Israel's proposed rocket shield.

[WileEcoyote]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/17/us-says-israel-rocket-shi_n_650061.html


WASHINGTON — A U.S.-backed rocket shield is on track to protect Israeli towns against rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip, a senior State Department official said Friday.

The system, dubbed the "Iron Dome," is being touted by the Obama administration as the latest example of expanded military cooperation between the U.S. and Israel. President Barack Obama has asked Congress for $205 million to accelerate development of the system, about half its total cost.

The election-year message of increased U.S. aid to Israel seems aimed at assauging the concerns of many Jewish voters that Obama remains committed to Israel's security, despite diplomatic tensions earlier this year.



One quote missing from article was:

"Thousands of rockets launched from Hamas militants in Gaza and Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon".


How many kids did that feed in Gaza?

Time to underscore the wrong headed attitude of many D/U'ers concerning Israel. Far too many Progressive Democrats are in bed with Hamas these days. For what good purpose? The Palestinians have a long history of refusing peace offers.

I sure hate to see money spent on anti missile systems. However can you blame them? We don't want continued war but senseless rocket attacks only create martyred Palestinians. Which could be the objective of the Gazans anyway.

[obxhead]

1. I'm sure the Palestinians could relate to the

American Indian quite well. Peace offers that are crap and violated by Israeli expansion in the end anyway.

Neither side is "right" on this issue of peace.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

2. I am somewhat surprised someone has not commented that this introduces instability into the region

Since it clearly does. The primary offensive weapon of Hezbollah and Gaza have been rockets. Suicide bombers are rare these days and the IDF is getting the secure fence stuff down pretty well these days. Should Iron Dome and other tools (its not the only one under development) prove effective, short of a national level mass attack, rockets will have considerable less effectiveness and the tactical equations will have changed. The rockets will not reach their targets and the launching locations (and the area nearby) will still be obliterated by counter battery fire. Considering the instability in the region, that may not be a good thing.

[shaayecanaan]

3. Israel already uses the Patriot anti-missile system

which was singularly ineffective at intercepting even the home-made sugar-powered rockets used by Hamas during the 2006 war.

Read "Nemesis" by Chalmers Johnson. He very persuasively argues that missile defence is a gigantic money hole that serves only to enrich the pockets of American defence and aerospace companies, who must be delighted that they are going to be paid vast sums of money to build another missile shield which will no doubt be ineffective. That way they can build an even more expensive one in a few years time.

As for the Israelis, they were so disgusted with the inefficacy of the Patriot system they were apparently going to scrap it, but were dissuaded from doing so by the Americans. The problem with Patriot is that to have any chance of stopping a $150 Hamas missile you have to fire 4 interceptor missiles which cost (wait for it) $6 million bucks apiece. Thats nearly twenty four dollars million dollars per attempt for a system that fails 90 percent of the time. Even if it worked, you could easily bankrupt your enemy by simply shooting more shitty little missiles.

And they want to build an even more expensive one? No doubt Osama is thinking "bring it on". Because when that deficit breaks the back of the American economy (and it eventually will) America won't have the money to build a bicycle, let alone a missile shield.

Personally, I am rather disgusted that supposedly "progressive" Americans such as yourself seem prepared to swallow such blatant military propaganda at face value.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot#Success_rate_vs._accuracy

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Unws1YIys8cC&pg=PA322&lpg=PA322&dq=missile+defence+chalmers+johnson&source=bl&ots=CPPc4yjgfk&sig=V1TOL9aEK2pv1XRYyoW3RkAJZTY&hl=en&ei=o3RCTJJJztBx6ba42g8&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAg

[bemildred]

4. Exactly. nt

[hack89]

5. What a bunch of nonsense

First off, Patriot was never intended to shoot down small rockets like the Katyusha rockets Hezbollah and Hamas shot at Israel - there is absolutely no evidence that a single Patriot was shot during the 2006 war. Can you back up your claim?

Secondly, it is disingenuous to point out poor Patriot performance from 1991 while ignoring near perfect performance in 2003. The Patriot system of 2003 was not the same as the one in 1991 - different and better missile (PAC3 is the best example), different radars and improved command and control.

From your own link:

Patriot was deployed to Iraq a second time in 2003, this time to provide air and missile defense for the forces conducting Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Patriot PAC-3, GEM, and GEM+ missiles both had a very high success rate intercepting Al Samoud-2 and Ababil-100 tactical ballistic missiles.

Added on edit:

The Iron Dome system is specifically designed to shoot down small short range rockets. It's interceptor missile is much smaller and maneuverable than a Patriot. A different system for a different problem - what a concept!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome

[shaayecanaan]

6. That "perfect success rate" is absolute bollocks...

as is apparent from the link I supplied, the US military claimed (and continues to claim) as a "success" any missile which missed or failed to reach its target. There was no way of telling whether Patriot actually had any effect on any particular missile.

So if a missile was 90% inaccurate anyway (as Scuds are) no problems - you could chalk that up to a 90% success rate for Patriot. Seems to have persuaded you anyway, right?

Israel deployed Patriot batteries in the north against Hezbollah's missiles prior to and during 2006:-

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/20/world/main1821335.shtml

http://www.lebanonwire.com/0412/04120602LW.asp

My guess is you heard nothing about it because Patriot was completely useless at stopping Hezbollah's rockets.

Regarding your Iron Dome link, I note the comments of the Professor in the "Criticism" section:-

More recently, Tel Aviv University professor and noted military analyst Reuven Pedatzur believes that Iron Dome "is all a scam ... The flight-time of a Kassam rocket to Sderot is 14 seconds, while the time the Iron Dome needs to identify a target and fire is something like 15 seconds. This means it can't defend against anything fired from fewer than five kilometers; but it probably couldn't defend against anything fired from 15 km (9 mi)., either." He concludes that due to the massive disparity in the cost of the Iron Dome missiles ($100,000) and the typical Kassam rocket ($5) means that the Iron Dome "issue has no logic to it whatsoever."<24>

Seems like a smart man.

[bemildred]

7. Lord only knows what would occur if you sent two rockets at once or something.

What is $100,000 divided by $5 anyway, or even by $25?

[shaayecanaan]

9. Thats exactly what the Soviets figured out...

if you want to overwhelm even a successful missile shield (something which billions of dollars has not successfully produced till now) just send more missiles.

The Soviets also produced missiles capable of launching decoys and moving laterally in flight (the latter of which is quite easy to implement). Not a single system has even the theoretical capability of dealing with such countermeasures.

At the end of the day, it is inherently far more easy to shoot missiles than to intercept them.

[hack89]

11. Which is why Patriot is used purely for the point defense

of small high value targets - with 32 PAC3 missiles per battery it is hard to overwhelm. It only intercepts short range tactical ballistic missiles. Something it did well in 2003.

[bemildred]

20. That's why I find the economic argument compelling.

In the end it is going to be who it costs the most to keep going that determines who "wins"; although these days nobody wins real wars, it's only the phoney PR wars that somebody "wins".

[hack89]

8. Do you even read your own links?

Although Patriot missile batteries have been set up around Haifa, no missiles have been fired in the current crisis, said Ben-Ari, who works for the CSIS International Security Program.

"There's really no time to engage Katyusha rockets in a safe manner," Ben-Ari said. The trajectory is too flat and the flying time is too short for a Patriot missile to effectively track and destroy them.

There may be some truth to the criticisms of Iron Dome - the only true deterrent against rocket attacks from Lebanon is a massive air campaign against launch sites and storage bunkers. Sucks if you are a civilian in the vicinity so lets hope Hezbollah shows some restraint. That's why I want to believe in missile defense - sometimes the alternative is too horrific.

[shira]

12. Hezbollah is expected to fire 600-800 missiles daily next time, all over Israel

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/idf-reveals-intel-on-huge-hezbollah-arms-stockpile-in-southern-lebanon-1.300656

Everyone should hope Israel's missile defense system works because with Hezbollah's launchers embedded within the civilian population, Israel will have little choice but to lay waste to the areas from which those missiles are fired from.

Hizballah Prepares for War Based on Using Civilians as Shields
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2010/07/hizballah-prepares-for-war-based-on.html


Many more civilian casualties next time around when Lebanon will be absolutely laid to waste and left in smoking ruins.

It's urgent that the UN, MSM, and NGO's do what they can to convince Hezbollah that war is not the way to go and that Hezbollah will be held accountable for Lebanese civilian deaths.

[shaayecanaan]

14. There's not a chance a missile defence system could deal with that amount of traffic (nt)

[shira]

15. I agree.

[hack89]

19. Which is why, unfortunately

Israel will flatten much of southern Lebanon going after launch sites and weapon hiding places. Hezbollah is truly wielding a two edged sword.

[shira]

23. self-delete.

[shaayecanaan]

13. If they haven't fired them because they don't work...

I don't know that that supports your POV. If I had to pay $24 million to have a sub 5% chance at knocking down an old WW2 artillery rocket I would think twice myself.

That's why I want to believe in missile defense - sometimes the alternative is too horrific.

Northrop Grumman wants you to believe in it too. And no doubt the President of the day will go along with them. After all, any leader who doesnt believe in missile defence is a bedwetting liberal pantywaist, right?

Seriously, read "Nemesis" by Johnson. He tears the whole thing to shreds. And then have a look at this video:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPOQ

[hack89]

18. They weren't designed for short range, non-ballistic rockets

what so hard for you to understand about that? C-RAM is the system that the US Army developed for short range rockets - they don't use Patriot for that mission.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/cram.htm

http://defense-update.com/newscast/0508/news/news2105_c_ram.htm

Patriots were deployed to Haifa for 3 reasons:

1. possible suicide drones.
2. Long range (100-200 km missiles) that they were concerned Hezbollah got from Iran. Like the Ababil-100.
3. possible Syrian SCUDS if Syria decided to intervene.

The Onion? That explains a lot.

[hack89]

10. And as I pointed out

your link address the 1991 war. I have no doubt that you have links showing that the same methodology was also used in 2003? You do, don't you?

[shaayecanaan]

16. You're the one talking about 2003

the link in the Wikipedia article is dead. I found a similar link here:-

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=4UxRIIN4uEsC&pg=PA194&lpg=PA194&dq=patriot+success+al-samoud+2&source=bl&ots=WITtjmnC8i&sig=7IDinHlR_tT_o1QZA3CkHKHfybE&hl=en&ei=P89DTJODB8r0cPylpHo&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CCsQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=patriot%20success%20al-samoud%202&f=false

Basically, the claimed success rate for 2003 is about 30% by my calculation (9 hits for 22 Patriot missiles deployed). The US military somehow claims a 100% success rate (even if they fired two weapons for every Scud I can't see how it could be higher than 60%).

It was the exact same claim they made in 1991, and which was uncritically swallowed by a supplicant Congress. It turned out to be bullshit, of course:- http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/cbc-f07.shtml

The US military made the same claim in 1991 for missiles that were not destroyed but "diverted" (blown off course, apparently). It is very difficult to tell if a missile is diverted or whether it was simply inaccurate, which in the case of the al-Samoud (basically a slightly revised Scud) is very much the tendency.

The Patriot also caused at least 3 friendly fire deaths in 2003, which probably outweighed any threat to Coalition forces by the Scuds.

[shaayecanaan]

17. 60 minutes also did a story on the Patriot in 2004

from reading it it sure doesnt seem like a 100% success:-

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/19/60minutes/main601241.shtml

[hayu_lol]

21. The shield would be essentially useless...

against mortar fire...which can be zeroed in on a specific target.

Mortars can also be hidden amongst civilians and civilian areas...then moved easily and quickly after firing.

[Chulanowa]

22. That's just silly

Stealing money from US taxpayers to help Israel steal from their taxpayers for a defense system that won't work, in order to fight a menace that ranks below Israeli-on-Israeli violence in terms of injuries and deaths.

So. Who's the contract company? Should we just follow the sound of chortling and the smell of burning money?

[shira]

24. Israeli US envoy: Hizbullah has 15,000 rockets on border

Hizbullah has an arsenal of approximately 15,000 rockets amassed on Lebanon's border with Israel, including some with a long enough range to hit the southern city of Eilat, Israeli envoy to the US Michael Oren told AFP on Friday.

"The Syrian-Iranian backed Hizbullah poses a very serious threat to Israel...Hizbullah today now has four times as many rockets as it had during the 2006 Lebanon war. These rockets are longer-range. Every city in Israel is within range right now, including Eilat," he said.

Oren expressed Israeli concerns with Hizbullah's concealment of the weapons as well. "In 2006, many of their missiles were basically out in the open, in silos and the Israeli air force was able to neutralize a great number of them...Today those same missiles have been placed under hospitals, and homes and schools because Hizbullah knows full well if we try to defend ourselves against them, we will be branded once again as war criminals."

more...
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?ID=187022

The next Lebanon war will be very ugly...