Type 42 v Sa'ar V

Very well put Vaiar!

By the way, that crisis is a good example for every armed forces to show its own value for the own taxpayers if justified in that scope or not. I do not see, that the British forces were send in to counter Israeli forces, just to ashure, that they were not made party from the Lebanese side.

right, so they attack without any kind of intelligence and do not kill Hezbollah, but end up only killing women and children. perfect.

See this is the thing, Lebanon is not a terrorist organization. They are dragged into this war, because Hezbollah and Israel got problems with each other. And in the end, Lebanese civilians are the people that must suffer.

Hezbollah is not living on the moon. The Hezbollah people are citizens of Lebanon and the Lebanese government is responsible for its citizens.
The reporters in Beyrouth were shown the debris from the attacks with a guide/guard of the Hezbollah. They are not allowed to show armed people from the Hezbollah there. At least some reporters did not hesitate to give away, that they were not allowed to film that armed Hezbollah people around from their “guides”. They are not allowed to inspect such sites of their own and what happened there. It is a deal, the press got its pictures, when stick to the rules set by Hezbollah. Two reporters, which did not obey to that rules that, were highjacked and accused of spionage. When there are civil installations only, none can blame someone of spionage at all.
When Hezbollah works with the consent of the government, no can claim that Hezbollah is something different.
Israel has no real intrest to target marked ships, because they are shure that those did not not support Hezbollah in any way.
By the way, why not asked the Egyptian crew of a vessel sunk by Hezbollah, when it comes to intel and targeting accuracy. I am still surprised, that some people claim that one side has to be limited by all rules to name, when the other side has not so. No double standards please.

Isn’t some of this discussion a bit far fetched? Israel seems to take great care to avoid bombardment near the evacuation points and, from television reports and interviews with a.o. British Naval Officers and embassy staff, there seems to be good cooperation from the Israelis to allow for a relatively unscathed evacuation of foreign nationals.
Furthermore, if damage or destruction would arise from Israeli strikes, you can be sure that immediate embassy contact would clarify the situation and defuse matters; as neither Israel nor the countries evacuating their nationals are interested in hostilities.

Exactly, very well put.

Isn’t some of this discussion a bit far fetched? Israel seems to take great care to avoid bombardment near the evacuation points and, from television reports and interviews with a.o. British Naval Officers and embassy staff, there seems to be good cooperation from the Israelis to allow for a relatively unscathed evacuation of foreign nationals.
Furthermore, if damage or destruction would arise from Israeli strikes, you can be sure that immediate embassy contact would clarify the situation and defuse matters; as neither Israel nor the countries evacuating their nationals are interested in hostilities.

If the Israeli ship has all 16 of its anti-ship missiles in range, than I think just about any ship in the world would be screwed. However, launching anti-ship missiles at RN warship would be death sentence for the IDF navy. We probably would never know, but there might be a SSN lurking around the waters somewhere, and if the Israeli ships take an offensive action against the RN evacuation force, I imagine it wouldn’t take too long for most IDF warships to be sunk.

Due to top weight issues the Saar 5 never sails operationally with a full load of 16 SSMs (8 Harpoon + 8 Gabriel). In practice at best 2×4 Harpoon. This is also the reason why the rear 32 cells for Barak are not in use (notice how the ships currently sport a SATCOM antenna in that location)

I dont think the IDF would target a British warship.. in fact any British/Australian/US warship would not be targeted at all, not even by ‘accident’. If anything did happen i think it would most likelly involve the French Navy. The French have a long standing bond with the lebanese people and if the port was attacked while a French warship was pulling civilians out then i would have no doubt that there would be crotales in the air and exocets hitting below the waterline. I was actually thinking about this particular scenario especially after reading about the USS Liberty. The French would not be in any mood to take an explanation from the IDF and it would most likelly flatten the IDF with punitive strikes as a matter of course. I simply do not rate the Isreilis as a first rate defence force by international standards, they may be the big kid on the block in the Mideast but against a large conventional European defence force they would be mince. A few squadrons of Mirage 2000’s from Southern France and a Rafale armed Charles De Gaulle battlegroup would make short work of their Navy and Air Force and punish them for any indescretion.. Dont think that there is a complete complement of Rafales yet for the De Gaulle

Comments?

I think not, don’t forget that the French got a bloody nose, as did the Americans, the last time they were in Beirut.
We got away with it, whether this was due, as mythology likes to think, to the Buccs flying sorties between the buildings in Beirut or the knowledge that we could muster a powerful force on our land base in Cyprus only 200 miles away is open to conjecture.
Flying missions from Southern France would be a tactical nightmare and Britain would be unlikely to allow access to Akritori for airstrikes directly on Israeli territory.
As for the Charles De Gaulle battle group, I’m sure that the IDF must have an air/sea capability and in fanatical defence of their homeland would just simply swamp the fleet with air attacks.
I shudder at the thought.
Yes, I’m sure that the RN have probably got an SSN lurking off the coast, could be anything, nearest Trident, Hunter killer, possibly tooled up with cruise, who knows.

I had an interesting conversation with my missus about all this this morning.
Her father is Hungarian and that countries population seems to have real hatred of the Israelis,( and gypsies ) and that isn’t just a generalisation, I’ve been there and heard all their wingeing.
I gather that in his case, his local village concealed a jewish family from the Nazis during the war, but afterwards, when the village was starving, the family would only help out at a price. That’s his story, but I get it down my neck at the moment every time I phone him up, though it gets difficult because he hates Hammas and Hezbollah as well so it all goes round in circles.
Madam was keen to put the record straight and I recieved an interrogation on my limited knowledge of Israeli history at 7:00 this morning, just what I needed.
Our conclusions seem to be the same as everyone elses, that the response is OTT, but considering the provocation from Hammas and Hezbollah, it’s hardly surprising, there are some interesting comments on my thread concerning Lebanese Hunters on the Historic Forum, some of you may be interested in looking at that.

Sealord: I was not suggesting you were being anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic at all, I was referring to the suggestion that seems to be common that the Israelis would intentionally target the foreign evacuees. I apologise if it seemed I was suggesting you were being.

I dont think the IDF would target a British warship.. in fact any British/Australian/US warship would not be targeted at all, not even by ‘accident’. If anything did happen i think it would most likelly involve the French Navy. The French have a long standing bond with the lebanese people and if the port was attacked while a French warship was pulling civilians out then i would have no doubt that there would be crotales in the air and exocets hitting below the waterline. I was actually thinking about this particular scenario especially after reading about the USS Liberty. The French would not be in any mood to take an explanation from the IDF and it would most likelly flatten the IDF with punitive strikes as a matter of course. I simply do not rate the Isreilis as a first rate defence force by international standards, they may be the big kid on the block in the Mideast but against a large conventional European defence force they would be mince. A few squadrons of Mirage 2000’s from Southern France and a Rafale armed Charles De Gaulle battlegroup would make short work of their Navy and Air Force and punish them for any indescretion.. Dont think that there is a complete complement of Rafales yet for the De Gaulle

Comments?

If the Israeli ship has all 16 of its anti-ship missiles in range, than I think just about any ship in the world would be screwed. However, launching anti-ship missiles at RN warship would be death sentence for the IDF navy. We probably would never know, but there might be a SSN lurking around the waters somewhere, and if the Israeli ships take an offensive action against the RN evacuation force, I imagine it wouldn’t take too long for most IDF warships to be sunk.

The reality is that the current situation is to further Iranian interests, not to deal with any grievances. Israel pulled out of all Lebanese territory in 2000, and do not occupy any Lebanese territory – they have no legitimate grievance, merely a rabid hatred of the state of Israel. Very few in Israel wish to occupy Lebanon, though some feel that withdrawing from there was a mistake, since it gave the Hezbollah terrorists six years to re-arm, free from any interference by the Lebanese government. It is very clear who is to blame for the current crisis, since Hezbollah crossed over into Israel, murdered Israeli soldiers, and took hostages – it is difficult to see how this could be argued to be Israel’s fault, unless motivated by anti-Israeli or anti-semitic feelings, which seem to be on the rise!

I am not anti-Israeli or anti semitic and I find the suggestion repugnant.

The reality is that the current situation is to further Iranian interests, not to deal with any grievances. Israel pulled out of all Lebanese territory in 2000, and do not occupy any Lebanese territory – they have no legitimate grievance, merely a rabid hatred of the state of Israel. Very few in Israel wish to occupy Lebanon, though some feel that withdrawing from there was a mistake, since it gave the Hezbollah terrorists six years to re-arm, free from any interference by the Lebanese government. It is very clear who is to blame for the current crisis, since Hezbollah crossed over into Israel, murdered Israeli soldiers, and took hostages – it is difficult to see how this could be argued to be Israel’s fault, unless motivated by anti-Israeli or anti-semitic feelings, which seem to be on the rise!

Sealord: I agree that there is more to it than simply destroying Hezbollah – it is impossible to destroy them, but it is possible to make their position untenable in the South. With regard to a permanent foothold, not even remotely likely, they had 18 years of that, more than enough to warn Israel off doing it again. What they want is to make southern Lebanon inhospitable for Hezbollah, thus making Israel out of reach of all but the longest range (and by implication easiest to spot and intercept) rockets. This buffer zone can be ensured through a combination of international observers, who must actually be willing to report Hezbollah presence, Lebanese authorities, and Israeli UAVs.

As for Lebanese forces, that is exactly the point – there needs to be a respectable, workable government, that does not include Hezbollah, willing to build the security forces up. This would be an excellent opportunity for Saudi or similar to step in, and help fund a secular non-partisan security force, equipped to take on Hezbollah.

Israel has no interest in running Lebanon, or its affairs, but if Lebanon does not show any interest in tackling the terrorists, then Israel has no choice. Reconstructing Lebanon is not just about repairing buildings, as seemed to be the impression in Lebanon before all this started, it is also about taking control of the country. This must be the focus once all this has finished, otherwise this whole story will happen again.

I can assure you it will keep happening. As for who is to blame- well whoever you like but it is apparent that both sides have very real grieveances and I can promise you that there are elements within Israel which would happily see the occupation of Lebanon, just as there are those in Lebanon who would happily see the destruction of Israel.

Sealord: I agree that there is more to it than simply destroying Hezbollah – it is impossible to destroy them, but it is possible to make their position untenable in the South. With regard to a permanent foothold, not even remotely likely, they had 18 years of that, more than enough to warn Israel off doing it again. What they want is to make southern Lebanon inhospitable for Hezbollah, thus making Israel out of reach of all but the longest range (and by implication easiest to spot and intercept) rockets. This buffer zone can be ensured through a combination of international observers, who must actually be willing to report Hezbollah presence, Lebanese authorities, and Israeli UAVs.

As for Lebanese forces, that is exactly the point – there needs to be a respectable, workable government, that does not include Hezbollah, willing to build the security forces up. This would be an excellent opportunity for Saudi or similar to step in, and help fund a secular non-partisan security force, equipped to take on Hezbollah.

Israel has no interest in running Lebanon, or its affairs, but if Lebanon does not show any interest in tackling the terrorists, then Israel has no choice. Reconstructing Lebanon is not just about repairing buildings, as seemed to be the impression in Lebanon before all this started, it is also about taking control of the country. This must be the focus once all this has finished, otherwise this whole story will happen again.

Israel is not attacking without intelligence, it is attacking two things – the Hezbollah support infrastructure near Beirut and other areas, and the other target is the Hezbollah firing positions in the southern areas. Hezbollah are not reporting how many of their terrorists are dead, so the only reports are those that they wish the western media to see. Unfortunately, when you hide in civilian areas, civilians will be casualties as well. It is Hezbollah who are to blame – or would you suggest that Israel just let Hezbollah terrorists attack, and not fight back because Hezbollah choose to use human shields?

Lebanon is not a terrorist organization in principle, however, its failure to even make the smallest effort to stop Hezbollah means that they are liable for the actions of Hezbollah. Hezbollah is actually part of the Lebanese government, and Lebanon has failed in its obligations under 1559 – when you choose to allow terrorists to operate from your territory, you cannot cry foul when the other side hits back. If the Lebanese people do not like what is happening, then perhaps they should understand that supporting terrorism makes you a (legitimate) target. If they want to end the suffering, they must tackle Hezbollah.

1) The Israeli offensive is quite clearly aimed at a little more than destroying Hezbollah, from the way in which southern lebanon has been laid waste it is apparent that they are trying to create some sort of buffer zone be it unmanned or manned, and possibly get a permanant foothold in the area.

2) The lebanese have little choice but to live with Hezbollah as that organisation has more troops and weapons than Lebanons own army, to challenge it directly would be to ask for another devastating civil war and I think that they have had enough of them already.

Israel is not attacking without intelligence, it is attacking two things – the Hezbollah support infrastructure near Beirut and other areas, and the other target is the Hezbollah firing positions in the southern areas. Hezbollah are not reporting how many of their terrorists are dead, so the only reports are those that they wish the western media to see. Unfortunately, when you hide in civilian areas, civilians will be casualties as well. It is Hezbollah who are to blame – or would you suggest that Israel just let Hezbollah terrorists attack, and not fight back because Hezbollah choose to use human shields?

Lebanon is not a terrorist organization in principle, however, its failure to even make the smallest effort to stop Hezbollah means that they are liable for the actions of Hezbollah. Hezbollah is actually part of the Lebanese government, and Lebanon has failed in its obligations under 1559 – when you choose to allow terrorists to operate from your territory, you cannot cry foul when the other side hits back. If the Lebanese people do not like what is happening, then perhaps they should understand that supporting terrorism makes you a (legitimate) target. If they want to end the suffering, they must tackle Hezbollah.

IDF chief estimated close to 100 Hizb casualty (includes wounded?), Hizbollah has reported 6 deaths including 3 in yesterday’s gun battle.

Israel is not attacking without intelligence, it is attacking two things – the Hezbollah support infrastructure near Beirut and other areas, and the other target is the Hezbollah firing positions in the southern areas. Hezbollah are not reporting how many of their terrorists are dead, so the only reports are those that they wish the western media to see. Unfortunately, when you hide in civilian areas, civilians will be casualties as well. It is Hezbollah who are to blame – or would you suggest that Israel just let Hezbollah terrorists attack, and not fight back because Hezbollah choose to use human shields?

Lebanon is not a terrorist organization in principle, however, its failure to even make the smallest effort to stop Hezbollah means that they are liable for the actions of Hezbollah. Hezbollah is actually part of the Lebanese government, and Lebanon has failed in its obligations under 1559 – when you choose to allow terrorists to operate from your territory, you cannot cry foul when the other side hits back. If the Lebanese people do not like what is happening, then perhaps they should understand that supporting terrorism makes you a (legitimate) target. If they want to end the suffering, they must tackle Hezbollah.

Illustrious was returning from exercise, and had reached Gibraltar when the crisis broke, and turned around. It is not carrying any Harriers, merely helicopters (Chinooks), and providing command facilities. As for the suggestion that Illustrious has somehow been deployed to face down an Israeli air threat, that stretches credibility well beyond breaking point – firstly, there is no air threat from Israel, and secondly, if there was, a dozen Harrier GR-7s would not be able to face down a few hundred top-notch Israeli fighters!

As for Israeli targetting, it is the very nature of the Hizbollah terrorists that they hide in civilian areas, and conceal their weapons in homes, not nice clearly defined military barracks. Israel has no choice but to hit them where they are – if Lebanon is not willing to fight them, and they continue their indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians, then Israel is entirely within their rights to engage them in residential areas. Israel does try to minimise collateral damage, but when at war (a war started by Hizbollah, operating freely from Lebanon), civilians will, unfortunately, be killed.

right, so they attack without any kind of intelligence and do not kill Hezbollah, but end up only killing women and children. perfect.

See this is the thing, Lebanon is not a terrorist organization. They are dragged into this war, because Hezbollah and Israel got problems with each other. And in the end, Lebanese civilians are the people that must suffer.

Illustrious was returning from exercise, and had reached Gibraltar when the crisis broke, and turned around. It is not carrying any Harriers, merely helicopters (Chinooks), and providing command facilities. As for the suggestion that Illustrious has somehow been deployed to face down an Israeli air threat, that stretches credibility well beyond breaking point – firstly, there is no air threat from Israel, and secondly, if there was, a dozen Harrier GR-7s would not be able to face down a few hundred top-notch Israeli fighters!

As for Israeli targetting, it is the very nature of the Hizbollah terrorists that they hide in civilian areas, and conceal their weapons in homes, not nice clearly defined military barracks. Israel has no choice but to hit them where they are – if Lebanon is not willing to fight them, and they continue their indiscriminate attacks on Israeli civilians, then Israel is entirely within their rights to engage them in residential areas. Israel does try to minimise collateral damage, but when at war (a war started by Hizbollah, operating freely from Lebanon), civilians will, unfortunately, be killed.

The IDF would not target a British ship, or any of the vessels brought in to evacuate foreign nationals. The only possibility would be an accident, and that would be very unlikely indeed – the Israelis are very careful what they do. The Israelis sometimes use more force than necessary, but they are good people, unlike the Hezbollah terrorists, who actively target civilians, and would not think twice about hitting a ship on a mercy mission, especially if they thought it would further their cause. Israel is not the enemy, so Tornado and Harrier sorties are not necessary, and the Israelis will help protect the shipping if that proves necessary.

Do you seriously believe that, while I consider Hezbollah to be the scum of the earth and agree with what you say, as far as I’m concerned Israel are a good people unto themselves, note the bombing of the Christian areas of Beirut, are they a problem then.
If there were no concerns about a threat, what is Illustrious doing there then, on exercise by chance.