Question about Israel's military tactics

Oki9Sedo!

Can somebody educated in military strategy and tactics please answer this question for me. Do the Israel Defence Forces have any reasonable alternative strategies to the way they are fighting Hamas in Gaza?

The reason I ask is that everybody criticizes their bombing enemy sites in houses, schools and hospitals and killing the civilians located there, but if they have no reasonable alternative strategy then, logically, these deaths are unavoidable and as such they cannot be blamed.

Lurching

Not bombing is always an alternative.

Oki9Sedo!

Lurching wrote: »

Not bombing is always an alternative.

So they're supposed to just sit back, relax, have a cup of tea and allow Hamas to fire rockets at them are they?

Nonsense. They have to do something.

My question, as previously stated, is whether that "something" has to be bombing back or are there other military attack methods that would be as effective at destroying Hamas militants but result in less civilian casualties.

Five Lamps

I think it's worth noting that the military response is not purely that, it's also political. Shock and awe aimed at regime change.

The Israelis have the Iron Dome which by all accounts has functioned pretty well. That in itself is a proportionate defensive response to what Hamas are doing without going on the offensive.

The problem with the offensive Israeli response that they are attacking a densely populated civilian area. The "collateral" damage is considerable and well documented over the past few weeks.

It would be my view that both the actions of Hamas and the Israeli military are war crimes given that they both actively target civilian populations.

Reggie.

Well to my knowledge hamas clearly hide in civilian areas so how are the civilian causalities to be avoided if the enemy hides behind it's own civilian population as a human shield

Five Lamps

Reggie. wrote: »

Well to my knowledge hamas clearly hide in civilian areas so how are the civilian causalities to be avoided if the enemy hides behind it's own civilian population as a human shield

That's a point of view that the Israelis would prefer people held. The reality is that Gaza is pretty much one big urban area. Any activities that Hamas engage in is going to be along side the civilian population whether or not they are hiding. In no way and I defending Hamas firing rockets at civilians in Israel - that's a war crime too.

The Israeli response is disproportionate by any reasonable minded person particularly as it's a no-brainer that civilians will be killed or injured. They already have proportionate defensive capabilities.

Of course, this current phase will end and at some point down the line the same thing will happen all over again and it makes no odds who fired first. The solution is political and will need to be negotiated. There doesn't seem to be a military solution - unless one side successfully obliterates the other.

Reggie.

Five Lamps wrote: »

That's a point of view that the Israelis would prefer people held. The reality is that Gaza is pretty much one big urban area. Any activities that Hamas engage in is going to be along side the civilian population whether or not they are hiding. In no way and I defending Hamas firing rockets at civilians in Israel - that's a war crime too.

The Israeli response is disproportionate by any reasonable minded person particularly as it's a no-brainer that civilians will be killed or injured. They already have proportionate defensive capabilities.

Of course, this current phase will end and at some point down the line the same thing will happen all over again and it makes no odds who fired first. The solution is political and will need to be negotiated. There doesn't seem to be a military solution - unless one side successfully obliterates the other.

Gaga is just a meat grinder and its gonna be the ones with the mist numbers that will prevail

Oki9Sedo!

Five Lamps wrote: »

I think it's worth noting that the military response is not purely that, it's also political. Shock and awe aimed at regime change.

The Israelis have the Iron Dome which by all accounts has functioned pretty well. That in itself is a proportionate defensive response to what Hamas are doing without going on the offensive.

The problem with the offensive Israeli response that they are attacking a densely populated civilian area. The "collateral" damage is considerable and well documented over the past few weeks.

It would be my view that both the actions of Hamas and the Israeli military are war crimes given that they both actively target civilian populations.

But the Iron Dome is far from 100% effective. Rockets get through. Hence, they can't just rely on it.

Cork boy 55

Most arab civilian casualties where assorted not with counter-battery fire against arab rockets but the ground OP
A lot of the civilian Casualties came when they went in on the ground to destroy tunnels and also most of Israel losses

The ground OP could have been cancelled and tunnel infiltration defeated by defense in depth and detection.

Advantages
less arab civilian death
most Israel solders where killed in this OP as well
they would have won the propaganda war as we would have seen far more images of Hama infiltrators trying to kill Israli civilians
The arab would have painted as aggressor.
Some of the tunnels where aimed at farms.

Disadavnatges
Tunnels mostly left intact on arab side for possible future sneak surprise attack post war
Possible civilian causalities on Israel side , some military losses but much less than ground OP
lots of distributions to life on Israeli side from "defense in depth" + ocst of deploying troops in block houses patrols etc

Oki9Sedo!

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

Most arab civilian casualties where assorted not with counter-battery fire against arab rockets but the ground OP
A lot of the civilian Casualties came when they went in on the ground to destroy tunnels and also most of Israel losses

The ground OP could have been cancelled and tunnel infiltration defeated by defense in depth and detection.

Advantages
less arab civilian death
most Israel solders where killed in this OP as well
they would have won the propaganda war as we would have seen far more images of Hama infiltrators trying to kill Israli civilians
The arab would have painted as aggressor.
Some of the tunnels where aimed at farms.

Disadavnatges
Tunnels mostly left intact on arab side for possible future sneak surprise attack post war
Possible civilian causalities on Israel side , some military losses but much less than ground OP
lots of distributions to life on Israeli side from "defense in depth" + ocst of deploying troops in block houses patrols etc

Thanks for your post. What would this process of defense in depth and detection involve doing? I don't know anything about military tactics.

Oki9Sedo!

Five Lamps wrote: »

That's a point of view that the Israelis would prefer people held. The reality is that Gaza is pretty much one big urban area. Any activities that Hamas engage in is going to be along side the civilian population whether or not they are hiding. In no way and I defending Hamas firing rockets at civilians in Israel - that's a war crime too.

Yes, but Hamas seem to be firing from a disproportionately high number of schools, hospitals, UN refugee camps etc. There are only so many of those.

riffmongous

Oki9Sedo! wrote: »

Yes, but Hamas seem to be firing from a disproportionately high number of schools, hospitals, UN refugee camps etc. There are only so many of those.

Do you have a link for that? It would be interesting to read some numbers

Cork boy 55

Oki9Sedo! wrote: »

Thanks for your post. What would this process of defense in depth and detection involve doing? I don't know anything about military tactics.

Defense in depth
So you work out the areas where the tunnels can emerge
Work out the area where they are most like to emerge
Work out vulnerable targets

Once you have that done you arm civilians in area
Build manned block houses /bunkers on targets
Set up checkpoints on roads
Set-up sensors ,cameras, towers Observation posts, ambushes, patrols
in the countryside


Detection
On gaza side
Use intelligence to ID tunnel builders and planners and kill them
Use intel to find tunnel entrances and bomb them


On Isralei side
Use various techs to detect and find tunnels and tunnel exits
I am not an expert on this I believe current tech is crap and/or expensive
and/or not ready.

folbotcar

You can argue that the Israeli response was disproportionate. The Israelis have been quite literally fighting for their lives for decades now. Their attitudes are a lot harder than huggy, fluffy western liberal outlook we have here in west.

Remember Hamas fired thousands of rockets at Israel in an attempt to kill Israeli men, women and children. That they failed to kill thousands is down to their incompetence and a good Israeli defence. They also very cynically placed the rockets in built up areas, including hospitals and schools knowing full well the Israelis will attempt to knock them out and quite cynically knowing civilians would be killed. They care nothing for the Palestinians because they are Islamic extremists and martyring people is what they do. Plus they know the propaganda value of dead children. It really is that cynical.

So your real question should be about Hamas military tactics or more to the point strategy. Because their strategy is to isolate Israel from the west in order to make it easier to destroy it. They're not interested in peace. This ceasefire is to give time to rearm and do it all again a year or two from now. Perhaps they're hoping their friends in IS will prevail and open a second front on Israel.

Judging by the number of people making anti Israeli comments in this country you can see the propaganda exercise worked here.

Israelis tactics may be a blunt instrument but they have no choice but to retaliate. Imagine what Assad would do, actually we don't need to. He uses chemical weapons. Imagine what Iran would do? They would obliterate the problem. On that basis the Israelis seem remarkably restrained.

Reggie.

folbotcar wrote: »

You can argue that the Israeli response was disproportionate. The Israelis have been quite literally fighting for their lives for decades now. Their attitudes are a lot harder than huggy, fluffy western liberal outlook we have here in west.

Remember Hamas fired thousands of rockets at Israel in an attempt to kill Israeli men, women and children. That they failed to kill thousands is down to their incompetence and a good Israeli defence. They also very cynically placed the rockets in built up areas, including hospitals and schools knowing full well the Israelis will attempt to knock them out and quite cynically knowing civilians would be killed. They care nothing for the Palestinians because they are Islamic extremists and martyring people is what they do. Plus they know the propaganda value of dead children. It really is that cynical.

So your real question should be about Hamas military tactics or more to the point strategy. Because their strategy is to isolate Israel from the west in order to make it easier to destroy it. They're not interested in peace. This ceasefire is to give time to rearm and do it all again a year or two from now. Perhaps they're hoping their friends in IS will prevail and open a second front on Israel.

Judging by the number of people making anti Israeli comments in this country you can see the propaganda exercise worked here.

Israelis tactics may be a blunt instrument but they have no choice but to retaliate. Imagine what Assad would do, actually we don't need to. He uses chemical weapons. Imagine what Iran would do? They would obliterate the problem. On that basis the Israelis seem remarkably restrained.

Couldn't agree more

Manic Moran

Five Lamps wrote: »

I think it's worth noting that the military response is not purely that, it's also political. Shock and awe aimed at regime change.

Partially regime change, but in the short term they'll be happy with "convince the other guys that this really isn't worth the trouble that it will cause." It seems to have worked on the Lebanon border, though, granted, the situation is not entirely analogous.

The Israelis have the Iron Dome which by all accounts has functioned pretty well. That in itself is a proportionate defensive response to what Hamas are doing without going on the offensive.

Relying on Iron Dome is a losing proposition. Not only is it not 100% reliable! but quite simply! as long as cheap rockets are being fired! Israel will use expensive rockets to intercept them. Israel loses on the economic balance. The only way to get the rockets to stop coming in, if no political solution is found (I'm not saying that one shouldn't, just that it hasn't happened regardless of who is at fault for it), is to take active military measures to stop them at the source. As 2006 indicated, air power alone, no matter how heavy, cannot do it. Ground control is necessary.

The reality is that Gaza is pretty much one big urban area

Apparently not so. I took that statement as a given as well, until i saw a density map of the place. Then I arsed myself to look at a satellite image on Google Maps and there is a substantial amount of greenfield. It's not exactly Megacity One.

Now, that said, it's not as if Hamas are stupid enough to operate from the fields, but it is interesting to note that there was a decision made.