| Using Technology to Cover Incompetence|
by Steven E. Golden
Nov 02, '06 / 11 Cheshvan 5767
| E-mail This Print Homepage|
Now, consider the various strengths of the Israel Defense Forces: tanks, planes, bombs, night-vision, armored personnel carriers, all sorts of expensive and fancy mechanisms, along with the training that goes with them. Superficially, it would seem, most of that stuff didn't work too well in the last conflict. (If you're a soldier, don't worry, you'll have your time in a bit.)
What with the recent missile attacks on northern Israel, we now have an even fancier gadget due to be deployed around several cities - an American-built laser-powered anti-rocket system. It sounds great, is very costly, and no doubt will soothe the nerves of many people who were so upset at the odd explosion in their neighborhoods a few months ago. At least, I hope it soothes them, because they're paying for it.
The only problem with this new light-show machine is that it won't work. Period, end of sentence.
I can hear the bubbling hostility already, and I know all the arguments - technical, military and political. Believe it or not, I say that they are all correct, and in more ways than their proponents may think.
Nevertheless, this system will not work.
Why? Because the entire concept is flawed in one crucial sense: the Arabs made it obsolete on the first day of their rocket launches last July. Superior tactics, my dear, remember?
Let's take the problems one at a time:
First, notice that most of the missile launches were from multiple sites, with many rockets triggered at one time from each launching platform, usually with mechanical timers so that the missile crews would be absent when the rockets fired. Combine this with launching platforms that are emplaced in or near homes, well camouflaged and ready to be deployed by civilian-dressed technicians, and you have virtually no way to stop dozens of missiles being put into the air before even the most modern observation-strike planes can find and destroy them. Only the big, single-missile launchers can be found and taken out this way, and the IAF made yeoman work of doing just that. Unfortunately, it takes troops on the ground to find the rest.
So, this means that any anti-missile system has to anticipate dealing with hundreds of projectiles at one time, with a very good chance of missing some rockets that will continue on to their targets. All the enemy has to do is throw enough rockets in the air to make certain that some get through. Unless you're unlucky and happen to be within the kill-zone when one lands, an occasional bang is not a very effective military weapon; but it only takes one explosion to rattle an entire city's population. Remember Haifa, Netanya, Kiryat Shmona - the videos of those cities' residents boarding buses with just a memento or two in hand?
Secondly, this kind of anti-missile system is unbelievably expensive. That is a severe limit on how many can be developed or bought, and that means that only cities considered a priority to the government will be "protected" by these systems. Everyone else, well, be sure your bomb shelters are up to snuff or have a friend or relative you can bunk with for the duration. That is, if there is any place that is out of rocket range next time.
All this brings us to the final problem, which is the motivation behind buying these light-saber machines. Politics is wonderful and even entertaining, but it should have little to do with the safety of a country's civilian population. Have you thought about what's going on behind closed doors at the cabinet table when these kinds of decisions are made?
Consider: Plans are presented by the Northern Command to push through to the Litani River, thus enabling the IDF to backtrack and clear the southern half of Lebanon of missiles and other enemy emplacements. Not allowed. Special units are called to attack vital supply routes, caches and military headquarters in order to disrupt the Hizbullah chain of command and prevent the kidnapped Israeli soldiers from being taken out of the country. Not allowed. Reserves are called up to free regular army units for combat. Not allowed until too late in the war. Combat units are ordered to take positions for jumping off into Lebanon, but are not allowed to move except in piecemeal fashion, endangering the troops.
I could go on, but I won't, for brevity's sake. The point is that certain decisions were made, and a war that was started by accident was ended by unadulterated incompetence. It left Israel with so many questions about itself and its government that people are now grasping at any solution presented to them, mostly by the very fools who got the country into this situation in the first place.
The facts are that the real solution to the problem of missile attack is not more technology, but rather a tactical one. Go in, find the enemy, kill him, leave no stone unturned. That was what was presented to the cabinet, and it was a short, workable and reasonably cheap method, which would've resulted in less lives lost or disrupted than what actually happened. Alas, they blew it big time.
Now, the politicians are in snake-oil-salesman mode, as if they were trying to put a bandage on a spreading cancer instead of showing that they know the actual cure. I'm not certain if the public completely buys this routine anymore, but I certainly don't. It is time that citizens of Israel see the real wizard behind the Emerald City's curtain for what he is. All the gears and switches and flashing lights don't change the fact that the problem with the machinery is operator-error.
281 565 6977
LEVITICUS CHAPTER 26, VERSE 19, 20, 21
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
| Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, and PM Ehud Olmert attending a ceremony to honor donors at Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem on Oct. 27. (AP) |
|Netanyahu: It's 1938 and Iran is Germany; Ahmadinejad is preparing another Holocaust|
|By Peter Hirschberg, Haaretz Correspondent|
LOS ANGELES - Drawing a direct analogy between Iran and Nazi Germany, Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu asserted Monday that the Iranian nuclear program posed a threat not only to Israel, but to the entire western world. There was "still time," however, to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, he said.
Speaking on Army Radio on Tuesday, Netanyahu hinted that Israel possesses the military capabilities necessary for curbing by itself the Iranian nuclear threat, declining to specify what these entail.
American sovereignty, Illegal aliens
Dear America: What will you do when G.W. Bush surrenders to Mexico?
By John Lillpop
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Picture the ugly scene, if you have the heart and or stomach:
A breaking news bulletin interrupts regular broadcasting during prime time. Television cameras zoom in on the White House where a historic piece of legislation is being about to become law by virtue of approval by President G.W. Bush.
At the center of the stage sits President Bush, smiling broadly at the Democrats and RINOs who made amnesty for illegal aliens possible. That would include Democrat senators Reid and Kennedy, and Republicans Frist and McCain. The U.S. House would be represented by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Sanchez sisters, and other advocates for illegal aliens.
With a stroke of his presidential pen, G. W. Bush will grant legal status to the 12-20 million illegal alien criminals who have invaded America since 1986, when wholesale amnesty was last granted. Once Bush is finished, former illegal aliens will comprise anywhere from 3-8% of the total United States population.
Nearly all of the “hardworking, goodhearted” illegal aliens that Bush will legalize will vote Democrat for the remainder of their lives, thereby effectively ending the two party system in America.
Mexicans still living in Mexico, but disenchanted with life there, will see the latest amnesty as a sure sign that invading America can be accomplished with impunity. It will be abundantly clear that America’s “conservative” president is adamant in his refusal to enforce U.S. borders and immigration laws.
Thus, scores of millions of additional illegal aliens will head north with little or no concern for U.S. borders and immigration laws.
G.W. Bush will go down in history as the president who actively campaigned for the invasion of America by foreigners from a third-world nation. He will be remembered as the president who discarded American sovereignty, rule of law, language, and culture in exchange for cheap lettuce and fruit.
He will also be remembered as the president who sent American men and women 8,000 miles from home to fight for Iraq and Afghanistan, but who abandoned the American people at our southern border.
Finally, G.W. Bush will be remembered as the president who abandoned the Republican party and consigned it to permanent minority status.
Monday, November 13, 2006
Photo shows Iran leader
as '79 U.S. hostage taker
Ahmadinejad has denied role in seizure
of embassy seizure, abuse of Americans
Posted: November 13, 2006
10:26 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The Russian publication Kommersant has published a newly located photograph of a U.S. hostage-taker in Iran circa 1979 bearing a striking resemblance to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The Iranian leader has steadfastly denied he was involved in the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the holding of 52 Americans for 444 days despite assertions to the contrary of some of those hostages and former Iranian President Abholhassan Bani-Sadr, who says he was a ringleader and the liaison with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
Russian newspaper published photo, left, bearing striking resemblance to Iranian president
Charges by the ex-hostages were made shortly after Ahmadinejad came to power June 24, 2005. But from the beginning, the White House and State Department made it clear they would rather not know the truth about Ahmadinejad because it would place the U.S. in a position of refusing to permit a head of government into the country to attend U.N. meetings.
One official said such a finding would "enormously complicate" matters.
U.S. "investigators" never bothered to interview any of the former hostages who made the charges against the Iranian leader.
Perhaps the most damning evidence against Ahmadinejad with regard to the hostage-taking came from Bani-Sadr, Iran's president during the early days of the Khomeini revolution.
He has adamantly affirmed Ahmadinejad was one of the kidnappers who held 52 Americans for 444 days. He said the former student leader was in the embassy throughout the hostage crisis.
"Ayatollah Khomeini's deputy, Ayatollah Khamenei, demanded of him a constant report on what is happening in the embassy," he said.
When told Ahmadinejad denied the accusation, Bani-Sadr laughed.
"What do you want?" he said. "That he should not deny it? I was president, and I know the details, and I am telling you for sure that he was there, though his role was not organizational. He was the chief reporter to Khamenei."
Sadr added that Ahmadinejad initially opposed the hostage-taking but changed his mind once Khomeini gave his support.
At least six former American hostages agree the president of Iran played a key role in interrogating and abusing them.
Chuck Scott characterized his tormentor as "cold, hard-nosed" and said his memory is solid, "as sure as I'm sitting here."
"If you went through a traumatic experience like that and you were around people who made it possible, you're never going to forget them," said Scott, a 73-year-old retired U.S. Army colonel.
Scott said he recognized him almost instantly during the publicity surrounding his election in June, when he shocked the world by winning in an upset.
Former hostage Don Sharer identified Ahmadinejad as a student leader who called Americans "pigs and dogs."
Ahmadinejad acknowledges membership in the radical student organization that stormed the embassy when he was 23.
"He was in the background, like an adviser," recalled Sharer, a former U.S. Navy officer. "He called us pigs and dogs and said we deserved to be locked up forever."
Scott called him "a leader, what I would call a hard-a--. Even the other guards said he was very strict."
"The new president of Iran is a terrorist," said Scott.
Sharer said Ahmadinejad was an interrogator and remembers being personally grilled by him.
"He was involved in interrogating me the day we were taken captive," said former Marine security guard Kevin Hermening. "There is absolutely no reason the United States should be trying to normalize relations with a man who seems intent on trying to force-feed the world with state-sponsored terrorism."
William Daugherty, another former hostage, concurs that Ahmadinejad was there. He claims he saw him eight to 10 times in the first 19 days of captivity before the hostages were separated into smaller groups.
"As soon as I saw the face, it rang a lot of bells to me, and it was a recent picture, but he still looks like a man, take 20 years off of him, he was there. He was there in the background."
David Roeder, the embassy's former deputy Air Force attache, also said Ahmadinejad was present during one of his interrogations.
"It was almost like he was checking on the interrogation techniques they were using in a sort of adviser capacity," Roeder said.
Sharer added: "He was extremely cruel. He is one of the hardliners, so that tells you what their government is going to stand for in the next four to five years."
In addition to Bani-Sadr and the hostages, BBC correspondent John Simpson also recalled seeing Ahmadinejad on the embassy grounds, according to Middle East analyst Daniel Pipes.
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
The Associated Press
Tuesday, November 14, 2006; 8:58 AM
TEHRAN, Iran -- President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday said Iran would soon celebrate completion of its controversial nuclear fuel program.
"With the wisdom and resistance of the nation, today our position has stabilized. I'm very hopeful that we will be able to hold the big celebration of Iran's full nuclearization in the current year," the hard-line president said referring to the country's nuclear fuel program.
Iran's current calendar year ends on March 20.
The hard-line president also claimed that the international community was caving in to Tehran's demands to continue its nuclear program.
"Initially, they (the U.S. and its allies) were very angry. The reason was clear: They basically wanted to monopolize nuclear power in order to rule the world and impose their will on nations," Ahmadinejad said.
"Today, they have finally agreed to live with a nuclear Iran, with an Iran possessing (the whole) nuclear fuel cycle," he said, without elaborating.
Iran has been locked in a standoff with the West over its nuclear program. The United States and its European allies have been seeking a U.N. Security Council resolution imposing impose sanctions on Tehran for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment.
Russia, which is backed by China, has opposed tough action advocated by the U.S., Britain and France, and its amendments to a Western draft resolution would reduce sanctions and delete language that would cut off Iran's access to foreign missile technology.
The U.S. and some of its allies allege that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and are suspicious of its intentions after Tehran concealed parts of its nuclear development from U.N. inspectors for many years.
But Tehran claims its program is peaceful and for generating electricity.
Uranium enrichment at low levels can be used to produce fuel to generate electricity but at higher levels can be use to make atomic bombs.
Iran has said it will never give up its right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel. Officials have said they plan to generate 20,000 megawatts of electricity through nuclear energy in the next two decades.
Ahmadinejad said he will soon send a message to the American people in an apparent attempt to influence the U.S. public opinion over President George W. Bush's policy toward Iran.
"We will issue a message to the American people ... many Americans have asked me to talk to them and offer my opinions to them. This message is being drawn up," he said.
In August, Ahmadinejad called for a televised debate with Bush months after he wrote a letter to the U.S. president that Washington said was irrelevant and not addressing the key issue of Iran's disputed nuclear program.
Iran also recently has said it would consider negotiating with the U.S. over Iraq and other regional issues if Washington proposes having talks. But has hinted that it would not drop its refusal to talk about its nuclear program.
Previous stories:Iran president: Terrorist, murderer