Why does Hamas launch rockets from cities?

[Alceste]

According to CNN at around 1:30 p.m. e.s.t., Hamas has now launched 137 rockets/missiles into Israel within the last 24 hours, plus they launched two missiles at an oil tower off-shore, both of which missed.

Yes, yes, and Israel also dropped some bombs on Gaza, and on and on it goes.

 

[CMike]

Hamas could have stopped this at any time by stopping to shot rockets.

They chose not to.

Therefore, they are responsible for these deaths.

 

[metis]

Here I am assuming my objective is to kill or capture Hamas militants, so their responsibility is to get killed or captured.

Obviously they should stop launching rockets at Israel, but it's to be expected that they will make an effort to defend themselves and seek out retribution. That's war for you.

Oh, I see. It's "war" for them, so Hamas can retaliate targeting Israeli civilians in "retribution", but it's not acceptable for Israel to defend itself in "war" whereas they try to not kill civilians. And how is this in any way even remotely logical or even moral?

 

[metis]

Yes, yes, and Israel also dropped some bombs on Gaza, and on and on it goes.

Did you ever hear of something called "cause and effect"? Israel made it abundantly clear a couple of weeks ago when it told Hamas it would not launch any attacks unless Israel was attacked. So, what did Hamas do? Attacked.

 

[metis]

How would you pull it off?
If sending soldiers becomes the norm, Hamas will be more than ready and prepared to fight back. It could easily ambush the soldiers and kill them all.

Also, forgive my ignorance on warfare, but is it possible for the air cover to use bullets efficiently without putting itself into harm's way?

You are correct with your implication, and there's more that can be added.

Let's say Israelis stop their air responses and send in troops, not only would they be sitting ducks in a closed-urban environment, but then the problem becomes how do they find all these rockets and launchers, most of which could be hidden and/or moved?

On top of that, urban warfare even using ground troops tends to be terribly nasty with large losses of life. A great many Palestinians were killed when Israel went into parts of Gaza City because, when gun-fire came from a building, the IDF returned that fire.

 

[RitalinOhD]

Rediculous.

The problem is that Hamas knows that Israel puts more value on gaza civiians than they do. That's why they are using them as human shields thereby putting them in harm's way.

I'm gonna let you reread this and see if you can figure out why it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

 

[Koldo]

That's probably a question for RitalinOhD, who I would appoint to execute the strategy due to his 18 years of military experience. Yes, I expect some IDF soldiers would be killed or captured. That's war for you. To me a soldier killed in combat is preferable to a child killed by aerial bombardment.

Some? Do you expect only some soldier casualties using that strategy? I would expect a lot of soldier casualties.

Your course of action doesn't seem viable at all.

 

[RitalinOhD]

They obviously are being cautious.

The even bigger issue is that the US (the Obama regime) and other Pro-Hamas countries not only legitimize Hamas but give them hundereds of millions of dollars that they use to remiliarize.

ThIs is absolutely absurd. First, I'd love to see you try and justify 2000+ dead civilians as being "cautious". Certainly they could do much worse, but they sure as hell don't get a medal for humanitarianism here. Evident by the almost unanimous international criticism it's receiving.

And secondly, to imply that the US is "Pro-Hamas" is far and away the dumbest thing I've heard all week. You're aware of the billions of dollars the US has given Israel for their Iron Dome defense alone? Between 2009 and 2018, the total aid given to Israel will approach $30 billion. The US has given more money to a Israel than any other country on the planet. Upwards of $130 billion+ total. Now compare that to the roughly $7 billion the US has given to palestine between 1993-2012. (This may even be a high estimate, as the exact numbers seem to be in dispute.)

So, tell me again how this qualifies the US as "Pro-Hamas".

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

And secondly, to imply that the US is "Pro-Hamas" is far and away the dumbest thing I've heard all week.

On this I fully agree.

 

[RitalinOhD]

How would you pull it off?
If sending soldiers becomes the norm, Hamas will be more than ready and prepared to fight back. It could easily ambush the soldiers and kill them all.

Also, forgive my ignorance on warfare, but is it possible for the air cover to use bullets efficiently without putting itself into harm's way?

The US Airforce has several ways it identifies and engages ground targets from the Air. One of the main ones is the use of a pseudo-special Ops group called TAC-P. Stands for Tactical Air Control Party. This is usually a small unit, usually no more than 2-3 people. Their role is to assist in Air to Ground engagement. They identify and assess targets to see if these targets can be safely engaged, while minimizing any form of collateral damage. they're utilized with air attacks from fixed wing/rotary aircraft, as well as drones.

They are actually very effective. A lot of times they have eyes on target through the entire engagement, until it's either destroyed, or the engagement is called off due to circumstances, such as civilians in the area, or the human targets leave.

This is one tactic that the IDF could employ, instead of just dropping bombs on targets they think may or may not contain militants. If the IDF doesn't have a Spec-Op unit that performs this mission, it should.

This is of course if the IDF is interested in actually making progress and killing militants, instead of just praying they hit someone with a bomb.

 

[metis]

The US Airforce has several ways it identifies and engages ground targets from the Air. One of the main ones is the use of a pseudo-special Ops group called TAC-P. Stands for Tactical Air Control Party. This is usually a small unit, usually no more than 2-3 people. Their role is to assist in Air to Ground engagement. They identify and assess targets to see if these targets can be safely engaged, while minimizing any form of collateral damage. they're utilized with air attacks from fixed wing/rotary aircraft, as well as drones.

They are actually very effective. A lot of times they have eyes on target through the entire engagement, until it's either destroyed, or the engagement is called off due to circumstances, such as civilians in the area, or the human targets leave.

This is one tactic that the IDF could employ, instead of just dropping bombs on targets they think may or may not contain militants. If the IDF doesn't have a Spec-Op unit that performs this mission, it should.

This is of course if the IDF is interested in actually making progress and killing militants, instead of just praying they hit someone with a bomb.

In urban warfare, the selection and killing of targets is much more difficult than being in the open, especially since Hamas and related groups launch and then run into buildings. If you've seen Gaza, this is the most highly condensed population area in the world, so any military strike is automatically going to have some civilian casualties unless they're very lucky.

Secondly, according to both the Israeli government and the IDF, many strikes were called off because it was deemed that the collateral damage would be too high.

Thirdly, the IDF definitely has special ops, and they have been utilized in many missions, including in dealing with Hamas. However, special ops are "special", thus implying and meaning that they have only limited capabilities.

Finally, a large challenge for Israel is the same problem we had in Vietnam (I was opposed to that war, btw), namely the use of hit-and-run tactics along with the ability to blend in with the population that was used by the VC and now by Hamas. Drones help, but even they will amount to civilian casualties as we're not talking about pea-shooters here.

 

[Alceste]

Some? Do you expect only some soldier casualties using that strategy? I would expect a lot of soldier casualties.

Your course of action doesn't seem viable at all.

Tell that to bin Laden.

 

[Alceste]

The US Airforce has several ways it identifies and engages ground targets from the Air. One of the main ones is the use of a pseudo-special Ops group called TAC-P. Stands for Tactical Air Control Party. This is usually a small unit, usually no more than 2-3 people. Their role is to assist in Air to Ground engagement. They identify and assess targets to see if these targets can be safely engaged, while minimizing any form of collateral damage. they're utilized with air attacks from fixed wing/rotary aircraft, as well as drones.

They are actually very effective. A lot of times they have eyes on target through the entire engagement, until it's either destroyed, or the engagement is called off due to circumstances, such as civilians in the area, or the human targets leave.

This is one tactic that the IDF could employ, instead of just dropping bombs on targets they think may or may not contain militants. If the IDF doesn't have a Spec-Op unit that performs this mission, it should.

This is of course if the IDF is interested in actually making progress and killing militants, instead of just praying they hit someone with a bomb.

You're hired.

 

[Alceste]

... according to both the Israeli government and the IDF...

Do you see any problems of credibility with this phrase at all? Just curious.

 

[RitalinOhD]

In urban warfare, the selection and killing of targets is much more difficult than being in the open, especially since Hamas and related groups launch and then run into buildings. If you've seen Gaza, this is the most highly condensed population area in the world, so any military strike is automatically going to have some civilian casualties unless they're very lucky.

Secondly, according to both the Israeli government and the IDF, many strikes were called off because it was deemed that the collateral damage would be too high.

Thirdly, the IDF definitely has special ops, and they have been utilized in many missions, including in dealing with Hamas. However, special ops are "special", thus implying and meaning that they have only limited capabilities.

Finally, a large challenge for Israel is the same problem we had in Vietnam (I was opposed to that war, btw), namely the use of hit-and-run tactics along with the ability to blend in with the population that was used by the VC and now by Hamas. Drones help, but even they will amount to civilian casualties as we're not talking about pea-shooters here.

Understood, but you're aware that the US utilized TAC-P in Iraq quite effectively correct? In the same setting as Gaza. The best part is Israel has much more experience fighting a guerilla war than the US had 13 years ago. Still does. Hell, Israel spent decades fighting that type of war.

And I know Israel has special ops, what I am unsure of is if they have a TAC-P type of unit. I'm not overly familiar with their commandos. Also, the TAC-P was only 1 suggestion. It's by far the end all be all solution.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Do you see any problems of credibility with this phrase at all? Just curious.

I see potential problems. They are the same problems I see with the virulent demonization of Israeli forces and sources.

 

[metis]

Understood, but you're aware that the US utilized TAC-P in Iraq quite effectively correct?

But do you remember "shock and awe" and why it was described in such terminology? How many Iraqis were killed and how many were displaced by our actions? [btw, I was opposed to that war as well]

Gotta go for today.

 

[RitalinOhD]

But do you remember "shock and awe" and why it was described in such terminology? How many Iraqis were killed and how many were displaced by our actions? [btw, I was opposed to that war as well]

Gotta go for today.

Well, I can't say I agreed with that whole approach. And yes, to say way too many Iraqis died needlessly would be an understatement.

However, George Bush is quite possibly one of the dumbest humans to ever live. I put most of the blame on him and his terrible advisors.

 

[CMike]

I'm gonna let you reread this and see if you can figure out why it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Try reading slower.

 

[Alceste]

I see potential problems. They are the same problems I see with the virulent demonization of Israeli forces and sources.

Simmer down. Media literacy is a good thing. I've been skeptical of press releases from people with a vested interest in the subject matter since early childhood, and for good reason. Lying to the masses is a multi-billion dollar industry globally, and those ******** are REALLY good at what they do. It would be utterly absurd to assume that Israel's government and military is honest when no other government on earth practices frank and full revelation of the facts to which they are privy.

Hell's bells. Demonization? I've heard Netanyahu state loud and proud (after asking for the camera to be turned off) that he personally uses deceptive language to manipulate the Western media, undermine the peace process and evade his legal obligations. (You have too. I sent you a link.)

Whatever politicians and military generals say when the cameras are rolling is less than worthless. You of all people should know that by now.