Israel - Iran and regional players | Please post respectfully and stay on topic

It looks like it. I don’t suspect the Houthi and Hezbollah ones will be constant as what has happened in Gaza.

That's ok then, it's only an estimated 1 million people that have been displaced from Lebanon according to Save The Children. In less than two weeks. A few thousand killed, thousands more injured... Meanwhile all eyes were off Gaza and the West Bank and they have been continuing there too. Well The IDF have in Gaza and settlers have in the West Bank
The US striking Syria and now Israel hitting Yemen too.

Nothing to see here. It's only peoples lives, families, homes, history.... We don't know them and they are Arabs (and a few Christians too, that nobody seems to care about... How Trumps Evangelicals are ok with this only adds to the mental gymnastics they are all struggling with, racists but supporting Jews, love Russia, hate Ukraine... Anti semetic graffiti everywhere during Trump's Presidency but can't do that anymore.... Arrrrgh... It's ok we have Haitians and Venezuelans now)

I just can't deal with how fecking flippant so many seem to be about this.
 
So how are they striking Yemen are the Saudis really letting them fly over their airspace? Or are they taking off American carriers?


over the Red sea. it's international waters
 
So how are they striking Yemen are the Saudis really letting them fly over their airspace? Or are they taking off American carriers?

None of the Israeli planes can come anywhere close to being able to take off from a Carrier.
 
Don't they have hornets?

Nope, they have absolute no need for them. All in all, a F18A/D Hornet capability wise is just an F-16 with 2 engines and is carrier capable. Given Israel doesn't have a carrier...

Israeli Air Force is a very top heavy organization, with huge firepower in fighter jets and able to assert aerial dominance anywhere within close range of Israel.

They have very little in the way of support aircraft.
 
Nope, they have absolute no need for them. All in all, a F18A/D Hornet capability wise is just an F-16 with 2 engines and is carrier capable. Given Israel doesn't have a carrier...

Israeli Air Force is a very top heavy organization, with huge firepower in fighter jets and able to assert aerial dominance anywhere within close range of Israel.

They have very little in the way of support aircraft.
Oh fair enough. Assumed Israeli air force would mimic that of the US.
 
Oh fair enough. Assumed Israeli air force would mimic that of the US.

It has no reason to.

US Air Force is all about huge aerial logistics chains for global power projection, whereas Israel needs to project power at most 1000 miles from it's air bases.

This is reflected in the force structure. When I say Israel is top heavy, most air forces are. US is a singular exception when it's both top heavy and bottom heavy.

For example, US Air Force Refuelling Tanker Fleet is 3x larger....than every other air force in the world's combined. It's transport Fleet is larger than the world's combined.

US Air Force is also geared towards kill chain optimization. Air Force planners realized over the past decades that the easiest way to stop an enemy missile is to prevent the enemy from locking on to you. All other countries are more focused on the missile itself whereas US is focused more on the kill chain (not to say US missiles aren't also top of the range). To mitigate this, USAF have a metric fecktonne of assets to aid and provide redundancies in the kill chain. ELINT, SIGINT, AWACs, Recon, AESA radars spammed everywhere. US probably has more aerial support aircraft than the entire size of the RAF.

The idea is, the difference in speed/range of a missile is not that important if we have have 100% guaranteed weapons lock at all times on all of our targets.

China's air to air missile, the PL-15 is faster and has longer range than the US AMRAAM. Yet it has almost no kill chain support. Therefore it cannot fire.
Easy comparison:

PL-15 Range = 100km. AMRAAM range = 70km. (rough estimates). Yet, PL-15 won't be able to fire until it's plane is 40km from the target, whereas AMRAAM with it's datalinked aircraft and a huge support aircraft armada behind it can fire at 70km. Again, these are just arbitary numbers to illustrate the point.


Israel has no need for any of the above. Forget any of this because none of it's potential enemies outside of Interior Iran even has radar guided anti-air missiles or a single serviceable modern military aircraft or warship between them. So what's the point of having huge support aircraft to provide kill chain support for none-existent enemies and furthermore, what's the point of having a gigantic tanker fleet if the furthest they ever need to sortie to is Tehran.

If you're interested more about this I can continue in the geopolitics thread to avoid derailing yet another thread :lol:
 
It has no reason to.

US Air Force is all about huge aerial logistics chains for global power projection, whereas Israel needs to project power at most 1000 miles from it's air bases.

This is reflected in the force structure. When I say Israel is top heavy, most air forces are. US is a singular exception when it's both top heavy and bottom heavy.

For example, US Air Force Refuelling Tanker Fleet is 3x larger....than every other air force in the world's combined. It's transport Fleet is larger than the world's combined.

US Air Force is also geared towards kill chain optimization. Air Force planners realized over the past decades that the easiest way to stop an enemy missile is to prevent the enemy from locking on to you. All other countries are more focused on the missile itself whereas US is focused more on the kill chain (not to say US missiles aren't also top of the range). To mitigate this, USAF have a metric fecktonne of assets to aid and provide redundancies in the kill chain. ELINT, SIGINT, AWACs, Recon, AESA radars spammed everywhere. US probably has more aerial support aircraft than the entire size of the RAF.

The idea is, the difference in speed/range of a missile is not that important if we have have 100% guaranteed weapons lock at all times on all of our targets.

China's air to air missile, the PL-15 is faster and has longer range than the US AMRAAM. Yet it has almost no kill chain support. Therefore it cannot fire.
Easy comparison:

PL-15 Range = 100km. AMRAAM range = 70km. (rough estimates). Yet, PL-15 won't be able to fire until it's plane is 40km from the target, whereas AMRAAM with it's datalinked aircraft and a huge support aircraft armada behind it can fire at 70km. Again, these are just arbitary numbers to illustrate the point.


Israel has no need for any of the above. Forget any of this because none of it's potential enemies outside of Interior Iran even has radar guided anti-air missiles or a single serviceable modern military aircraft or warship between them. So what's the point of having huge support aircraft to provide kill chain support for none-existent enemies and furthermore, what's the point of having a gigantic tanker fleet if the furthest they ever need to sortie to is Tehran.

If you're interested more about this I can continue in the geopolitics thread to avoid derailing yet another thread :lol:
Yeah probably best :lol:

A question for another thread was I wanted to ask how the Russian and the new Turkish 5th gen fighters stack up against the F-35.

In the context of Israel I suppose they'd have no need for the higher fidelity and firepower of the newer gen fighters since they're essentially just bombing civilian targets (they've not been in a conventional air war with anyone since the Arab-Israeli wars, and any potential conflict with Iran will probably be over in a moments notice, not counting an insurgency).
 
Israeli tanks massing at the Lebanese border. Seems a ground invasion is all but inevitable now.
 


I'm honestly not sure if there are parallels to this kind of behaviour in modern history. All to different extents of course but the Israelis have settled every single piece of land they've conquered through war since the country's inception.

Are there Russian telegram channels with mock ups of Odesaa penthouses? Were the Rwandans carving up ideas in the DRC? Are the Turks dreaming up villas in the Syrian north?
 
I'm honestly not sure if there are parallels to this kind of behaviour in modern history. All to different extents of course but the Israelis have settled every single piece of land they've conquered through war since the country's inception.

Are there Russian telegram channels with mock ups of Odesaa penthouses? Were the Rwandans carving up ideas in the DRC? Are the Turks dreaming up villas in the Syrian north?
To my knowledge Russia has been building property in Mariupol and real estate agents have done marketing for it. As well as taking away Ukrainian passports in occupied regions and stuff like that.

Example: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-66393949
 
I'm honestly not sure if there are parallels to this kind of behaviour in modern history. All to different extents of course but the Israelis have settled every single piece of land they've conquered through war since the country's inception.

Are there Russian telegram channels with mock ups of Odesaa penthouses? Were the Rwandans carving up ideas in the DRC? Are the Turks dreaming up villas in the Syrian north?
Israeli "Rightmove" must have some interesting filters...

Disputed territory [] Occupied Land [] Site of imminent invasion []

Within range of rockets [] Outside of rocket range[]

Development opportunity [] Requires Body/Remains removal []
 
553238ac-1ba3-4acc-8b37-998c5e72182a.jpg.webp


Israeli APC's and Tanks massed at the border.

This image just shows the complete military dominance that Israel has despite the constant "We are the victims and invaded by 7 fronts" crap that some posters here spouted.

It isnt the equipment and vehicles themselves.

It's how they're clumped together, in the open terrain, without any attempt to mask, hide or set them up in a way that is easily dispersable. There is nobody closed perimeter around them and randomly people it seems are able to just walk up/past them. It is almost hubris.

This just shows that the IDF knows that none of their enemies can even come remotely close to being a threat to their formations.
 
Israeli "Rightmove" must have some interesting filters...

Disputed territory [] Occupied Land [] Site of imminent invasion []

Within range of rockets [] Outside of rocket range[]

Development opportunity [] Requires Body/Remains removal []
"This valuable plot has only seen 2 people massacred on it prior to its rejuvenation! A rarity."
 
553238ac-1ba3-4acc-8b37-998c5e72182a.jpg.webp


Israeli APC's and Tanks massed at the border.

This image just shows the complete military dominance that Israel has despite the constant "We are the victims and invaded by 7 fronts" crap that some posters here spouted.

It isnt the equipment and vehicles themselves.

It's how they're clumped together, in the open terrain, without any attempt to mask, hide or set them up in a way that is easily dispersable. There is nobody closed perimeter around them and randomly people it seems are able to just walk up/past them. It is almost hubris.

This just shows that the IDF knows that none of their enemies can even come remotely close to being a threat to their formations.
What are you talking about? Nobody ever disputed Israeli military dominance. And you know probably better than anybody here that the reason why they could be clumped together like that is because of air campaign that preceded it.

And also nobody ever spoke about "being invaded by 7 fronts". But despite Israel military dominance, the enemy can still cause significant damage inside Israel (Hezbollah alone still). In the bigger picture, that was their best shot to destroy Israel. Coordinated parallel attack, yes from all 7 fronts. Ground invasion from north and south, in concurence with air attack to overwhelm Israeli air defence from, yes, 7 fronts. But they (Hamas, now Hezbollah) blew it. But you can continue to semantically nitpick what "front" means and argue straw man that somebody expected Iranian ground troops to enter Israel or whatever you meant by "invaded by 7 fronts".
 
What are you talking about? Nobody ever disputed Israeli military dominance. And you know probably better than anybody here that the reason why they could be clumped together like that is because of air campaign that preceded it.

And also nobody ever spoke about "being invaded by 7 fronts". But despite Israel military dominance, the enemy can still cause significant damage inside Israel (Hezbollah alone still). In the bigger picture, that was their best shot to destroy Israel. Coordinated parallel attack, yes from all 7 fronts. Ground invasion from north and south, in concurence with air attack to overwhelm Israeli air defence from, yes, 7 fronts. But they (Hamas, now Hezbollah) blew it. But you can continue to semantically nitpick what "front" means and argue straw man that somebody expected Iranian ground troops to enter Israel or whatever you meant by "invaded by 7 fronts".

Pray tell what these seven fronts are.

Hamas, Hezbollah, ... Houthi's?

This is like US saying they are surrounded by 25 fronts in the Middle East because there are 25 random small rag-tag militia groups who periodically hurl mortars that land 50m from their base.

No, it's not because of that at all. European/American troops in the middle east never put their equipment like that despite having complete air dominance. It offers zero reaction time to...anything.

Also ground invasion by Hezbollah, seriously?
 
What are you talking about? Nobody ever disputed Israeli military dominance. And you know probably better than anybody here that the reason why they could be clumped together like that is because of air campaign that preceded it.

And also nobody ever spoke about "being invaded by 7 fronts". But despite Israel military dominance, the enemy can still cause significant damage inside Israel (Hezbollah alone still). In the bigger picture, that was their best shot to destroy Israel. Coordinated parallel attack, yes from all 7 fronts. Ground invasion from north and south, in concurence with air attack to overwhelm Israeli air defence from, yes, 7 fronts. But they (Hamas, now Hezbollah) blew it. But you can continue to semantically nitpick what "front" means and argue straw man that somebody expected Iranian ground troops to enter Israel or whatever you meant by "invaded by 7 fronts".
Ground invasion from south and north by who exactly?
 
553238ac-1ba3-4acc-8b37-998c5e72182a.jpg.webp


Israeli APC's and Tanks massed at the border.

This image just shows the complete military dominance that Israel has despite the constant "We are the victims and invaded by 7 fronts" crap that some posters here spouted.

It isnt the equipment and vehicles themselves.

It's how they're clumped together, in the open terrain, without any attempt to mask, hide or set them up in a way that is easily dispersable. There is nobody closed perimeter around them and randomly people it seems are able to just walk up/past them. It is almost hubris.

This just shows that the IDF knows that none of their enemies can even come remotely close to being a threat to their formations.


Wow, just look at the way they are all clumped together facing in no coordinated formation all pointing in different directions so if they had to move quickly it would be a nightmare. There is no real protection stopping anyone walking past and tossing grenades in them or sticking C4 or other explosives to them and they are easy to hit with targeted missiles or even a drone attack. They definitely would be from the air with attack helicopters or jets but I'm quite sure Hamas and Hezbollah don't have air capabilities.

The fact they openly behave like this is astonishing. It's lazy, disrespectful and arrogant as hell, not to mention completely demoralising their enemies. I guess that's the point? Or is it just laziness and arrogance?
 
Pray tell what these seven fronts are.

Hamas, Hezbollah, ... Houthi's?

This is like US saying they are surrounded by 25 fronts in the Middle East because there are 25 random small rag-tag militia groups who periodically hurl mortars that land 50m from their base.

No, it's not because of that at all. European/American troops in the middle east never put their equipment like that despite having complete air dominance. It offers zero reaction time to...anything.

Also ground invasion by Hezbollah, seriously?

They are....

Hamas
Hezbollah
Houthis
Groups in Syria
Groups in Iraq
Iran itself
And I think groups in the west Bank

Attacked by 7 fronts in an existential threat for survival sounds better and more justification to bomb everything to oblivion than the reality of the situation of complete Israel military and intelligence dominance for hundreds of miles in every direction......

So 7 fronts it is.
 
its the jews that are are being threatened with being wiped off the face of the earth. a refrain you see again and again, from some pretty intelligent and articulate people.
whilst millions of others are displaced and tens of thousands blown into smithereens.
there is part of me that wishes the israelis got a taste of thier own medicine (clearly their suffering on the 7th oct hasnt led to any empathy for the suffering of others) and a rocket or 2 got through and blasted a big hole in some tel aviv suburb, but actually most of me rejects that because im not a blood thirsty psychopath and understand that the cycle of violence will just continue with more and more suffering.
 
To my knowledge Russia has been building property in Mariupol and real estate agents have done marketing for it. As well as taking away Ukrainian passports in occupied regions and stuff like that.

Example: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-66393949

The people of these countries really do have odd people. I can't even imagine wanting to live in somewhere like Mariupol or Gaza knowing how I'd gotten that property.

A bargain for some though I guess.
 
Pray tell what these seven fronts are.

Hamas, Hezbollah, ... Houthi's?

This is like US saying they are surrounded by 25 fronts in the Middle East because there are 25 random small rag-tag militia groups who periodically hurl mortars that land 50m from their base.

No, it's not because of that at all. European/American troops in the middle east never put their equipment like that despite having complete air dominance. It offers zero reaction time to...anything.

Also ground invasion by Hezbollah, seriously?
Ground invasion from south and north by who exactly?
Imagine October 7 would not be only Hamas on the south but also Radwan forces on the north. In concurrence with air campaign (from drones to ballistic missiles) from various directions. Of course Israel would not be defeated militarily because US would step in (as they did in April) but the damage would be enormous.

I am genuinely (no sarcasm) trying to understand what you mean by the zero reaction time. That is obviously correct. So are you saying it is unnecessary risk? And that Israeli army is cocky enough that they think nothing can happen to them now? And that it simply provides no military advantage? I am saying that the tanks wouldn't be there in that way two weeks ago (whether it is to show military dominance or prepare for ground invasion, or both).
 

Six paramedics killed in Sahmar, says Lebanese health ministry​


Six paramedics were killed in Israeli strikes that hit ambulances in Sahmar in western Bekaa, says the Lebanese health ministry in its latest update.

In a separate update, the ministry also says 12 people were killed and 20 wounded in Israeli strikes on Hermel last night.



To be fair, they were probably hiding missiles in the boot/ there were Hamas tunnels under there/ the health ministry is making it up /choose your poison.
 
Imagine October 7 would not be only Hamas on the south but also Radwan forces on the north. In concurrence with air campaign (from drones to ballistic missiles) from various directions. Of course Israel would not be defeated militarily because US would step in (as they did in April) but the damage would be enormous.

I am genuinely (no sarcasm) trying to understand what you mean by the zero reaction time. That is obviously correct. So are you saying it is unnecessary risk? And that Israeli army is cocky enough that they think nothing can happen to them now? And that it simply provides no military advantage? I am saying that the tanks wouldn't be there in that way two weeks ago (whether it is to show military dominance or prepare for ground invasion, or both).

Do you honestly believe Hesbollah would try a ground invasion?
 
Last edited:
its the jews that are are being threatened with being wiped off the face of the earth. a refrain you see again and again, from some pretty intelligent and articulate people.
whilst millions of others are displaced and tens of thousands blown into smithereens.
there is part of me that wishes the israelis got a taste of thier own medicine (clearly their suffering on the 7th oct hasnt led to any empathy for the suffering of others) and a rocket or 2 got through and blasted a big hole in some tel aviv suburb, but actually most of me rejects that because im not a blood thirsty psychopath and understand that the cycle of violence will just continue with more and more suffering.
Saw a good tweet about this a couple of days ago

 
Ahh yes, the threat of the impending Hezbollah ground invasion. With their enviable fleet of tanks and their air force. Perhaps they'd also be backed by the formidable naval fleet of the Houthis too to aid with their invasion.

It amazes me that folks still buy into this 'existential threat' nonsense. The sole nuclear power in the region, with the most advanced military in the region, backed by the world's premier superpower is at threat from some ragtag bunch of militiamen and kids with decommissioned soviet gear.