'Hizbullah had better intel than Israel in 2006'

[Alamuti Lotus]

'Hizbullah had better intel than Israel in 2006'

Hizbullah had better intelligence information than Israel and better control of its forces during the Second Lebanon War, according to an official IDF scorecard compiled recently by a top navy officer.

The article - which was given an award by Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi - was written by Lt.-Col. Robi Sandman, and was published in the latest edition of Ma'arahot, a monthly journal on military issues.

During his research for the article, titled "How the Arabs are preparing for the next war," Sandman asked 24 senior IDF officers to grade the army and Hizbullah in 10 categories, on a scale of 1 to 10.

While the IDF enjoys superior technology, the scorecard revealed that the army performed poorly in gathering intelligence on Hizbullah, did not command its troops effectively during the monthlong war and lacked motivation to win.

In intelligence, Hizbullah received a 7 and the IDF a 6; in military doctrine and strategy Hizbullah received a 9 and the IDF a 5; In technology, the IDF received a 9 and Hizbullah a 5; in training and organization, Hizbullah received a 8 and the IDF 7, and in tactical command Hizbullah received a 8 and the IDF a 6.

The 24 officers also ruled that Hizbullah had greater motivation to win than the IDF. Hizbullah received a score of 8 in the motivation category, while the IDF scored only 4.

In the article, Sandman claims the IDF is currently structured in a way that it will not be able to prevent thousands of fighters - from Hizbullah or Syria - from infiltrating deep into Israel.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1254163537499&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Ozymanithrax]

1. If Israel attacks Iran, this may indicate a disaster for Israel.

Everyone knows they can be beaten on the battlefield.

[Ian David]

2. But the IDF served better nosh. n/t

[shaayecanaan]

3. You have to hand it to them...

the Israelis can be brutally honest with themselves when the situation requires it - unlike many other countries who insist that their troops always perform superlatively no matter what the reality is.

I just finished reading "34 days", the book of the 2nd Lebanon war from the two guys that work for Haaretz (cant remember their names). A pretty good read.

They discussed Hezbollah's preference for human intelligence, that they prefer to sit across the table from their sources and look into the whites of their eyes, as opposed to Western intelligence agencies that increasingly rely on gadgetry.

To be honest, I thought Hezbollah were going to have their arse handed to them during the initial stages. I think Nasrallah did as well, after Israel was so successful in destroying their medium range missiles. The PLO lost badly when they tried to check the Israeli advance into Lebanon during the 1st Lebanon war and I thought Hezbollah would fare likewise, and that it was far better for them to wait for the Israelis to hunker down and then use conventional guerilla tactics.

They were successful, obviously, but personally I think 2006 was a high water mark for them. Ultimately they are a small irregular force with small arms and anti-tank rifles and there is only so much you can do with those.

[bemildred]

4. Well, they aren't going to conquer anyone soon.

But they can make it expensive if you annoy them. I said at the time that I thought it was a mistake to attack their prepared positions on their home ground. Since one of the goals of that war was to establish "deterrence", the IDF felt that it had to invade a bit.

As with most modern wars, everybody lost. Israel bought itself a period of "quiet" on the N. front, mainly with the air assault. Hizbullah established a level of "deterrence". Neither seems anxious to repeat the experience now. Combat creates clarity.

[Vegasaurus]

5. Facts remain

that despite the very negative press about both the 2nd Lebanon War and OCL, both were successful as big sticks.

Prior to the wars, rockets fell.

Nothing, from sonic booms to threats to incentives, changed that.

Except a war.

Now there are no rockets, so from many people's perspectives, the wars were a success,

[shaayecanaan]

6. The situation is exactly as before...

there are occasional rocket attacks, usually in response to Israeli air infractions.

In the years from 2000 to 2006, there were less than a dozen rocket attacks, not including SAM missiles that were shot at aircraft and landed over the Israeli border. So it was at worst an occasional occurrence before 2006.

Since the end of the war, I think there have been about five incidents involving rockets, the last one was about two weeks ago. Israel has generally acted with restraint when the rockets have been prompted by IAF planes performing sonic booms. On other occasions they have responded with their own artillery, as they did in the most recent incident.

There is certainly mutual deterrence on both sides, but I think in relative terms Hezbollah's deterrent capabilities were enhanced by the 2006 war as much as the IDF's were.

[Vegasaurus]

7. a dozen? really?

[shaayecanaan]

8. Yes

You can view a list of incidents here:-

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-%20Obstacle%20to%20Peace/Terrorism%20from%20Lebanon-%20Hizbullah/Incidents%20along%20Israel-Lebanon%20border%20since%20May%202000

There are only about three rocket attacks described in this list, but I recall that there were others in which no one was killed or injured. My recollection is that the number was about a dozen.

[Vegasaurus]

9. I was thinking about Gaza

You are correct about Lebanon.