Recent Items

Fog of War and Narrative, Israel and Hezbollah Attacks Edition

Posted on by

Forgive me for trying to dig into a story, of the exchange of strikes by Israel and Hezbollah a few days ago. Like far too many conflict-related accounts, the initial accounts depicted the attacks as a major escalation, possibly presaging a wider war, then dialed that back, way back, to the degree that one wonders if at least some press outlets were trying to memory hole the events. Confirming this perhaps unduly cynical view was that the Financial Times did not mention these attacks on the landing page of the Financial Times mere hours after they occurred. By contrast, the Wall Street Journal did make it their leading piece, with the title Israel, Hezbollah Signal De-Escalation After Predawn Bombardments. We’ll discuss it

Recall that Israel and its allies, the US, France, and the UK, have been waiting to see what if anything Iran and Hezbollah will do in the way of retaliation after Israel killed senior Hezbollah military official Fuad Shukr in Beirut and the lead negotiator from the Hamas side in the not-going-anywhere Gaza ceasefire talks, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran when he was a guest attending the inauguration of incoming president Masoud Pezeshkian. The assassination of Haniyeh is particularly significant since he was from the political, not military, wing and was widely depicted as one of the most moderate voices in Hamas. He has been replaced in the negotiations by military leader Yaha Sinwar.

With Iran, the Anglosphere press has been faithfully repeating the spin that stern words have cowed Iran into inaction. But a sharp letter from some EU states along those lines elicited a tart response:

Iranian commentators like Professor Sayed Mirandi also stress that Iran most assuredly will retaliate, but at a time of its choosing.

Even though it is difficult to be sure what exactly happened in the mutual attacks on Sunday, the more complete-seeming accounts indicate that both Iran and Hezbollah intend to control the escalation and will not be provoked into rash moves. Their strategy has been and continues to be a war of attrition, wearing down not just Israeli and US capabilities, but Israel’s will. The Axis of Resistance has studied Israel over a very long period, and has taken stock of the fact that Israel and the US are set up to wage short, airpower heavy conflicts. Thus it should come as no surprise that even the Western media is chronicling how Israel has failed to make much of a dent in Hamas after nearly 11 months of engagement (see Simplicius for lots of detail).

The psychological toll is even greater since the premise of Israel was that it was a place where Jews could be safe. Larry Wilkerson in a recent interview with Nima emphasized that Israel and the US need to restore the image of Israel as the fiercest and most formidable force in the region, even though one wonders how that can be done. Slaughtering Palestinian women and children does not rate.

A remarkable confirmation of that view came in a op-ed in Haaretz last week, Israel Will Collapse Within a Year if the War of Attrition Against Hamas and Hezbollah Continues by former IDF General Yitzhak Brik. Key sections:

I assume that Defense Minister Gallant already understands that the war has lost its purpose. Israel is sinking deeper into the Gazan mud, losing more and more soldiers as they get killed or wounded, without any chance of achieving the war’s main goal: bringing down Hamas.

The country really is galloping towards the edge of an abyss. If the war of attrition against Hamas and Hezbollah continues, Israel will collapse within no more than a year.

Terror attacks are intensifying in the West Bank and inside the country, the reservist army is voting with its feet following recurring mobilizations of combat soldiers, and the economy is crashing. Israel has also become a pariah state, prompting economic boycotts and an embargo on arms shipments.

We are also losing our social resilience, as the growing hatred between different parts of the nation threatens to ignite and bring to its destruction from within.
Sinwar and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah understand Israel’s dire situation. What Israel could have achieved earlier with a hostage/cease-fire agreement has become impossible due to the new conditions that Netanyahu introduced into the proposed deal…

In light of the new situation, a threat by Iran and Hezbollah to attack Israel in response to the killing of the two senior officials is materializing in the region. The use of assassinations is a step threatening to ignite the entire Middle East, decided upon by the three pyromaniacs, Netanyahu, Gallant and Chief of Staff Halevi, without thinking about the significance of their irresponsible decisions.

So Israelis have been waiting for what the Axis of Resistance will do. That anxiety is wearing. That’s confirmed in the Journal story we mentioned earlier, which holds back on the details on the strikes till the end. And even then they are a bit thin. From the Journal:

After a heavy exchange of fire early Sunday between Israel and Iran-backed Shiite militia Hezbollah, the regional military powers signaled a desire to avoid a spiral that could lead to a wider Mideast conflict.

Let’s stop here. That seems to be US de-escalatory messaging coloring the Journal’s account. See by contrast:

Mind you, both Hezbollah and Iran do want to avoid a wider war, but continued retaliation, which Hezbollah has said is coming, risks that. The Journal argues that the two sides might settle back into tit for tat exchanges. From much later in the Journal account:

Sunday’s fighting got under way before dawn, when Israel’s military hit dozens of targets in Lebanon in what it called a pre-emptive strike. The U.S. and Israel had recently obtained intelligence that Hezbollah planned to attack early Sunday, U.S. officials said. Israel briefed the U.S. on its plans before going ahead….

Israel knocked out about two-thirds of the projectiles that Hezbollah planned to launch Sunday morning, a senior Israeli official said. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said all of the drones launched at a “strategic target in the center of the country” were intercepted.

One Israeli sailor was killed by shrapnel from an Israeli rocket interceptor that exploded over his boat, a military spokesman said. Hezbollah said two of its members were killed.

Nasrallah said the attack had two phases—a barrage of 340 rockets at northern Israel and a launch of attack drones farther into the country. Among the targets was the headquarters of Israel’s spy agency, Mossad, just north of Tel Aviv, Nasrallah and a person familiar with the matter said. Nasrallah said Hezbollah also targeted a Tel Aviv-area base of the Israeli military’s Unit 8200, which is responsible for signals intelligence and cyber.

One notices that Israel says that it shot down most but not all of Hezbollah rockets and drones, but the story is silent on whether the attack on the Mossad HQ and Unit 8200 outpost had any success. Note that much earlier, the Journal quoted Hezbollah leader Nasrallah:

“We said this was a preliminary response,” Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said in an address Sunday. “If we assess that the impact of the preliminary response was not satisfactory, we will act accordingly. For now we consider that the response is over, and the country can take a breath.”

One has to think whether Nasrallah deemed the attack to be satisfactory or not would depend on the harm done to the Mossad and Unit 8200 operations. The Times of Israel quote Nasrallah stating that the Glilot military base, which houses the 8200 intelligence group, was the main target

Hezbollah published footage supporting the idea that they did damage the Unit 8200 facility:

Even though other targets were secondary, it appears Hezbollah inflicted additional damage (there was much ridicule on Twitter that Hezbollah torched a chicken coop but the fires went beyond that):

The Times of Israel reported ‘We don’t count’: Northern leaders complain military only acts when Tel Aviv is targeted, noting that the mayors of three communities vowed to “cut off contact with the government”. I am not sure why that amounts to a threat.

The Journal is also curiously silent on what the Israel pre-emptive strikes amounted to. It gets credit for not dignifying claims like this:

We’ll unpack soon what was wrong about this claim. A less excitable version of the Israel attack from the Financial Times:

Israel began its attack shortly before 5am local time, deploying 100 jets to bomb about 40 sites in Lebanon after identifying what it said were preparations by Hizbollah “to fire missiles and rockets”.

The presentation on Monday by Alastair Crooke on Judge Napolitano fills in some key gaps in these accounts. Starting at 3:10:

Whatever you’ve read is almost certainly wrong. It’s a narrative…..First of all, it all happened at around 4 o’clock in the morning on Sunday. The Israelis started to see people moving in Lebanon and moving towards platforms. Hezbollah was planning the operation to fire drones and rockets at 5:15 on Sunday morning. And Israel started to, an attack, a direct attack. It involved I think about a hundred aircraft.

But contrary to what the Israeli propagandists at the IDF are saying, and I know this not from Hezbollah but I know this from inside Lebanon, people who are on the ground there, it was chaotic twenty minutes. Israel just bombed various valleys where they imagined the ballistic missiles were. But they’d been cleared out of there some time ago. There were no ballistic missiles. You can check that, there are people on the ground who know what’s happened. There are no missiles. So when they said they destroyed thousands of missile launchers, this is a complete lie. Because first of all, there are no missiles, no ballistic missiles, no large missiles south of the Litani River. What you have is drones and small rockets. And none of these have launchers. And they destroyed none of them. It was just a show, a show of force and it only lasted about twenty minutes…..

[6:40] What we have seen is the war fragmenting in different ways. First of all, it fragmented with the killing of Fuad Shukr in Beirut just before Haniyeh was killed in Tehran. And for that reason, the actual operations of the Resistance changed. Because as far as Hezbollah was concerned, the killing of Fuad crossed all red lines, all the understandings, the careful balances were broken by that. And they opened a separate account, quite separate to what was happening in Gaza. And they opened a separate account.

And so what happened in this weekend was about settling that account with Israel. And it stuck very carefully to the equation, the war equations, that they had between Israel and Hezbollah. The didn’t go out of the equations. So if you like they attacked in Tel Aviv the Mossad headquarters and the headquarters of 8200, equivalent roughly to NSA in the US, if you like, it’s the communications intercept. Because that was the decision-making if you like structure that led Fuad Shukr’s killing in Beirut. And they did in Tel Aviv because they killed him in Beirut. There was a complete equivalence if you like in that.

And one phase was three hundred and twenty rockets. Of course, it’s been played down. I can’t tell you exactly how many were shot down or didn’t land properly. But they were targeted not on people or civilians, they were targeted on military bases and very precisely on air defense systems. You can see that.

And then immediately, 4 o’clock, the Israelis came in bombing, pretty randomly, in the areas where they thought Hezbollah would have their ballistic missiles but as I said there were none, they were north of the Litani [River]. They were sending a message to Hezbollah by not going beyond the Litani, that the equation with the war with Israel was still holding. And that’s an important point. The Israelis were signaling, “OK, you hit Tel Aviv for Shukr but we are not going to hit Beirut.”

Note that the “precision-guided” in the tweet we flagged earlier as dubious = ballistic missiles.

Crooke shortly thereafter report that the reason the Western press has no reports of damage in Israel was that the government put out a complete ban on that information, confirmed independently by the Palestine Chronicle.

Given the news blackout, it’s impossible to confirm claims like this, but they can’t be ruled out either:

And Nasrallah seems exceptionally pleased with himself.

If the IDF actually thought there were ballistic missiles in those valleys south of the Litani, that also points to a pretty big Israel intelligence failure.

Needless to say, this somewhat long-winded account illustrates what an informational hall of mirrors we live in, and why it’s hard to take any reports from Team US at face value.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Subscribe to Post Comments
47 comments

  1. ChrisFromGA

    We are now at the point where we have to assume that everything our government says is a lie and that the press is their captured mouthpiece.

    1. Screwball

      I agree, but part of the problem is way too many people still believe them. Even to the point they think the government is the only one telling the truth.

    2. Louis Fyne

      So we’re right back to 1968? except the 20 y.o. “hippie” Democrat is now a comfortable neocon-neoliberal boomer retiree cheering on Team MSNBC.

  2. Altandmain

    The Israeli military, the IDF is clearly a lot weaker than the image they’ve been propping up. The difficult reality for Israel is that peace was their only real chance at a long term survival as a settler colony. That’s long gone now. They made the decision to wage war and on the Palestinians, genocide.

    Another consideration is that the US and Israel don’t have a lot of magazine depth, that is to say the stockpiles of ammunition that would be required to maintain a prolonged conflict. Thanks to neoliberal economics, the US no longer has the industrial base either to make enough. Then there’s the matter that Western air defenses have performed poorly in both Ukraine and the Middle East.

    They’ve reached the limits of propaganda here. Using propaganda only works when the military strength is actually able to back up the propaganda.

    Iran and Hezbollah don’t want war because they are responsible leaders that try to govern themselves in the interest of their nations (Lebanon in the case of Hezbollah). They also want to minimize the amount of risk for nuclear weapons being used.

    However, we’ve reached a point where they have been provoked to where they feel compelled to defend themselves.

    There are other cracks. Note for example the number of people who have left Israel. Usually it is the rich that do this because they have the money. If this isn’t obvious, they are not willing to fight and die for Israel. In other words, it’s not their land. They are settlers. Note the stark contrast with how the Palestinians are willing to die for their land or if you watch the Scott Ritter show, he recently interviewed a member of the Russian Duma that noted that the Ukrainian attack into Kursk resulted in a surge of military enlistment in his hometown.

    1. Polar Socialist

      I think you sort of hit the nail in the head. Regardless of the details what is obvious to any observer is that Hezbollah, basically a NGO, has enough fire- and willpower to deter Israel – with allegedly the best military in the world – from a direct war.

      Just like the Houthi vs US Navy, what we have here is a national high-tech army supported by US money and weapons afraid of a militant faction in one of the poorest countries in the Mediterranean region. The optics, should MSM chose to show them, would be bad.

    2. Ana

      Not just the IDF but the US military as well. The NAFO crowd keep crowing about Russia getting bogged down in Ukraine, but it’s very hard to imagine a nation as hollowed out as the US handling that situation nearly as well under similar circumstances. I mean, the US lost in Iraq and Afghanistan (the latter under MUCH more favorable circumstances than what the USSR faced there).

      Israel is and always was just a modern crusader state for the west. That they roped some unfortunate Jews into going along with it is a tragedy on many levels, but the reality is that the country is not destined to be a permanent presence there. It might not be gone any time soon, but its days are as numbered as the Empire’s.

  3. XXYY

    Yves, I know Naked Capitalism is primarily an economics site, but thank you so much for doing this kind of exceptional work on analyzing political and war events. As you say, the traditional media is becoming increasingly useless, and it’s great to have other non-traditional outlets like yours stepping into the breach when we very much need it.

    Very much appreciated.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      Aaw, very kind! But keep in mind that this is an exercise in method, as in essentially a media analysis, even if the material is war related.

  4. gcw919

    The U.S. has enabled Israel to the point where they don’t know how to control themselves. This horrific genocide serves no purpose, other than a visceral urge to slaughter people they consider beneath themselves.
    A society should be judged by how it treats people and the environment. This current genocide condemns the U.S. as a failure, and all the “hope and joy” we are hearing from the DNC rings hollow when thousands of children are being decimated so Israel can carry out its “right to defend itself.” And this begs the question, Why does the U.S. have to defend Israel, when as I understand it, we have no formal agreement, such as found in NATO?

    1. Chris Cosmos

      As we all should know the answer to your question is: money, money, money! Zionist oligarchs dominate the Washington foreign policy community. Just ask them in a private moment at any time in that past half century. Money, as everyone says, talks and bullshit walks. Zionism is a cult and their radicals are in power in Israel and honestly and they believe that Palestinians (and Muslims in general) are less than human.

  5. Louis Fyne

    It only took 65 to 75 years but the Arab insurgency has finally learned to copy the Viet Cong playbook: full-press simmer of constant asymmetric warfare.

    Presumably most of this is due to the Iranian “long game” of extreme strategic patience.

    With the Arab Street viewing Shia Iran as the defender of ordinary (Sunni) Muslims, we probably won’t see the real endgame until both Palestine independence and a prominent western-backed Sunni monarchy gets overthrown—-King Abdullah or House of Saud? Place your bets!

    1. hk

      Probably Abdullah. MbS has surprised me greatly with his survival skills–he has hedged his bets, joining BRICS and making nice with Iran. I think the Jordanian monarchy is doomed–so far from God and so close to Israel and all that.

    2. Lefty Godot

      Not a monarch, but what happens in Egypt if Sisi has a sudden dire misfortune? Sisi and Abdullah are the two most obvious US puppets, where the Saudis appear to be playing multiple sides off against each other to stay afloat.

  6. Louis Fyne

    (not even pretending to be close to presenting authoritative info)…..

    some accounts (pro-Palestinian) that I find credible and prudent to publish info labeled the purported 8200 unit death as false wishful thinking.

    Your mileage may vary.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      I in no way presented it as such and take offense at your straw manning. I made clear that that claim was highly speculative but could not be 100% ruled out due to the blackout, as in the blackout has the effect of promoting/enabling precisely that sort of rumor.

      1. Louis Fyne

        i intended no offense or allegation.

        i threw out my own disclaimer that I was in no way pretending to be authoratative with my own counter-factual

  7. Balan Aroxdale

    Given the news blackout,

    The IDF has in fact imposed censorship on Israel in the wake of this attack. But it must also be noted that western MSM outlets, by and large, also obey IDF diktats when it comes to covering stories. Don’t expect to see stories about damage to Israeli bases showing up in any western news outlets.

    1. nippersdad

      We will have to wait for the next batch of Hezbollah drone videos to find out all about that. I imagine they are out there in force making them right now.

    2. Yves Smith Post author

      Thanks for that addition. I had assumed (but did not state) they would not make independent reports on damage due to lack of the ability to do much more than take dictation from official sources That’s pretty much the state of MSM reporting here and they would have way fewer reporters/stringers there, proportionally.

      1. Offtrail

        All media in Israel, both foreign and domestic, are subject to military censorship. There is no prior restraint – stories don’t have to be cleared by the censor before being published. But if a news outlet violates a censorship directive such as the prohibition on reporting on any recent damage to the Unit 8200 headquarters, the reporter is liable to having their visa revoked, and the outlet itself may be banned from Israel. Western media meekly play along, and their readership is none the wiser.

    3. gk

      They’ve always had censorship. A good example is the Meron Northern air control base. Having been there, I searched for it a few years ago. There is a very detailed image on Google Earth, but otherwise almost nothing. As the tallest peak in Israel, Google seemed to have a lot of pictures attached, but they were always of views from the peak, never of the peak itself. The only views of the peak were from sites like Palestine Remembered.

  8. ilsm

    Generating 100 sorties, with a mix of F-35, F-16, and F-15 (maybe too expensive) is quite an undertaking, and would be hard for several USAF tactical wings.

    The number of aircraft parading through generation spots and the traffic to and from with parts, munitions and technicians. Quite a traffic control job.

    Short distances suggest some of the later sorties were combat turns. The IDAF is pretty good!

    They probably got limited results.

  9. nippersdad

    That Alistair Crooke interview was very good. A sortie of a hundred jets (who knew they had that many?) and all of the bombs and air defense must have been very expensive for the Israelis. A few more of those interchanges and they will start to resemble Ukraine, and for a military that is over reliant upon bombs and Patriot type things that could get very embarrassing very quickly.

    1. vao

      Another crucial aspect is that those modern jets cannot sustain numerous operations indefinitely and require extensive maintenance after a certain number of flight-hours. If Israel keeps sending them en masse to bombard Lebanon and Syria, or on long-distance raids against Yemen (or Iran), the availability of its air fleet is going to degrade progressively.

      We shall know whether a critical point has been reached when the USA and European nations start transferring (selling, donating, lending, leasing) aircraft to Israel to replace those units that must be grounded for refit.

      This is probably another drawback of armies relying on very powerful, high performance, technically advanced weaponry: they are good for short, intensive warfare that overwhelms the enemy with speedy offensives relying upon technological superiority, but are unsuited for protracted, attritional warfare that they cannot sustain because of the heavy maintenance requirements. Alternatively, the latter kind of conflict would require an enormous fleet of high-tech equipment that can be rotated as needed (or an industrial scale capacity for the fast production of spare units). According to Wikipedia, Israel has between 403 and 429 F-15/F-16/F-35 of all kinds in service; I do not know whether this is sufficient for that kind of heavy-usage+rotation of equipment.

      1. Polar Socialist

        Should Hezbollah acquire air-defense systems like the Houthi have, it would be a game changer. Maybe serious enough to trigger an existential crisis in Israel.

      2. ilsm

        GAO reports annually, USAF has not kept it F-15 C/D, F-16’s,at or above mission capable “goals” for zero of the last 11,years. F-35A 2 for 8. That means 50% of aircraft on any given day cannot do all its assigned missions.

        F-35 has not passed all operational suitability tests because it breaks a lot! Its fully mission capable rate is lower than the older fighters.

        USAF could “lend” fighters…..

        1. The Rev Kev

          Pretty sure I read a month or two ago of the US transferring F-35s to Israel but don’t know if they did or not. The F-35s that the Israelis fly have all been heavily modded and it might be difficult to integrate US F-35s into their inventory.

      3. nippersdad

        Between four hundred and four hundred thirty of them! Looks like Hezbollah needs to invest in some caltrops to drop on Israeli runways from their “invisible” drone fleets. Can you imagine? A hundred million dollar aircraft grounded by a few twenty cent pieces of barbed wire.

        The taxpayers would not be pleased.

        1. Muralidhar Rao

          Not really, because the runways can be repaired pretty rapidly. I read that as Russia bombs the runways in Ukraine, Ukraine repairs them immediately. So bombing the runways is just a nuisance factor.

  10. Chris Cosmos

    I think that attritional warfare is the name of the game in the Israeli theater of war. This could last for years. Clearly the imperial government in Washington, does not want Israel to lead it into a full-scale war with Iran while Israel like Ukraine is begging for US involvement. My guess is that the Pentagon sees the writing on the wall in both places and will not take the bait to enter WWIII. Why is that? I believe the finance oligarchs who, in the US, always have the final word on anything major, have let it be known that they do not want any chance of WWIII.

    Iran and its allies know this and are thus going to wage a very low key conflict. Won’t help the Gazans and those on the WB but this will be the first time that I can remember that the Israeli state is in serious trouble–it cannot afford a slow-war over time.

    Also, does anyone know what each side wants at the end of this conflict? Two-state “solution” is impossible so what has Iran proposed as an end point?

    1. ilsm

      My theory is the resistance does not want anything to do with full scale war! They are doing the “death of 1000 cuts” on the US!

      At some point US runs out of stored munitions and cannot produce in numbers that the resistance does today!

      At that point the US is cornered just as US is trying to corner Russia (Putin has turned the table) by surrounding it with NATO weapons holders.

      It is possible someone in a think tank will recognize (as Hitler did), that the resistance will soon be too strong and to pre-empt start WW III.

      Agree the financial interests would rather the resistance erode the US/NATO, without a big war and massive nuclear devastation.

      The hope is on mercantile China!

      1. Karl

        Agreed. I thought this point of Yves is illuminating:

        The Axis of Resistance has studied Israel over a very long period, and has taken stock of the fact that Israel and the US are set up to wage short, airpower heavy conflicts.

        Unfortunately for Israel, right now is not a good time to ask the U.S. to join its March of Folly to war with Iran. There is little likelihood it could be contained to short bursts of air power. We are, politically, in no mood for another long war of attrition with U.S. troops. Politically, we can’t handle 100 cuts to say nothing of 1000 cuts. So, Israel will need to do the fighting. But reportedly, the exhausted IDF can hardly prosecute a bigger war of any duration, and Israel lacks the economic means.

        All of the above also applies to Putin’s strategy for success in Ukraine: make lots of incremental advances over a long period of time and eventually the U.S. will tire out. Similarly for China’s strategy for Taiwan.

        As demonstrated in Iraq and Afghanistan, two distant and simultaneous wars of attrition are hard to sustain, let alone win. Ditto for Israel and Ukraine. The U.S. is in one serious corner with only one exit–diplomacy. The Asia Pacific nations would be well advised to start hedging their bets now, starting with Taiwan (while it can) or (eventually) it will drop into China’s lap like a ripe apple.

    2. hk

      Wondering the same. I think we can be certain what Israel wants, but do Iranians, Lebanese, and Palestinians (of different factions) even agree on their goals, besides “defeating” Israel? Seeing as that defeating Israel has long seemed de facto impossible, I’d guess that they hadn’t thought about the aftermath often. What exactly does defeating Israel even mean, from their perspectives?

    3. Balan Aroxdale

      My guess is that the Pentagon sees the writing on the wall in both places and will not take the bait to enter WWIII.

      That decision lies with the politicans, not the Pentagon. If the President and Congress decide to enter a war to save Israel (they will), the role of the Pentagon is to carry out those instructions.

  11. Synoia

    This appears to be untrue:

    I assume that Defense Minister Gallant already understands that the war has lost its purpose. Israel is sinking deeper into the Gazan mud, losing more and more soldiers as they get killed or wounded, without any chance of achieving the war’s main goal: bringing down Hamas.

    The comment appears to ignore the position in some Israeli circles to remove all Arabs from Gaaz ,
    An objective could be for Israel to rid itself Garza to extinguish any Claim by Garza and to expand their control of a very large oil and gas oil field on the west side of the Nile estuary.

    1. tegnost

      Amos Hochstein is on the case…
      from 2020…
      https://www.kyivpost.com/post/10696

      FTA…Kobal added that Naftogaz needs support now more than ever — Hochstein’s departure is sending a bad signal, which some see as his attempt to flee from responsibilities he had at Naftogaz.

      He’s a bomb thrower

  12. Godfree Roberts

    At $150,000 apiece, the 340 Iron Domes fired to intercept 340 rockets cost Israel $50 million. The damage cost extra.
    At $20,000 each, the Katyusha barrage cost Hezbollah $7 million and killed their top spy and blinded their EW and their pretensions to invincibility.
    Incidentally, good footage of the (very extensive) attacks was on Telegram in real time

  13. The Rev Kev

    ‘The Axis of Resistance has studied Israel over a very long period, and has taken stock of the fact that Israel and the US are set up to wage short, airpower heavy conflicts.’

    Netanyahu may want to attack Iran and start a general war in the middle east but the Russians have transferred radars and aerial defenses to Iran. Probably not so much to help defend Iran as to shut down Netanyahu doing something stupid like attacking civilian neighbourhoods in Tehran. So a airpower-heavy attack is probably off the table for Iran.

    1. Ben Panga

      And the US continues to affirm that it will defend Israel but not be drawn into offensive actions against Iran. Bibi ain’t so tough without his big brother coming along for the ride.

  14. Karl

    I wonder if Russia might soon put S-400 air defense and EW jamming systems in Lebanon, the way it did in Iran?

    These systems would give Lebanon the ability to deter future air attacks from Israel (or from the U.S.). If the U.S. can assert the right to deter Iran with offensive aircraft carriers and submarines, so should Russia (in its own way), with defensive systems. Such deterrence can be stabilizing. And, it would prevent Israel from gaining what Mearsheimer calls “escalation dominance.” This would probably mean putting Russian technical crews in Lebanon to man these systems, just as the U.S. has Patriot missile crews in Israel defending Israel. Tit for Tat.

    Russia could, presumably, just move these systems into Lebanon from neighboring Syria?

  16. Not Moses

    There’s little doubt that the IDF is a paper tiger, and MOSAD a run of mill “intelligence” gathering outfit. The Gaza genocide has forever undone the “forever victims” complex and blackmail weapon. Besides the casualties in Gaza and Israel, the diaspora is the biggest loser – we can also add a dash of Joe Biden. The Paris car explosion, and the German attack are two recent examples. American’s are also waking up to AIPAC’s control of Congress and the WH – for now. Not sure this can or will go on forever. The plurality of Americans are opposed to military conflicts, including with Iran over Israel’s right to loot Palestinian land.

  17. NotThePilot

    I don’t really have anything to add about the latest exchange between Israel & Hezbollah, but I have thought about some things a bit more.

    On the standard media US take that Iran won’t hit back, not only am I pretty sure they will, but I think it’s partly mistaken to say the Resistance Axis doesn’t want a regional war. On an emotional & intuitive level, I think they kind of do and they’re not afraid of one. On a rational level though, they obviously want to minimize the harm to people they care about so they’ll do it in the smartest way they can.

    As for the how they specifically will retaliate, I have no idea for sure, except that even if it’s loud, it will also have a subtle angle. I still think they’re aiming indirectly for Israel’s allies too (open & tacit). I also wonder if it might actually be outside the Mideast (I’ve mentioned Iran possibly supporting a Venezuelan move on Guyana before).

    For one, that exploits one of Israel’s major weaknesses (it can’t directly project much conventional power even if someone hands it a landing zone). If there’s also a clear demonstration of a diplomatic coup (Turkish help?) or strong alliance with a country not typically considered in the Resistance, it also kind of makes a moral & ideological contrast with the assassination of Haniyeh (a party to diplomatic talks)

Comments are closed.