- cross-posted to:
- worldnewsnonus@lemy.lol
- cross-posted to:
- worldnewsnonus@lemy.lol
The Israeli military says its Northern Command has approved operational plans for war with Lebanon.
Israel is ready for an “all-out war” in Lebanon and has plans approved for an offensive targeting Hezbollah, officials have said.
Israel and Hezbollah have been engaged in border fighting since shortly after the start of the war on Gaza, following the October 7 attacks on Israel. The confrontation is increasingly expanding, with both sides saying they are ready to go to war.
More than 400 people have been killed in Lebanon, including journalists and paramedics, over the past eight months, with 25 deaths in Israel. At least 90,000 people have been displaced in Lebanon, and more than 60,000 have been forced from their homes in northern Israel.
Forever wars only work against enemies that can’t really do anything back.
Israel is about to enter the ‘find out’ stage.
They will end up finding out that the US will absolutely have their back despite the genocide of Palestinians so that the US can keep their middle east ally. You know, like that one asshole who always starts fights because their big friends help out when they start getting their ass kicked.
If they do, that will very likely pull in Iran, Russia, and now with the recent agreement, possibly North Korea.
The US is not as big as they were in the late nineties and early aughts.
The US navy has almost as many aircraft as all of Russia.
The US Army has more aircraft than all of Russia.
The US Airforce has more aircraft than the US navy and army.
That’s just planes and helicopters.
If you think any of the countries you talked about are a serious threat to the US outside of nuclear war, then you’re sorely mistaken about how truly insane US defense spending is.
That’s true, but I think what recent conflicts have demonstrated is that total firepower isn’t everything. Ukraine was significantly outmatched by Russia and hung on, even before western weapons shipments. Hamas, estimated at something like 30k fighters strong and armed with small arms and light rockets/artillery, continues to fight effectively against the US armed IDF. Then we have historical examples like the US war in Vietnam, or the US failures to fight insurgents in Iraq (with the tide only changing after deliberate hearts and minds political/social strategy).
The whole “we have a lot of planes” thing is just defense contractor marketing. How that translates on the battlefield, especially when the civilian population despises you, is not great.
A war like that would devestate Isreal and drag the US into a true quagmire. It would sap a tremendous amount of resources and leave the US more vulnerable to the china’s and Russias of the world.
Not to mention our good old buddy international terrorism, which Bidens unwavering support of Bibi is already making us a prime target for. Shit would be fucked.
The scenario I described is World War 3.
That what Bibi, and Biden with his unwavering support, are playing with.
NevermindNoMind already made this point to you but it bears repeating, Money spent doesn’t translate into combat effectiveness. In fact, it tends to actually go against it. EDIT: Or, more specifically, money spent on individual weapon systems. The best weapon is the cheap one that can be mass produced, even if there are better weapon systems.
Ansarallah has been clear that part of their missile strategy is to eat into our budgets. They’ve been winning by that strategy. The total cost of their drones/missiles used against the US was in the several hundred thousand range, and the estimate for the missile defense ammo the US has used is around a billion dollars, and that was several months ago. Even the US can’t compete with that cost disparity.
Secondly, it doesn’t matter how many ships you have if you can’t resupply them with ammo. America outsourced its production capabilities. It didn’t outsource its weapon production facilities, but we can’t convert the facilities we don’t have any more to support increased ammo production, and we don’t have enough weapons factories to supply the requisite ammo for continued operations in a modern war.
Third, your usage of “just planes and helicopters” is stupid beyond description. I am not willing to agree with you that the US will have air superiority in all theaters, which sadly is what its military doctrine both requires and assumes. (Which, by the by, is why the NATO trained Ukrainians did so poorly with their spring offensive. It’s not their fault they couldn’t use tactics that assume air superiority that they didn’t have, but jesus the NATO people switched to racism right quick to explain the failure.) However, other countries doctrine assumes that air superiority won’t be theirs.
Iran, for example, assumes they won’t have air superiority from the start and so they spent most of their engineering time on missile technology. The Russians have tried to compete with their aircraft, but focused mainly on their G2A anti-air defenses. Now, even with Syria and Ukraine, there still isn’t a lot of info on the effectiveness of the S400 in against the American Airforce.
It also doesn’t account for the huge disparity in drone deployment capability which is frankly the future of the next war. And the US fails at this completely. The two main US drones cost 30 and 40 million a piece when the name of the game here is CHEAP. Frankly, Iran and now Russia beat our pants off on this topic. Even Hezbollah and Ansarallah have confirmed US drone kills. This is the scariest part. Culturally in the American military right now, being involved with drones was not seen as a career advancer, and definitely not something you’d want to put money into serious research.
This is more than I meant to write in response to a comment that basically amounts to a middle-schooler pounding their chest while screaming “My daddy can beat up your daddy” so I’m going to end it here.
If you think money translates to military readiness and sound doctrine, then you’re not thinking about this very hard at all.
But the war in Ukraine has demonstrated that US stockpiles of ammunition are woefully low. Doesn’t matter how many planes you have or that your soldiers have the best weapons if they run out of missiles and bullets.
I mean this is purely conjecture but I would be very surprised if the US military did not in fact have huge stockpiles of ammunition that they are simply not willing to give to ukraine explicitly so they can be ready for an actual US deployment
Right that’s just the stock of old/obsolete/close-to-expiring munitions and equipment we’re willing to spare.
Exactly. The US doctrine is and has been to counter two foes/theatres at once. That’s the baseline that still includes the civil defense.
There’s a reason why the US has the largest, second largest, and fourth largest air forces in the world.
We’re experts at logistics and palletization. We bring the war to you!
Relevant Beau of the Fifth Column:
https://youtu.be/9G39T4z0eiI?si=ffd2dmZUGIJDdB6f
Half-assed support from the US isn’t because of ammunition shortfalls, it’s because the US will only give just enough to drag out the war and drain Russia as much as possible.
Ammunition for artillery that they don’t use by doctrine.
They have a ton of eg. plane ammo, but they don’t give planes to Ukraine.
https://youtu.be/9G39T4z0eiI?si=ffd2dmZUGIJDdB6f
deleted by creator
I’m curious what you mean. Hasn’t Hezbollah been targeting Israel for decades? There’s already been the South Lebanon Conflict and the 2008 Lebanon War.
What will they find out that they didn’t already know?
You need to understand that most people’s understanding of the conflicts in the Middle East started on October 7, 2023.
Many users here start their understanding from about a week after October 7.
I think if they do a full-blown invasion, they’ll find out that Hezbollah (and quite possibly the regular Lebanese military) is a much bigger, experienced, and sophisticated enemy than Hamas. Also, an invasion of Lebanon could easily attract third parties (like Syria-based militias or even other countries).
If it’s a limited, restrained operation to create a buffer zone, it might not lead to escalation. There’s apparently a peace deal on the table that would accomplish just that but Hezbollah wants Israel to agree to the “ceasefire for hostages” deal in Gaza first.
But let’s not forget that Netanyahu is going to jail on corruption charges as soon as he isn’t prime minister. He’s alienated everyone except the extremist parties on the right so, ultimately, they’ll be able to control policy just by threatening to leave the fragile coalition government. So, I don’t know if I’d bet on a limited, restrained operation.
Oh they know well. Israel has invaded Lebanon twice (at least?) and both times they failed in a humiliating way.
The situation is not static at all.
Hezbollah has significantly improved upon their capabilities during that time period. Also, as a corollary to this, weapons technology in general has significantly advanced in a form that brings various capabilities to state actors that didn’t use to have the tech or financial base to support them.
Guidance systems, avionics, electronics, and drones are changing the face of warfare in a way that removes a lot of the tech advantages rich nations had over poorer nations. But, the richer nations (And this isn’t just about Israel, but most of the western states) are sticking their heads in their sand because their weapons manufactures are used to being used more for laundering tax payer money to the right people then for making great weapons. The main drones for the US cost between 30-40 million EACH!
Furthermore, Israel is going through all of the copium that settler colonialist societies go through when their martial superiority is starting to come into question. They clutch harder to their beliefs that make them feel secure. Israel withdrew in 2006 and declared themselves victors when it was obvious that they were not victors at all. Now, that is all that Israel remembers about 2006. That they won. That is what they truly believe.
There are a lot of delusions that are about to break here. That is why I say that if they try with Hezbollah, that it will be a ‘Find Out’ stage.
EDIT: Also, people tend to use the wrong measurement for what they consider to make an army strong. One of the most important factors is a willingness for a military to take causalities. There are very few armies stronger than Hezbollah by this measurement, whereas Israel has been very weak on this front since the early 2000’s. Having a conscript army will do that.
Who exactly are they going to fight that’s going to make them find out? The only powers in the region that are threat to them are Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. None of which they’re going to fight.
LOL.
Yeah, that’s why the north is evacuated and Hezbollah is striking the north of Israel with impunity. How’s that Iron Dome working in the North?
Secondly, Hezbollah is probably, pound for pound, the most competent military force in the region right now. You want to discount that to feel safe, well, that’s part of the fuck around and find out. Thirdly, Iran will have this as an Casus Belli to enter the conflict, and the PMU’s in Iraq have already stated they will invade in the event of an invasion of Lebanon.
This is what makes it clear that you are not a serious person in the area. Saudi Arabia couldn’t beat the poorest nation in the world with American planes, Columbian mercenaries, American refueling, and American intelligence all while starving the nation in an attempted genocide.
Saudia Arabia as a regional military power? That’s a bad joke. I can’t believe you wrote that with a straight face. They were literally beat by teenagers in flip flops.