Lessons Learned From The Gaza War

[seahawk]

I would say reality has shown that this iDF is not very good at it.

[Rick]

Would tear gas be of value for the I.D.F. in this conflict?

[Mighty_Zuk]

17 minutes ago, Rick said:

Would tear gas be of value for the I.D.F. in this conflict?

Tear gas usage is illegal for a military force in an armed conflict. That's why when you see Israel employing it - it's always a police force. 

But what exactly do you propose? Why tear gas and for what use?

[Rick]

8 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Tear gas usage is illegal for a military force in an armed conflict. That's why when you see Israel employing it - it's always a police force. 

But what exactly do you propose? Why tear gas and for what use?

Off the top of my head, tunnel and large building clearing.

[Mighty_Zuk]

23 minutes ago, Rick said:

Off the top of my head, tunnel and large building clearing.

Such buildings could have civilians in them, so that's already not an option. As for tunnels, the IDF has its methods. Most are classified. But generally speaking the IDF typically wants to locate, map, and then destroy a tunnel. Tunnels could have hostages inside, hence the mapping and recon. There are methods to do it without endangering soldiers. Destruction of tunnels can be done in a number of ways. I think one popular method is pumping fuel and then detonating it.

[Rick]

1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Such buildings could have civilians in them, so that's already not an option. As for tunnels, the IDF has its methods. Most are classified. But generally speaking the IDF typically wants to locate, map, and then destroy a tunnel. Tunnels could have hostages inside, hence the mapping and recon. There are methods to do it without endangering soldiers. Destruction of tunnels can be done in a number of ways. I think one popular method is pumping fuel and then detonating it.

Thank you for pointing out I.D.F. options and abilities. The reason I suggested tear gas is that it is, used correctly, non-lethal. I admit to not paying much to the suffering started and perpetuated by Hamas nor to the defenses that Israel has used to protect and recover its citizens. 

[Ssnake]

15 hours ago, Rick said:

Thank you for pointing out I.D.F. options and abilities. The reason I suggested tear gas is that it is, used correctly, non-lethal.

Other than being classified as a chemical weapon, so its use by military forces is generally outlawed as already pointed out, the "correct use" with non-lethal outcome forbids the use of it in enclosed spaces (because it can be lethal then).

To summarize the answer to your initial question:

17 hours ago, Rick said:

Would tear gas be of value for the I.D.F. in this conflict?

NO.

[Rick]

8 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Other than being classified as a chemical weapon, so its use by military forces is generally outlawed as already pointed out, the "correct use" with non-lethal outcome forbids the use of it in enclosed spaces (because it can be lethal then).

To summarize the answer to your initial question:

NO.

Thanks. Did not know tear gas was considered a chemical weapon (cannot use) by military standards and not so by police standards (can use.) 

[PaulFormerlyinSaudi]

Lessons learned? I do not know. Lessons that were taught are many.

 

1) Underestimating the Other Guy is a rookie mistake. The Other Guys here were playing a long game and biding their time. The Israeli policy of "managing the conflict" was (as we see in hindsight) foolish. Better you should make peace while you are top. This is tough to do, but better than endless war or having peace terms forced on you when you are on the bottom. 

 

2) Know what the Bad Guys want and then do not give them those things. If the Bad Guys want to start a war in order to sidetrack the peace process, to alienate a whole generation of Western youth, in order to increase internal dissent in Israel, do not accept their invitation to a conventional war. 

 

3) Understand that fighting a war with the units, tactics and weapons you got may very well be suboptimal. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The Israelis had firepower and used it, even though it was obvious the Other Side was hoping that is what they would do. 

 

4) Understand that military force is not to be used alone. In some circumstances it is simply a support for other means.

[R011]

If the bad guys are giving you a war already, it's a bit hard not to be a part of it.

[PaulFormerlyinSaudi]

On 7/28/2024 at 5:15 PM, R011 said:

If the bad guys are giving you a war already, it's a bit hard not to be a part of it.

Fight the war you want to fight. Not the fight they are suckering you into. Fight the war you can win. 

[Mighty_Zuk]

20 minutes ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

Fight the war you want to fight. Not the fight they are suckering you into. Fight the war you can win. 

Care to give an example of a different approach Israel could take, then?

[PaulFormerlyinSaudi]

1 hour ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Care to give an example of a different approach Israel could take, then?

Northern Ireland. View it as a law enforcement operation rather than a war. Arrest and try the fighters.  Jail them. Rehabilitate the general population with economic and political development. They have little popular support. Drain that from them. Rich, democratic countries do not usual war against each other. 

 

A decades-long campaign. Now, you say this is unrealistic. I simply cannot see another way to win. 

[Mighty_Zuk]

6 minutes ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

Northern Ireland. View it as a law enforcement operation rather than a war. Arrest and try the fighters.  Jail them. Rehabilitate the general population with economic and political development. They have little popular support. Drain that from them. Rich, democratic countries do not usual war against each other. 

 

A decades-long campaign. Now, you say this is unrealistic. I simply cannot see another way to win. 

[R011]

9 hours ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

Northern Ireland. View it as a law enforcement operation rather than a war. Arrest and try the fighters.  Jail them. Rehabilitate the general population with economic and political development. They have little popular support. Drain that from them. Rich, democratic countries do not usual war against each other. 

 

A decades-long campaign. Now, you say this is unrealistic. I simply cannot see another way to win. 

There was no Israeli police force in Gaza because Israel left Gaza to be run by Palestinians.  It would be like the RUC trying to make arrests in Dublin or Boston.  Not to mention that Gaza isn't Northern Ireland having a somewhat different history, culture, and demographic mix.

Edited August 5 by R011

[Stuart Galbraith]

Its very similar in that Northern ireland was regarded as an intractable problem, then overnight it was not. Although to be fair, I think at least some of that was a change in attitudes of the IRA and the UDF, whom both recognised it was not a war that was ever going to be won militarily. That was always the British Army view, that they would keep a lid on it, till the politicians managed to figure things out. And so it proved.

In Israel and Gaza, i think the militarists have got control, and reject any other solutions other than outright military victory, which neither side will ever be able to achieve. The other difference is there is a lack of willingness on either side to think outside the box and do anything different. In Northern Ireland, that ended pretty much with the same generation that started the war, whom recognised they woudl achieve more at the Ballot box than with the bomb.  With Gaza, thats now passed into the second or third generation whom have been educated there is no other choice but conflict, and its becoming a near intractable problem now.

If Northern Ireland is a model, it illustrates that to get peace, you need the participation of both sides. Right now, I dont think either side are very interested.

[RETAC21]

22 minutes ago, R011 said:

There was no Israeli police force in Gaza because Israel left Gaza to be run by Palestinians.  It would be like the RUC trying to make arrests in Dublin or Boston.  Not to mention that Gaza isn't Northern Ireland having a somewhat different history, culture, and demographic mix.

That was a bad choice that should have been rectified years ago. Different history et al are just excuses not to do COIN properly when it needed to be done.

Gaza and the WB weren't a problem back in 1973 when Israel faced a conventional attack and it wasn't because history, culture and demographics were different then. 

[R011]

1 minute ago, RETAC21 said:

That was a bad choice that should have been rectified years ago. Different history et al are just excuses not to do COIN properly when it needed to be done.

Gaza and the WB weren't a problem back in 1973 when Israel faced a conventional attack and it wasn't because history, culture and demographics were different then. 

History was.  There was fifty-one years less of it.  There were also Israeli forces acting as cops so the PLO and their ilk couldn't build an army with fortifications or fire hundreds of rockets from the occupied territories.

[RETAC21]

16 minutes ago, R011 said:

History was.  There was fifty-one years less of it.  There were also Israeli forces acting as cops so the PLO and their ilk couldn't build an army with fortifications or fire hundreds of rockets from the occupied territories.

There wasn't any PLO there nor on the West bank, they were in Lebanon - there was no military reason for the Israelis to pack up and leave (there was a political one, they didn't want to be forced to give the gazans any chance of becoming Israelis) and there was no logical reason for not going back in 2006 (for example) to clean the place up. History, demographics and other excuses are just that. Israelis chose to make this hard for themselves by turning a blind eye to the problem and then letting their guard down.

[Mighty_Zuk]

If anyone suggests a police, rather than military response to Gaza, I recommend they try to apply the same logic to Ukraine, Vietnam, Japan and Germany of WW2, and see the results.

The only feasible way to do that is to first send the military to crush Gaza's military capabilities and only then can a police force function.

Police performing like a full fledged armed force with tanks, aircraft, navy ships etc would really be a patent and if you can make it work, you'll be filthy rich.

But judging by the comments I'm really intrigued about whether the suggestion is really to use a police force or a time machine.

Edited August 5 by Mighty_Zuk

[PaulFormerlyinSaudi]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Right now, I dont think either side are very interested.

Well, I suspect, I hope, that the population of Gaza and the West Bank is about fed up with the people who started this war. The majority of Palestinians are ready for peace (I think). We need to establish government institutions that allow these people to govern themselves and lock up those who opposed peaceful self-government. 

Some might say that now is not the time to do this. I understand that. But the path I have outlined does seem to be what many people claim to want. Others might simply say that such a policy is too soon now. 

Establish Palestine as a rich democratic state. This will drain the swamp in a generation or so. Not easy, not cheap, not fast, but the only way out of this mess I think. 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

19 minutes ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

Well, I suspect, I hope, that the population of Gaza and the West Bank is about fed up with the people who started this war. The majority of Palestinians are ready for peace (I think). We need to establish government institutions that allow these people to govern themselves and lock up those who opposed peaceful self-government. 

Some might say that now is not the time to do this. I understand that. But the path I have outlined does seem to be what many people claim to want. Others might simply say that such a policy is too soon now. 

Establish Palestine as a rich democratic state. This will drain the swamp in a generation or so. Not easy, not cheap, not fast, but the only way out of this mess I think. 

 

It needs to happen sometime. I can certainly understand Israeli reluctance to give the Palestinians anything now, because it would look like rewarding them for October 7th. Which really isnt a lesson anyone would want to send.

One suspects the West bank took a look at Gaza, took a deep gulp and made a few mental calculations about what was in their best interests. Considering the relative lack of problems coming out of there, suggests to me  they and the Israeli Government had a damn good talk. Thats good news. But Gaza? I think thats going to be a failed state for the next generation, and its going to take years to sort it out, if ever. I think perhaps rather than looking at a 2 state solution, its going to have to be at least 3.

[PaulFormerlyinSaudi]

It does show you that making peace is as filthy and unpleasant a business as making war. "You want me to cut a deal with those animals?" But I simply see no other way. At least we can agree, I think, that to keep doing what we have been doing is shown to not work. Doing what he have been doing but twice as much is also unlikely to help. It would seem that the path out of this mess is doing something else. 

 

 

[seahawk]

3 hours ago, RETAC21 said:

There wasn't any PLO there nor on the West bank, they were in Lebanon - there was no military reason for the Israelis to pack up and leave (there was a political one, they didn't want to be forced to give the gazans any chance of becoming Israelis) and there was no logical reason for not going back in 2006 (for example) to clean the place up. History, demographics and other excuses are just that. Israelis chose to make this hard for themselves by turning a blind eye to the problem and then letting their guard down.

That always happens if you want to control a piece of land, but do not actually want to control it. And, as you correctly pointed out, it is a problem that Israel has made for itself. If they would exercise no control, the Palestinians would become a state and Israel could no longer build settlements in the territory. If they exercise full control, the locals would sooner or later gain a right to become full citizens, which Israel also can not afford, as it would tilt the demographics. Therefore the current situation serves the interests of Israel, as it can exercise control whenever it wants, but does not have to take full responsibility for the local people.

But this unresolved situation is pulling both sides into a spiral of violence that no side will get out of without serious and lasting harm. I think Israel sometimes completely fails to see things from another perspective than its own. New settlements are only built in the less hostile areas, while Israel stayed out of the more hostile Gaza. Does this look as being less hostile is rewarding?

[Mighty_Zuk]

11 minutes ago, seahawk said:

But this unresolved situation is pulling both sides into a spiral of violence that no side will get out of without serious and lasting harm. I think Israel sometimes completely fails to see things from another perspective than its own. New settlements are only built in the less hostile areas, while Israel stayed out of the more hostile Gaza. Does this look as being less hostile is rewarding?

Israel did have settlements in Gaza. And also in the Sinai. But it withdrew them from Sinai for peace.

In 2005 it dismantled all Gaza settlements in the hope it'll advance peace. It did not. So the conclusion is dismantling settlements and giving the Palestinians more autonomy - does not advance peace, and does breed violence.

But I'm willing to hear reasonable arguments for why repeating it in a different way will yield different results.

1 hour ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

It does show you that making peace is as filthy and unpleasant a business as making war. "You want me to cut a deal with those animals?" But I simply see no other way. At least we can agree, I think, that to keep doing what we have been doing is shown to not work. Doing what he have been doing but twice as much is also unlikely to help. It would seem that the path out of this mess is doing something else. 

Then let's start with a proposal. Care to give one?

1 hour ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

Well, I suspect, I hope, that the population of Gaza and the West Bank is about fed up with the people who started this war. The majority of Palestinians are ready for peace (I think)

Every poll so far indicates Hamas is still very much popular especially in J&S.

1 hour ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

We need to establish government institutions that allow these people to govern themselves and lock up those who opposed peaceful self-government. 

The PA is that. Unfortunately Hamas and other terrorist organizations are massively more popular than the PA is, and even with Israeli assistance, terror activity in J&S keeps growing.

1 hour ago, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

Establish Palestine as a rich democratic state

Palestinians aren't ready for democracy. PA hasn't had elections in close to 20 years because they fear Hamas will be elected.

 

Let me ask you these few questions:

1) If Palestinians were now given a territory and ability to self-rule, do you really think they wouldn't use it at the first opportunity to establish a terrorist rule and attack Israel?

2) Why exactly is it always proposed that Palestinians have a state in Israeli territory, when it is similarly possible to establish it in Jordan, Egypt, Syria, etc, who have more territory that is easier to develop?

Is it really said out of care for Palestinians, or just to stick it to the Israelis?