Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Hezbollah's defeat of Israel uncovered
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810 		  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Hezbollah's defeat of Israel uncovered
    Posted: 03-Jan-2008 at 14:46
Egypt had only 20 000 men almost all of them west of the 34 longitude while Israel had over 200 000 men doing exercises just 10 Km from the borders with Egypt from Dec 66. Israel was under a state of emergency since March of 67 while Egyptian soldiers did not even have ammunition. Only two air strips without planes and no Radar installations whatsoever. Sorry, the only provocation was a couple of stupid speaches by Abdul-Nassir after the humiliation of Yemen for internal consumption that is if speeches of this kind can be considered provocation.
 
As for the summer war, Israel had every right to retaliate and this was war, if Hizbollah had no power to stop or defeat Israel then why attack in the first place, unless you are strong, don't provoke the beast.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Kerimoglu View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 05-Oct-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 313 		  Quote Kerimoglu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Jan-2008 at 14:32
totally agree. In fact, I do not like when people do not like Israel becouse of their religious reasons. 
History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962 		  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Jan-2008 at 00:15
Originally posted by Al Jassas

 In 67, again unprovoked attacked Egypt and refused to return the occupied lands.


1967 attack unprovoked?  Other acts of Israeli aggression aside, the 1967 war was clearly not unprovoked. 

Egypt masses her Armies deep in the Sinai and directly on the Israeli border, closes off the port of Eliat, pressures a reluctant Jordan to join Egypt and Syria in the upcoming "Final Battle", Egyptian radio proclaims that the "Final Battle" is about to start and that the "The Jews will be cast into the sea".

The main issue in 1967 was that the "Final Battle" did not go according to Arab plans.   The overwhelming Israeli victory and catastrophic Arab defeat in 7 days needs to be placed in the most embarrassing defeats thread.

 
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810 		  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 22:01

Hello king John

 
I don't talk naturally about the Arab-Israeli conflict but since you started it then I will continue. Arab states attacked Israel in the 48 war for the simple reason that Jewish terrorist organizations were launching a bloody terroist campaign against both the Brits and the Palestinians. Thousands of Palestinians who were living in Jewish majority areas were forced to flee before the war and one of the first acts of the new Israeli state was to put upto 400 000 palestinians under military rule and hddle them into "security zones". From 700 000-1 million fled or were forced to flee leading to the current refugee problem. Israel tried to take all the settlements that were outside the original brderes of the state of Israe as the UN decreed and Arabs helped the helpless Palestinias. After that, Israel, unprovoked, attacked Jordan 4 times killing upto 2000 Jordania civilian from 48-56. In 56, again unprovoked they Attacked Egypt and occupied Sinai but were forced to leave it. In 67, again unprovoked attacked Egypt and refused to return the occupied lands. In 73 Egypt and Syria were already in a state of war with Israel and they regained what is rightfully their own.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792 		  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 21:35
Well Hezbollah was formed specifically to get rid of the Israeli occupation of Southern Lebanon which it has not completely achieved. 

If you want to know what Hezbollah's actual goals are: well I have heard them on youtube and other media but if I wanted solid concrete evidence of this I guess Hezbollah (official media?) itself may be a good place to start! Just an after thought.  I am pretty sure they are not after the 'destruction' of Israel though - diriving anyone into the sea or anything like that.

As for the Yom Kippur war, that was Egypt and Syria trying to get their territories back from the Israeli surprise attacks in 1967.  Egypt achieved its goal and reclaimed the Sinai whereas Syria failed because it kept too many forces central in case of any internal insurrection and was subsequently unable to withstand the ISraeli counter attack.
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366 		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 20:52
First, I noted the bias of zionism-israel.com. That is why I tried to provide other cites.

I never labeled everybody that has a problem with Israel as an anti-Christ. I realize that some people that have problems with Israel have valid reasons for their issues, heck I have some issues with Israel. Has Israel done some questionable things sure, but Hezbollah has also done questionable things as well. Hezbollah is here due to the actions of both Arabs and Israelis. Israelis were attacked the 1948 with out provocation, again in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Let's not act like Hezbollah and other Arab groups are innocent here. I understand you have sympathies for Hezbollah that however does not justify blindly believing that Hezbollah is a noble cause. The fact of the matter is that they target civilians this is hardly a noble act.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 20:17
Originally posted by King John

After some searching I have found one instance of Hezbollah's statement of it's aim I will provide the link for you.

http://www.zionism-israel.com/hdoc/Hezbollah_Charter.htm

this is not an unbiased site so I will provide at least one more link for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hizbullah#Position_on_Israel


    I could not find a translation of the Open Letter published in Bierut 1985 that actually stated Hezbollah's goals. So I just provided the two above links



www.zionism-isreal.com? Ouch

That is where you are steering off the right track. You can go to al-Quada.com to find out about Western society too then.

I understand you have sympathies for Isreal that however does not justify blindly labeling everyone that has a problem with Israel as some anti-Christ. The thing is that Israel has comitted some horrendeous acts from the 40s on and that trend still continues. Hezbollah like them or not are here due to those actions, and their aim was not to destroy Isreal, but to react to their forceful measures with force.


Back to Top
TranHungDao View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 31-May-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 277 		  Quote TranHungDao Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 04:07
Thanks.  I don't know how I could have missed it.  I looked all over for it, in several forums and even used the search function. Confused
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 02:28
bumpWink

The BIG Current affairs thread on the war


Edited by Leonidas - 29-Dec-2007 at 03:21
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Feb-2007 at 20:35
Good find, Leonidas.
 
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Feb-2007 at 03:09
Found this article on one aspect of the conflict the anti tank warfare

Hezbollah anti-amour
Tactics and weapons

Assessment of the Second Lebanon War By Col. David Eshel


Realizing the capabilities of the Merkava 4 tank, Hezbollah allocated their most advanced weaponry to combat this advanced tank, engaging these tanks exclusively with the heavier, more capable missiles such as 9M133 AT-14 Kornet, 9M131 Metis M and RPG-29.

RPG-29 and 9M113 Konkurs (AT-5) were employed mostly against Merkava 3 and 2 while non-tandem weapons, such as Tow, Fagot and improved RPG 7Vs were left to engage other armored vehicles such as AIFV. The least used were AT-3 Sagger and, to a limited extent, the TOW as well as non tandem RPGs, were considered obsolete against tanks, but proved quite lethal against troops seeking cover in buildings.

Overall, almost 90% of the tanks hit were by tandem warheads. In general, Hezbollah militants prioritized Merkava Mk 4 over Merkava Mk 2 and 3, and in general, targeted tanks over AIFV. At the beginning of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, the main Israeli concern was a report that Hezbollah possessed Russian Kornet antitank missiles. However, it also saw the RPG-29 Vampir with a tandem HEAT that had stolen the show. There were even rumors that Hezbollah had received the notorious TBG-29V thermobaric rounds, but these could not be confirmed in action.

Hezbollah deployed their tank-killer teams in a thin but effective defensive scheme, protecting the villages where the organization's Shiite members reside; villages where their short range rockets were positioned and where command infrastructure and logistics support was set up. An estimated 500 to 600 members of their roughly 4,000-strong Hezbollah fighting strength in South Lebanon were divided into tank-killer teams of 5 or 6, each armed with 5-8 anti-tank missiles, with further supplies stored in small fortified well camouflaged bunkers and fortified basements, built to withstand Israeli air attacks.

Due to mountainous area, engagements were encountered at ranges below 3000 meters. Hezbollah tank-killer teams would lay in wait in camouflaged bunkers or houses, having planted large IEDs on known approach routes. Once an Israeli tank would detonate one of these, Hezbollah would start lobbing mortar shells onto the scene to prevent rescue teams rushing forward, also firing at outflanking Merkava tanks by targeting the more vulnerable rear zone with RPGs. In general, Hezbollah demonstrated rather slow regrouping and response rate, since their mobility and command links were severely restricted by the IDF dominating the open areas. However, even this slow pace was fast enough to match the slow and indecisive movements of the Israelis forces.

The night vision equipment used by Hezbollah was not as advanced as the IDF's. They possess mainly individual night vision equipment and some night observation systems, but generally lacked night capabilities for their anti-tank weapons. Benefiting from its superior night combat capability, the IDF conducted most movements at night, minimizing exposure of forces during day time.

link



Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jan-2007 at 03:29
Personally I think it's the Prime Minister who should be resigning after that one.
Back to Top
TheDiplomat View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1988 		  Quote TheDiplomat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jan-2007 at 08:37
And Israeli chief of military staff just resigned..It is argued that this is closely related with ''failure'' in Lebanon.
ARDA:The best Turkish diplomat ever!

Back to Top
konstantinius View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 762 		  Quote konstantinius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Jan-2007 at 07:45
Certain parts strike me as being extremist on the part of Hezbollah. I higlight them below:
Originally posted by Leonidas

in 1985? things have changed. There are statements i can find in those wiki sources that contradict that hard line. Different audiances require different language, our politicians do it also, as far as i can see they wont accept isreal taking over all of jerusalem which is not acceptable to most arabs anyway.

Nasrallah, Q and A and his ideas for peace (washington post in 2000)

"If Israel pulls out, he promises that Hezbollah will end its "security" activities there. But he refuses to say whether Hezbollah, whose history includes bombings and the taking of hostages, will halt all activities against Israel, its archenemy.......

From the perspective of Hezbollah, what are the major issues to be addressed during any future Lebanon-Israel peace negotiations?

Lebanon should first recover sovereignty over all its territories, without neglecting any. Second, all Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails should be released. . . . Third, Lebanon has the right to ask for compensation for all the damages and harm which have resulted from Israeli aggressions against Lebanon during the past decades. Furthermore, Lebanon has the right to ask for punishment of those Israeli officials who should be considered war criminals. . . .

Israel will never go for this last one. Hezbollah is pushing it too far here.


The next issue, which is no less important than the previous ones . . . is the issue of the Palestinian refugees. Lebanon cannot enter into any settlement with anybody based on the granting of Lebanese nationality to the 300,000 or 400,000 Palestinians who live on Lebanese territory. There is no way that such a thing can happen. . . . Any settlement that does not take into consideration the issue of the Palestinian refugees endangers the process and will prove to be a time bomb which can explode at any time."

This is debatable too. It ties any solution to the Palestinian question with the situation in Lebanon effectively complicating both. Perhaps the Palestinians can remain in Lebanon untill conditions are better in the West Bank/Gaza. But to seek relocation of 400,000 Palestinians as part of a settlement with Lebanon will not be accepted by Israel.

link

sounds unreasonable?

Hersch's converstion with Nasrallah in 2003

"Nasrallah emphasized that he was not seeking a confrontation with the United States. Because of Hezbollahs ability to disrupt a deal between the Israelis and Palestinians, I asked Nasrallah about his view of the renewed talks. He hesitated a moment and declared, At the end, this is primarily a Palestinian matter. I, like any other person, may consider what is happening to be right or wrong. . . . I may have a different assessment, but at the end of the road no one can go to war on behalf of the Palestinians, even if that one is not in agreement with what the Palestinians agreed on. Of course, it would bother us that Jerusalem goes to Israel.


I asked, But if there was a deal?

Let it happen, he answered. I would not say O.K. I would say nothing. "

Link

CNN transcripts (2003)

"MACVICAR: You know that one of the key questions here in the region that many want to know the answer to is how will Hezbollah act if there is a war? Would Hezbollah, for example, attack Israel if there is a war?

NASRALLAH: Our policy is clear, we are fighting in an area that is still under occupation in Lebanon. And beyond that area, we are on the defensive. What is being talked about now is the probability of the Sharon government launching an attack against Lebanon to eliminate the resistance of Hezbollah by using the American war against Iraq. But, of course, in this case, we will certainly fight with all our strength.....

But they launched missiles into Israeli cities and kidnapped israeli soldiers prior to israel attacking. These are hostile acts.


MACVICAR: Anderson, that was the key message of Sheikh Nasrallah -- that Hezbollah is now not looking for a fight. He came as close as he possibly could of saying that they were not interested now in attacking Israel. Of course, saying that if, in fact, Lebanon was attacked they would reserve the right to respond. A very different tone, as I said before, in this interview than in some of the other public statements that we've heard from Sheikh Nasrallah, which in many ways may have been meant for domestic consumption in Lebanon -- Anderson."
link

this is from the leader himself, not a foot soldier or an isreali adaption.




Edited by konstantinius - 03-Jan-2007 at 21:22
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."
Back to Top
souljahofgod View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 16-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote souljahofgod Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2006 at 17:32
in my opinion, nobody won. both 'sides' suffered heavy losses.
1. Although hezbollah repelled isreali attacks with great ferocity, they probably wouldnt have kept up that morale on the long term basis.

2. isreal could not reach the desired terms it wished to deal to hezbollah, even when they were downgraded, so it turned attention to Lebanon itself had dealt heavy blows on the long and short term.
Back to Top
Mameluke View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 15-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28 		  Quote Mameluke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Dec-2006 at 19:28
Since this is a military history thread, I wonder why political and moral issues are being discussed here.
          One thing we all have to bear in mind - any time a military force sets out on a mission and fails to accomplish that mission - it has to be considered a defeat - technically speaking. If the IDF's mission was to destroy Hezbollah's infrastructure then it certainly has failed in its mission, and therefore this is technically a defeat.
           Let's look at a parallel situation - America's involvement in Vietnam was to prevent the South Vietnamese from succumbing to Communism in general and to North Vietnamese aggression in paricular. It did not succeed in its mission and therefore America's experience in Vietnam must be considered a defeat, no matter what the mitigating circumstances.
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2006 at 04:45
apologies for the divergencesEmbarrassed

King John, when the war started, most people (media) said that aslong as hezbollah remian intact they would of won. Israel made that very gamble when it launched its massive campaign. Isreal initially announced its aim to wipe them out, it then changed this to weakening them by so much, and then to have them out of the southern border. So far none of these aims (even downgraded) have been realised.

Despite their (unknown) casualties a few thousand geurrilla's were still fighting strong and with the same level of discplined command-control they had before the war. That is a victory by any measure especially when (they admit) they were taken by suprise and had to fight one of the most powerful regional players for over a month.

To add to this there have been reports of isreal opening up to talks about prisoner exchange, which is what the hezbollah wanted in the first place,

BTW your far from offensive.



Edited by Leonidas - 12-Dec-2006 at 04:48
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor

Suspended

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8792 		  Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2006 at 14:05
Victory from a purely military perspective relative only to this past conflict. All divergences into politics must be avoided.
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366 		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2006 at 13:56
How are we defining "victory" here? Because there is a difference between an immediate victory and a long term victory. Hezbollah can be accused of agression especially in this instance. The major problem with this thread is that it quickly descends into racist rants. These rants will never change anybody's mind and will only lead to more obstinant counter-rants. Neither are good for the course of debate, we should be discussing issues like this with objectivity. Unfortunately, this will not happen. Keep in mind I am not calling anyone in particular a racist just that I am noting that some comments my own included can be seen by some to be biased in certain ways if not a tad bit racist. My appologies again if I have offended anybody, not my intent.
Back to Top
Travis Congleton View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 200 		  Quote Travis Congleton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2006 at 07:06
Originally posted by King John

I'm no expert on Middle Eatern Politics nor am I an expert in Israeli-Lebanese relationships nor on military actions. However, there seems to be an overglossing of certain issues running through this thread.

First pertaining to the referal of the term "Arab" as denoting both Jews and other middle eastern populations. This term is completely wrong! Jews although a semetic people are not "Arab," this does not mean that there are no Arab Jews just that they are few in number. If we want to be truely correct we should refer to the parties involved by there nation of origin ie: Israeli, Lebanese, Palestinian, Jordanian etc. I have no problems with a person being a bigot but if we are going to be bigoted we should know the difference between the focuses of our bigotry (although this is contrary to the idea of bigotry).

The second issue that seems to be running through some of the posts here is that people on both sides like to focus only on "chest thumping" that is my side is right your side is wrong. Although this is the nature of debate this is counter productive. However, some people seem to be missing basic history of this region. For this I suggest reading a wonderfully well written book From Beirut to Jerusalem. Some also seem to miss the point that while the actions of Israel might not have been a proper "proportional response" they were none the less provoked not just by the kidnapping of two IDF soldiers but the murder of at least two more during that same raid. Some people would go so far as to call this an act of war. This was just the culmination of years of animosity between Hezbollah and Israel. This brings me to my final point.

Hezbollah through out the running thread is commonly referred to in terms of endearment. This should not be the case any organization that rejoices at the death of an outsider should not be referred to in such terms. The fact remains that Hezbollah is an organization founded on the destruction of Israel and other westernly alighned governments. I read in one of the posts that they (Hezbollah) were defenders (or something to that nature the exact phrase escapes my mind for which I appologize) of Lebanese soil against foreign occupation. This is simply a less than true statement what was Hezbollah's stance on the recently ended Syrian occupation of Lebanon? They embraced it as a matter of fact they are still part of the pro-Syrian faction of Lebanese politics.

I would like to point out that the verdict is still out on this conflict. Neither side was able to claim an immidiate victory, but the long term effects have yet to be seen, and it is there that the winner will be made apparent.

I would like to appologize for any misspelled words or poorly chosen phrases. If some people feel that I have attacked them that was not my intent and I would like to appologize, I simply wanted to address issues that I encountered. Again I would like to appologize for misspelled words, poorly chosen phrases, and bad grammar.


POST OF THE MONTH
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.