EdLawSealord: 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.
EdLawThe 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!
EdLawSealord: 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.
EdLawIsrael 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.
EdLawIllustrious 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.
EdLawThe 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.
EdLawAlso, Taiwan gives the Chinese military something to do – as long as Taiwan is there, the military can keep itself occupied with endless ‘preparations’. If they ever actually try to take Taiwan, then once it is over, they will need to do something else, and shift their attention, either inwards (painful and dangerous) or outwards to neighbors, which would severly hurt foreign trade. As long as Taiwan can hurt a Chinese invasion badly enough to make such an invasion unworkable, the Chinese will be happy to have a standoff, allowing a Chinese flexing of muscles, without upsetting anyone too much.
EdLawThe whole idea of the Taiwanese military has basically never been to defeat a Chinese invasion – there are two tasks for the Taiwanese military. The first of these is to make any invasion very painful on China – make them lose as many aircraft and ships as possible, making any victory pyrrhic. The second is the more popular belief, and that is to delay any invasion long enough to get the US to intervene. In order to render any attack pyrrhic, you must be able to inflict devastating losses on the attacker, which is made easier nowadays by the media, where every loss makes the headlines. To ensure this level of defense, Taiwan really needs subs and SAMs, which can inflict losses, at a high bang-for-buck ratio.
EdLawAny word on VF-213? They are part of CVW-8, and have been in the process of conversion to Rhinos, but will not have completed conversion yet. If CVW-8 has been surged, then it would be interesting to know about VF-213…
EdLawThe problem with the SSK deal was that there were really only two sub designs on the cards – Moray and the 209. Unfortunately, for political reasons, the Netherlands and Germany both said no, leaving the deal stalled. The political state means that the 209/212/214/Dolphin, Moray, Agosta, Scorpene are all out, the Collins is probably out due to the Swedes, though it would be good.
I hope the Taiwanese improve the spec a little – perhaps adding the thrust vectoring from the MATV (allowing the Vipers to face the Flankers with some chance). It would help give the Viper a new lease on life, though that is exactly why Lockheed will not do it, since it would pose too big a threat to the JSF program.
EdLawSuper Puma / Cougar is still in production, and new versions have recently been released, as the EC-225 and EC-725. They are an older design, especially given the fact that they are fundamentally derivatives of the original SA-330s, but that does not mean much now – Bell 412s are derivatives of the original HU-1s, but are very different aircraft now! The problem with replacing the Pumas is budget, suitability, and politics – the EH-101 was to replace them (one of its roles), and is a much better helicopter, though much more expensive (like Blackhawks replacing Hueys, much more capable, much more expensive).
The AW-149 should be a great helicopter, though needs an initial push, preferably into UK service – a hundred or so would be very useful. If fitted with maritime sensors, they could be a good Lynx replacement, as well as being a good AB-212ASW replacement. As launch customer, the UK would probably get a very good deal, and they would make a very good Lynx replacement in the transport role.
As for the mounting of the FLIR, that is the normal solution for transport helicopters, for which the FLIR is for terrain avoidance and night flying, not targetting. Fitting the system above the cabin would not make sense for a transport, and mast mounting is very complex and expensive. A basic level of targetting capability should be included, perhaps allowing transport helicopters to use APKWS rockets, to suppress a landing zone – but I would not use them for anything more than this.
EdLawFrom what I have heard, she was more like 5km offshore, to carry out naval gunnery (the 3in gun has quite a short range, somewhere between 15-20km, which would make 15km from shore improbable). If the ship was that close, then the available time would be very limited, probably 15-25 seconds, which is not very long, even for advanced systems. The problem is that such missile systems can easily be hidden in a commercial-looking vehicle, and parked in a garage, to be brought out only when intended to be used – thus limiting Israel’s opportunity for spotting such systems.
EdLawAt the moment, Omega provide a 707 tanker for the US Navy, and have been found to be very useful – low running costs, and always available for the Navy, which cannot be said for the KC-135s. The US Navy now want to expand their air refuelling capability, independent of the USAF, and have been looking at DC-10s (Omega, using former Japanese DC-10s), more 707s, or as reported in AFM, even Il-78s. Omega are trying to offer a variety of customers their services – they reportedly offered the RAF their services, to allow FSTA to be put off until the proper budget is around. They may end up being used to supplement the peacetime operations, and possibly contingency non-combat (i.e. evacuations etc…), given the tiny A-330 fleet being proposed.
EdLawI think it is also important to separate the issues of Hizbollah and Hamas – both are terrorist groups, but very different as well. Hamas are radical Islamic terrorists, with a mad loathing of Israel, but fundamentally they have reasons for their terrorism. In contrast, Hizbollah are just a rent-a-terrorist for Iran, as shown by the whole current mess – Iran gives the orders, and they carry them out, with no thought for what they are doing to Lebanon.
Terrorism can never be legitimate, and the suggestion that Israel should give in to terrorist demands is actually quite ridiculous. Unfortunately, a lot of people do not understand that when you give an inch, they will demand a mile – any time you negotiate with terrorists, you make them stronger. Any time you use appeasement, you just make the problem much bigger.
EdLawI think it is also important to separate the issues of Hizbollah and Hamas – both are terrorist groups, but very different as well. Hamas are radical Islamic terrorists, with a mad loathing of Israel, but fundamentally they have reasons for their terrorism. In contrast, Hizbollah are just a rent-a-terrorist for Iran, as shown by the whole current mess – Iran gives the orders, and they carry them out, with no thought for what they are doing to Lebanon.
Terrorism can never be legitimate, and the suggestion that Israel should give in to terrorist demands is actually quite ridiculous. Unfortunately, a lot of people do not understand that when you give an inch, they will demand a mile – any time you negotiate with terrorists, you make them stronger. Any time you use appeasement, you just make the problem much bigger.
Sign In
