| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Hizbullah achieves deterrence against Israel |
| 2004-12-09 |
| From Geostrategy-direct, requires subscription It sounds incredible but a Lebanese militia has managed to achieve effective deterrence against the most powerful military in the Middle East. Israeli commanders have acknowledged that Hizbullah has acquired a missile and rocket arsenal that is so large that the Jewish state does not want to provoke the Iranian-sponsored terrorist group. The commanders said Iran has obtained up to 15,000 short, medium and long-range rockets that could cover most of the country. This is very disconcerting. I would like to see some independent verification. As a result, Hizbullah calls the shots along the Israeli-Lebanese border. The Shi'ite group decides when to attack Israel and how. If Hizbullah wants to conceal its fingerprints, it merely hires Palestinian mercenaries to fire rockets inside Israel. "We can fight and beat Hizbullah," a senior commander said. "That's not the issue. The issue is the cost. Large parts of the north would be destroyed and the casualty rate could be enormous." How enormous was the subject of study recently submitted to Israel's Defense Ministry. It found that Hizbullah could wipe several Israeli communities off the map with a rocket and missile barrage. And Hizb'Allah gets its resources from Iran. It all goes back ultimately to Iran. Even more dangerous was the vulnerability of Israel's northern city of Haifa to Hizbullah rockets. In an assertion supported by military commanders, the study found that Hizbullah could destroy chemical facilities in Haifa that would kill everybody for miles around. Quietly, the General Staff is warning the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that such a threat cannot be tolerated. Senior commanders warn that in any war with Syria, Hizbullah could flatten northern Israel and create a second military front that must be reckoned with. It seems that neutralizing Syria as a base for Hizb'Allah would go along ways in drying up this threat. |
| Posted by:Alaska Paul |
| #19 Anyone willing to consider now that Syria/Lebanon and not Iraq should have been the first target? Were there already violations by Syria or Lebanon of a previous agreement (a la Gulf War 1)? No? Then that's why Iraq came next. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2004-12-09 11:57:35 PM |
| #18 No. Syria's Israel's problem. Saddam was the region's and our problem. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 11:47:02 PM |
| #17 Yeah -- make that "first target *after* Afghanistan". |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-12-09 11:44:31 PM |
| #16 Afghanistan was the first target. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-09 11:34:41 PM |
| #15 nope - Israel has this covered |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-12-09 11:33:16 PM |
| #14 Anyone willing to consider now that Syria/Lebanon and not Iraq should have been the first target? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2004-12-09 11:25:44 PM |
| #13 I call BS on this one, sorry, AP - Israel wouldn't allow themselves to be subjected to this blackmail |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-12-09 11:10:53 PM |
| #12 All the more reason for making it crystal-clear to Iran that any massive offense by Hizbullah will result in Kargh Island or some other vital Iranian asset being crippled. That Israel should have to constantly fight a proxy war with Iran is becoming ridiculous. Especially so, in light of Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and their avowed intention of instigating an atomic war in the Middle East. Hold Iran responsible for Hizbullah. Period. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-12-09 9:44:39 PM |
| #11 Nice link, Bernie. If only it were true. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-12-09 7:19:23 PM |
| #10 The analogy with Korea is apt. The author, Jack Wheeler, of the article at the link believes that both the USA and Israel have the means to deal with massive artillery, missile/rockets & troops in a border situation near cities. Also the smart spears might be a solution to the Iranian nuke problem. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/30/30344.shtml |
| Posted by: Bernie 2004-12-09 6:52:15 PM |
| #9 We are talking a high concentration of missiles in a relatively small area, mostly the Bekaa Valley. The logical counter would be to use air-dropped pressure munitions, like propane bombs, that would cause sympathetic detonations over a wide area. Even in bunkers, each bomb might set off well over 100, 1000 or more missiles. This is assuming that they are properly stored and separated, which they probably aren't. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2004-12-09 6:50:38 PM |
| #8 There is a down side for Hizbullah here also. They become hostages for Lebanon's stability. The govt of Lebanon/Syria needs stability to have economic growth and they need Hizbullah to be quiet to have stability. One thing I'm not sure of is the cost Hizbullah bears to keep all their missiles and launchers in good condition. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-12-09 6:29:16 PM |
| #7 I call shenanigans. This seems a bit pessimistic. I liken this situation to that of N. Korea attacking the South, only on a much smaller scale. The first hour (few minutes in the case of Israel) would be bad, but the attackers would be destroyed in the next hour or two (15 minutes in the case of Israel). It may be that this is too high a price for a small country like Israel. However, it does make the case for preemption more compelling. |
| Posted by: Tibor 2004-12-09 6:02:19 PM |
| #6 Don't assume those JDAMs were for Iran. Syria command and control centres are also held at risk. The missle threat is real but over-rated, they're gone in 48 hours and N. Israel build houses thick. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-12-09 5:33:52 PM |
| #5 " As a result, Hizbullah calls the shots along the Israeli-Lebanese border " Do you really think Isreal lets Hizbullah call the shots on the border ? That is a statement like the Insurgency calls the shots in the Sunni Triangle. |
| Posted by: tex 2004-12-09 5:30:28 PM |
| #4 Iran? What about "certain people" knowing about "certain hiding places" in Iraq, and shipping this stuff... |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-12-09 5:29:55 PM |
| #3 Iran? What about "certain people" knowing about "certain hiding places" in Iraq, and shipping this stuff... |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-12-09 5:29:42 PM |
| #2 I would like to thank Ehud Barak for bending over (not backwards) and giving up the Golan Heights. If I were to ever meet you, I will buy you a drink. < NOT > |
| Posted by: Poison Reverse 2004-12-09 5:27:22 PM |
| #1 Looks like pulling out of southern Lebanon has worked out really well for Israel. < NOT > They really need to move the border to the outskirts of Tripoli and Damascus over in Syria. Let those cities stare out at a pile of artillery pieces and rocket launchers for a while. |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2004-12-09 4:58:59 PM |