Patriot Missiles from the 1st Iraq war?
Saddam was lobbing SCUDS at Israel & the US lent IDF a bunch of our trailer mounted ABM interceptors
We've got to assume the Israelis have the state of the art now...is this as good as it gets? Seems like it should be better, given what we had in 1991...I know Hamas isn't launching big fat slow SCUDS, but even so, technology has just gotten so much more precise & fast. I wonder if the intercept rate would be higher if Hamas didn't use DIY rockets among
Re: (Score:3)
Not the stuff Hamas has, it's very old technology that makes a SCUD look like something out of Science Fiction. They started off with stuff the Shah bought in the 1970s which Iran was giving away as being useless for Iranian purposes. They have moved on to cheap knockoffs off the same old technology. Since they get the stuff for free (via Saudi's etc stumping up the cash) and are trying
Stay on target (Score:3)
No Access (Score:2)
He has no access to the system. He has no access to radar logs. He has no access to destroyed rockets, etc. He has some pics and a PowerPoint presentation.
I see.
Maybe (Score:5, Interesting)
Postol has a long history opposing any form of missile defense. While his assessment may well be correct, it should be viewed with considerable skepticism until data from opposing viewpoints is examined against his. Postol's view can be summaraized as: "No missile or rocket defense can work, therefore we should not try."
Re:Maybe (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually his assessment is simply based on a false premise.
What performance characteristics make a rocket defense effective? To successfully intercept an artillery rocket of the type Hamas has been firing, an Iron Dome interceptor must destroy the warhead on the front end of the rocket. If the Iron Dome interceptor instead hits the back end of the target rocket, it will merely damage the expended rocket motor tube, basically an empty pipe, and have essentially no effect on the outcome of the engagement. The pieces of the rocket will still fall in the defended area; the warhead will almost certainly go on to the ground and explode.
The Iron Dome's purpose is not to destroy the rockets mid-flight, its to protect the population centers. If the rocket is damaged and blows up a parked tractor in the farm field, mission accomplished. If the rocket is damaged and falls on an empty farm house, mission accomplished. If the rocket is damaged and falls on a school, ok yeah we can call that a failure.
Re: (Score:3)
Iron Dome isn't designed to hit rockets in the boost phase; when it hits them, the motor is not in operation. You could turn 90% of the rocket into swiss cheese, if you don't hit the warhead it's still going to explode when it comes down, and it's going to come down right where it otherwise would have (the Iron Dome interceptors work by shrapnel, not by concussive force that could push a rocket onto a different trajectory)
Re: (Score:3)
1. A hit by a few pieces of shrapnel each weight no more than a few grams is not going to have a noticeable impact on something that's dozens of kilograms moving at roughly half their speed. It's simple physics.
2. The warhead is the whole point. A warhead-less rocket won't penetrate your roof. If you're out walking in the park and it lands on your head you might get seriously injured, but apart from that. no.
3. What are you talking about? The payload of the Tamir interceptors is is 11kg, that's no secret. A
Re: (Score:2)
Postol has a long history opposing any form of missile defense. While his assessment may well be correct, it should be viewed with considerable skepticism until data from opposing viewpoints is examined against his. I don't care about that, because someone opposed to missile defense can still have a good argument. I read his post with interest.
Unfortunately, his data isn't very good. He starts with a hypothesis on how the missile defense system works, then proceeds to show that if his hypothesis is correct, it is unlikely that the Iron dome is effective, based on data he analyzed in 2012 and photographs he's seen since then. I shouldn't need to explain why I see that as unconvincing.
There's always room to doubt official figures, but I'd like to see something a little more convincing than that from a story with this kind of headline. It was just a longer explanation of what he said previously, he didn't produce any more data, unfortunately.
If you require the system to act NOT as designed (Score:4, Informative)
His perspective is that success requires in-air destruction of the warhead. That is not what the system is designed to do. No system has successfully hit warheads in the air with any frequency. Second, Postol (and Lloyd and others) assert that the falling warheads aren't large enough to do damage. But mortar shells do substantial damage and then contain, even using Postol's numbers, perhaps 1/20th the TNT. That's enough to blow big holes and kill a lot of people. Where are the holes? Where is the structural damage to buildings? Where are the casualties?
Definition of a successful intercept... (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems that Ted Postol defines a successful intercept as one where the opposing warhead is completely destroyed in mid-air and doesn't count a rocket being damaged enough to be knocked down over an area where it can detonate harmlessly. He also relies on personal and public photos and reports to draw his conclusions. This would miss a good portion of the rockets fired as most are fired at night, when photographing rockets and interceptions are much more difficult.
I'm not going to argue that he is right or wrong. It just seems to me that his extrapolations are not based on enough factual evidence to draw a conclusion with any amount of confidence.
It would be cool to find out just what the real statistics are. I'm pretty sure, though, that Israel classifies this information as a state secret and we may never know in our lifetimes.
What he actually said... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Definition of a successful intercept... (Score:5, Insightful)
It would be cool to find out just what the real statistics are. I'm pretty sure, though, that Israel classifies this information as a state secret and we may never know in our lifetimes.
The rockets generate more psychological damage then physical. As far as weapons go, they are rather pathetic. All the iron dome really has to do is to make those it protects feel safe. If statistics have the potential of damaging this feeling of safety then you ca be assured that they will be kept secret.
The other purpose of the iron dome is to limit the desire to fire the rockets in the first place. If one thinks their efforts are in vain then they are less likely to follow through. If Israel can convince members of Hamas that their rockets are not working then there will be fewer rockets launched at Israel.
Re: (Score:2)
During World War II Japan unleashed swarms of explosive laden balloons. The hope was that the balloons would flow into the US and cause a big of damage here and there. If you were to believe the lack of coverage in the US news we were completely unaware of any such threat and clearly the balloons were simply floating elsewhere or falling short. In reality they were in fact reaching the US and occasionally causing a little mayhem here and there--but a concerted propaganda operation kept it out of the
Re: (Score:2)
They wanted to create wild fires - unfortunately, and without the Japanese knowing, it was the wettest summer of the century (or one of the wettest) in USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, an effective system would DETER attacks. Instead, Iron Dome seems to perpetuate the conflict. Need to find a way to deter attacks.
You're talking about radar-guided counter-battery fire. Well, Israel could most certainly do that, but prepare for the shit hitting the fan it they ever do that.
Re: (Score:2)
Please put up or shut up (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should anyone believe a person with a clear agenda, no access and no evidence?
Wake me up when you have actual data to collaborate your (conspiracy) theory Israel's estimates are lies.
Israeli's collect the rockets and rocket parts they are able to find. The answer is knowable and evidence obtainable. Have you even tried?
Re: (Score:2)
That was my thought too... except I'd have added "and whose report contains so many assumptions, incorrect statements, and weasel words that even if I was inclined to believe the guy I'd be skeptical".
Doubtful (Score:2, Informative)
My parents are both in Israel. I go there frequently. Since the start of the rocket attacks I have talked with them daily. I can tell you Iron Dome works. Otherwise there would be far more destruction to property. Yes there are bomb shelters. I can tell you in Tel Aviv many people don't bother to go to them when the sirens go off. My dad says more people get hurt running to the bomb shelters because they trip/fall/etc. than from bombs.
Iron Dome is highly effective. Without it there would be not only signifi
Iron Dome is clearly a conspiracy! (Score:5, Informative)
Don't tell anyone, but Iron Dome causes autism because it contains gluten! It's all part of a secret Illuminati plot, of course...
(Seeing as I live in Rishon Le Ziyyon, and watch interceptions every single day, and hear the distinctive sound of an interception (as opposed to a rocket hitting a building) several times a day, I reckon that the esteemed Mr. Postol would do well to loosen up his foil hat a bit)
Postal is an Ideological Fanatic (Score:5, Insightful)
The way he defines success and failure is framed to say all missile defense fails [redstate.com].
Re: (Score:2)
That assumes that a certain degree of accuracy is needed by the incoming missile. If the target is "somewhere within a 10 mile radius" and the missile is knocked off course by a couple of miles, then the missile is likely successful.
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes it simply breaks the incoming missile or rocket into segments or destroys its ability to follow its planned ballistic path. According to Lloyd and Postol, if the warhead isn’t destroyed the interceptor failed.
You don’t need a Ph.D. to see the immense flaw in this logic: if someone fires a missile at you and you aren’t hit that is good news.
These are unguided rockets, not cruise missiles. They aren't targeted at a person or home, they are targeted at entire neighborhoods or city regions. If a rocket is heading to a neighborhood across town and iron dome disables the rocket and forces it down in your neighborhood, is that a "win"? destroying the warhead limits the damage, but even falling rocket debris can cause injury and damage.
If the 5% figure is right then it takes around $1.6M worth of $80K interceptors to stop each $800/rocket. Is that
Re: (Score:3)
Linking to an article that uses a sentence like this:
"This is just stupidity but it is common of the combination of ideology driven faux-science (see manmade global warming) and gaslighting that the left relies upon to influence public policy."
is probably not going to convince me that POSTOL is the ideological nutcase here.
On topic, the argument makes no sense (Score:2)
The professor is saying that if the warhead is no destroyed the intercept fails. That's nonsense. If you knock it off course or cause it to fall off target then it succeeded.
Furthermore, the statistics seem to suggest that SOMETHING is stopping the missiles because we have fairly reliable figures on the number of missiles fired and the number of missiles that landed in populated areas. We also have stats from previous bombardments... comparing the two we can see a huge difference. So why is that? Is the sug
Re: (Score:2)
Are the rockets even targeted? And if they are, are they accurate enough that knocking it off course is a good thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they constantly claim that the rockets are targeted at schools or whatever - are they just pushing them there themselves?
Re: (Score:2)
Even if they are not precisely targeted they can hit something by mistake. Also, Iron Dome is set up to intercept only rockets that have chance to hit a real target in Israel. For instance if Hamas launches a rocket towards some Palestinian target (by mistake or deliberately), the Iron Dome won't stop it.
From my personal and up-close experience (Score:2)
... it works for about 100%
and my point is: without clear evidence, both this and Postol's statements are equally Ill-founded.
Ted, shall we compromise on (100+5)/2?
Picture manipulation (Score:4, Informative)
First evidence from the article is shown in figures 4 and 4a ... As can be seen by inspecting the photograph in figure 4, there is significant damage in the area where the rocket fell. This damage was almost certainly due to the detonation of the rocket’s small warhead."
"Figure 4 and figure 4A show the consequences of a failure in the fuse timing
However, the figure is a cropped version of an image taken from Ynet article
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4541542,00.html
and the picture title is "The shrapnel that hit the Tel Aviv synagogue.".
As clearly seen in the full picture, there is very little damage that is easily explained by a steel tube falling through the roof. The picture clearly shows that there were no explosion. This was the only direct evidence of Iron Dome failure that is provided by the article. This "evidence" is malicious manipulation of an image that is easily available online.
The images and more facts can be found in ...
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?239702-An-Explanation-of-the-Evidence-of-Weaknesses-in-the-Iron-Dome-Defense-System
Since slashdot is not very graphics friendly
Reminds me of the Patriot missile success rate (Score:2)
claims during the First Gulf War. George H. Bush early in the conflict claimed that the missile was 41 of 42 against scuds. Later analysis showed that the success rate may have been less that 10%.
The point? (Score:2, Insightful)
The Iron Dome is designed to stop Iranian ballistic missiles tipped with Chemical, biological and in the future nuclear weapons. The fact that it has trouble hitting Hamas's glorified model rockets doesn't make it any less effective in its true mission. And eve if it really was only 5% effective, I'd take 5% less ballistic missiles headed at my town thank you.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As opposed to perfect precision strikes on that evil Palestinian hospital? Or is this "jew hating" somehow?
https://twitter.com/search?q=%... [twitter.com]
but there are extremists on both sides, like parts of Hamas, (and similar on the other side, see the "settlers") that want to murder each other. Something tells me your are one of these extremists too.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
Extreme would be to drop a nuke on them. See? Isn't it fun using strawmen to argue your point.
may be i'm a bit picky, but i'd say robbing their land, expelling them, denying access to water and healthcare, imprisioning them indefinitely with no warrant, and killing them at will or bombing them with white phosphor is quite extreme.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They didn't steal the land, they bought it. They didn't expel them, the arabs left with the intention to come back with arab armies to steal back what they sold. Those who didn't leave became israeli arabs.
Re: Here we go... (Score:3, Insightful)
That is a combination of revisionist history repeated in mainstream publications and outright lies.
Sure, some properties were sold. But does China have sovereignty over California because many Chinese nationals bought land there?
Re: Here we go... (Score:4, Interesting)
I actually agree with this, but two things. Nearly 70 years have passed. The UN drew a line in the sand. What if Germans decided they wanted their land back, which they lost in war? Pakistan was founded at a similar time, largely for a religious group. The UN partly created this problem, the UN needs to solve the refugee crisis which is the Palestinian people, regardless of what their "leadership's" ideas are about changing history.
Re: (Score:3)
Its time to return most of California to Mexico, and the lands back to the native indians.
Jerusalem and Jordan and the current land of Israel were always inhabited by Jews. For over 100 years Jews were buying up land in that area. There is no way that Israel will tolerate terrorism against it.
Hamas has refused to recognize peaceful co-existance. Their charter says to have muslim world domination and death to infidels and Jews. Had Hamas concentrated in building infrastructure, schools, universities, roa
Re: Here we go... (Score:4, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I... [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... [wikipedia.org]
The UN (Score:4, Informative)
story [thewire.com]
20 rockets were found in a UN owned school in the Gaza strip. The UN is caliming they were not using the building and did not know the rockets were in the building. What happened to the rockets once the UN discovered they were hiding munitions for Hamas in a school? The UN did the only responsible thing possible and handed those rockets over to Hamas.
Re:The UN (Score:5, Informative)
story [thewire.com]
20 rockets were found in a UN owned school in the Gaza strip. The UN is caliming they were not using the building and did not know the rockets were in the building. What happened to the rockets once the UN discovered they were hiding munitions for Hamas in a school? The UN did the only responsible thing possible and handed those rockets over to Hamas.
Interesting, lets read the link then:
So where did the rockets go? Well, according to Israel, they went right back to Hamas. As an official told The Times of Israel:
The rockets were passed on to the government authorities in Gaza, which is Hamas. In other words, UNRWA handed to Hamas rockets that could well be shot at Israel.”
Ok, that sounds damning, but lets read till the end for the buried lede:
On Monday afternoon, Chris Gunness, the spokesman for U.N.R.W.A., denied that the rockets went back to Hamas.
UNRWA did not give the rockets to Hamas. The rockets were taken away by bomb disposal experts that were answerable to the newly formed government of national consensus, which Hamas has left."
So the rockets went to people most likely hostile to Hamas. Now maybe the UN could have done better disposing of the bombs themselves, but a UN bomb disposal mission in Gaza sounds like something that could also go really wrong. Remember the role of the UN isn't to fight for Israel, in that case they're just trying to provide humanitarian aid.
Re:The UN (Score:4, Insightful)
answerable to the newly formed government of national consensus, which Hamas has left."
Citation?
I see lots of news stories about Hamas creating a new joint government with Fatah last month and none about them leaving it.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/palestinians-set-swear-unity-government-20146281348223961.html
Re: (Score:3)
Clearly, Israel should bomb the UN.
Re:Here we go... (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess since I used to raise money for Israeli medical research and investments in Israeli industry, that would qualify me as an anti-Semite.
But let's look at what the real anti-Semites are saying -- the Jews who actually live there:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/di... [haaretz.com]
Reaping what we have sown in Gaza
Those who turned Gaza into an internment camp for 1.8 million people should not be surprised when they tunnel underneath the earth.
By Amira Hass
Jul. 21, 2014
A book on Israeli military psychology should have an entire chapter devoted to this sadism, sanctimoniously disguising itself as mercy: A recorded message demanding hundreds of thousands of people leave their already targeted homes, for another place, equally dangerous, 10 kilometers away.
In contrast to the common Israeli hasbara, Hamas isn’t forcing Gazans to remain in their homes, or to leave. It’s their decision. Where would they go?
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion... [haaretz.com]
What does Hamas really want?
Read the list of conditions published in the name of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and judge honestly whether there is one unjust demand among them.
By Gideon Levy
Jul. 20, 2014
we should stop for a moment and listen to Hamas; we may even be permitted to put ourselves in its shoes, perhaps even to appreciate the daring and resilience of this, our bitter enemy, under harsh conditions.
Read the list of demands and judge honestly whether there is one unjust demand among them: withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces troops and allowing farmers to work their land up to the fence; release of all prisoners from the Gilad Shalit swap who have been rearrested; an end to the siege and opening of the crossings; opening of a port and airport under UN management; expansion of the fishing zone; international supervision of the Rafah crossing; an Israeli pledge to a 10-year cease-fire and closure of Gaza’s air space to Israeli aircraft; permits to Gaza residents to visit Jerusalem and pray at the Al-Aqsa mosque; and an Israeli pledge not to interfere in internal Palestinian politics such as the unity government; opening Gaza’s industrial zone.
These conditions are civilian; the means of achieving them are military, violent and criminal. But the (bitter) truth is that when Gaza is not firing rockets at Israel, nobody cares about it. Look at the fate of the Palestinian leader who had had enough of violence. Israel did everything it could to destroy Mahmoud Abbas. The depressing conclusion? Only force works.
True, after Hamas started firing rockets, Israel had to respond. But as opposed to what Israeli propaganda tries to sell, the rockets didn’t fall out of the sky from nowhere. Go back a few months: the breakdown of negotiations by Israel; the war on Hamas in the West Bank following the murder of the three yeshiva students, which it is doubtful Hamas planned, including the false arrest of 500 of its activists; stopping payment of salaries to Hamas workers in Gaza and Israeli opposition to the unity government, which might have brought the organization into the political sphere.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Amira Hass [wikipedia.org] and Gideon Levy [wikipedia.org] are by no means unbiased reporters.
Sure the demands to not seem unreasonable but what has Hamas offered? Nothing at all. Until Hamas changes their views on the existence of Israel there will be no peace.
I would also like to point out that you have no references for what you call the Hamas conditions. As far as I can tell you might be making them up and/or embellishing them to make them look better.. Lets assume they are true look at a couple of demands
allowing farmers to work their land up to the fence;
So tunneling can be done wit
Re: (Score:3)
Sure the demands to not seem unreasonable but what has Hamas offered? Nothing at all.
What exactly are they supposed to offer? Perhaps they could stop making Israel look bad by just not telling us when Israel systematically half-starves them. Palestine is under attack every day.
Re:Here we go... (Score:4, Insightful)
What exactly are they supposed to offer?
There's two concessions that would grease the wheels to allow peace to happen. Either Hamas is barred from any government capacity in Palestine or Hamas recognizes Israel's right to exist. Barring either of those concessions, any cease fire will only last until something else relights the powderkeg. You cannot negotiate with a party that doesn't recognize your existence unless you have leaders in that party that can see the forest for the trees like Anwar Sadat following the Yom Kippur War who was, incidentally, assassinated by Islamic jihadists for signing peace with Israel. That peace treaty also lead to Egypt getting kicked out of the Arab league until 1989.
Israel has demonstrated in the past that it wants peace. It has removed Israeli settlers from Gaza, forceibly. It returned the entire Sinai pennisula to Egypt once the peace treaty following the Yom Kippur War was concluded. However that requires that the other party will engage honestly in negotiations that are seeking lasting peace. I cannot honestly say that will ever occur with Hamas.
Re: (Score:3)
How about the following;
1. Recognize Israel's right to exist
2. Stop shooting rockets across the border
3. Stop sending assassins over the border
4. Stop building tunnels under the border
5. Actively stop their people from attacking Israel.
Obviously the most important one is the first one. There can be no peace when one side is still trying to destroy the other.
Re: (Score:3)
If you want to follow international law, Israel has to return to the 1967 borders. If they don't return to the 1967 borders, they're not following international law.
I support international law. If you don't support international law, don't complain when the other side commits massacres (like the ones the Israelis are committing on the Palestinians, even in the West Bank).
Re: (Score:2)
To get our attention.
The GP even said that explicitly.
Re: Here we go... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, those damned terrorist children in their terrorist-loving hospital beds. Good riddance!
Oh, but Israel warned them, right? Yeah, great how that goes down!
Gaza has been since the beginning like a giant open-air prison camp [foreignpolicyjournal.com]. Where the heck are the impoverished people trying to flee the conflict supposed to go? And for that matter, for everyone criticizing Hamas for fighting and storing weapons in or near civilian areas... there is nowhere in Gaza not near a civilian area, certainly nowhere further than a stray tank shell can fly - it's one of the most densely populated places on Earth, over 5 times denser than Taiwan and 11.6 times denser than Japan. Israel forced as many people as possible into as little land as possible. And not accidentally. What little farmland there is can be overrun in a matter of minutes. Israel could fill the entirity of Gaza with tanks and artillery at a density of over 100 per square mile.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem there is that Gazans procreate like rabbits. This is why the population density is so high and this is why they don't value human life that much.
You have this entirely backwards, I'm not surprised you didn't log in to associate your name with your abject ignorance. Making people live like animals makes them act like animals. When you force any animal into a space too small and too poorly to support it then it will always behave badly. In this case, it's an instinctive survival mechanism built into all living things. When you kill them, they make more. Forms of life which don't do this tend to be driven to extinction by forms of life which do.
A simil
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The root cause of this mess is that the Palestinians want their land back (after it was taken off them first in the post-WW2 UN partition plan that broke up Palestine into a Palestinian section and a Jewish section and then later further taken by the new state of Israel in various wars)
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as I have sympathy for the Palestinians, their land is gone and it isn't coming back, no more than the Roman Empire is going to rise again and reclaim Palestine as a province for the Romans.
Is it fair that the land has left the hands of the Palestinians? Probably not. Did it happen? Yes. Will they ever get it back? Not in any meaningful way.
For their own sake, it is time to move on. If their answer is getting their own civilians killed, I'd think even unconditional surrender and exile would be preferable to any group that is actually concerned about their civilian population.
The Israelis are there. They aren't going anywhere, and they don't like the rhetoric that has been thrown at them about being cast into the sea. They remember genocide, and they aren't going back to Diaspora. The rocket attacks on the cities will only increase the resolve of a people who have the history that the Jews have.
Peaceful protest does work, probably better on a country that is a democracy like Israel than a war ever would. We've seen it work elsewhere. Israel can hold a hard line while rockets are shooting at their cities, but they cannot hide behind that excuse if the rockets stop falling. Violence has failed the Palestinians and their Arab allies for 70 years, and that isn't going to change now.
The time for what is "just" is over. It is now time to do what it takes to improve the future for everyone in Palestine. The bombs and rockets need to stop falling, and someone has to do it first. I think the Palestinians would have the most advantage from ending the struggle and adopting a policy that might actually net them more gains and fewer deaths of their own people. If Israel persists in extremist settlements and reprisals when there is nothing to reprise against, they will lose the support of their allies, and they need their allies. Painful as it would be, there is no military option for Palestine worth considering and so those actions should be set aside.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, please tell me.What do you think happens then?
That Israel will stop blocking humanitarian support for Palestinians?
Give them access to the resources that have been cut off?
Stop bulldozing their towns to make room for 'settlers' bought in from overseas?
Perhaps they will share some of the countries rather fine wealth with the people who have been forced out of the way?
They have a great track record of allow those things previously, haven't they..
No, they want the Palestinians gone, end of story - preferab
Re:Here we go... (Score:4, Insightful)
As long as they keep firing rockets at people, using their own people as human shields, they might as well let Israel block humanitarian aid, because humanitarian aid isn't going to get through anyway.
What happens is that some of the stuff you mention will likely happen. No one is suggesting that the Israelis are saints here. It will take time for a peaceful solution to turn the tide. Is that worse than not only death, but decades of deaths that have been completely ineffectual?
The realization needs to be made that there will never be improvement while Hamas is shooting rockets at Israeli civilians. It is simply PR cover for hardliner Israeli politicians to keep circling the wagons.
You need a peaceful Israel that feels safe enough to not have to circle those wagons for them to purge the extremist elements that they can't quite get rid of now.
Palestine as a current state is the worst kind of place carved out of completely impractical considerations. It's a failed state before it even had a chance to succeed. It needs peace more than it needs anything else to even have a chance.
Hamas, is more like a gang that thrives from exploiting the misery and anger of its people more than it is an organization for freeing them. If Hamas was serious about protecting its people, it would unilaterally stop the rocket attacks and only use defensive measures, even if ineffectual. They *know* that the rocket attacks won't stop the Israeli reprisals, its just that they can only seem to respond to any crisis with violence, possibly because it is the only way they can maintain the backing of their supporters.
There is no war to be won here. Just constant bombing into the distant future. The Palestinians can't conquer their ground back, and the Israelis won't budge unless the Palestinians stop pretending that it is still 1949 and they have addresses in what is now Israel. The Israelis grabbed that land by right of conquest, and then defended it against all comers, pretty much like every conqueror before them. Israel is there to stay, and Palestine is a shithole that will only improve if they stop pretending and get on with their future.
This isn't the fair way for them to move forward, it's merely the only way they will move forward. Peace, even if unilateral, is the best option for the Palestinians as a people.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They have been squeezed into a ghetto and there is nowhere to move on to each time an election brings another pogrom. It's not as if they can escape into Egypt.
The ancestors of the bunch of fascists running Israel at this point would be horrified by this situation, especially how each shooting fish in a barrel episode coincides with an election.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know history at all? From 1516 to the end of WW2 the area was controlled by the Ottoman Empire. After WW2 it was controlled by the British. The British the partitioned it. Palestinians never had the land to want back.
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY
Yes, a very important point.
Actually, the root cause can be traced back another couple of decades, to the various crises in the British Mandate of Palestine following the breakup of the Ottoman Empire in World War I. You might argue that the British handled things badly, but I'm not that sure that it could have been handled well. By the time World War II was over, there was little that could be done to repair the situation.
Re: Here we go... (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, if you put an entire people inside an area more akin to the ghetto of Warsaw then a real country. An area with an insanely high population density an almost no way in our out for armed forces of their own the what did you expect really?
I am not condoning the firing of any weapon or participation in any combat activity amongst civilians but really... What do the Israeli expect??
On the other hand, where are the other Arab countries when it comes to really help out the Palestinians?
It ll never get s
Re: Here we go... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, if you put an entire people inside an area more akin to the ghetto of Warsaw then a real country. An area with an insanely high population density an almost no way in our out for armed forces of their own the what did you expect really?
I expect Israel would gladly hand the Gaza Strip back to Egypt at this point. It doesn't seem that Egypt wants it back.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> Here it comes, all the reactionary Jew hatred posts...
They are coming because you wrote that, practically a first post even.
It makes me wonder if your goal is to derail any thoughtful analysis of the story.
Isn't that one of the tactics from the recently revealed GCHQ/JTRIG "Disruption Operational Playbook?" [firstlook.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you're exactly right. The best thing the human race could do is turn the entire place into a radioactive crater, then say "off you go, fight over that".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If Israel is not willing to do the above, then don't complain when Hamas have to improvise just to have a fighting chance of defending themselves.
Two points: First, their improvisations are war crimes; second, Hamas are the aggressor. This is not particularly complicated.
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
second, Hamas are the aggressor. This is not particularly complicated.
Israel bulldozes Palestinian homes and builds settlements, Hamas fires rockets into Israel.
"Both sides" is usually a shitty argument to make, but in this case, both sides have been aggressors for decades.
If it wasn't complicated, we'd have peace by now.
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Informative)
So, we can see that Hamas is just following what it was organized to do. It's not difficult to understand.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Funny
(sorry, lacking mod points!)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No. The stated goals of hamas and other groups is to exterminate jews and wipe israel off the map. a "peace" agreements are just time to plan for those goals.
Yes, and the goal of Israel is to claim the entire region for the Israeli state. Two border expansions and an ongoing campaign of semi-starving the besieged populace next door suggest that this is in fact the case. And there is a sizable group of people who suggest that all Jews who do not feel the same are some sort of traitor, and that anyone who does not support Jewish dominance of the region is not just anti-Zionist, but an anti-Semite, making rational discussion impossible just as surely as invoking Go
Re:Here we go... (Score:4, Insightful)
Israel's pre-1960 borders? The ones were the West Bank belonged to Jordan and Gaza belonged to Egypt?
If it brought a real chance at peace, I believe Israel would agree to that. But Jordan doesn't want the West Bank anymore. Egypt doesn't want Gaza. Israel's pre-1960 borders still would not create a country called Palestine.
Jordan and Egypt don't want to deal with the Palestinian problem anymore than Israel does.
Re: (Score:2)
If Israel is not willing to do the above, then don't complain when Hamas have to improvise just to have a fighting chance of defending themselves.
Two points: First, their improvisations are war crimes; second, Hamas are the aggressor. This is not particularly complicated.
There is no crime in war. War has no law.
Regardless, if you want to morally judge the actions of both sides here, Israel comes out looking far, far worse.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no crime in war. War has no law.
Tell that to Peter von Hagenbach, was was convicted and executed for war crimes in 1474 . He even offered the "only following orders" excuse.
Regardless, if you want to morally judge the actions of both sides here, Israel comes out looking far, far worse.
I'm not morally judging actions, I'm legally judging actions [wikipedia.org]. Hamas is deliberately and systematically committing war crimes as defined by international law.
Re:Here we go... (Score:4, Interesting)
If you view either side as clearly in the right, you're a fucking fool.
Israel is clearly in the right.
That doesn't mean that Israel is without fault. Clearly, they're not. But we have one side ready for peaceful coexistence and the other side who wants only the total destruction of their enemies.
The situation is not complicated. That doesn't mean solving it is easy; there are many simple problems that are hard to solve. But we can say for sure that false equivalencies do not help.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Israel has never shown themselves to be ready for peaceful coexistence (and neither has Hamas). The closest they've come to that is being agreeable to peacefully doing whatever they want; there have been plenty of times during ceasefires where they continue with illegal actions, knowing full well it'll result in return illegal actions by the other side.
Re: (Score:2)
Israel has never shown themselves to be ready for peaceful coexistence
That is quite simply untrue. Israel has shown that consistently for decades.
Peaceful co-existence doesn't mean there won't be disagreements. Even closely allied nations disagree with one another all the time. It means there won't be war.
I(and neither has Hamas).
That, at least, is true. Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel; it's stated explicitly in their charter.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But we have one side ready for peaceful coexistence and the other side who wants only the total destruction of their enemies.
Unfortunately, "peaceful coexistence" means land that families have farmed for generations being progressively taken away and given to Israeli settlers.
In recent times, there has been so significant violence directed at Israel from the West Bank portion of the occupied territories. In fact, it seems fairly clear that the people who live there are ready for peaceful coexistence. How ha
Re: (Score:2)
That's idiotic. The idea was to get them away from civilian homes, so when Israel does have to retaliate and destroy them, innocent bystanders aren't killed in the process. Promising not to shoot back would be crazy, and your statement massiv
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
They're not at war? Are you high? Hamas has declared war on Israel from day one. At this very moment Israel and Gaza is exchanging rockets missiles and bombs and hundreds of people are being killed every day. If, as you say, "Israel could wipe them out in a matter of days", then do it and get it over with.
Israel are trying to minimise casualties on both sides. Hamas are trying to maximise Israeli casualties, and use Palestinian casualties to their political advantage. It's a perfect example of asymmetrical warfare; the capabilities and aims of the combatants are completely different.
Israel has the military capability to destroy Gaza, just as the US had the military capability to destroy Iraq or Afghanistan back in 2003. But doing so is not in their long-term interests.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They're not at war? Are you high? Hamas has declared war on Israel from day one. At this very moment Israel and Gaza is exchanging rockets missiles and bombs and hundreds of people are being killed every day. If, as you say, "Israel could wipe them out in a matter of days", then do it and get it over with.
Israel are trying to minimise casualties on both sides. Hamas are trying to maximise Israeli casualties, and use Palestinian casualties to their political advantage. It's a perfect example of asymmetrical warfare; the capabilities and aims of the combatants are completely different.
Israel has the military capability to destroy Gaza, just as the US had the military capability to destroy Iraq or Afghanistan back in 2003. But doing so is not in their long-term interests.
Do yourself a favor and drop your agenda and take a fresh look at what has been going on for decades. Israel is absolutely not trying to minimize casualties. They'll do everything and anything they can get away with, toeing the line as long as they have the backing of the US, which prevents anyone from doing anything about their horse shit.
Re: (Score:3)
If Israel where not trying to minimize casualties they would just carpet bomb the whole of the Gaza strip back to the stone age. Would be a lot cheaper than the current effort.
Re:Here we go... (Score:5, Insightful)
More than 500 Palestinians dead and climbing and you say Israel is trying to minimise casualties? Do you seriously expect people to believe that?
Absolutely, yes. If Israel were actually out to cause casualties, rather than to prevent them, the death toll would be enormous. If they were merely careless of civilian casualties, the death toll would not only be higher, it would be statistically correlated with the demographics of the Palestinian people, with deaths of women, children, and the elderly roughly in proportion to the size of those groups in the general population.
Instead, the Palestinian death statistics are massively skewed towards males aged 18-38. That can't happen if you're killing civilians either deliberately or carelessly. But it's exactly what you'd see if you were carefully targeting enemy combatants.
Re: (Score:3)
Just like in the 'stans', if their brothers in arms retrieve the weapons they are counted as 'civilians'.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you so high you don't realize how stupid that sounds? Why would they do such an illogical thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Will Israel promise that if Hamas puts all its rocket launchers, military command and control, and military supplies neatly organised in easily identifiable military bases, Israel won't simply send a missile to figuratively cook all those eggs being put in one basket? Will Israel remove the embargo being imposed of Gaza so that Hamas can buy better weapons that they can use to precisely target Israel military installations rather than have to make do with using cheap mortar and rockets that is just as likely to hit civillian targets as Israeli military installations? If Israel is not willing to do the above, then don't complain when Hamas have to improvise just to have a fighting chance of defending themselves.
I never knew that having a fighting chance is a prerequisite to adhere to the rules of war or that it is the responsibility of the stronger force to level the playing field. Well they are levelling the playing field but only one side.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't have a single clue what "genocidal" means, you twisted evil tool.
Re: (Score:2)
Citing the site thereligionofpeace.com for anything about muslims is like citing Stormfront for anything about blacks, jews, and sundry non-whites. It makes you a bit of a loony.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, I'm sure you read every source that anyone ever throws at you, for anything. What happens in the real world is that we make assessments on the probability of a source providing actual insight. Thereligionofpeace.com is a site that is identical in insight and accuracy as Stormfront is. I've read both sites a while back, and both are idiotic, wrong, and scary in very similar ways. As a result, I don't read them anymore, and I don't pay attention to people using them as sources.
If you want me to take you
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is it is not sustainable. Each intercept missile cost $60,000, a rocket launched by hamas costs $800. Hamas can DDoS the hell of out Israel. All they need is decently trained soldiers and decent supply of rockets.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is it is not sustainable. Each intercept missile cost $60,000, a rocket launched by hamas costs $800.
Israel's GDP is the equivalent of about US$250 billion. They can easily afford tens of thousands of intercept missiles if it keeps the population safe.
Hamas can DDoS the hell of out Israel.
DDoS attacks generally rely on multiplier effects, getting someone else to do most of the work for you. Botnets, service vulnerabilities like the NTP reflection attack, that sort of thing. Hamas don't appear to have any such advantage.
All they need is decently trained soldiers and decent supply of rockets.
And if they had three fully-equipped tank divisions and a carrier group, that would help too.