Well fancy that! BBC changes its tune on Israeli missile defence - by Hadar Sela

"...Technology has advanced dramatically with some of the most significant strides being made by Israel. Its interceptor systems and their associated radars – funded in large part by the US – have shown themselves spectacularly successful, even though against a full-scale onslaught even Israel’s system would be sorely tested.” Well fancy that!

Hadar Sela..
BBC Watch..
02 August '17..

Back in March 2013, the BBC’s defence correspondent Jonathan Marcus wrote an article entitled “Israel’s Iron Dome: Doubts over success rate” which appeared on the Middle East page of the BBC News website.

“A leading US expert on missile defence has raised doubts about the efficacy of Israel’s Iron Dome defence system.

Israeli officials say it hit some 84% of the targets engaged in last year’s conflict with Hamas in Gaza.

But Professor Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology suggests the defence system’s success rate may have been “drastically lower”.”

Mr Marcus took great exception at the time to our critique of the claims made by his source. Six weeks later, the BBC News website published filmed and written reports by Kevin Connolly on the same subject, asking “Does Israel’s Iron Dome actually work?”.

Fast forward to July 4th 2017...

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Israel - Turning Security Lemons into High-Tech Lemonade

...Israel isn’t the only country in the world that has been at war for decades. But few other countries have taken this obvious drawback and leveraged it into a spate of high-tech development that is benefiting people all over the globe. That determination to turn lemons into lemonade is a major source of Israel’s success–and not just in high-tech.

Evelyn Gordon..
Commentary Magazine..
05 February '15..

Bloomberg released its annual Global Innovation Index this week, and Israel was ranked fifth worldwide. Given Israel’s reputation as the “start-up nation,” that may not seem surprising (in fact, it should, but that’s a topic for another post). Yet “start-up nation” has become such a cliché that it often obscures one of the most important–and admirable–qualities behind Israel’s tech successes: a consistent determination to turn lemons into lemonade.

This is true in many walks of Israeli life. Back in 2007, for instance, I wrote a column about the astounding fact that after losing a child in a war or terror attack, Israeli parents had repeatedly responded not with a desire for revenge, but with a desire to commemorate their child by doing something to make the world a better place. Consequently, bereaved parents in Israel have set up everything from public parks to foundations that help families care for special-needs children.

In the high-tech field, this same quality has led Israel to respond to a horrendous security environment by creating products that not only serve immediate defense needs, but have the potential to benefit humanity as a whole. And this response has played a major role in fueling its tech boom.

Take, for instance, the Iron Dome anti-missile system, which was born of the grim need to deal with nonstop rocket fire from Hamas-run Gaza. Though the system proved spectacularly successful during last summer’s war, it initially seemed to have limited application; few other countries routinely suffer rocket attacks from their neighbors.

Now, however, an Israeli-Canadian partnership is busy turning the technology behind Iron Dome into a system for smart electrical grid management. As the Jerusalem Post reported last month, “The same algorithms that help Iron Dome respond to complex inputs quickly and efficiently were applied to monitoring and controlling the electric grid,” which will both save energy and help reduce blackouts. The new technology “has the potential to change grid management in North America and beyond,” according to Henri Rothschild, president of the Canada-Israel Industrial R&D Foundation, which helped broker the joint venture.

Hamas Rebuilds Tunnels With International Aid As Israel’s Critics Say ...

...By acquiescing to a situation in which a criminal terrorist group not only continues to rule over a captive population and threaten war against a neighboring sovereign state but also standing by silently as Hamas creates the conditions for another terror war, the West is demonstrating its moral bankruptcy on the Middle East.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary Magazine..
19 December '14..

Five months ago Hamas rained down rockets on Israeli cities and attempted to use a tunnel network to infiltrate into the Jewish state and kidnap and kill as many Jews as they could. But predictably most of the world’s attention was focused on Israeli counter-attacks to suppress the missile fire and take out the tunnels and it came under severe criticism, even from its American ally, for the toll of civilian deaths that were caused by Hamas using the population of Gaza as human shields. But those who deplored the 50-day war as a tragedy for the Palestinian people now need to ask themselves whether they are really interested in watching another such round of fighting in the future. The same international community that blasted Israel for having the temerity to defend itself now needs to address the fact that the aid that is pouring into the strip for the purpose of rebuilding homes destroyed in the fighting, is actually being used to rebuild the terror tunnels. If they don’t, they’ll have no right to criticize Israel when it is once again forced to act to defend itself.

As the Times of Israel writes, the Israel media is reporting that:

Some of the cement and other materials being delivered to the coastal Palestinian territory, as part of an international rebuilding effort, has been diverted to the tunnels.

The story goes on to detail some things that can’t come as a surprise. Even as it rebuilds its terror tunnels, Hamas is replenishing its supply of missiles and rockets. Given that the group has just kissed and made up with Iran, the flow of money and munitions into the strip by one means or another is bound to increase.

Though expected, this does increase Hamas’s leverage over the Palestinian Authority, which isn’t interested in making peace with Israel but will certainly never do so while it remains under threat from its erstwhile unity partner. Though many in Israel and elsewhere assumed Hamas would emerge weakened from a war in which Gaza was flattened and little material damage was done to the Jewish state, it is more popular than ever (especially in the West Bank which did not suffer much from the terror group’s murderous policies) and may soon be as much of a threat to Israel as it was before the fighting started. Indeed, if, as reports indicate, Hamas is working on ways to defeat Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system succeed, the danger will be far worse the next time the terrorists decide they wish to try their luck.

Outraged over Israel and US fail to share Iron Dome technology with Gazan terrorists

...But more than anything else it's just breathtaking to see how, confronted with an entirely defensive system that can bring no harm to the fat-cat insiders of Hamas or to the masses of Gazans suffering under their fanatical rule, Judge Pillay criticizes Israel for the Iron Dome system too.

Frimet/Arnold Roth..
This Ongoing War..
02 August '14..

A reasonable observer could be forgiven for thinking that the people who manage some of the world's most influential and well-funded humanitarian organizations enter into moments of madness when Israel is on the agenda. Maybe not all of them, but certainly some.

Here's an example recorded on the Al Jazeera site ["UN says illegal Gaza blockade must be lifted | UN officials condemn Israeli attacks and warn of humanitarian crisis amid 440,000 displaced and lack of basic services"] from yesterday. It quotes Navanethem Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights since 2008, speaking about the rights of the Gazans:

Pillay also criticised the US, Israel's main ally, for failing to use its influence to halt the violence. "They have not only provided the heavy weaponry which is now being used by Israel in Gaza, but they've also provided almost $1bn in providing the Iron Domes to protect Israelis from the rockets attacks," she said. "No such protection has been provided to Gazans against the shelling."

Reuters ["World powers must hold Israel accountable: U.N. rights boss"] has it too.

It's hard to ignore her silence on the brazen (and suicidal) siting of jihadist rocket-fire emplacements inside residential buildings, schools, hospitals, mosques by the men of Hamas. And she says nothing about the absence of bomb shelters or other protective structures to serve Hamas' Gazans; the terrorist regime has been in power since 2006 and presided over its descent into ever deeper poverty and hopelessness, with tragically little attention to the infrastructure needs of those they rule. Does this not impact on Gazans' human rights? Of course it does, but it's an inconvenient truth.

But more than anything else it's just breathtaking to see how, confronted with an entirely defensive system that can bring no harm to the fat-cat insiders of Hamas or to the masses of Gazans suffering under their fanatical rule, Judge Pillay criticizes Israel for the Iron Dome system too.

It's too easy to characterize Pillay's (and OHCHR's) distorted reality as merely bizarre. It comes against a more serious, sadly rich background of distortion and agenda-driven partisanship, as Anne Bayefsky pointed out some days ago in "Depravity at the UN Human Rights Council":

(Continue)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Check-it out!
.

Scoring an Own Goal, ‘The Biggest Political Mistake of the War So Far’

...That single FAA decision did more than any political argument ever could to ensure that Israel won’t be leaving the West Bank anytime soon. Having long argued that such a withdrawal would be untenably dangerous, I’m certainly not sorry. But for the Obama administration, it was definitely an own goal.

Evelyn Gordon..
Commentary Magazine..
27 July '14..

On Friday, the always perceptive Walter Russell Mead termed the FAA’s decision to suspend flights to Israel last week “the biggest political mistake of the war so far.” Mead was referring to the decision’s impact on a cease-fire, but it actually has far larger political implications. In one fell swoop, it destroyed the main diplomatic return the Obama Administration hoped to earn on its years of generous support for the Iron Dome anti-missile system: increased Israeli willingness to withdraw from the West Bank.

While Congress’s motive in supporting Iron Dome was mainly to save Israeli lives, the Obama administration always had an additional motive: countering Israeli fears that ceding the West Bank would lead to “rockets from Nablus, Ramallah and Jenin onto Ben-Gurion Airport,” as Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon put it, just as leaving Gaza resulted in massive rocket fire on Israel’s south. If Iron Dome could protect Israel from rocket fire, the argument went, then Israel needn’t fear a West Bank withdrawal.

Until last week, that argument might have had a chance: True, Hamas was sending rocket barrages all over Israel and forcing Israelis into shelters several times a day, but the combination of Iron Dome and civil defense measures kept Israeli casualties negligible.

Last week, however, Israelis learned that even Iron Dome can’t keep their main airport open when their neighbors are launching rockets at it. No anti-missile system is foolproof, and one intentionally missed rocket proved enough for most of the world to suspend flights to Israel.

As Mead correctly noted, the discovery that Hamas’s rockets can threaten its main transportation link to the outside world makes it much harder for Israel to end the fighting without eliminating Hamas’s rocket capabilities. But it also makes it much harder for Israel to quit the West Bank as long as there’s any chance of it turning into a rocket launching pad like Gaza has.

The vast majority of Israel’s foreign investment and trade comes from the West, and Israel’s geographic distance from the West means this commerce depends on aerial traffic. With its airport shuttered, investors can’t come in and time-sensitive exports can’t go out. Thus Israel simply cannot afford to have its air links with the West at the mercy of a terrorist organization. Its economy wouldn’t survive.

Grappling With the Hamas Human Shield War

...But the problem with those who draw superficial conclusions from the casualty figures is not just that they don’t understand what Hamas is doing to inflict as much pain on their own people as they can. It’s that these numbers obscure the basic point of the conflict. Hamas is not seeking to end the occupation of Gaza or the West Bank or to force Israel to draw its borders differently. Hamas’ purpose is to destroy Israel and kill its people.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
Commentary Magazine..
10 July '14..

Hamas terrorists continued shooting rockets at Israel today as air raid sirens sounded all over the country including in Jerusalem. But the international media’s focus on the conflict continues to be the rising toll of Palestinian civilian casualties. Yet, as with previous conflicts, not much attention is being paid to the way Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields.

As I noted yesterday, even the New York Times found it necessary to report that the Israel Defense Forces are issuing warnings to Palestinians living in and around Hamas missile launchers and operations center in Gaza. But having decided to escalate another round of violence by launching hundreds of rockets into Israel, the Islamist group is still hoping to use the presence of Palestinian civilians around legitimate military targets as a weapon against the Jewish state.

In the past, this merely meant putting missile launchers next to schools, hospitals, and mosques as well among civilian homes in the densely populated strip. But as Israel has stepped up its efforts to try and spare civilians even as it seeks to silence the terrorist fire, Hamas has also increased its efforts to ensure that as many inhabitants of Gaza as possible are hurt in the fighting.

As Memri.org reports, speaking on Tuesday on Hamas’s Al Asqua-TV in Gaza, the group’s spokesperson Sami Abu Zuhri urged the population of the strip to refuse to heed warnings and to use their bodies to shield Hamas facilities:

This attests to the character of our noble, Jihad-fighting people, who defend their rights and their homes with their bare chests and their blood. The policy of people confronting the Israeli warplanes with their bare chests in order to protect their homes has proven effective against the occupation. Also, this policy reflects the character of our brave, courageous people. We in Hamas call upon our people to adopt this policy, in order to protect the Palestinian homes.

The talk of defending “Palestinian homes” with “bare chests” is an allusion to the fact that instead of evacuating buildings after IDF warnings, Palestinians have instead surged into them in an effort to either deter the attack or to incur the maximum casualties from the attack.

The cynicism of this tactic is transparent but even though Hamas is making no secret of its intentions, the news reports about the conflict remain centered on the “disproportionate” force used by Israel and the contrast between Palestinian and Israeli casualty figures.

The Iron Dome Success - A Second Look

...the tacit, often unintended message conveyed by deploying defensive systems – that the challenged side is ready to tolerate attacks on its home front – has put Israel in a position of weakness against an enemy that is ready to kill and be killed, and has negatively affected its deterrent posture.

Prof. Avi Kober..
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 199..
February 25, 2013..

In early February 2013 the IDF deployed the Iron Dome anti-rocket system in northern Israel, to fend off potential threats in the area. This system is truly an impressive technological achievement. It was evaluated as an asset, thanks to the system’s ability not only to save lives but to also afford greater freedom of choice for the political and military echelons regarding when and how to respond to attacks on the home front.

Praise for Iron Dome

Even initial critics have admitted that the system’s ability to intercept some 90 percent of the missiles fired at Israel during Operation Pillar of Defense in Gaza in November 2012 – which would have otherwise hit populated areas – is beyond the developers’ expectations and a significant contribution to Israeli defensive capabilities. The system saved lives of civilians and troops, which makes it attractive to Israel’s casualty-averse society, particularly in conflicts that do not endanger Israel’s most vital security interests, let alone its survival. Its high cost is still lower than the damage inflicted by Palestinian or Hizballah rockets on property, let alone the cost in human loss. Each intercepting Iron Dome missile costs approximately $50,000, whereas the damage inflicted by one rocket on Israeli targets is much higher, estimated at around $750,000 for one “average” middle age Israeli killed or $190,000 for damage caused to property. The United States’ readiness to assist Israel in funding the system means that its burden on Israel’s security budget is, and will be, tolerable.

Criticism of Iron Dome

A handful of strategic experts have spoiled the euphoria, raising some doubts regarding the system’s efficiency. For example, some claim that the system can hardly cope with thousands of enemy rockets, particularly with the challenge of multiple rocket launchers, and that it has from the start been technologically unable to defend the communities located close to the Gazan border; such a defense would require other systems, like laser interceptors. They also argue that the effect of Iron Dome is limited because some rockets manage to penetrate the system.

But there are additional negative aspects of the system that should be considered. A major problem is created by the fact that it does not produce deterrence. Iron Dome is unable to destroy the appetite of the Palestinians and Hizballah to attack Israel, as it contributes neither to deterrence-by-denial nor to deterrence-by-punishment. In the former type of deterrence the attacker is expected to pay a high price by being denied by the adversary’s defensive deployment, while in the latter type of deterrence the attacker is expected to pay a high price as a result of the painful offensive retaliation of the adversary. Currently, Iron Dome can do no more than frustrate the challenger, not deter him. Furthermore, the tacit, often unintended message conveyed by deploying defensive systems – that the challenged side is ready to tolerate attacks on its home front – has put Israel in a position of weakness against an enemy that is ready to kill and be killed, and has negatively affected its deterrent posture.

Amb. Michael Oren makes the correct connection

Calev..
LOTL..
19 February '13..




On the recent 60 Minutes segment Will Israel's "Iron Dome" help bring peace? aired on February 17th, Bob Simons exercises what might be charitably described as a snarky approach in his interchange with Ehud Barak, attempting to create a self- imagined linkage between American Iron Dome support and Israel's continued housing construction in communities lacking his approval.

Bob Simon: While the Americans are helping you so much in your defense. Israel goes on building settlements, which is exactly what the Americans don't want. How does that work, when you're asking America for help and doing exactly what the Americans don't want you to do?

Ehud Barak: You know, Bob, I prefer not to answer this question right now. You know, we are in the height of the election period. I basically think that the relationship, especially between our intelligence communities and our defense establishment, is extreme-- are extremely close.

Bob Simon: You mean, between the Israelis and the Americans?

Ehud Barak: Yeah. Extremely close. And of course, we have certain differences.

'Washington Post' logic - Iron Dome is anti-peace?

Barry Rubin..
Columnist/JPost..
16 December '12..

I hate to spend time discussing US media coverage of Israel. It should be clearly understood that in general this coverage is a farce and should not be taken seriously. Yet there are examples which are irresistible because they are so revealing of the political as well as media assumptions made about Israel that so mislead the Western public and policymakers.

The Washington Post ran a major article explaining that while, on one hand, the Iron Dome missile defense system is a good thing because it blocks missiles that would otherwise kill and injure Israelis as well as cause damage, it is also a bad thing. Thomas Friedman made similar claims. Why? “For a nation that longs for normalcy and acceptance, one question being debated here is whether Iron Dome will motivate Israel’s leaders to pursue peace with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world or insulate them from having to do so.”

In other words, if a lot more Israelis were being killed and wounded, Israel would have more incentive to make peace with the Palestinians and Arabs. But since their lives are merely being paralyzed, Israel just isn't interested in making peace.

And who is “debating” this? Well, basically the Post comes up with one name: left-wing author Tom Segev.

Nobody is interviewed who ridicules this bizarre thesis.

And who in Israel is arguing that if only they were more bloodied, their hearts would be softened and they would prefer peace to endless conflict? Supposedly Israelis are saying: “Wow, we wish our leaders tried harder to make peace with the Palestinians. Maybe it’s because we are too strong and secure.”

Disproportionate criticism unlike any other nation

Jonathan Rosenblum..
Columnist/Jpost..
13 December '12..

Israeli military actions are consistently judged and found wanting by metrics that are applied to no other army or conflict. Application of these standards is designed to render Israel incapable of defending its citizens.

Prominent among these new metrics is the comparison of Israeli casualties to those of the civilian population from whose midst the enemy fights. As soon as the casualties on the other side exceed those suffered by Israel – usually within hours of an unprovoked attack on Israel and without any cessation of fire from the other side – Israel’s response is labeled disproportionate.

The Washington Post’s ombudsman Patrick B. Pexson, for instance, recently dismissed the overwhelming majority of rockets fired from Gaza as “like bee stings on the Israeli bear’s behind.” By which he presumably meant that they only killed a few Jews.

But there is no acceptable level of civilian casualties, and any Israeli government that treated rocket attacks on its cities as tolerable would deserve to be tossed out of office. The protection of its citizens from external attack is the first duty of any government.

In a widely read essay, “America, Israel, Gaza, the World,” Walter Russell Mead accurately describes what the reaction of American citizens would be in a similar situation: “Certainly if some kind of terrorist organization were to set up missile factories across the frontier in Canada and Mexico and start attacking targets in the United States, the American people would demand that their President use all necessary force, without stint or limit until the resistance had been completely, utterly and pitilessly crushed.” While Americans might feel sorrow for non-combatants killed, writes Mead, they would feel no moral guilt.

Pexson himself would never dream of living in a place like Sderot. Crude and unguided Kassam rockets do not kill people every day. But people in Sderot run for the closest cover when the warning siren shrieks, sometimes many times in a day, and sleep in basements at night for a reason. Kassams have killed more than a dozen people. Americans would never subject their children to an environment in which somewhere between 42 percent (according to Ambassador Michael Oren) and threequarters of the children suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder.

Complaining Israel's Iron Dome missile defense is too perfect?

Leo Rennert..
American Thinker..
10 December '12..

Israel strengthened its military deterrence during the recent clash with Hamas by demonstrating that its Iron Dome missile defense intercepted Israel-bound rockets from Gaza 84 percent of the time. Most media accounts of Iron Dome in action marveled at its precision performance in preventing most of the rockets from reaching their targets in southern Israel - although a few did get through its new defensive net. Iron Dome was widely credited with keeping Israeli casualties to a bare minimum.

But that's not exactly the view of the Washington Post in its Sunday, Dec. 9, edition. In a front-page article that spills over two pages inside the paper, correspondent Scott Wilson sees a decidedly darker side to Iron Dome. Its very success, he argues, could prompt Israel henceforth to go into a defensive crouch and lose interest in advancing the peace process ("In Iron Dome, an emblem of Israel's unmet challenges").

"Iron Dome has become an emblem of the unmet challenges that sit at the center of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," Wilson writes. The key issue, he adds, is whether Iron Dome will motivate Israel's leaders to pursue peace with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world or insulate them from having to do so.

"Israelis of various political leanings (not otherwise identified) see worrying evidence in the system's defensive nature that their country, rather than working to resolve its security problems through decisive military action or lasting peace treaties, is acquiescing to a siege mentality

"If only Israel's diplomacy could be as inventive, many Israelis (otherwise not identified) say, perhaps a solution to the Palestinian conflict could have been found by now."

So, as usual with Washington Post correspondents, it's all Israel's fault that a peace with the Palestinians has not been achieved and Iron Dome will make the situation even worse by prompting Israelis to go into a defensive crouch behind Iron Dome.

In Wilson's eyes, the technical wizardry of Iron Dome makes the system too perfect. It reminds me of a Yiddish saying, "die khale is tzi scheen" - the bride is too beautiful.

However, in painting a dark side of Iron Dome, Wilson fails to give Post readers a fuller account of the necessary ingredients for peacemaking.

Israel's Iron Dome Battle to Get Off the Ground

Charles Levinson/Adam Entous
Wall Street Journal..
26 November '12..

TEL AVIV—Israel's Iron Dome rocket-defense system spent the past two weeks successfully blasting Hamas rockets out of the sky—many in dramatic nighttime explosions—helping to end the recent hostilities between Israel and Hamas in just seven days.

The battle to build Iron Dome, however, lasted years and provided fireworks of its own.

Before Wednesday's cease-fire, Iron Dome knocked down 421 rockets launched from Gaza and bound for Israeli cities, an 84% success rate, according to the Israeli military. The system limited Israeli casualties to six during the seven days of bombardment. As a result, there was markedly less political pressure on Israel's decision makers to invade Gaza.

"If it was not for Iron Dome, for sure you would have seen a more aggressive action in Gaza by air and ground," said an Israel general and member of Israel's joint chiefs of staff.

For Israel's primary foes Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, their weapon of choice—rockets and missiles—could soon prove nearly obsolete. That could alter the strategic calculation for Israel and its enemies alike. Despite initial Pentagon misgivings, President Barack Obama has given $275 million to the project since 2010 with the aim of reducing the rocket threat and eventually bolstering chances of a peace deal by making Israel feel more secure to agree to territorial concessions.

For years, Pentagon experts dismissed Iron Dome as doomed to fail and urged Israel to instead try a cheaper U.S. approach. Iron Dome faced similar skepticism at home. But an Israeli mathematician-general, along with a labor-organizer-turned-defense-minister, pushed the project through, overcoming the opposition of some of Israel's most powerful military voices.

In 2004, then-Brig. Gen. Daniel Gold was named director of the Ministry of Defense's Research and Development department, responsible for overseeing the development of new weapons systems. Mr. Gold, who also has a Ph.D. in mathematics, took up the rocket challenge with a zealot's gusto, according to people involved in the project.

That August, he put out a call to defense companies for proposed antirocket systems. Few took notice within the defense establishment.

Israel's Hezbollah foes in Lebanon first turned to short-range rockets in the mid-1990s. The first Hamas-fired Palestinian rocket hit Israel in early 2001. The crude projectiles rarely hit their intended targets, yet over the years they rained down by the thousands—some 4,000 by 2008.

Almost no one in Israel's military brass believed rocket defense could work. Palestinian rockets from Gaza fly erratically and can hit Israeli communities within seconds. Most are just a few feet long and a few inches wide.

Gen. Gold and his team, deep in the bowels of the Defense Ministry in central Tel Aviv, reviewed the options. They considered lasers and giant shotguns. In March 2005, they agreed on a patched-together concept for the system that would become Iron Dome, drawing on technologies from three Israeli defense companies.

He called up Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd., an Israeli weapons maker, and asked the company to head the project. A 2008 audit by the Israeli state comptroller, an independent government-oversight office, criticized this step, saying he bypassed required approvals from the military's general staff, the defense minister and the Israeli government.

Reuters Editor’s Ignorant Tweet and the Robbie Guy Response

Simon Plosker..
Honest Reporting..
21 November '12..




Twitter feeds often reveal what media personalities really think about Israel and it can be really ugly. Take this tweet from Reuters social media editor and columnist Anthony De Rosa:

The ignorance on display is simply breathtaking. But it might begin to explain the mentality at Reuters that allows footage of fake casualties to be disseminated to major media outlets.

Iron Dome is fantastic but ....

Elder of Ziyon..
21 November '12..

The star of Operation Pillar of Defense - indeed, practically the source for the very name of the operation - was undoubtedly Iron Dome.

Iron Dome is purely defensive. It is remarkably effective. It is an impressive technological achievement. It probably saved scores of lives. And almost certainly it is going to bring a lot of countries to Israel's door to buy the system for their own needs.

President Obama said (possibly as a carrot to convince Netanyahu to accept a cease fire) that he would seek more money to help pay for more of the anti-missile systems to help enhance Israel's protection even more.

What's not to love?

Here's the problem:

You know how Western nations are eager to say that Israel has a right to defend itself? They have systems like Iron Dome in mind. It doesn't kill anyone, it seems to magically protect Israelis, and its name even evokes a protective shield. But when Israel actually take the offensive - bombing terrorists and their infrastructure, striking missile sites, destroying tunnels - people start to die, and that makes Israel's allies skittish. Can't those brilliant Israelis just come up with lots of Iron Dome-type solutions and stay happy? Why rock the boat?

The reason is that Iron Dome might save lives, but it does not stop terror.

(Continue..)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
. 

Rocket Shooting Competition - Operation Pillar of Defense

Batya Medad..
Shilo Musings..
19 November '12..

I'm finding this latest war against Israel, the Operation Pillar of Defense, to be a strange one, sort of by remote control in a sense. It's a rocket shooting competition on civilian targets. The Gazan Arab terrorists purposely aim to murder and terrorize Israeli civilians, while Israel tries to aim only at the terror networks, but have no choice other than to hit civilians because the Hamas Gazan terrorists use them as shields.

Even though tens of thousands of Israeli reservists have been called up to active service so far, as we approach the end of the first official week of the war, it has been more of a target shooting competition than anything else. Israel has been using technology aka the Iron Dome to try to catch and destroy the deadly rockets before they hit civilian areas.

(Continue...)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.
. 

Tolerating the terrorizing of our fellow citizens

Gideon Israel..
Times of Israel..
06 November '12..

On Monday the defense ministry proudly announced that the IDF had successfully completed testing an improved version of Iron Dome which will be able to intercept medium range missiles carried by Hezbollah and Syria that can reach the center of the country. At first glance, this is a reason for celebration; but on the second thought, there is nothing to celebrate about. Why not?

Six months ago, as southern Israel was bombarded with more than 200 rockets from Gaza during a period of a few days, and Iron Dome was used at least 56 times, IDF Chief of General Staff Benny Gantz proclaimed, “Quiet will be met with quiet.” Next the Prime Minister chimes in: “Quiet will bring quiet.” In other words, stop attacking us and we won’t bother you, as if that round of rockets was an exception.

This seemingly tactical approach to the Gaza problem is the result of a very clear defense doctrine that has overtaken our military and political leadership and a large part of our nation’s citizenry: Our refusal to root out and deter our enemies. This is exemplified by our conduct of the Second Lebanon War and Operation Cast Lead. Even more so, it is demonstrated by the terrible sin of the nation of Israel forsaking the 20,000 citizens of Sderot to be bombed for ten years. Over 10,000 missiles have been lobbed into the South and no end in sight.

This new defense doctrine rejects preemption as a means of disabling our enemies’ capabilities. The purpose of military action has changed, from victory to “sending a message.” Punitive military activity is now authorized by our leadership provided, as everyone who lives in the south knows and as everyone in the north may soon find out, it provides no real deterrence. Never to such an extent have we, as a matter of policy, tolerated the terrorizing of our fellow citizens, and indeed of the entire country.

In Gaza and in Lebanon, our enemies continue to arm and continue to state their intentions toward Israel with complete clarity: our total destruction. Their growing military sophistication provides significant building blocks for the success of their genocidal objective.

Honig - Batman and the Iron Dome

Sarah Honig..
Another Tack..
29 March '12..

Rare are the violent clashes from which all sides emerge positively cheery. But the latest exchange of fire with Gaza was just such an atypical conflict. When the smoke cleared, both combatants came away upbeat and sure their respective enemy was taught a painful lesson.

We are near-giddy with gladness over the technological wonders of our Iron Dome anti-missile missiles, while the Gazans are hoarse with victory whoops because they managed to fire off as many rockets as they did. We effusively congratulate ourselves because no major catastrophes were wrought on our side of the border. Nevertheless, the Gazans know that had we truly won, they wouldn’t be left standing and able to spark another conflagration at another time.

What does all the sound and fury signify in real terms? Most likely that no lessons at all were taught, that no one was punished and that in all probability we once more critically misread the signs. It’s as if somewhere along the line we’ve managed to lose sight of what constitutes triumph in our peculiar immediate environment. According to Mideastern conventions, the absence of incontrovertibly humiliating vanquishment denotes a degree of victory.

This local logic mustn’t be dismissed out of hand.

Fresnozionism - Preemption is better than defense

Egyptian aircraft destroyed on the
ground in 1967. Is Israel changing
its traditional military doctrine? 

Fresnozionism.org..
21 March '12..




When Iron Dome was first deployed, I was concerned. Now that it has proven itself in battle, perhaps saving countless lives, I am even more concerned.

This is not to say that Israel should not add more Iron Dome and other defensive systems. Every life is valuable. But Iron Dome’s success also has a downside.

Israel’s traditional military doctrine is based on the need to defend a small nation with a small regular army and little strategic depth. For this reason, the IDF has tried to take the war to the enemy, to fight outside of Israel’s borders, and to win quickly and decisively. This doctrine also makes it possible for the IDF to fight less often, by maintaining a posture of deterrence.

A primarily defensive strategy, even if supported by effective technology, turns this doctrine upside down. And this is not reasonable, neither from a military and technological standpoint, nor from a political and psychological one.

Every advance in offensive ability, either technological or tactical, has a defensive response; which, in turn, is overtaken by new offensive capabilities. Iron Dome shoots down a remarkable percentage of short-range missiles, but at a severe economic disadvantage. It can be saturated by a massive bombardment, there can be technical failures, etc.

It is impossible to rely on defense alone, because Israel simply isn’t big enough to absorb the damage when the defensive systems are not 100% effective. More importantly, a strictly defensive posture has zero deterrent ability. Why not fire rockets at Israel if the worst that can happen is that they will get shot down?

Heller - The Last Round in Gaza – and the Next

Mark A. Heller..
INSS Insight No. 322..
March 18, 2012..





The recent round of inconclusive fighting across the Gaza-Israel border prompts several observations about the outcome and possible implications for the future.
.
1. Iron Dome


Israel’s Iron Dome rocket interception system underwent its first operational test and achieved some notable successes. It was able to discriminate between rockets likely to land in open areas and those headed for population centers, and to refrain from wasting itself on the former while intercepting about 80 percent of the latter. As a result, many Israeli fatalities and injuries were undoubtedly prevented and extensive property damage was avoided. That result validates the economic rationale of the project, despite the huge cost imbalance between cheap rockets and missiles coming out of Gaza and expensive interceptors sent up to destroy them.

Notwithstanding these successes, however, Iron Dome is not a strategic game-changer. Because the “leakage” rate remained close to 20 percent, warnings of hostile rockets and missiles still sent the civilian population into shelters and obliged the authorities to cancel public events and close schools, thereby forcing worried parents to stay away from work. Unless active defense is 100 percent effective, it will not eliminate the need for passive defense or prevent massive disruption of normal life inside the envelope of the rockets. Nor will it spare the government the need to take weighty strategic decisions that it would prefer to avoid. That was the result this time, not because Iron Dome destroyed 80 percent of the incoming rockets and missiles, but because the 20 percent that got through did not land on exposed concentrations of civilians. In other words, only sheer luck stood between government reluctance to embark on large scale escalation and irresistible domestic pressure to do so.

Finally, 80 percent success is not enough to persuade those who launch rocket attacks from Gaza that there is no point in continuing (or in trying again on another occasion). Just as Iron Dome does not eliminate the need for passive defenses, neither does it provide deterrence by denial. Palestinian rocket attacks were ended this time (and will perhaps be deterred next time) only by offensive operations that kill or threaten to kill those directly involved and constitute a threat of unacceptable disruption or damage to the lives of their relevant constituents – the Palestinian public. In other words, coercion/deterrence by punishment remains the dominant motif in this discourse. In the last round, Israel retained a credible threat of escalation because large scale Palestinian civilian damage and casualties had not yet been inflicted and because international attention to this part of the world was distracted by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Circumstances might be different in a future round.

Egozi - We Must Not Be Dragged into a War of Attrition in Gaza

Arie Egozi..
israeldefense.com..
13 March '12..

In the past few days, there seems to be the impression that all the activity against the terror organizations in Gaza was created to provide a “photo-op” for the Prime Minister, the Minister of Defense, and other officials to come to one of the Iron Dome batteries, stand by it, and discuss the way the IDF is “responding with all its might."

It looks great against the background of the green fields, but also very weird. With all its might? Israel has been dragged into a war of attrition, yet again. Retired generals are once more talking about how "we need to let the terror organizations fire the last bullet" on every TV show they are invited to, discussing the "current round.” It would be funny were it not sad.

Israel, which has a tremendous air force, is playing a game of cat and mouse with a few terror organizations in Gaza. This is not serious. Instead of bringing down a blow to the heads of the organizations and hurting infrastructure so that the population act against the lunatics governing the Gaza Strip, the air force "aircraft" are hitting weapon production sites, training facilities, and launch squads.