Hezbollah's Deadly Arsenal

[bemildred]

For years, the border towns and kibbutzim in the upper Golan section of Israel, near Lebanon and Syria, have been under threat from Katyusha missiles. Cities just a few miles further south -- like Haifa and Tsfat, the crumbling, quiet mountaintop home of Jewish mysticism -- were safe; relying on short-range Katyusha rockets, Lebanese militants had the ability to sew terror only twelve miles into Israel. That changed on Thursday, when Hezbollah launched a new weapon, the Ra'ad rocket, which hit Tsfat and, for the first time, Haifa, 20 miles from the border. 220,000 Israelis stayed in bomb shelters last night to avoid the missiles, Ha'Aretz reports.

The exact make-up and configuration of these weapons is unclear. Some sources call it a modified anti-tank rocket; others a cruise missile. Range estimates vary from 120 to 350 kilometers, or more. One report calls it a 122mm projectile. Hezbollah claims the Iranian-made "rocket is of 333 mm in diameter and has a warhead of 100 kilograms."

Hezbollah's arsenal is likely filled with even deadlier weapons. Israel believes the terrorist group "has missiles that can hit most of Israel, and which could even strike Be'er Sheva under optimum conditions," Ha'Aretz notes.

Iran supplied Hezbollah with solid-fuel, Zelzal-2 missiles with a 200-km range, but these are not very accurate, since they do not have a self-guidance system.

The Zelzal-2 missiles, intended to strike broad targets such as communities and cities, are equipped with explosive warheads weighing up to 600 kilograms...

Hezbollah's original Katyusha rockets had a range of 12 kilometers to 22 kilometers. At a later stage, it obtained Iranian Fajar-3 and Fajar-5 rockets, with a range of 45 kilometers and 75 kilometers, respectively. Hezbollah did not use these rockets until the current conflict.

Defense Tech

[DistressedAmerican]

1. Deadly arsenal my ass.

Hello?

Katushas have killed 8 people in five years. They are homemade in basements. They are little more than Hezbollah propaganda.

Israel has NUKES (illegally BTW) and you come with this propoganda about Hellbolah having a "deadly arsenal"? Israel has top of the line weaponry made right here by American defense contractors. Do you think they have a little miliitary advantage there? Maybe?

Are you kidding me. The Palestians and any groups supporting them are overwhelmingly outgunned by Israel. That is why they call is "asymetric warfare". One side is massively dominant to the other. And you want to claim some sort of supremacy for the Palestinian groups?

Sorry, when Israel is actually threatened by a force that is remotely comparable in its armament, I'll by this argument. Until then, it is utterly hollow. Can we say NUKES kiddies?

As it stands, Israel could wipe the entire region clean if the rest of the world would tolerate it. World public opinion seems to be all that keeps that from happening.

One question for you to respond to:
Who is better armed with a "deadly arsenal"? Israel or The Palestinians?

Get real.

[bemildred]

2. I didn't write the OP. nt

[DistressedAmerican]

3. You Reposted It.

Are you saying that you disagree with an article you reposted? If so, you should make that clear in the OP. Sure reads like more excusing Israel's attacks in Lebannon to me as it is posted.

Was I wrong? Do you not support this incursion?

[bemildred]

5. I post lots of things.

Let's say I view the OP with a certain skepticism, but I thought the claims made were interesting, and I hadn't seen them before. I was hoping for some informed comment. You are wrong to assume a poster agrees with and supports anything he posts, although that is sometimes the case. You are wrong about my opinions too.

[DistressedAmerican]

6. I'm Sorry If I Have Misinterpreted The Post.

Is is quite rare that anyone posts articles they disagree with in the absence of a clear statement of that fact.

My apologies if I misjudged your intentions with the post. Please be more clear next time. I doubt I'm the only one that assumess support of a reposted article when it is posted without comment.

DA

[bemildred]

7. No apology is necessary, I am not offended.

I have no intention of changing my habits. One cannot come to a full understanding of this or any issue without examining the most varied sources and points of view, and I only comment when I have something I want to add.

[eyl]

21. I think you're confusing

Katyushas and Qassams. It's beyond me why so many people seem to think Hamas and Hizbullah are synonomous.

[earthside]

4. Israel's Deadly Low-Tech Arsenal

My hunch is that Israeli bulldozers -- administering collective punishment and vengence on Palestinains -- have inflicted many hundreds of times more death and destruction upon innocent people than Katyusha rockets ever have.

[philb]

8. actually,

Israel has a knack for taking many of the tools of war that the U.S. makes available and improving them....

but, the underlying premise is appropriate, we are watching a gaggle of cavemen try to fight against 21st century warriors.

[lyonn]

9. Living proof that bush couldn't have been more wrong

when it came to protecting the U.S. He strikes one of the few Muslim countries that was sectarian. It appears so clear that Iraq was not tied to any groups affiliated with Iran/Syria/etc. that could be real threats to our country. We now see how we have played into Osama's, Hezzbola, Hamas' hands. Clinton worked his tail off trying to calm the M.E. waters and doofus has completely made our position in this world more perilous. Rather than defending America he has put us in the cross-hairs for sure. We have destroyed Iraq and probably any chance of them becoming peaceful for decades. Iraq need an international body to try to bring calm to a chaotic country.

[bemildred]

10. No destabilizing Lebanon and Iraq was not the brightest idea.

But don't expect the morons who did it to suddenly see the light.
Iran is the big winner here, and will continue to be as long as this folly continues.

[lyonn]

11. Looks that way to me

And no, I don't expect these moron or their mouth pieces (media) to admit anything. This whole mess has been brought on, in my mind, by our lack of diplomacy and history in foreign affairs. Duh

When you posted the article about what the Hammas/Hezbollah, etc. have in the way of attacking, all it said to me is they will throw at Israel or any other country all the weapons they have be it suicide bombers, hand held rockets, etc. that they can get some action from. What do they have to lose, they have no country. What the hell do we know about Lebanon's ability to fight either us or Hammas, etc.? Same with Syria. Again, this is pot stirring and it is scary.

The German Chancellor (?) seemed so bored with bush's antics yesterday. The whole world knows our leader is nuts.

[bemildred]

12. There are several things interesting about this piece.

Some of the rockets mentioned have the range to hit all of Israel, e.g. Dimona. That is a new claim/admission AFAIK. One might infer that it's a way to further implicate Iran, the claimed source, but it raises certain questions too, and if true would affect the strategic balance in this dispute, it would improve Hiz'bullah's "deterrent".

One has to ask why Hiz'bullah was allowed to get these weapons? Was Israel unable to prevent it? In Iran these weapons aren't worth much, on the northern border, they are very dangerous, so if Iran managed to move them there it's a big win.

Of course it may well be bullshit, and pending some better confirmation, that is my guess.

Edit: if this were true, it would be a plausible reason for the bombing of Beirut, rather than S. Lebanon, where the rockets are.

[lyonn]

15. Well, since this article came from our Military

One must use their imagination. Does this mean we are about to go after Iran since they say that is who provided the weapons? Bush: when in doubt bomb. That is what I am afraid of. We attack Iran and Iraq will look like childs play. Our poor troops are at the mercy of this wild policy. Wait, bush can use his anti-missle system to knock down those Iranian missles, or Israel can bomb Iran. Sorry, I'm losing it, none of this makes sense.

[bemildred]

16. Yep.

I am skeptical those anti-missile systems will prove effective in practice.

[eyl]

22. How exact;y was Israel supposed to prevent it?

We've been screaming about this for years. The response was pretty much zilch from the world (actually, more often than not, the response in this forum to such Israeli complaints was to accuse us of warmongering).

As for Beirut, some of the rockets are stored there, and Hizbullah's command centers are there as well.

[bemildred]

24. You got me.

But if they have failed, that is worthy of note. Elsewhere I read that some of these have showed up in the last month. Considering the source, I remain skeptical about that, but it's something to think about, as are the allegations now that the boat was hit by silkworms.

[RethugAssKicker]

13. You're kidding us.... aren't you???

[bemildred]

14. Please see post #2. nt

[bemildred]

17. Another version of this stuff:

Israel: Hezbollah rockets can reach Be'er Sheva

Israel believes Hezbollah has missiles that can hist most of Israel, and which could even strike Be'er Sheva under optimum conditions.

Iran supplied Hezbollah with solid-fuel, Zelzal-2 missiles with a 200-km range, but these are not very accurate, since they do not have a self-guidance system.

The Zelzal-2 missiles, intended to strike broad targets such as communities and cities, are equipped with explosive warheads weighing up to 600 kilograms.

The missiles are a later version of the Zelzal-1 missiles, which Iran first displayed in September, 2005 at a military parade in Tehran, together with six Shihab-3 missiles.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738403.html

[ihaam]

18. Indeed..... deadly arsenal my foot

F16 and warships are obviously harmless weapons of war...


Israel is vastly more superior and stronger, but to justify the disproportional force being used against Lebanese and Palestinian civilians, Israel need to beef up Hizbullah's capabilities.

[Lefty48197]

19. Why is Hezbollah bombing the kibbutz's?

Why?

[bemildred]

20. Seems to be random violence. Not much aiming involved. nt

[bennywhale]

27. What like this?

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/

Half way down

[bemildred]

28. Pretty much the same, yeah. nt

[bennywhale]

31. Its funny how the leaders of any conflict

don't seem to have to deal with this. But when its your family who's being blown to fucking peices its a bit harder to say, i think we should carry on with this. Its always the innocents who get fucked. Bastards

[bemildred]

32. I'm sure it would be a quieter world if the big-shots got blown up first.

Makes me think of "V for Vengeance".

[bennywhale]

33. Exactly. It makes me sick when

Tony Blair destroys Britains civil liberties, talks of bravery in the face of terriorism and tells us what he must do, when he has body guards, and armoured car and is probably the safest man in Britain. Same with these bastards on both sides. It won't be them who die.

funnily enough, pepole always seem to view the middle ages as brutal. They were, but at least the kings and tribal leaders of the day went into battle at the front. If they had to do that today do you think there'd be less war?

[bemildred]

34. Well, we would certainly have a different class of leader. nt

[Matilda]

23. Because they are there.

There are kibbutzim all over the border area, and the Israelis are
trained to fight. They also all have bomb shelters, so they're a lot
safer than say, Palestinian homes in Gaza.

[Lefty48197]

25. Did the people in the Kibbutz bomb Hamas & Hezbollah?

yet they continue to bomb the Israeli civilians. Why?

[AnOhioan]

26. Good question....an equally good one would be to ask....

Did civilians in Beirut and Gaza bomb Israel? Nope. Then why the destruction of civilian infrastructure?

There are multiple parties in this situation that are guilty of deplorable actions. What is wrong for Hamas and Hezbollah is equally wrong for the IDF.

[barb162]

29. What do you call the people who shot the missiles from Lebanon

They weren't the Lebanese military. If they aren't the military, they're civilian, right? I would pose the same question re Gaza

[AnOhioan]

30. Nice try......

The ones shooting missiles into Israel are either members of Hamas or Hezbollah, both ARMED resistance groups/terrorists/insurgents/whatever you want to call them....they are not civilians.

Of course one could argue that no Israeli adults are civilians either, because they all have to serve in the IDF and receive military training. See how easy it is to make laughable statements to bolster your viewpoint??


I mourn all the civilian deaths...I would hope you do as well.

[Igel]

35. Everybody constantly refers to the

bombshelters that the Israelis have. And the bombshelters that the Lebanese don't have.

The Israelis' took time, effort, and money to put into place.

They're apparently far more common in the north of Israel than in the south.

But oddly, many seem to believe there was absolutely no motivation for them.