Article

2006-07-17 Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-07-17 09:04|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The battlefield is being carefully prepared.

Posted by 6 2006-07-17 09:39|| 2006-07-17 09:39|| Front Page Top

#2 This is crap. Israel is acting properly. Strategic strikes and covert ops to conserve forces and maximumize effect should be the rule of the day. They are surrounded by the enemy and should only commit forces when they know it will be decisive.

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2006-07-17 09:48|| 2006-07-17 09:48|| Front Page Top

#3 Peters is desperately trying to look relevant.

Posted by lotp 2006-07-17 10:08|| 2006-07-17 10:08|| Front Page Top

#4 Remember also that Lebanon is tactically not just one country, but two. That is, Syria, on the flank, has to be seen as a serious threat to any ground assault. So any advance is Lebanon has to not only be long, but wide enough to keep the Syrians from dividing the Israeli forces.

This would be done with a quick thrust just north of the border, with lots of SAM support and artillery to pound every ground access from Israel north, cutting off the Israelis in Lebanon. Then the Syrian air force would turn the tables on the trapped Israelis.

The new Russian SAMs the Syrians have could then really punish the IAF trying to protect their ground forces. At that point, even the Lebanese army could be a player.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-07-17 10:35|| 2006-07-17 10:35|| Front Page Top

#5 Total BS article. Charge of the light brigade is a stupid suggestion from a pencil pusher.

Posted by Inspector Clueso 2006-07-17 10:37|| 2006-07-17 10:37|| Front Page Top

#6 Perters isn't exactly a pencilpusher. He had a very distinguished career as an enlisted man, NCO and commissioned officer.

But that was a good while ago and he has some strong biases which distort his judgement in certain circumstances IMO.

Posted by lotp 2006-07-17 10:42|| 2006-07-17 10:42|| Front Page Top

#7 There is a good chance that Israel agreed to not send the tanks in return for a promise from Egypt and Jordan to lay off for a while.

Posted by mhw 2006-07-17 11:11|| http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/]">[http://hypocrisy-incorporated.blogspot.com/] 2006-07-17 11:11|| Front Page Top

#8 The Egyptians and Jordanians would probably love to see an Israeli Pyrrhic victory over Hesballan.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-07-17 11:38|| 2006-07-17 11:38|| Front Page Top

#9 I think that Peters editorial is ill-timed. If the Israelis really mean to destroy Hezbollah, they are going to have to take some enormous risks. Somehow, they've got to be able to cut Lebanon in two, encircle Hezbollah, and then squeeze until the damn thing dies. A frontal attack across the Lebanese border doesn't work since Hezb will just retreat/go to ground, forcing the Israelis to occupy Beirut again and subjecting their lines of communication to constant harrassment.

I honestly don't know if Israel has the will or resources to attempt this. I personally don't think that they have any choice. But Peters is off the mark here. I agree with 6 that Israel is shaping the battlefield right now. If they haven't attacked in a month, then Peters screed will have more standing.

Posted by 11A5S 2006-07-17 13:26|| 2006-07-17 13:26|| Front Page Top

#10 The problem is they don't get a month. I do think Olmert has the stones, I just don't know if he has the time.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-07-17 13:37|| 2006-07-17 13:37|| Front Page Top

#11 Somehow, they've got to be able to cut Lebanon in two, encircle Hezbollah, and then squeeze until the damn thing dies.

I would use Damascus route for that kind of thrust. ;-)

Posted by twobyfour 2006-07-17 15:48|| 2006-07-17 15:48|| Front Page Top

#12 I think he misses the mark as well. If Israel invades Lebanon in anything more than a smash and dash back to Israeli territory it will eventually be used against them. Brutal occupation and then any withdrawl turned into chased out.

Best not to go in if staying becomes more painful politically. Best case scenerio is to get the lebanese military to occupy the region after Isreal has hammered it and done raids and done as much damage as possible short of full blown tank columns and occupation.

Let the Leb military say they chases Israel out as they drove over the skulls of Hezbollah, whatever it takes to prop up the right people and remove the wrong ones.

Posted by rjschwarz 2006-07-17 16:40|| 2006-07-17 16:40|| Front Page Top

#13 How odd that he would time this article to come out before the Israelis would be able to go in. It's like he's trying to communicate directly with Olmert and tell him what needs to be done.

He's a good historian. I think he's falling prey to that desire to direct from the keyboard rather than to report.

Posted by 2b 2006-07-17 21:29|| 2006-07-17 21:29|| Front Page Top

#14 Maybe Peters would like Olmert to challenge Nasralla to personal combat?

Posted by gromgoru 2006-07-17 21:57|| 2006-07-17 21:57|| Front Page Top

#15 Austin Bay has been reporting (via AT&T) that Israel has sent troops into Lebanon, probably about sundown, Lebanon time. Israel has full night vision capabilities, I doubt Hezbullshit has the same.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2006-07-17 22:11|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2006-07-17 22:11|| Front Page Top

00:13 anymouse
00:00 Master of Obvious
23:58 mojo
23:52 mojo
23:52 mojo
23:50 mojo
23:46 Fred
23:46 anymouse
23:43 mojo
23:39 anymouse
23:36 ex-lib
23:35 anymouse
23:26 FBH
22:40 pihkalbadger
22:34 Oldspook
22:30 Oldspook
22:27 twobyfour
22:22 bigjim-ky
22:21 M. Murcek
22:19 Robert Crawford
22:14 Manolo
22:14 J. D. Lux
22:13 mcsegeek1
22:11 Old Patriot