Debka reports that Hezbollah is planning missiles for Tel Aviv.
This will bring a next stage into the war.
I wonder what Israel will do then, it is losing the war already and another
big blow will certainly have implications to the proud people of Israel. Or
is this the comet that will run ?
/Michael
.
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 03:18:20 PM |
|
|
Woodswun <woodswun@tepidmail.com> Spat the Words
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:45:48 +0930, The CO wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote:
Hezbollah on points.
You need to reassess your scoring technique.
Hezbollah cannot defeat a major standing army, at most
they can inflict casualties and delay the Israeli advance.
At most.
Isn't that what the Brits thought about the Continental Army during the
Revolution?
The colonials were fighting to kick an occupying army out of
their home and untie the political binding from mother England.
The colonials probably wouldn't have won without help from
the French (the other super-power of the day). Hezbollah are
primarily Iranian, Syrian, and other foreign militants bent
on destruction of another race and religion. I don't think
think it's a real good comparison.
Hezbolla is certainly spirited and seems well motivated, but
the Israelis are fighting for their lives, the security of
their homeland and families. When it comes down to man on
man and who has the more righteous, stronger, motivation,
I'd have to give that to the Israelis.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Cornelissen" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 05:34:01 PM |
|
|
Dont underestimate the position of Iran these days. They have accomplished
more than one would care to imagine.
I would even dare to say that Syria has become a vasal state.
/Michael Cornelissen
"Perseid" <eidpers@anti-spam.comcast.net> schreef in bericht
news:Xns980F918644538rrfkwrantispamattbic@216.196.97.136...
Woodswun <woodswun@tepidmail.com> Spat the Words
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:45:48 +0930, The CO wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote:
Hezbollah on points.
You need to reassess your scoring technique.
Hezbollah cannot defeat a major standing army, at most
they can inflict casualties and delay the Israeli advance.
At most.
Isn't that what the Brits thought about the Continental Army during the
Revolution?
The colonials were fighting to kick an occupying army out of
their home and untie the political binding from mother England.
The colonials probably wouldn't have won without help from
the French (the other super-power of the day). Hezbollah are
primarily Iranian, Syrian, and other foreign militants bent
on destruction of another race and religion. I don't think
think it's a real good comparison.
Hezbolla is certainly spirited and seems well motivated, but
the Israelis are fighting for their lives, the security of
their homeland and families. When it comes down to man on
man and who has the more righteous, stronger, motivation,
I'd have to give that to the Israelis.
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 07:48:09 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 15:18:20 -0500, Perseid wrote:
Woodswun <woodswun@tepidmail.com> Spat the Words
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:45:48 +0930, The CO wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote:
Hezbollah on points.
You need to reassess your scoring technique.
Hezbollah cannot defeat a major standing army, at most
they can inflict casualties and delay the Israeli advance.
At most.
Isn't that what the Brits thought about the Continental Army during the
Revolution?
The colonials were fighting to kick an occupying army out of
their home and untie the political binding from mother England.
The colonials probably wouldn't have won without help from
the French (the other super-power of the day). Hezbollah are
primarily Iranian, Syrian, and other foreign militants bent
on destruction of another race and religion. I don't think
think it's a real good comparison.
I was mostly referring to the guerrilla warfare tactics. It's extremely
difficult to "win" in such a situation. (Also, the "occupying army" isn't
quite accurate - the Colonies were British, and it was the British Army,
who were doing their normal thing. The Colonists up until that point were
reliant on Britain for security, supplies, etc).
Hezbolla is certainly spirited and seems well motivated, but the
Israelis are fighting for their lives, the security of their homeland
and families. When it comes down to man on man and who has the more
righteous, stronger, motivation, I'd have to give that to the Israelis.
They may fight the good fight, but I don't agree that they will
necessarily win just because they have more at stake. And they aren't
exactly garnering support for themselves in any quarter right about now.
Woods
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 08:47:28 PM |
|
|
Woodswun <woodswun@tepidmail.com> Spat the Words
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 15:18:20 -0500, Perseid wrote:
Woodswun <woodswun@tepidmail.com> Spat the Words
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:45:48 +0930, The CO wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote:
Hezbollah on points.
You need to reassess your scoring technique.
Hezbollah cannot defeat a major standing army, at most
they can inflict casualties and delay the Israeli advance.
At most.
Isn't that what the Brits thought about the Continental Army during
the
Revolution?
The colonials were fighting to kick an occupying army out of
their home and untie the political binding from mother England.
The colonials probably wouldn't have won without help from
the French (the other super-power of the day). Hezbollah are
primarily Iranian, Syrian, and other foreign militants bent
on destruction of another race and religion. I don't think
think it's a real good comparison.
I was mostly referring to the guerrilla warfare tactics. It's extremely
difficult to "win" in such a situation. (Also, the "occupying army"
isn't
quite accurate - the Colonies were British, and it was the British Army,
who were doing their normal thing. The Colonists up until that point
were
reliant on Britain for security, supplies, etc).
"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for
one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected
them with another"
Once the decision was made that England could not adequately
represent the colonists from across the Atlantic, the Brits
were nothing more than an occupying army (IMHO of course).
Hezbolla is certainly spirited and seems well motivated, but the
Israelis are fighting for their lives, the security of their homeland
and families. When it comes down to man on man and who has the more
righteous, stronger, motivation, I'd have to give that to the Israelis.
They may fight the good fight, but I don't agree that they will
necessarily win just because they have more at stake. And they aren't
exactly garnering support for themselves in any quarter right about now.
Israel has withdrawn from Bint Jbeil and staying mobile.
That's the Israel that came to dominate the region, not
getting bogged down by one fight. The Arabs in that town
now get to care for their shot-up comrades with no fresh
supplies and surrounded by an Israeli army.
I still have to say Israel still has the advantage, but war is
usually not a popularity contest. Israel will do this ugly
deed with or without any support. Their lives and security
depend on it, just as it has on so many occasions in their
short 60 year history (can you tell I'm siding with Israel
on this one ?)
Woods
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "eric" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
28 Jul 2006 11:05:09 PM |
|
|
The Vietnamese couldn't defeat a major standing army, at most they
could inflict casualties and delay the American advance. At most. Yet
Vietnam won, just as Hezbollah is winning now. Hezbollah, like the
Vietnamese are in the right - it's their land - and they will never
give up. Not ever. Israel likes to pretend to be the perpetual
victim, but it is obvious that Israel is the arrogant Goliath about to
fall on its face.
The CO wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote:
Hezbollah on points.
You need to reassess your scoring technique.
Hezbollah cannot defeat a major standing army, at most
they can inflict casualties and delay the Israeli advance.
At most.
They have no CAS, no armour and no significant heavy weapons assets.
This isn't Iraq, Israel isn't there to win hearts and minds and
overthrow a dictatorship - they are there to exterminate Hezbollah and
secure their border from their incursions and attacks and I suggest that
they will continue this operation until that objective is achieved.
The fact that Israel has a major air force with significant CAS assets
is a major advantage - Hezbollah has no air assets, so Israeli defensive
counter air is not necessary - they can be used instead for CAS and
tactical strike.
You need to assess 'points' based on military facts, not your
particular bias towards Hezbollah.
While we're at it, is there something you find admirable in the Islamic
terrorist organisation called Hezbollah?
Could it be you are simply yet another Muslim extremist sympathiser
living in Holland?
The CO
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 05:08:40 AM |
|
|
"eric" <ericdavis500@gmail.com> Spat the Words
The Vietnamese couldn't defeat a major standing army, at most they
could inflict casualties and delay the American advance. At most. Yet
Vietnam won, just as Hezbollah is winning now.
Vietnam lost an estimated 2 million people while the US lost
close to 60,000. Vietnam ridded itself of the US army not through
anything they did (other than persevering the onslaught) but
because the US public finally had enough of a war half way
around the world.
If you're gonna fight a first class army, you need to get yourself
a first class army of your own and that means industrializing
(something the Arabs have not been real successful at). When they
do get some industry going (Iran for example) they almost
immediately become in peril of getting wiped out because they
are threatening a religious war.
The only successful Arab states are ones headed by secular
governments.
Hezbollah, like the
Vietnamese are in the right - it's their land - and they will never
give up. Not ever. Israel likes to pretend to be the perpetual
victim, but it is obvious that Israel is the arrogant Goliath about to
fall on its face.
The CO wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote:
Hezbollah on points.
You need to reassess your scoring technique.
Hezbollah cannot defeat a major standing army, at most
they can inflict casualties and delay the Israeli advance.
At most.
They have no CAS, no armour and no significant heavy weapons assets.
This isn't Iraq, Israel isn't there to win hearts and minds and
overthrow a dictatorship - they are there to exterminate Hezbollah and
secure their border from their incursions and attacks and I suggest
that
they will continue this operation until that objective is achieved.
The fact that Israel has a major air force with significant CAS assets
is a major advantage - Hezbollah has no air assets, so Israeli
defensive
counter air is not necessary - they can be used instead for CAS and
tactical strike.
You need to assess 'points' based on military facts, not your
particular bias towards Hezbollah.
While we're at it, is there something you find admirable in the Islamic
terrorist organisation called Hezbollah?
Could it be you are simply yet another Muslim extremist sympathiser
living in Holland?
The CO
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The CO" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 06:47:01 AM |
|
|
eric wrote:
The Vietnamese couldn't defeat a major standing army, at most they
could inflict casualties and delay the American advance. At most.
Not the same situation at all.
Remember that the Vietnam was about winning the hearts and minds of the
population, which failed partly because the Yanks suck at that and
partly because the VC weren't afraid to ensure the support of the local
populace by any means available.
Vietnam won, just as Hezbollah is winning now.
Are they? Looks like they are getting their arses kicked further back
every day.
Hezbollah, like the
Vietnamese are in the right - it's their land
Then they should have stayed in it. What are they trying to do, win
Lebanon back for the Syrians?
Hezbollah is a bunch of terrorists controlled by Syria and Iran as
proxies to achieve by other means what they couldn't do by direct
armed conflict. ie Destroy Israel.
- and they will never
give up. Not ever.
So they get exterminated. Fine by me.
The Israelis are not known for pulling their punches or being shamed
into fighting 'limited wars'. ISTR that political pressure at home not
to bomb Hanoi was one of the reasons that Vietnam could not be won.
Israel likes to pretend to be the perpetual
victim, but it is obvious that Israel is the arrogant Goliath
Seems to me that this particular arrogance was started by Hezbollah.
Israel withdrew from Lebanon some time ago. Hezbollah elected to start
the party again, Israel reacted for more than they expected.
Hezbollah craves legitimacy, Hamas does too. Hamas got elected to
government, Hezbollah is trying to get legitimacy by forcing a nation to
negotiate with them, which Israel doubtless considers would be a
tantamount admission that they aren't the terrorist arseholes they in
fact are.
about to
fall on its face.
Or not. The Arabs already tried to invade them how many times?
And got their arses handed to them how many times?
You're entitled to your opinion.
I don't share it.
--
The CO
.
|
|
|
| User: "Charly the Bastard" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
29 Jul 2006 09:09:25 AM |
|
|
The CO wrote:
eric wrote:
The Vietnamese couldn't defeat a major standing army, at most they
could inflict casualties and delay the American advance. At most.
Not the same situation at all.
Remember that the Vietnam was about winning the hearts and minds of the
population, which failed partly because the Yanks suck at that and
partly because the VC weren't afraid to ensure the support of the local
populace by any means available.
Vietnam won, just as Hezbollah is winning now.
Are they? Looks like they are getting their arses kicked further back
every day.
Hezbollah, like the
Vietnamese are in the right - it's their land
Then they should have stayed in it. What are they trying to do, win
Lebanon back for the Syrians?
Hezbollah is a bunch of terrorists controlled by Syria and Iran as
proxies to achieve by other means what they couldn't do by direct
armed conflict. ie Destroy Israel.
- and they will never
give up. Not ever.
So they get exterminated. Fine by me.
The Israelis are not known for pulling their punches or being shamed
into fighting 'limited wars'. ISTR that political pressure at home not
to bomb Hanoi was one of the reasons that Vietnam could not be won.
Israel likes to pretend to be the perpetual
victim, but it is obvious that Israel is the arrogant Goliath
Seems to me that this particular arrogance was started by Hezbollah.
Israel withdrew from Lebanon some time ago. Hezbollah elected to start
the party again, Israel reacted for more than they expected.
Hezbollah craves legitimacy, Hamas does too. Hamas got elected to
government, Hezbollah is trying to get legitimacy by forcing a nation to
negotiate with them, which Israel doubtless considers would be a
tantamount admission that they aren't the terrorist arseholes they in
fact are.
about to
fall on its face.
Or not. The Arabs already tried to invade them how many times?
And got their arses handed to them how many times?
You're entitled to your opinion.
I don't share it.
--
The CO
Vietnam was an oil war. IIRC, the UN tasked the US with covering the
withdrawal of the French after their disaster at Dien Bien Phu, THEN setting
up a nationwide plebicite to determine the type of government that Vietnam
would have. At the last minute, Big Oil Inc pressured the US to blow off the
election and support the dictatorship in the south, because test drilling
had shown that there were significant onshore and offshore deposits. Check
the back issues of "The Petroleum Journal", in the late sixties and early
seventies. There are several articles discussing the deposits and leases.
The reserves were, at the time, estimated to rival the Gulf of Mexico. As
to not bombing Hanoi, you're forgetting the Linebacker 2 operation in the
fall of '72. After less than a month of B-52 massage, the north was back at
the table in Paris, ready to make a deal deal. So much for ancient history.
But you're right about one thing; America sucks at 'winning hearts and
minds' at the barrel of a gun. You win hearts and minds by leading by
example, not by grabbing by the balls. We haven't been setting a very good
example lately, say since the end of WW2. IF everyone here in the US got
***** enough, we might be able to still turn it around, but I'm not
going to hold my breath. Our government is bought and paid for, and it will
probably take a monumental disaster, like an Impact Event, to knock the
Mighty from their perch.
Charly
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jayjbee" |
|
| Title: Re: Tel Aviv |
31 Jul 2006 09:28:25 PM |
|
|
Styrbjörn wrote:
Michael Cornelissen wrote / skrev:
Debka reports that Hezbollah is planning missiles for Tel Aviv.
This will bring a next stage into the war.
I wonder what Israel will do then, it is losing the war already and
another big blow will certainly have implications to the proud people
of Israel. Or is this the comet that will run ?
/Michael
Losing the war? Who is winning?
Truth
JayJBee
"What is winning"
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
