Israel - a victim or agressor?

[pieter]

Israeli General: Hezbollah to Try to Invade N. Israel, Capture Territory

Thursday, 15 Jan 2015 06:36 PM
By Joel Himelfarb


Brigadier-General Itai Brun, outgoing head of Israel’s Military Intelligence research division

The next time it wages war against Israel, Hezbollah will likely attempt to invade the Jewish state, Brig. Gen. Itai Brun, the outgoing head of Israel’s Military Intelligence research division, said in an interview.

Brun told Israel Hayom that the Iranian-backed terror group based in Lebanon would try to send large land forces across the border and carry out "pinpoint" terrorist attacks on cities in northern Israel like Nahariya. About 50,000 people live in that city, located on Israel's northern Mediterranean Sea coast just six miles south of the Lebanon border.
Brun believes Hezbollah is preparing for renewed conflict with the IDF (Israeli Army).

"Unlike in the Second Lebanon War, I believe that next time we will see Hezbollah forces on Israeli soil," he warned. "They will come in two forms: One will be terror attacks — pinpoint strikes in Nahariya or Shlomi or Maalot" — all of which are communities in northern Israel near the Lebanon border.

The other method of attack would involve "more substantial operations to grab territory inside Israel" — in other words, that a Hezbollah unit would seize an entire community, Israel Hayom quoted Brun as predicting.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that Hezbollah's main means of attack would involve "the firing of about 1,000 rockets a day into Israel — more than twice the average fired during the month-long Israel-Hezbollah war in 2006." Hezbollah, the website added, is believed to have well over 100,000 rockets in its military arsenal.

In the 2006 war, virtually all of the 4,000 Hezbollah rockets fired were of short range and mainly endangered border areas in northern Israel. Brun said that today Hezbollah has thousands of rockets capable of reaching virtually anywhere in Israel.


Israeli soldiers with Lebanon and Hezbollah flags returning from southern Lebanon on the last day of the 2006 war.


Smoke over Haifa, Israel, after a rocket launched by Hezbollah hit the city near Bnei-Zion hospital

In an interview broadcast this week on Al-Manar, a Hezbollah-controlled television channel, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah declared that his group is prepared to invade the Galilee region of northern Israel as well as the Israeli "settlements" (cities and towns) which lie beyond Galilee.

Nasrallah added that Hezbollah was working to improve its relations with Hamas, which became strained as a result of differences over the war in Syria. He said Hezbollah would work to bolster ties with Hamas "in order to fight the Zionist enemy together."


Hassan Nasrallah (born 31 August 1960) has been the third Secretary General of the Lebanese political and paramilitary organization Hezbollah since his predecessor, Abbas al-Musawi, was assassinated by the Israel Defense Forces in February 1992.

Links:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces

[pieter]

Interesting statement of the Christian militia leader. (Watch from 17:38)









P.S.- I don't share the ideology (religion/mythology) nor philosophy of the makers of these last three video's, but I posted it because it shows something about Hezbollah and Israel.

[pieter]

www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=190749&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=18&s1=1

[pieter]

Hezbollah



Hezbollah (Ḥizbu 'llāh, literally "Party of Allah" or "Party of God") is a Shi'a Islamist political party and militant group based in Lebanon. After the death of Abbas al-Musawi in 1992, the organisation has been headed by Hassan Nasrallah, its Secretary-General. With significant support from Iran and Syria, Hezbollah maintains an extensive security apparatus, political organization, and social services network in Lebanon, where the group is often described as a "state within a state". Hezbollah's paramilitary wing is the Jihad Council, the strongest non-state military actor in the world. The United States, France, the Gulf Cooperation Council, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the Netherlands, the European Union and Israel classify Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, in whole or in part.


Abbas al Musawi (1952 – 16 February 1992) was an influential Lebanese Shia cleric, co-founder and Secretary General of Hezbollah. He was killed by Israel Defense Forces in 1992.


Hassan Nasrallah, the present Secretary General of Hezbollah

Hezbollah was conceived by Muslim clerics and funded by Iran following the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, and was primarily formed to offer resistance to the Israeli occupation. Its leaders were followers of Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of 1,500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards that arrived from Iran with permission from the Syrian government. After the 1982 invasion, Israel occupied a strip of south Lebanon, which was controlled by a militia supported by Israel, the South Lebanon Army. Hezbollah waged a guerilla campaign against them; with the collapse of the SLA, Israel withdrew on May 24, 2000.


Ayatollah Khomeini, stil an important icon and hero of Hezbollah

Hezbollah has grown to an organization with seats in the Lebanese government, a radio and a satellite television-station, programs for social development and large-scale military deployment of fighters beyond Lebanon's borders. Hezbollah is part of the March 8 Alliance within Lebanon, in opposition to the March 14 Alliance. Hezbollah maintains strong support among Lebanon's Shi'a population, while Sunnis have disagreed with the group's agenda. Following the end of the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon in 2000, its military strength grew significantly, such that its paramilitary wing is considered more powerful than the Lebanese Army. Hezbollah receives military training, weapons, and financial support from Iran, and political support from Syria. Hezbollah also fought against Israel in the 2006 Lebanon War.

After the 2006–2008 Lebanese political protests and clashes, a national unity government was formed in 2008, giving Hezbollah and its opposition allies control of eleven of thirty cabinets seats; effectively veto power. In August 2008, Lebanon's new Cabinet unanimously approved a draft policy statement which secures Hezbollah's existence as an armed organization and guarantees its right to "liberate or recover occupied lands". Since 2012, Hezbollah has helped the Syrian government during the Syrian civil war in its fight against the Syrian opposition, which Hezbollah has described as a Zionist plot and a "Wahhabi-Zionist conspiracy" to destroy its alliance with Assad against Israel. Once seen as a resistance movement throughout much of the Arab world, this image upon which the group's legitimacy rested has been severely damaged due to the sectarian nature of the Syrian Civil War in which it has become embroiled.


A Hezbollah fighter stands behind a rocket launcher used against Israel.

Ideology

The ideology of Hezbollah has been summarized as Shi'i radicalism. Hezbollah was largely formed with the aid of the Ayatollah Khomeini's followers in the early 1980s in order to spread Islamic revolution and follows a distinct version of Islamic Shi'a ideology (Valiyat al-faqih or Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists) developed by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the "Islamic Revolution" in Iran. Although Hezbollah originally aimed to transform Lebanon into a formal Faqihi Islamic republic, this goal has been abandoned in favor of a more inclusive approach.


Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah meets with Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei.


A picture of the late Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini (right) being carried by youth members of the Hezbollah movement, during a funeral procession in Lebanon.

The Hezbollah manifesto

On February 16, 1985, Sheik Ibrahim al-Amin issued Hezbollah's manifesto. Translated excerpts from Hezbollah's original 1985 manifesto read:

We are the sons of the umma (Muslim community) ...
... We are an ummah linked to the Muslims of the whole world by the solid doctrinal and religious connection of Islam, whose message God wanted to be fulfilled by the Seal of the Prophets, i.e., Prophet Muhammad. ... As for our culture, it is based on the Holy Quran, the Sunna and the legal rulings of the faqih who is our source of imitation ...

Hezbollah follows the Islamic Shi'a theology developed by Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.


Sheik Ibrahim al-Amin

Source: Wikipedia, english language section

[karl]

Pieter

A very well researched and presented situational issue at present. The Israelie Brigadier General-Itai Brun of Israelie Intelligence division of research, has with certainty earnt his pay, this for sure.

Perhaps though, if earlier reports had been provided of the Iranian General-Mohammed Ali Allahdadi {ballistic missile expert} had been properly reported as noted upon observation point of the Golan Heights that over looks Israel {high cliff like ridge bordering Israel and Syria}, this would have been an indicative of possible action in short future time. A simple ground pounder patrol could have been the effect to capture a very important piece of a puzzle, for if note then as a trade back to Iranian authorities for what ever concessions to be made in future or present time.

It is very well known in past, of exports under the authority of Iranian Supreme Leader {Ali Khamenei}, of export of manufacturing to both Syrian leadership {Basher al-Assad} and in conjunction to Lebanese Hezbollah, in short past, of manufacturing technology of both the enitial Russian designs of Iranian Sejjil Multistage solid fuel missils with a 2000 Km range before fuel burn out. These and coupled with manufacturing rights of the Hormoz-1 and Hormoz-2 maritime missils capable if properly deployed, as long distance capable against both ship board targeting of armoured battle ships and cruisers alike.

Withen the confines of your presentation has been a coverage of a great deal of ground, in as much to the visual and audio presentational videos.

This was with the combat contact between Hezbollah forces in a mountain area of rocks/canyans/caves. For these areas are not tank combat conditions. For the tank as with calvery forces, need open ground for maneuver and room to target and fire the mobile turent cannon {normal language in tanker use is: rifle}. If the enemy is hold up in such terrain, then best to by pass with contingent of field solders to keep small arms fire against these various hold put areas until air power is available to use napalm to clean out the enemy held area.

If airpower is not available, then to keep a contingent of tanks {Panzers} in readieness for to then target out into the rocks and caves with anti-personal shot. If any thing, to create with noise and shrapnel fire into the rocks to disharden the enemy to leave the protection of such cover into the open. This then to renew with machine gun fire combined with cannon fire into the vacating enemy positions.

It is to the manner of in use of the combined power of the tank {Panzer} in the manner of the cutting edge of the sword to take ground and keep it. But, must be used in conjunction of rapid field transport of solders to protect the tank.

It has been many years since my panzer years with required at that time of military service. But the lessons learnt do not diminish with the passage of time.

Of course, once and action has been enitiated, it becomes fluid, then it is to the individual decisions of the varius commanders in action of indipendant action decision. In short, to shoot or not to shoot, based upon the prevailing conditions of probable success.

Karl

[pieter]

Karl,

Interesting military tactics and strategic explenation. You point out some true facts there. Another consideration is the difference between the Israeli armed forces, with some US and German backing (equipment, arms and ammunition) and the Hezbollah armed wing, which as you and the articles rightly state receives large amounts of Iranian arms and Iranian instructors. Hezbollah indeed has Iranian and Russian arms, and probably received some Syrian military assistance in the past too. Today Syria will need all the arms and supplies it got in it's own civil war.

We also have to take into account the different objectives of the Isreali's and Hezbollah. Israel want's to protect it's Northern border, and Golan Height, and also it's borders with the West-Bank since there seem to be Hezbollah and Hamas loyalists there. Israel indeed is military superior, but weak due to it's small seize and population, which is a direct target.

We also have to take into account the different ideological motives and fighting power and motivation. Both Shia and Sunni-Muslim Islamist militants have a devine mission in combat, they fight a theocratic, sacret, holy war (Jihad) in their beliefs. Israel or Palestine is in their view devine land, Muslim territory (which was once Ottoman Turk, and thus part of an Islamic Caliphate or state, and before that Arab, Kurd, Persians and other Muslims ruled over it). After Mecca and Medina, Jerusalem (Al Quds in the Arabic language of the Holy Quran) is the third-holiest city in Islam.

For approximately a year, before it was permanently switched to the Kaaba in Mecca, the qibla (direction of prayer) for Muslims was Jerusalem. The city's lasting place in Islam, however, is primarily due to Muhammad's Night of Ascension (c. CE 620). Muslims believe Muhammad was miraculously transported one night from Mecca to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, whereupon he ascended to Heaven to meet previous prophets of Islam. The first verse in the Qur'an's Surat al-Isra notes the destination of Muhammad's journey as al-Aqsa (the farthest) mosque, in reference to the location in Jerusalem. The hadith, the recorded sayings of the Prophet Mohammad, name Jerusalem as the location of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Today, the Temple Mount is topped by an Islamic landmark intended to commemorate the event—al-Aqsa Mosque, derived from the name mentioned in the Qur'an, and also the place from which Muslims believe Muhammad ascended to Heaven.

Iran and Hezbollah have for a long time been supporters of the Palestinian independence struggle, a Muslim Palestine (without the state Israel), and allies of the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The Syrian Civil War has devided Hamas and Hezbollah, because Hamas is a Sunni-Muslim islamist organization with close links to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, and Sunni Arab states like Qatar, Saoudi-Arabia and Kuwayt, Sunni-Muslim Lebanese, Syrians and Iraqi's from the Sunni Triangle (region in Iraq). Although Hamas received military, financial and political support from Iran and Syria in the past, it switched sides to the Syrian Sunni-Muslim opposition side of the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian branch of the Muslim Bortherhood. Maybe Hezbollah attacking Israel might restore the old ties between Hamas/Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah/Iran?

Hezbollah fighters are battle hardened and trained in decades of fights during the Lebanese Civil War (1978-1990). Hezbollah fought with the Palestinian PLO and other Palestinian Fatah Fractions, Lebanese Christian militia's, the competing Amal militia and party (a Lebanese Shia competitor during the eighties), and recently against Sunni-Muslim Jihadi Islamist extremists in Lebanon and Syria. They gained experiance in the South Lebanon conflict (1982–2000) and their conflict with Israel in 2000 (2000 Hezbollah cross-border raid) and 2006 Lebanon War. Hezbollah is very professionally trained and funded by Iran and Syria. The close cooperation between Hezbollah and the Syrian army in the Syrian Civil War will make Hezbollah stronger, more experianced and battle hardened. Many battles in the Syrian civil war with the 'Free Syrian Army', 'the Al Nusra Front' and even 'ISIS' are won by Hezbollah. Hezbollah fighters have probably a better morale, an ideological and religious motivation and Shia martyrdom as objectives in their fights in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine/Israel (Hezbollah fighters infiltrated in Israel).

Hezbollah is so dangerous for Israel and the West (terrorist operations in Western countries and non-Western countries throughout the world) due it's long build up of it's military wing, well trained and equipped soldiers, and it's arsenal of rockets, mortars, grenades and explosives. Hugo Chávez's Venezuelan government also gave "indispensable support" to Iran and Hezbollah in the Western Hemisphere. Ghazi Atef Nassereddine, a Venezuelan diplomat in Syria, was an operative of Hezbollah who used Venezuelan entities to launder money for Hezbollah with President Nicolas Maduro's personal approval.

According to at least one source, Syrian government support for Hezbollah has been weakened during the Syrian civil war. Support for Hezbollah among the Syrian public has weakened since the involvement of Hezbollah and Iran in propping up the Assad regime during the civil war.

According to the U.S., the Assad loyalist militia known as al-Jaysh al-Sha'bi was created and is maintained by Hezbollah and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force, both of whom provide it with money, weapons, training and advice.

On May 12, 2013, Hezbollah with the Syrian army attempted to retake part of Qusayr. In Lebanon, there has been "a recent increase in the funerals of Hezbollah fighters" and "Syrian rebels have shelled Hezbollah-controlled areas."

On May 25, 2013, Nasrallah announced that Hezbollah is fighting in the Syrian Civil War against Islamic extremists and "pledged that his group will not allow Syrian militants to control areas that border Lebanon". He confirmed that Hezbollah was fighting in the strategic Syrian town of Al-Qusayr on the same side as Assad's forces. In the televised address, he said, "If Syria falls in the hands of America, Israel and the takfiris, the people of our region will go into a dark period."

On May 26, 2013, two rockets hit a Hezbollah area of Beirut injuring five people whilst another two rockets caused property damage to buildings in the al-Hermel district of Beirut. Syrian rebels have been blamed for the attack as they had promised to attack Hezbollah targets in Lebanon in retaliation for their helping the Syrian army particularly in the border town of Al-Qusayr. Syrian rebels have also shelled al-Hermel previously.

On May 28, 2013, Free Syrian Army General Salim Idris gave Hezbollah "24 hours to withdraw from Syria" or he may order FSA units to attack Hezbollah targets in Lebanon.

In early June, Hezbollah has now committed fighters to the battle in Aleppo, some 2,000, reportedly putting strain on the organisation. This has resulted in Hezbollah introducing a change to its rotation policy for its fighters from 7 days fighting followed by 7 days leave, Hezbollah has increased it to 20 days fighting and followed by 7 days leave for its fighters.

Cheers,
Pieter

[Jaga]

I think, nobody is trying to invade Israel, it is just Israel trying to make sure that public opinion sees Israel's as victim.

[pieter]

You get a point there Jaga. But we don´t live in that region and we don´t know what excactly is going on.

I don´t think that Hezbollah can afford a war on two Fronts (Syria and Israel).

Cheers,
Pieter

[karl]

Pieter and Jag

A bit of media made public in as not of personal opinion as possibly suspect as vested interest upon my self. For as a profession to say: My self am very much in vested interest in Israelie affairs, whilst as so, do hold and interest laden with consideration of interest in Syrian and Iranian points of view.

As forementioned in a previous discussion, it would be quite beneficial for both Israel and The Americans to create friendship with both Syria and Iran. But then to do so, would inself bring upon them {Israel and USA} the suspicions of the Saudies who control the keys to the oil locker of export.

But if to do so as above, would take the pressure off Israel for some breathing room, but only if Israel would concede to remove pressure off Iran and their nuclear programme.

The following is rather lengthy in reading, but provides a good foundation to build upon in the sense of Hezbollah and their place in the sun.


The Tower.org/article

Don,t Be Fooled.
Hezbollah is Bigger and Badder Then Ever

Don’t Be Fooled. Hezbollah Is Bigger and Badder Than Everthetower.org/article/dont-be-fooled-hezbollah-is-bigger-and-badder-than-ever/
Just across Israel’s northern border, the world’s most dangerous terror group is getting stronger by the day.

Hezbollah is probably the world’s largest, most sophisticated, wealthiest and most militarily capable terror organization. Created, trained, funded and deployed as a proxy of the Iranian government, with operations spanning Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Americas, the Shi’ite group has effectively taken over the Lebanese government, launched thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians, and murdered more Americans than anyone other than al-Qaeda—all of these making it into perhaps the most fearsome weapon in the jihadist anti-Western arsenal.

For months now, however, Hezbollah has been mired deep in the Syrian civil war. Thousands of its fighters have streamed eastward to join the struggle to save the regime of another Iranian proxy, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Many of its best soldiers have been killed in battle. Fighting is now spilling back over into Lebanon, with car bombs going off in southern Beirut and other Hezbollah strongholds. And its decades-long claim, aimed at justifying its existence in southern Lebanon, that it existed solely to protect the Lebanese from Israeli aggression, is becoming increasingly impossible to defend. On the contrary, it looks increasingly transparent as the Iranian marionette that it is, sharing responsibility for the humanitarian disaster in Syria.

One should not be surprised, then, to hear commentators asserting that Hezbollah has been severely weakened by the events of the last year. But has it?
Many Israeli military strategists don’t think so. To the contrary, they point to a number of alarming indicators suggesting that Hezbollah may be stronger than it has ever been. And that has them worried. The massive arsenal of advanced weaponry Hezbollah has amassed since it last faced off with Israel in the 2006 Second Lebanon War, the technological advances it has made, and the battlefield experience it has gained in Syria, have all helped turn Hezbollah into what could be Israel’s most dangerous enemy in a generation.


As a highly disciplined Islamist group that operates as an asymmetric terror and guerrilla force, a political party, and a mini-state in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah has of course been a serious threat to Israel for decades. As expressed in its 1985 “Open Letter,” Hezbollah believes that an open-ended holy war—a jihad—is the “cure to the ills and oppression afflicted on Lebanon and the region by Israel.” Put simply, Hezbollah has always seen Israel as an existential enemy that must be destroyed for both political and religious reasons.

Yet while the group’s mission hasn’t changed, its strategic significance has. Because of its location on Israel’s northern border, Hezbollah terrorism has been a serious headache for the IDF since Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000; along with the group’s attempt to corrupt Israeli society by smuggling drugs across the border, a source of both revenue and intelligence. And its evident subordination to Tehran has meant that Iran has now established a substantial military presence in both Syria and Lebanon, combining with the Syrian army and the IRGC to create what Israeli military officials now see as a single northern front across Syria and Lebanon, rendering previous security doctrines and realities obsolete.

For all intents and purposes, Iran is now sitting on Israel’s northern border, making the Iranian nuclear threat a lot more immediate for Israeli decision-makers. If military grade missiles, rockets and unmanned aircraft systems are making their way into Hezbollah’s hands, it is not difficult to imagine tactical nukes and dirty bombs aimed directly at Israel’s northern civilian population.

But even without nuclear weapons, Hezbollah may have already strengthened to the point that it is the most difficult enemy facing Israel today. And this should be of concern not only to Israel, but to anyone interested in a stable Middle East. Not to mention any Western world leader concerned with protecting their own people from the long arm of this global terrorist menace. that has in the last two years, attacked or attempted to bomb, India, Bulgaria, Georgia, Cyprus, Syria, and even, Washington D.C.

The improvements in Hezbollah’s military and technological capacities can be owed, to an astonishing degree, to the work of one man: Hassan al-Laqis. One of Hezbollah’s top innovators and technical minds, al-Laqis was assassinated in Beirut this past December by unknown assailants. While his murderers may remain mysterious, al-Laqis’ legacy is clear: Hezbollah is now far ahead of any other terrorist group in the world in terms of the weapons it can deploy, the tactics it uses, and the offensive and defensive technology at its disposal. With the support of Iran, and the guidance of al-Laqis, Hezbollah is not a terrorist group, but rather Tehran’s terrorist army.

The higher one goes up Hezbollah’s military chain of command, the more secret and mysterious its members and activities become, and al-Laqis was no exception. His work was concealed even from many Hezbollah members, and he was granted relative independence in leading the organization’s research and development division. He worked primarily on making Hezbollah’s rocket and missile arsenal more accurate and deadly, its internal telecommunications systems more sophisticated and difficult to breach, and, most recently, spearheading efforts to develop Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), such as drones, for use in both offensive operations and intelligence gathering.

Although al-Laqis’ assassination was clearly a setback for Hezbollah, his activities had already made substantial progress at the time of his death, and his life’s work will threaten Israel for years to come. Under his supervision, Hezbollah went from being a standard-issue terrorist group employing crude tactics like suicide bombers and katyusha rockets to a technologically advanced paramilitary organization capable of accurately firing missiles at almost any Israeli target, especially civilian areas. The man may be gone, but the fruits of his labors remain.

Indeed, Hezbollah’s capabilities have expanded across the board. Its arsenal has grown dramatically since 2006, in both quantity and quality. This includes mortars and small rockets with a range of 24 miles and, more disturbingly, rockets and missiles that can strike anywhere in Israel. Hezbollah is also believed to possess guided missiles accurate to within dozens of meters. According to Brigadier General Itay Baron, head of the IDF Military Intelligence research section, Hezbollah now has around 65,000 rockets and missiles, many times the number they had on the eve of the 2006 war. Particularly worrisome is the Tishreen missile, which contains control and guidance systems that have given Hezbollah a precision-strike capability.


The group also possesses Iranian-made rockets such as the Fajr-3 and Fajr-5, with respective ranges of 27 and 45 miles; and a huge quantity of simpler 107mm and 122mm rockets with ranges up to 12 miles. These rockets are capable of striking many cities in northern Israel, such as Haifa, Tiberias, Afula, Nahariya, and Safed. Hezbollah intends to use them in order to paralyze life in Israel through intense barrages of rocket and missile fire; something Hezbollah proved itself quite capable of doing already in 2006.

Hezbollah has also upgraded its anti-aircraft missiles, anti-ship cruise missiles, anti-tank missiles, and reconnaissance and attack drones; all of which would make Israeli retaliatory strikes far more difficult. The group notoriously displayed its anti-ship capabilities in 2006 by firing a Noor anti-ship missile at the Israeli naval vessel INS Hanit. It may now have obtained Russian Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles from Syria. If these weapons have indeed been transferred to Hezbollah, it would instantly put any Israeli naval vessel under direct threat, even those docked at Israeli ports.

The Yakhont is difficult to defend against, since it can be launched from beyond the horizon, at supersonic speeds and with a range of different possible trajectories. If fired from behind mountain ridges or other geographical obstacles in Lebanon, they could avoid detection from the sea and strike targeted vessels with minimal warning. It is believed that 12 of these missiles may be in the hands of Hezbollah fighters in Syria itself.

Israeli military officials are now beginning to view the Hezbollah threat as strategic rather than tactical; that is, they are preparing for a confrontation with a foreign army, rather than a terrorist group. But this army is not like others, because while it has the size and capacity of an army, it still fights like a terrorist organization. The tactics it has adopted would pose a growing challenge to any military, even one as experienced in asymmetric operations as the IDF.

Hezbollah’s combat tactics have been increasingly refined over recent years, and the group is now on the cutting edge of terrorist and jihadi warfare. It has gained substantial combat experience from its battles with Israel and especially with Syrian rebel forces, as well as sharing tactical knowledge with other jihadist groups around the world.

The organization’s style of fighting is based, generally speaking, on guerilla and jihadi tactics. Due to the asymmetrical nature of combat between terrorist organizations and state military forces, groups like Hezbollah have adopted what are called “counter-value strategies,” which target civilians and civilian infrastructure. This is distinguished from traditional “counter-force strategies,” which target military infrastructure. This makes such groups extremely difficult to fight, especially for armies like the IDF that go to great lengths to protect civilian lives on both sides. Hezbollah is an acknowledged master of counter-value strategy, and serves as a role model for groups like Hamas, which is adopting similar tactics.

This style of fighting is based on three principles: Absorption, deterrence, and attrition. Absorption refers to the organization’s ability to withstand attack or retaliation. Hezbollah has sought to maximize its absorption capacities by building intricate systems of underground tunnels and bunkers across southern Lebanon, which it uses to store and transfer weapons and fighters from one combat zone to another, and as shelter from IDF retaliation. These bolt-holes also help create the sense of a “disappearing” enemy, difficult to detect and target. After all, you cannot defeat what you cannot see.

Hezbollah also deftly exploits the IDF’s rules of engagement, which seek to safeguard civilian lives, by using densely populated urban areas to store and launch rockets. This strategy has a propaganda element as well. Hezbollah is well aware that Israel will be globally condemned if civilians are killed in the crossfire, as they almost inevitably will be given the use of such tactics. While often effective, this tactic is, in essence, a double war crime: Hezbollah fires rockets and missiles directly at Israeli civilians, while using the civilian population it rules as human shields; both of which are entirely illegal under international law.


In regard to deterrence and attrition, both refer to Hezbollah’s ability to keep up its fight against Israel without suffering total destruction, thus drawing out the conflict to such an extent that it becomes difficult to bear the cost of sustaining it. Hezbollah’s massive arsenal ensures that Israeli towns and civilians will suffer a constant barrage of rockets and missiles, something the director of IDF Intelligence has recently referred to as an “era of fire.” In order to destroy this arsenal and the infrastructure used to deploy it, Israel needs a combined air, ground, and sea attack. To be successful, however, Israel will need to overcome Hezbollah’s advanced anti-air and anti-ship weapons, countless booby traps and ambushes, abduction attempts, advanced anti-tank missiles, and many other challenges.

In addition, Israel will face intense domestic and international pressure to end the fighting as quickly as possible, while Hezbollah will seek to sustain it in order to inflict maximum damage. The organization has adopted this strategy because it believes that anything short of total military defeat—something that is all but impossible given its strategy of attrition—is a total victory for the organization. They also believe that this will create a sense of frustration and despair among Israelis, giving them the feeling that they cannot defeat such a ruthless, radical, and well-armed enemy.

As a result, since 2006 Israel has sought to limit its operations against Hezbollah to avoid being drawn into a large-scale conflict. But this strategy is becoming obsolete due to factors within Lebanon itself. Although it is usually agreed that only the state should have a monopoly on the use of force, Hezbollah exercises this privilege throughout southern Lebanon, and its opponents treat it as such; as a result, domestic and foreign Sunni groups that support the Syrian rebels—including offshoots of al-Qaeda—have now taken the fight to Hezbollah on its own turf in Lebanon. The resulting sectarian violence has led to an ominous trend: The presence of Sunni jihadist groups in Lebanon is rising swiftly.

This violence is now threatening to spill over the Israeli border, which could make large-scale Israeli military action very difficult to avoid. For example, rockets have been fired across the Lebanese border in an apparent attempt to provoke IDF retaliation against Hezbollah. The explosive potential of such attacks is enormous. If one rocket from Lebanon strikes an Israeli city and causes casualties, Israel would have no choice but to retaliate. In turn, this could draw Hezbollah and Israel into a new round of conflict, potentially as large and as difficult as that in 2006. To say the least, this is an outcome that the Israeli military and political establishments want to avoid.
What can be done?

Obviously, Israel could attempt to destroy Hezbollah by launching a military operation much larger and more comprehensive than that of 2006. Theoretically, such a war could be successful. But in practice, it would likely be impossible. In order to achieve victory, the operation would have to be relatively long, and Israel would almost certainly be forced to end it prematurely due to domestic and international pressure. In the present diplomatic climate, no major world power, not even the United States, is willing to risk significant diplomatic capital in order to destroy Iranian proxies—even those it considers to be terrorists. At best, Israel could temporarily retard Hezbollah’s military capabilities. At worst, a failed campaign could further enhance Hezbollah’s prestige and position in Lebanon.

Some believe that Hezbollah will eventually moderate on its own. This seems unlikely, especially since it continues to operate with impunity while its military capabilities only expand. If anything, the group appears to be becoming more radical, more violent, and more dangerous. Hezbollah feels strong and will not compromise from a position of strength.
This does not mean, however, that nothing can be done. Concerted diplomatic efforts among Western countries could yield substantial results. Two particular measures could be exceptionally helpful.

First, any negotiations with Iran regarding its nuclear program must also address its ongoing support of global terror, especially Hezbollah. While it may be convenient for the international community to focus solely on the nuclear issue in hopes of increasing their chances of success, Hezbollah and similar terrorist groups cannot be stopped without depriving them of Iranian backing. Having Iran at the table is the perfect opportunity to make progress on terror as well.

Second, the international community should make no distinction between Hezbollah’s military and political wings, something many countries in Europe still do. Hezbollah leaders have openly stated that they “do not have a military wing and a political wing,” and the international community should take them at their word. The entire organization should be treated as one until it dismantles its military wing and ceases its terrorist activities. This would have a major impact, for example, on the group’s ability to raise funds in Europe.

Certainly, the IDF will continue to use limited force in order to contain the threat from Hezbollah; but the problem cannot be conclusively resolved unless the group itself is contained. This can only be accomplished through diplomatic action and political pressure on both Hezbollah and its patrons in Iran. Israel and its supporters, then, should make substantial efforts to persuade the international community to adopt the policies outlined above. Without such efforts, there is little chance of bringing peace to Israel’s northern border—or of defanging the most significant force for projecting Iranian might against Western interests today.

suspicion is the cancer that destroys-friendship is the binding force of trust.

Karl

[pieter]

[Jaga]

Netanyahu thinks that he is more important that the president of the United States..... I think there are some limits to his power. I am not surprised that it seems that nobody really defends "right or Israel to press the US to invade Iran in the name of Israel's security".....
Here is an article by Kagan, famous journalist of Jewish descent:

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-reasons-netanyahu-should-not-address-congress/2015/01/29/1c8c66a4-a7e1-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html
Five reasons Netanyahu should not address Congress

Robert Kagan is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. He writes a monthly foreign affairs column for The Post.
Here are five reasons Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should politely decline House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation to address a joint session of Congress:

● It’s inappropriate. It doesn’t matter what good allies the United States and Israel are, and it doesn’t matter how bad relations may be between Netanyahu and President Obama. Allies don’t go big-footing around in each other’s politics. It also doesn’t matter how worthy the cause. In 1793, when Citizen Genêt traveled through the United States, drumming up support for revolutionary France (and overtly violating President George Washington’s policy of U.S. neutrality), he no doubt thought it was a worthy cause — and so did the many Americans, including numerous Jeffersonian Republicans and Washington opponents, who welcomed him with open arms. But it was an unacceptable intrusion into the U.S. political system. Thomas Jefferson himself, then secretary of state, took Washington’s side.
● It will damage Israel’s image in the United States. Israel enjoys a great deal of sympathy among Americans, but there is such a thing as overplaying a hand. Even among those who may be enjoying the spectacle of Obama being defied (and, by the way, patriotic Americans should not be enjoying that spectacle, no matter how they feel about Obama), when all is said and done, Netanyahu’s visit may leave a sour taste. Genêt’s visit ultimately did more to discredit than help France in the eyes of many Americans, even some who had otherwise been sympathetic or neutral toward the revolution.
● It is not good for the American debate over Iran. At the end of the day, that debate has to rest on a consideration of U.S. interests, not those of Israel. The two sets of interests may be congruent in some instances, but they are never identical, because no two nations’ interests are ever identical. Israel conducts business with other countries that does not always serve U.S. foreign policy objectives. That is its prerogative. The United States is used to taking into account broader interests than its own, including those of its allies. Nevertheless, it, too, needs to make decisions based on its own calculations. Giving the Israeli prime minister the forum of a joint session to make Israel’s case on the Iran question might or might not be a good idea at a time of consensus between Congress and the president. Given that the United States is carrying out a vigorous and healthy debate over what to do about Iran, the intrusion of the Israeli prime minister only muddies the waters.
● It is not good for Congress. Congress already suffers from an image of excessive deference to Israel (humble submission and respect.) on matters of foreign policy. But Israel has no monopoly on strategic wisdom. It makes mistakes just as the United States does and all nations do. On issues such as Egypt and the broader question of supporting dictators in the Middle East, for instance, Israel always, and mistakenly, urges Congress and the administration to support autocrats who see that part of the world the way Israel does. In the case of Iran, Israel is uniquely threatened and, as a U.S. ally, it deserves a serious and appropriate hearing here. But it is a mistake for Congress to treat Israel as if it were fundamentally different from all other U.S. allies, some of whom also face dire threats.
● It fails the Churchill test. There was no greater friend of the United States than Winston Churchill and no better ally of the United States than Britain. Between 1939 and 1941, Churchill was desperate for deeper U.S. involvement in Britain’s life-and-death struggle with Nazi Germany. The British faced at least as dire a threat then as Israel faces today — arguably more dire. No one was inviting Churchill to speak to a joint session of Congress, of course, but would Churchill even have considered accepting such an invitation without the approval of President Franklin Roosevelt? When Churchill gave his famous “Iron Curtain” speech in Fulton, Mo., in 1946, he did so as a private citizen — and, as it happened, he was escorted to the speech by President Harry Truman.
U.S. congressional leaders probably should have given this invitation more thought. Although not a violation of the letter of the Constitution, it certainly seems to violate the idea that the nation speaks with one voice on foreign policy and that foreign leaders cannot choose whether they prefer to deal with Congress or the president. Will Republicans be happy when the shoe is on the other foot, and a Democratic Congress invites foreign leaders to joint sessions in defiance of a Republican president’s wishes?
But whether the congressional leadership has thought this through or not, there is still time for the Israeli prime minister to do the right thing — and decline.

[Jaga]

Karl,

I have to say that I really respect the depth of your posts about Hezbollah/Israel. It looks that you are an expert!

[pieter]

An Israeli singer whi is an icon in Iran speaks Farsi Iranian (Persian) to an Iranian chanal.



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita_%28Israeli_singer%29
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita_(S%C3%A4ngerin)

[pieter]

[pieter]