Started By
Message
re: The Gaza land invasion (Day 46) ...
Posted on 7/17/14 at 4:50 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Posted on 7/17/14 at 4:50 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Technological yes, most powerful? I don't think so. Saudi Arabia and Iran would probably wreck Israel. Israel has no capacity for a large ground invasion, this is really tiny and not that difficult since they've been starving the opposition.
Against Iran or SA? No way. Heck, the way Syria has handled its insurgency makes me think they could take Israel.
Israel looks so good because they're always defending and have a huge cashflow to pay for high tech gadgetry. Defense is a multiplier, if they had to capture objectives against a sizable force? I doubt they'd be effective.
You've got to quantify how you term 'most powerful'.
What's the metric?
Can Israel invade and occupy either SA or Iran?
Not no, but oh hell no. Having said that, neither SA nor Iran could defeat and occupy Israel. All of them lack the logistical ability to operate that far from home.
Both SA and Israel could hurt each other with their air power, so that might be a wash. Ditto at sea - although Israel's modern submarine force probably tips the balance in their favor.
Iran's air force and navy would be utterly destroyed.
And Syria? The country that can't put down a fractured and poorly armed insurgency? Really? Israel would swat them like flies.
Israel looks good because they ARE good. Their forces are built for defense because they've always been surrounded by enemies that would like very much to wipe them off the map.
2
Posted on 7/17/14 at 5:02 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
Israel looks good because they ARE good. Their forces are built for defense because they've always been surrounded by enemies that would like very much to wipe them off the map.
Ever heard of Shayetet 13? Bout the only Special forces unit on the planet that can rival our Navy Seals.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 5:03 pm to JustGetItRight
quote:
You've got to quantify how you term 'most powerful'.
I quantified it very well. Both trying to occupy and hold positions, factoring in attrition for neutral ground.
Israel could barely do anything to Lebanon and Hezbollah, Iran has the largest army in the Middle East and they are hardened having fought an insurgency against the Kurds and their mortal enemies.
quote:
Can Israel invade and occupy either SA or Iran?
Not no, but oh hell no. Having said that, neither SA nor Iran could defeat and occupy Israel. All of them lack the logistical ability to operate that far from home.
I have no idea if that's possible in actual terms since we have a puppet army standing between Israel and Iran for that scenario. I agree though, Israel has no sustainable offensive capacity regarding large forces.
quote:
Both SA and Israel could hurt each other with their air power, so that might be a wash. Ditto at sea - although Israel's modern submarine force probably tips the balance in their favor.
I'm a subscriber to Stratfor, and you're leaving out a key part here: Saudi Arabia could fund, launch and maintain a long term siege of Israel. They could bombard and defend their positions with technology that's similar or possibly better than Israel (overall). It wouldn't take long and the sizes of their military isn't even remotely close even though Israel loves to say that their numbers are way more than they actually are.
quote:
And Syria? The country that can't put down a fractured and poorly armed insurgency? Really? Israel would swat them like flies.
They did not do that in Lebanon, in fact, it was considered an Israeli loss. Iran may have been funding Lebanon/Hezbollah but Israel is no where close to being the strongest military might in the Middle East.
Saudi Arabia could occupy Israel at will, and so could Iran if they were neighboring countries.
This hardon for Israeli warfare really needs to be put into perspective.
quote:
Israel looks good because they ARE good. Their forces are built for defense because they've always been surrounded by enemies that would like very much to wipe them off the map.
Defending is phantasmagorically easier than assaulting, especially when you don't have to be self-sufficient and you can rely on aid from America.
It's very, very easy to look good, but their latest incursions (like the Israel-Hezbollah war) have not been fruitful.
In fact, that border had to be policed by (you guessed it) an UN Peacekeeping Force.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News