Lessons Learned From The Gaza War

[Mighty_Zuk]

We had one for Ukraine. Pretty sure we had one for Nagorno Karabakh. Now it's time to look at Gaza.

It's been 9 months since the brutal massacre that occurred on October 7th, and the subsequent Israeli campaign to dismantle Hamas. During that time the war shifted between phases such as:

1. Peacetime border defense.
2. Incursion into Israel and holding Israeli territory.
3. Air and artillery campaign and preparation for a ground incursion.
4. High intensity combat in Hamas strongholds.
5. Low intensity clearing operations.
6. Setting up alternative government or enacting day-after policy.

Inevitably some of these phases coexisted. For example low intensity clearing ops and setting up an alternative government go mostly in parallel. Or when one area switches to low intensity combat, another area is invaded and goes into high intensity combat.

 

Lesson 1: Law Enforcement Helps

On October 7th we saw Hamas committing its largest massacre in an outdoor festival, relatively far from civilization. Hundreds were murdered there and many more were taken hostage. In the tweet below is a map of Hamas's invasion. Immediately apparent is that the bigger a population center - the quicker Hamas was stopped. 

We see that small communities numbering hundreds of civilians were captured and Hamas expanded beyond them. Larger centers like Ofakim, Sderot, and Netivot - with 37,000, 35,000, and 52,000 civilians respectively, effectively halted Hamas. Ashkelon, a proper city of 160,000 civilians - stopped Hamas even before they can reach the city borders.  

The IDF deployed most of its forces on the fence and in nearby towns, not in cities. But in every population center are law enforcement. Bigger the population - the more likely it is to have a police station, and later special equipment and forces. Israeli civilians also carry arms in areas designated as dangerous, and soldiers often travel with their personal weapons. Again, bigger the population - the more armed people there are to tackle a threat.

This isn't to say we should line our borders with cities. Rather, that if there is a threat of a city being captured - training and equipping law enforcement for the task and having armed civilians, can contribute tremendously to the city's defense particularly in the crucial first hours or days until the army arrives.

 

Lesson 2: Urban Warfare Training & Coordination w/ Civilians

Retaking captured towns, especially when terrorists would intentionally hold living hostages with them, is an incredibly difficult task. A force untrained for this scenario may opt to use fires to retake territory and thus lead to horrendous casualties among their own population, or they may suffer these casualties themselves. Even if an armed force perceives the reference terrain to be open and far from population centers, as in Europe, or adjacent to small urban areas they deem easy to evacuate - such scenario is still possible. 

One of the greatest enablers of successful IDF operations in the Gaza envelope area is coordination with civilians. Civilians and soldiers could quickly establish contact via messenger apps like Whatsapp. The ability to establish such connection is valuable. In Israel it's easy because everyone is familiar with a lot of relevant people. You can't live around Gaza and not have at least a few contacts currently serving in the area and able to connect you to more relevant people. Other armed forces must build the capability even over great distances and for more isolated communities.

 

Lesson 3: Quantity and Diversity of Munitions 

The urban area poses enough challenges on its own. To add human shields to this, which are now a popular strategy - only multiplies the challenge. 

As such, the range of munitions needs to extend from anything capable of striking a human-sized target, through a window, with little to no collateral damage, up to deep penetrating munitions capable of collapsing tunnels and buildings. And they all need to be available in very large numbers. Striking with powerful munitions in a populated area may require the bomb to be delivered to a location and at an angle that prevent civilian casualties but in exchange also vastly reduce the damage to the actual target, and as such more munitions may be necessary. 

Hardened targets like tunnels also require many more munitions than above-ground buildings would, as the ground attenuates the blast effects and absorbs fragments.

The IDF hasn't revealed precisely how many munitions it has used, but we know it has used tens of thousands of aerial munitions, tens of thousands of tank shells, over 100,000 artillery shells in Gaza (and Lebanon, albeit in a negligible amount). This puts significant strain on global supply chains. Israel's own industry is a drop in the bucket when it comes to supplying winged iron, and foreign suppliers are straining to even supply enough to Ukraine. 

Israel still has the threat of Lebanon, a flareup in J&S, as well as Syria, Egypt, and Jordan to worry about in the 1st and 2nd circles. Yes there are some peace treaties mixed in, but they're not the most stable countries. In the 3rd circle Israel has to deal with Iraq, Yemen, Iran, and potential Iranian buildup in other countries.

So the lesson is that in peacetime every nation must build an arsenal that will last it at least several months of high intensity combat, preferably years. Better to overspend on munitions than to incur horrendous losses due to ammo shortages.

Lesson 4: Combat Engineers as Integral Part of A Fighting Force

This may sound obvious because combat engineers are a standard component in many armed forces, but their roles may easily be under-estimated. 

Watch a couple videos from Gaza and you'll see that the D9 armored bulldozer and its unmanned variants are no less popular than the Merkava 4 and Namer. They can shovel debris, tow vehicles, maneuver through a building, and clear IEDs. In a more conventional setting they can also move earth to create berms, fire positions for tanks, artillery, and infantry, and help set up trenches.

If you can also deploy a couple diggers, that'll be great. The IDF also employs drillers to aid in tunnel warfare. But if you can/want to use only 1 type of engineering asset aside from the regular breacher CEV - the D9 is your best friend.

As a general rule - if your opponent can utilize terrain to entrench themselves, you must have a similar capability to dislodge them and turn their terrain and rubble to your advantage.

Holed up in a small building? Collapse it.

Hiding in a tunnel? Put something over the shafts, destroy the vents, or fill it up with something nice and flammable.

Otherwise high intensity combat in a built up area will result in deformed terrain that can be repurposed by an adversary as new types of cover.

EDIT: Will update later with more lessons I believe we learned when I have some free time.

 

Edited July 26 by Mighty_Zuk

[Roman Alymov]

The key lesson is that when group of white men are trying to create a colony on another continent by pushing locals away  -it is not  going to end well both for them and for locals.

   Now you are in situation described by Harry Harrison in his "Deathworld". 

[crazyinsane105]

11 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

The key lesson is that when group of white men are trying to create a colony on another continent by pushing locals away  -it is not  going to end well both for them and for locals.

   Now you are in situation described by Harry Harrison in his "Deathworld". 

Let’s not turn this into a political debate but stick to military related topics. Probably one of the few things Zuk will agree with me

[Roman Alymov]

18 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

Let’s not turn this into a political debate but stick to military related topics. Probably one of the few things Zuk will agree with me

It is quite military related: the state of ~10 mln people (less then Moscow) and land surface of 22K km2 (1/2 of Moscow district) surrounded by ~370 mln of Arabs (and about 1.6 bln Muslims globaly) is in, let's say, unfavorable condition. No technological miracles could change this fact (especially since West is increasingly loosing its technological and industrial dominance). Ignoring this fact and pretending this or that Wunderwaffe or miracle military organisation practice/measures will reverse the situation is not making any good longterm.

    Yes there are some tactical steps that could temporary improve this or that situation - but they all come at a price. For example, proposed measures to communicate with caprured civilians via messangers etc. - yes it may sound reasonable, but the price for taking practical steps to establish this practice (it will take some regular tests/drills in peacetime) will result in at least part of civilians prefering not to live in this areas at all (or even leaving Israel for safer places). For example elderly coulpe of retired physics professors from StPete who were killed by Arabs on their "dacha"  - having them taking part in such drills could have potentially saved their lives, since they as reasonable people might have had considered leaving Israel at all.

[Roman Alymov]

2 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Rather, that if there is a threat of a city being captured - training and equipping law enforcement for the task and having armed civilians, can contribute tremendously to the city's defense particularly in the crucial first hours or days until the army arrives.

Congratulations, you have just invented Cossacks in their original Russian form  - armed and trained population that is living in dangerous border areas and is risking their lives defending themselves, own families and the state behind them from nomads, in exchange for some benefits from state.

[Mighty_Zuk]

1 hour ago, crazyinsane105 said:

Let’s not turn this into a political debate but stick to military related topics. Probably one of the few things Zuk will agree with me

Agreed, and I hope we could agree on more things. 

We had the great mod lock another thread. I really don't want this to be about anything political.

In the meantime, do you have any input on what may be lessons learned? I'd appreciate if this could turn into a productive debate.

@Roman Alymov I'm asking you politely to please stay on topic and keep such comments to the FFZ. I even revived the "Because, Israel" topic there specifically for such things.

Your "cossacks" comment is legitimate. I came to understand a while ago that the USSR distributed population in a way that an invading force (from the west) would stumble across a large and dense array of small, connected and defensible towns, and that this shapes current fighting in Ukraine.

Edited July 25 by Mighty_Zuk

[sunday]

.

Edited July 25 by sunday

[Roman Alymov]

14 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Your "cossacks" comment is legitimate. I came to understand a while ago that the USSR distributed population in a way that an invading force (from the west) would stumble across a large and dense array of small, connected and defensible towns, and that this shapes current fighting in Ukraine.

  I'm sorry but it is both technically wrong (USSR was never creating any "dense array of small, connected and defensible towns" on the way of " invading force from the west"  - USSR solution was to push initial border as far away as possible, but no games with towns). Cossack story is at least 500 years before USSR was created - and it was not exactly about "large and dense array of small, connected and defensible towns" but about de-facto reviving ancient practice of "walls" (see Hadrian's Wall or Great Wall of China etc) but on local material and in local way. Probably you can read Russian, so this link may be usefull for you Засечная черта — Википедия (wikipedia.org)

For English-speaking Members Great Zasechnaya cherta - Wikipedia

On armed population surviving de-facto separately from mainland in hostile envirionment- see  Гребенские казаки — Википедия (wikipedia.org) (in English - Greben Cossacks - Wikipedia ) but note that this Cossack group, to survive in situation of having no technological advantage over locals (as it will sooner or later with Israelies be in situation of) had to great degree adopted part of their culture and practicies. To some extent, Jewish communities in Arab countries (before Israel created) were following the same practice (but without military component). 

   Nothing new is new, and Israel situation is not unique in history. 

[Roman Alymov]

P.S. Actually, regarding "dense array of small, connected and defensible towns" - while it was never done by Soviets, as far as i remember something of that kind was done by Germans in Prussia, where locals were getting some sort of benefits from state for building their farms and houses in a way they could be used for defence (walls of stone etc.) But it is out of my field of knowledge, so may be our German Members could be more helpful on this.

   But i am not aware about Germans arming population of this farms (may be it was no need for that since there were heartland of Prussia military nobiles, so lot of locals with mil experience and may he own arms)

[crazyinsane105]

3 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Agreed, and I hope we could agree on more things. 

We had the great mod lock another thread. I really don't want this to be about anything political.

In the meantime, do you have any input on what may be lessons learned? I'd appreciate if this could turn into a productive debate.

@Roman Alymov I'm asking you politely to please stay on topic and keep such comments to the FFZ. I even revived the "Because, Israel" topic there specifically for such things.

Your "cossacks" comment is legitimate. I came to understand a while ago that the USSR distributed population in a way that an invading force (from the west) would stumble across a large and dense array of small, connected and defensible towns, and that this shapes current fighting in Ukraine.

Many of the soldiers killed in surrounding military bases weren't even armed. This includes many of the female soldiers. A bit bewildering that soldiers do not have access to firearms, and it's probably why Hamas was able to take down these areas with ease. And as to why female soldiers are stationed along some of the most dangerous places on this planet is a bit bewildering to me.

Also, many of the soldiers who were tasked with monitoring the day to day activities along Gaza were female, and were never taken seriously by their officers (most of whom who were male). Unsure if sexism played a role on this, but its definitely worth looking into since IDF is one of the few forces that enlists large numbers of women 

[Mighty_Zuk]

10 hours ago, crazyinsane105 said:

Many of the soldiers killed in surrounding military bases weren't even armed. This includes many of the female soldiers. A bit bewildering that soldiers do not have access to firearms, and it's probably why Hamas was able to take down these areas with ease. And as to why female soldiers are stationed along some of the most dangerous places on this planet is a bit bewildering to me.

I agree on some of these points. Female soldiers there are observers. They control various observation systems and the RCWS stations, and report back to an intelligence officer. 

There definitely is sexism in the IDF. Some duties are filled only by women. The observer job in the IDF is pronounced in feminine form in Hebrew. 

There is also the fact that observers don't need to score high on intelligence and the IDF does categorize its soldiers based on physical capabilities and intelligence. This and sexism combined with having to report to an officer with probably inflated ego and who's under pressure to be seen as maximally professional by his superiors - all contribute to general indifference to what observers say.

It's a human instinct as well. On one hand you see these girls dancing on tiktok every day and talking about generic stupid girl stuff, and then they say meaningful things about what they see through their cameras every day. It's sometimes hard to make that mental divide and I think the IDF should find a system that overcomes this issue.

It's not only their commanding officer's fault though. There are also separate intelligence researchers whose job is to analyze data including raw one from cameras and sensors on the borders.

We know however that the IDF was certainly not oblivious to this. Government officials have repeatedly warned about a potential Hamas invasion, but these were always brushed off. Everyone brushed these off, including the average citizen, but mostly the media which never put it on the headlines.

So who's primarily responsible for the situation on the border bases? I'd say the commander of the Gaza division. He knew of the possibility yet decided on letting the border protection be thinned on a holiday, as well as not arming his observers who do have enough training to put at least a few rounds when it matters. Even if 3/5 freeze, the other 2 will matter.

 

[seahawk]

24 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

It's a human instinct as well. On one hand you see these girls dancing on tiktok every day and talking about generic stupid girl stuff, and then they say meaningful things about what they see through their cameras every day. It's sometimes hard to make that mental divide and I think the IDF should find a system that overcomes this issue.

 

 

Sorry but if you have problem with this, you should not be an officer. It is not as if young male soldiers would not do stupid shit in their free time, actually they are probably doing much more stupid shit.

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Sorry but if you have problem with this, you should not be an officer. It is not as if young male soldiers would not do stupid shit in their free time, actually they are probably doing much more stupid shit.

I remember reading a book about this guy in the British Army. He was a Grenadan and this guy he used to hang around with whom was also black. Anyway, they used to hang around together, got a reputation, undeservedly of being skivers and up to no good. The two of them together was seen as a negative thing, and they kept getting pulled up on it.

Anyway, this young private rounded on an officer one day whom was giving them shit about it,  and told them the way they were treated stank. The officer conceded they might be a be a bit heavy on them, and vowed that if the private proceeded to do his best, they would bear it in mind and go easier on them. By and large, thats precisely what happened. The reason why I mention all this, is the private concerned was Private Beharry, whom one day led an entire Warrior platoon out of an ambush when his commander was knocked out,  and later drove a Warrior out of danger, even though he had fragments of an RPG istuck n his head. He got the VC for it. Which just goes to show, particularly if you remember Private Hook in Zulu, first impressions are worth shit.

I guess it comes down to whether an Army is able to identify potential in individuals or not, and treat people as individuals. Maybe that is a problem in any conscript force, but it seems particularly so in the IDF. The IDF is a remarkable organization, but if its not arming female soldiers because they are regarded as second class warriors, and its unable or unwilling to listen to them, then its got a major culture problem. So much so you kind of wonder why they have female soldiers at all.

Besides, any officer in command of such an observation post should have been preparing the facility, and drilling them to defend the position if it came under attack. If they werent doing that, they shoudnt have been in the army.

[Roman Alymov]

6 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I guess it comes down to whether an Army is able to identify potential in individuals or not, and treat people as individuals. Maybe that is a problem in any conscript force, but it seems particularly so in the IDF. The IDF is a remarkable organization, but if its not arming female soldiers because they are regarded as second class warriors, and its unable or unwilling to listen to them, then its got a major culture problem. So much so you kind of wonder why they have female soldiers at all.

Besides, any officer in command of such an observation post should have been preparing the facility, and drilling them to defend the position if it came under attack. If they werent doing that, they shoudnt have been in the army.

Are there any proofs this female soldiers were deliberately not armed, while constantly wearing personal weapon is mandatory during their initial trainin course?

(not only for girls)

As for me, it seems more likely their weapons were just kept somewhere in lockers and when substance hit the fan unexpectadly - were not able to reach their rifles. 

To be constantly armed (especially with automatic rifle) is not so fun thing as people might think, so quite likely this girls were quite happy to nlot be obligated to carry their ridles 24/7, but leave them stored under lock.... It takes living in hostile envirionment to become constanty loaded with weapons   -like were Cossacks, Caucasus highlanders or Polish nobiles ( «Bez Boga ani do proga, bez karabeli ani z pościeli.»)

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

I idly wonder if they didnt issue weapons, because they had a problem at some point with suicides in garrison. Dont know, that would be one to ask Marsh I think.

[Mighty_Zuk]

34 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I guess it comes down to whether an Army is able to identify potential in individuals or not, and treat people as individuals. Maybe that is a problem in any conscript force, but it seems particularly so in the IDF. The IDF is a remarkable organization, but if its not arming female soldiers because they are regarded as second class warriors, and its unable or unwilling to listen to them, then its got a major culture problem. So much so you kind of wonder why they have female soldiers at all.

It's not like the grand IDF has some conspiracy to shit on female soldiers. It's a matter that is between observers and their officers, but it's not that the officer hates women. It has more to do with the divide between an officer with training and knowledge relevant to their respective foe, and a conscript that's only trained to observe, not analyze. 

Not long ago a series about the early days of the Yom Kippur War was popularized, and in the first episodes we saw a real story about a listener/translator who heard Syrian chatter about occupying Israeli outposts on Mt Hermon. 

Male listener/translator, male officer. Same story, same outcome. There's sexism but it's not even the main reason here.

55 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Sorry but if you have problem with this, you should not be an officer. It is not as if young male soldiers would not do stupid shit in their free time, actually they are probably doing much more stupid shit.

I remind you the IDF is a conscript-based army within a country with a strong economy and high quality of life. It's not easy to keep your quality people in the army when civilian life pays so much better.

23 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Are there any proofs this female soldiers were deliberately not armed, while constantly wearing personal weapon is mandatory during their initial trainin course?

(not only for girls)

As for me, it seems more likely their weapons were just kept somewhere in lockers and when substance hit the fan unexpectadly - were not able to reach their rifles. 

To be constantly armed (especially with automatic rifle) is not so fun thing as people might think, so quite likely this girls were quite happy to nlot be obligated to carry their ridles 24/7, but leave them stored under lock.... It takes living in hostile envirionment to become constanty loaded with weapons   -like were Cossacks, Caucasus highlanders or Polish nobiles ( «Bez Boga ani do proga, bez karabeli ani z pościeli.»)

 

These photos depict an Israel full of Gal Gadots - beautiful women well trained in using arms and in the service of the Mossad. They're grossly misrepresentative of actual Israel.

Vast majority of soldiers don't travel with their firearms. Only combat soldiers do, and only when uniformed. The exceptions are volunteer municipal security squads, soldiers living in dangerous areas, or those who for any personal reason may have to carry firearms on a less than permanent basis. 

Female combat soldiers are a rare category. To be fit for combat and thus carry a firearm during travel, a soldier must typically meet Rifleman 05 standard. Vast majority of soldiers and particularly female ones are trained to lower standards as they're not combat. 

For a female to be considered a combat soldier she must serve in the rare few mixed combat units like Caracal, or be a combat instructor.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Lesson 3: Quantity and Diversity of Munitions 

The urban area poses enough challenges on its own. To add human shields to this, which are now a popular strategy - only multiplies the challenge. 

As such, the range of munitions needs to extend from anything capable of striking a human-sized target, through a window, with little to no collateral damage, up to deep penetrating munitions capable of collapsing tunnels and buildings. And they all need to be available in very large numbers. Striking with powerful munitions in a populated area may require the bomb to be delivered to a location and at an angle that prevent civilian casualties but in exchange also vastly reduce the damage to the actual target, and as such more munitions may be necessary. 

Hardened targets like tunnels also require many more munitions than above-ground buildings would, as the ground attenuates the blast effects and absorbs fragments.

The IDF hasn't revealed precisely how many munitions it has used, but we know it has used tens of thousands of aerial munitions, tens of thousands of tank shells, over 100,000 artillery shells in Gaza (and Lebanon, albeit in a negligible amount). This puts significant strain on global supply chains. Israel's own industry is a drop in the bucket when it comes to supplying winged iron, and foreign suppliers are straining to even supply enough to Ukraine. 

Israel still has the threat of Lebanon, a flareup in J&S, as well as Syria, Egypt, and Jordan to worry about in the 1st and 2nd circles. Yes there are some peace treaties mixed in, but they're not the most stable countries. In the 3rd circle Israel has to deal with Iraq, Yemen, Iran, and potential Iranian buildup in other countries.

So the lesson is that in peacetime every nation must build an arsenal that will last it at least several months of high intensity combat, preferably years. Better to overspend on munitions than to incur horrendous losses due to ammo shortages.

Lesson 4: Combat Engineers as Integral Part of A Fighting Force

This may sound obvious because combat engineers are a standard component in many armed forces, but their roles may easily be under-estimated. 

Watch a couple videos from Gaza and you'll see that the D9 armored bulldozer and its unmanned variants are no less popular than the Merkava 4 and Namer. They can shovel debris, tow vehicles, maneuver through a building, and clear IEDs. In a more conventional setting they can also move earth to create berms, fire positions for tanks, artillery, and infantry, and help set up trenches.

If you can also deploy a couple diggers, that'll be great. The IDF also employs drillers to aid in tunnel warfare. But if you can/want to use only 1 type of engineering asset aside from the regular breacher CEV - the D9 is your best friend.

As a general rule - if your opponent can utilize terrain to entrench themselves, you must have a similar capability to dislodge them and turn their terrain and rubble to your advantage.

Holed up in a small building? Collapse it.

Hiding in a tunnel? Put something over the shafts, destroy the vents, or fill it up with something nice and flammable.

Otherwise high intensity combat in a built up area will result in deformed terrain that can be repurposed by an adversary as new types of cover.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

2 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

It's not like the grand IDF has some conspiracy to shit on female soldiers. It's a matter that is between observers and their officers, but it's not that the officer hates women. It has more to do with the divide between an officer with training and knowledge relevant to their respective foe, and a conscript that's only trained to observe, not analyze. 

Not long ago a series about the early days of the Yom Kippur War was popularized, and in the first episodes we saw a real story about a listener/translator who heard Syrian chatter about occupying Israeli outposts on Mt Hermon. 

Male listener/translator, male officer. Same story, same outcome. There's sexism but it's not even the main reason here.

I remind you the IDF is a conscript-based army within a country with a strong economy and high quality of life. It's not easy to keep your quality people in the army when civilian life pays so much better.

These photos depict an Israel full of Gal Gadots - beautiful women well trained in using arms and in the service of the Mossad. They're grossly misrepresentative of actual Israel.

Vast majority of soldiers don't travel with their firearms. Only combat soldiers do, and only when uniformed. The exceptions are volunteer municipal security squads, soldiers living in dangerous areas, or those who for any personal reason may have to carry firearms on a less than permanent basis. 

Female combat soldiers are a rare category. To be fit for combat and thus carry a firearm during travel, a soldier must typically meet Rifleman 05 standard. Vast majority of soldiers and particularly female ones are trained to lower standards as they're not combat. 

For a female to be considered a combat soldier she must serve in the rare few mixed combat units like Caracal, or be a combat instructor.

Yes, I was thinking about that. The cute IDF girl 'You are very pretty, stay out of the combat zone' and the geek whom everyone wouldnt listen to, who turned out to be right.

Yeah, I get where you are coming from. Im just suggesting, if they didnt have those girls on guard with weapons, then they were not being taken seriously, and they really shouldnt have been where they were at all, which clearly was a potential combat zone. They failed them by not treating them like soldiers, whom might have been able to defend themselves.

I saw a photograph of Noa Argamani the other day, when she was in the Navy. And no disrespect to her, but it was clearly from her expression they saw it as a bit of a joke. Perhaps its reading too much into it, but there doesnt seem to be anything like the ethos in the early days that it all really mattered.

 

[Roman Alymov]

2 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

For a female to be considered a combat soldier she must serve in the rare few mixed combat units like Caracal, or be a combat instructor.

  I'm not pretending to know the situation in Israel better then you, but a number of sources in Russian are saying it is mandatory practice for all soldiers (others say "only during initial training month") to carry their firearms. For example

Convenirntly it got text of the video here Вопрос-ответ. Почему они с автоматами? — Иммигрант сегодня (immigrant.today) (in Russian)
Another opinion from   https://vk.com/wall-68833121_23503

"How do the Israeli military carry weapons when they go on leave?
Most often, terrorists choose the most advantageous situations for their actions when they cannot be rebuffed. The most common case of hostage-taking or attacks on Israeli soldiers is when military personnel are on leave.Israeli soldiers don't hitch a ride. To them, this is strictly prohibited by special rules. But riding the bus is always free for them, even if a soldier wants to get to the other side of the country.
Fighters who are on leave or on leave are required to have their combat weapons with them. A document is issued on hand, where the soldier's data and the number of the machine gun are indicated. Since the military patrol often checks people with weapons, what if it's a militant or worse, a terrorist?When a soldier is at home, he leaves his weapon in a safe or other equipped place and can already move around without it. And if the military does not have the opportunity to put the machine gun in a secluded place? Then you need to carry it with you all the time. If you change into simple clothes, then there will be a lot of questions from the military patrol or other security services to the vacationer in general. You can carry a weapon in this form, but only so that it is discharged.
The Israeli military uses two unique methods. The first is when the magazine is attached to the butt using rubberized fabric, which is in the balaclavas. And the second is when a plastic device is inserted between the store and the entrance for it, which will not allow the cartridge to get into the machine.If necessary, a soldier can insert a magazine in one movement or reset it with a special button so that the plastic product falls out."

"Why do Israelis walk through the streets with guns?

As the Israelis themselves joke, their country is the only place in the world where a man with a machine gun enters the room and others begin to feel safer.

In fact, they are a little mistaken, because, as a rule, these are military personnel of auxiliary units not involved in military operations. In local slang, they are called jobniky (from the English word job – "work"). Of course, they are also taught to shoot, but they have no experience of real combat encounters.

And experienced warriors, as a rule, are always at work. And the probability of meeting them on the street with guns at the ready, cheerfully marching to a party, is much less, because they have slightly different conditions of service.

But that's not really the answer to our question.

In fact, the conditions for the purchase of firearms for personal use for civilians in Israel are quite strict. This is not America, where in many states the purchase of a pistol and even a submachine gun is completely legal. Here, a short-barreled gun is allowed to be purchased by those who: a) live in a certain territory; b) perform security-related work.

In the second case, we mean all kinds of guards. The first one includes residents of Israeli settlements in the West Bank of the Jordan River, as well as people who get jobs there.

Jewish settlers have a gun culture similar to the American one. They often carry pistols with them and in general are often enthusiastic and skilled shooters. That is, to go further into the desert to shoot at "wild cans and bottles" is entertainment just for them. By the way, a significant number of them repatriated to Israel from the United States. Therefore, their attitude to weapons is almost like that of the Rednecks from Alabama. With claims towards the government when it declares the need to tighten the screws.

As for the rest of the civilians, in recent decades the authorities have been pursuing a policy of gradually reducing the issuance of licenses. I did not look for the current figure, but as of 2012, about 170 thousand people owned weapons in Israel.

Therefore, those Israelis who walk the streets of Israel in civilian clothes, but armed to the teeth, are ordinary soldiers. There are quite a lot of them simply because most local boys and girls wear the IDF uniform when they reach the age of 18. And in the future, they are called into service every year for a couple of weeks for a fairly long period of time. By the way, this also applies to officers, including senior ones.

Due to the small size of the country, they are often given a discharge. But the difficult external and internal situation in Israel has led to the emergence of the practice of carrying weapons on a daily basis. The army regulations on this matter are quite strict, and soldiers are forbidden to leave it at home.

It's good if it's a pistol, but usually it's an American M-16 assault rifle or its Israeli equivalent, the Tavor. But it is much worse if you are the proud owner of the Negev light machine gun, which weighs under ten kilograms in full gear.

Therefore, in Israel every day you can see young hipsters with machine guns on the bus, a girl with a machine gun who came to a party in a chic dress or even girls in bikinis on the beach in their hands, it is clear with what.

For people who are used to it, it does not cause any physical or psychological difficulties. Although, it is not always convenient to visit the bathroom with a "Negev")) Israelis who have served, as I have already said, begin to feel safe in the society of young people with guns. Although, due to the structure of the Israeli army, the presence of a "trunk" does not mean readiness and experience to use it.

But still, there were many cases when an Israeli soldier accidentally bumped into a Palestinian shahid on the street and solved the problem on the spot." ( Почему израильтяне ходят с оружием по улицам? | Народ Востока | Дзен (dzen.ru) )

etc.

  Our group member have served his conscript term in IDF (as tank gunner) and i remember his father (who is also member) complaining about his son having to go to visit his mother with his gun while on trainig course.

 

 

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

39 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

  I'm not pretending to know the situation in Israel better then you, but a number of sources in Russian are saying it is mandatory practice for all soldiers (others say "only during initial training month") to carry their firearms. For example

Your entire comment described combat soldiers. Females exist in combat units, but they disproportionately serve in non-combat duties. 

[Roman Alymov]

18 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Your entire comment described combat soldiers. Females exist in combat units, but they disproportionately serve in non-combat duties. 

Guote from text above 

"As the Israelis themselves joke, their country is the only place in the world where a man with a machine gun enters the room and others begin to feel safer.

In fact, they are a little mistaken, because, as a rule, these are military personnel of auxiliary units not involved in military operations. In local slang, they are called jobniky (from the English word job – "work"). Of course, they are also taught to shoot, but they have no experience of real combat encounters.

And experienced warriors, as a rule, are always at work. And the probability of meeting them on the street with guns at the ready, cheerfully marching to a party, is much less, because they have slightly different conditions of service."

[seahawk]

5 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Male listener/translator, male officer. Same story, same outcome. There's sexism but it's not even the main reason here.

I remind you the IDF is a conscript-based army within a country with a strong economy and high quality of life. It's not easy to keep your quality people in the army when civilian life pays so much better.

 

That is no excuse, but a sign of bad leadership in the highest levels. If you do not value S2 and you can not make a good career in S2, this will happen. But yes I can imagine that the IDF has bad case of combat prestige and that S2, S4 and S6 could usually draw the short stick. (when it comes to picking people and also when it comes to getting a promotion)

[Mighty_Zuk]

1 hour ago, seahawk said:

That is no excuse, but a sign of bad leadership in the highest levels. If you do not value S2 and you can not make a good career in S2, this will happen. But yes I can imagine that the IDF has bad case of combat prestige and that S2, S4 and S6 could usually draw the short stick. (when it comes to picking people and also when it comes to getting a promotion)

Yes but what do you propose be done to keep the good people in the army?

I'm all for criticism but it's pointless if you can't offer a remedy.

[seahawk]

Good people is relative. Many intelligence specialists or logistics specialists would really make bad infantry soldiers or tankers. The key is to place the right people in the right position and NCO and officers must be able to have a good career in S2 or S4. These fields must not become the conciliation price for combat officers or worse the punishment for officers that stepped out of line. The other key are the instructors in basic training. First this must be a job with a high prestige, the cadre needs to come from diverse specialisations and all must be willing to find the right job for each recruit.

[Mighty_Zuk]

40 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Good people is relative. Many intelligence specialists or logistics specialists would really make bad infantry soldiers or tankers. The key is to place the right people in the right position and NCO and officers must be able to have a good career in S2 or S4. These fields must not become the conciliation price for combat officers or worse the punishment for officers that stepped out of line. The other key are the instructors in basic training. First this must be a job with a high prestige, the cadre needs to come from diverse specialisations and all must be willing to find the right job for each recruit.

The IDF is already pretty good at locating people and assigning them relevant jobs. Same goes for officer training. 

To become an officer in a field other than your original assignment, you have to drop out of a prestigious program, like flight training or some academic programs.

While it is possible to switch roles, most stay where they are for most of their service, with some promotions within their unit. A problem of much bigger magnitude is convincing talented people to become officers and NCOs.