IDF intelligence chief: Israel's next war will see heavy casualties

[24107]

In farewell meeting at the Knesset, Gen. Amos Yadlin says next conflict will hit Israel far harder than recent wars in Lebanon and Gaza - and hints for first the time at Israeli involvement in a 2007 strike on a nuclear plant in Syria.

In a final meeting at the Knesset, outgoing Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin warned on Tuesday that Israel's next war would be fought on several fronts - causing far heavier damage and casualties than other recent conflicts.

Israel was currently enjoying a period of relative quiet, Yadlin said. But its enemies were rearming and now posed the greatest threat to the country since the 1970s. A new war would be far deadlier than Israel's last two, relatively short, conficts in Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008-9.

While Syria had failed to acquire Russian S-300 missiles, seen by Israel as the greatest potential threat to its aircraft, Damascus had improved its defense systems enough to push the military balance with Israel "back to the 1970s", Yadlin said.

IDF intelligence chief: Israel's next war will see heavy casualties - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

 

[washunut]

In farewell meeting at the Knesset, Gen. Amos Yadlin says next conflict will hit Israel far harder than recent wars in Lebanon and Gaza - and hints for first the time at Israeli involvement in a 2007 strike on a nuclear plant in Syria.


IDF intelligence chief: Israel's next war will see heavy casualties - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News
View attachment 67112975

One can only hope that Israel will be willing to fight a total war next time. Their opponents do it each war. Israel can no longer fight for a limited win. They will be blamed by the world anyway, might as well fix the problem for a number of decades. Beirut and Damascas need to be destroed or this will go on forever.

 

[Demon of Light]

One can only hope that Israel will be willing to fight a total war next time. Their opponents do it each war. Israel can no longer fight for a limited win. They will be blamed by the world anyway, might as well fix the problem for a number of decades. Beirut and Damascas need to be destroed or this will go on forever.

This is complete garbage. The notion that Israel's only mistake is going too easy on its opponents is why most people outside Israel are so disillusioned with that government and its supporters. Israel has not been faced with total war and that is just a joke to suggest that they have. However, its opponents have often seen their territories razed to the ground. A consistent policy of Israel has been to overreact. I do not doubt that Israel might go further in the next war than it has ever gone before, but that is not something to be encouraged or cheered. For heaven's sake, these are human beings we are talking about!

 

[washunut]

This is complete garbage. The notion that Israel's only mistake is going too easy on its opponents is why most people outside Israel are so disillusioned with that government and its supporters. Israel has not been faced with total war and that is just a joke to suggest that they have. However, its opponents have often seen their territories razed to the ground. A consistent policy of Israel has been to overreact. I do not doubt that Israel might go further in the next war than it has ever gone before, but that is not something to be encouraged or cheered. For heaven's sake, these are human beings we are talking about!

Yes Israeli citizens are also human beings, which I don't seem to ever hear from the likes of you. The fact that the combined Arab armies were not able to destroy Israel in 1967 ot 1973 is not for lack of trying.

I am not sure why you are disengenuous about this but it clear from all of your writings you have a one sided view. Perhaps I also have a one sided view. I admit that it would disturb me quite a bit if the Arabs got their way and destroyed Israel.

It is also garbage to not take understand the war Hezbellah intends to wage when Iran pulls their chain. Those 40,000 missles will not be fired solely at military targets but will attempt to kill as many Israelu cotizens as possible. All I am saying if this is the type of war that Hezbellah or Hamas start, then Israel should be willing to fight a similar war.

 

[William Rea]

The only thing that the Military gets it's rocks off on more than waging war is procuring money to increase the technology and gadgets at its disposal. This sounds like a pre-budget review speech to me.

 

[ido_]

The only thing that the Military gets it's rocks off on more than waging war is procuring money to increase the technology and gadgets at its disposal. This sounds like a pre-budget review speech to me.

Why would the retireing general care about the budget? And if this is the case why would he state that the chances for a 3rd intifada are low?

 

[washunut]

Why would the retireing general care about the budget? And if this is the case why would he state that the chances for a 3rd intifada are low?

The statement made by Rea was so not in my view worth responding to. My sense if no one would respond to nonsense the person making those kind of statements go away.

 

[Demon of Light]

Yes Israeli citizens are also human beings, which I don't seem to ever hear from the likes of you.

That is because most of the radicals here support Israel. I don't have to constantly remind people that Israelis are human beings, because no one here has said that Tel Aviv should be destroyed like you have just said about Beirut and Damascus.

The fact that the combined Arab armies were not able to destroy Israel in 1967 ot 1973 is not for lack of trying.

Israel started the war in 1967 and 1973 was an attempt at reclaiming the territories taken in that war. I am not going to rehash the nonsensical debate over who really started the 1967 War because it is all on Israel despite the constant deceitful attempts to justify everything Israel does.

I am not sure why you are disengenuous about this but it clear from all of your writings you have a one sided view.

Far from it, I just have to deal with people who are incredibly one-sided when it comes to Israel.

It is also garbage to not take understand the war Hezbellah intends to wage when Iran pulls their chain. Those 40,000 missles will not be fired solely at military targets but will attempt to kill as many Israelu cotizens as possible. All I am saying if this is the type of war that Hezbellah or Hamas start, then Israel should be willing to fight a similar war.

I think you are mistaken in your assumption. Most of the rockets and missiles Hezbollah fired in the last war did not hit heavily-populated areas and they often appeared to be targeted at strategic installations and military posts. The fact Israel can easily afford laser-guided bombs and all Hezbollah can get are some inaccurate rockets does not make them more brutal than Israel. Considering that many things Israel indisputably targeted deliberately had no military use at all says a lot more than what Hezbollah may or may not have hit when aiming for something else.

 

[William Rea]

Why would the retireing general care about the budget? And if this is the case why would he state that the chances for a 3rd intifada are low?

Generals never retire, they usually end up with jobs in politics. To quote...

"Israel was currently enjoying a period of relative quiet, Yadlin said. But its enemies were rearming and now posed the greatest threat to the country since the 1970s. A new war would be far deadlier than Israel's last two, relatively short, conficts in Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008-9."

"Syria, particularly, posed a greated military obstacle to Israel than at any time in the past three decades, Yadlin said, having amassed advanced Russian-built antiaircraft missiles that seriously limited the operational freedom of the Israel Air Force."

Translates as...

"We have enjoyed relative peace for some time but our enemies are rearming. If we become complacent and don't keep our military up to specification then we are at risk."

In my experience that normally involves expenditure of GDP. Why does this surprise you?

Just as an aside, it should not be taken for granted that this commentary was meant only for Israeli ears. I'm sure that there are several benefactors out there who needed to hear this.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

The statement made by Rea was so not in my view worth responding to. My sense if no one would respond to nonsense the person making those kind of statements go away.

Moderator's Warning:

Knock off the flaming or there will be further consequences.

 

[Apocalypse]

That is because most of the radicals here support Israel. I don't have to constantly remind people that Israelis are human beings, because no one here has said that Tel Aviv should be destroyed like you have just said about Beirut and Damascus.

That is plainly false, as the absolute majority of the ultra radicals here, like those who refuse to acknowledge anti-Israeli terrorist organizations as terrorists and those who justify their actions for example, are on the anti-Israeli side.

Israel started the war in 1967 and 1973 was an attempt at reclaiming the territories taken in that war. I am not going to rehash the nonsensical debate over who really started the 1967 War because it is all on Israel despite the constant deceitful attempts to justify everything Israel does.

Once more, plainly false, while this history revisionism and propaganda becomes more and more welcomed due to the campaigns by those who wish to demonize everything Israel does, the fact remains that Israel's attack on Egypt was but a pre-emptive strike in a war started by Egyptian (and also Syrian) moves such as the blockade on the Israeli port, the strains of Tiran.
Anything else that does not fit these historic facts is but a crude attempt to deceive and rewrite history.

I think you are mistaken in your assumption. Most of the rockets and missiles Hezbollah fired in the last war did not hit heavily-populated areas and they often appeared to be targeted at strategic installations and military posts. The fact Israel can easily afford laser-guided bombs and all Hezbollah can get are some inaccurate rockets does not make them more brutal than Israel. Considering that many things Israel indisputably targeted deliberately had no military use at all says a lot more than what Hezbollah may or may not have hit when aiming for something else.

Absolute bollocks. Hezbollah has always targeted Israeli cities and its leader did not deny that when he has spoken about reaching more and more cities and sending innocent Israeli civilians to the shelters.
There's really no argument here that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization like Hamas and al-Qaeda, and by rejecting it a terror supporter needs to deny its leaders' own words and claims.

 

[Apocalypse]

Generals never retire, they usually end up with jobs in politics. To quote...

"Israel was currently enjoying a period of relative quiet, Yadlin said. But its enemies were rearming and now posed the greatest threat to the country since the 1970s. A new war would be far deadlier than Israel's last two, relatively short, conficts in Lebanon in 2006 and Gaza in 2008-9."

"Syria, particularly, posed a greated military obstacle to Israel than at any time in the past three decades, Yadlin said, having amassed advanced Russian-built antiaircraft missiles that seriously limited the operational freedom of the Israel Air Force."

Translates as...

"We have enjoyed relative peace for some time but our enemies are rearming. If we become complacent and don't keep our military up to specification then we are at risk."

In my experience that normally involves expenditure of GDP. Why does this surprise you?

Just as an aside, it should not be taken for granted that this commentary was meant only for Israeli ears. I'm sure that there are several benefactors out there who needed to hear this.

The military has just got an approval from the government a few weeks ago to make a billion dollars deal with the US on some dozens of F-35 jets. They're not going to get a buget increasal any time soon.

 

[Demon of Light]

That is plainly false, as the absolute majority of the ultra radicals here, like those who refuse to acknowledge anti-Israeli terrorist organizations as terrorists and those who justify their actions for example, are on the anti-Israeli side.

Not considering an organization a terrorist organization is not radical. Some would not even consider the term terrorist to be anything more than a political term intended to demonize opponents in war. Many definitions of terrorism could easily be applied to both sides of any conflict. If you consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization then you must also consider the IDF a terrorist organization.

Once more, plainly false, while this history revisionism and propaganda becomes more and more welcomed due to the campaigns by those who wish to demonize everything Israel does, the fact remains that Israel's attack on Egypt was but a pre-emptive strike in a war started by Egyptian (and also Syrian) moves such as the blockade on the Israeli port, the strains of Tiran.
Anything else that does not fit these historic facts is but a crude attempt to deceive and rewrite history.

Like I said, I am not going to rehash this, but even the blockade, the most oft-cited justification, was nothing more than a reaction to Israeli actions. Israel had just the month before instigated a major cross-border incident with Syria and was planning even more devastating attacks on that country with some even suggesting the removal of the regime in Syria and occupation of Damascus. The Soviets told Egypt that Israel was planning to go to war with Syria before the Straits of Tiran were closed.

Absolute bollocks. Hezbollah has always targeted Israeli cities and its leader did not deny that when he has spoken about reaching more and more cities and sending innocent Israeli civilians to the shelters.

Even targeting only military targets and strategic infrastructure would cause Israeli civilians to go to shelters. Reaching more cities means reaching more military targets and strategic infrastructure.

 

[Apocalypse]

Not considering an organization a terrorist organization is not radical.

When there is undoubtful evidence that said organization is indeed deliberately targeting civilians then denying its terrorist elements would constitute as a support of the terrorist organization, and the support for terrorism is one of the most radical levels a human being can reach.

Some would not even consider the term terrorist to be anything more than a political term intended to demonize opponents in war. Many definitions of terrorism could easily be applied to both sides of any conflict. If you consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization then you must also consider the IDF a terrorist organization.

Deliberate attacks on civilians are deliberate attacks on civilians, and when an organization partakes in such actions as part of a policy it is indeed to be defined as a terrorist organization. Which is why al-Qaeda and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations while the IDF, British army or the NATO forces aren't.

Like I said, I am not going to rehash this, but even the blockade, the most oft-cited justification, was nothing more than a reaction to Israeli actions. Israel had just the month before instigated a major cross-border incident with Syria and was planning even more devastating attacks on that country with some even suggesting the removal of the regime in Syria and occupation of Damascus. The Soviets told Egypt that Israel was planning to go to war with Syria before the Straits of Tiran were closed.

Lame excuse, those attacks were on terrorist targets in Syria that were attacking Israeli villages, Israel didn't simply attack Syria as you try to portray it and besides that was not the cause for the war, the war was planned long before with statements coming from Nasser of the coming annihilation of the Israeli state.
As I was saying this history revisionism is nothing but propaganda and an attempt to deceive, there is no doubt at all that Israel was justified with its preemptive attack after Egypt has blocked its port and has violated the cease fire agreement when it has banished the entire UN peace keeping force that was stationed in the Sinai peninsula.

Even targeting only military targets and strategic infrastructure would cause Israeli civilians to go to shelters. Reaching more cities means reaching more military targets and strategic infrastructure.

Once more, a lame excuse, the terrorists were targeting civilians and by proudly stating that you would get more and more innocent Israeli civilians running into the shelters when you'll be attacking them with rockets you're really leaving no room for doubt that you do not share humanity values.

How can one accept such deliberate attacks on innocent civilians is beyond me, for ****'s sake, those are human beings.

 

[Mika-El]

That is because most of the radicals here support Israel. I don't have to constantly remind people that Israelis are human beings, because no one here has said that Tel Aviv should be destroyed like you have just said about Beirut and Damascus.

Lol. Most of the radicals here support Israel?

Getting a bit personal are we with those assumptions?

Lol, the fact that I or someone else may disagree with you and find your opinions a tad bias against Israel does not make us radicals.

In my case though I admit I am known to drink prune juice and am a great believer in it so that is radical.

That said, it would be foolish for anyone to welcome war or death on anyone.

Also again I want to go back to something Wiliam Rea said because again I think it was misconstrued as being "radical". He engaged in rhetoric as to the military industrial complex and budget forecasting.

I would argue there is a connect between our industrial and economic actvities, the need for oil to fuel them, and the military industrial complexes of our nations. I think they are all intricately connected in complex mazes and networks of interaction and cause and effect and fuel certain foreign interest objectives and transactions.

 

[Demon of Light]

Lol. Most of the radicals here support Israel?

Getting a bit personal are we with those assumptions?

Lol, the fact that I or someone else may disagree with you and find your opinions a tad bias against Israel does not make us radicals.

Point me to a "pro-Palestinian" poster who has said Tel Aviv should be destroyed.

 

[Tashah]

Moderator's Warning:

Get back on topic and stay there plz.

 

[William Rea]

...Also again I want to go back to something Wiliam Rea said because again I think it was misconstrued as being "radical". He engaged in rhetoric as to the military industrial complex and budget forecasting.
I would argue there is a connect between our industrial and economic actvities, the need for oil to fuel them, and the military industrial complexes of our nations. I think they are all intricately connected in complex mazes and networks of interaction and cause and effect and fuel certain foreign interest objectives and transactions.

Sometimes "engaging in rhetoric" is the only way to concisely sum up a situation.

Being surprised that someone in the Military says that "We're all doomed unless you get bigger and better armaments" is like being surprised that the sun comes up in the morning.

 

[Mika-El]

Well I don't want to get steered off the main point of the thread and that is the intelligence forecast.

I myself was a bit surprised. Usually such bad news is kept quiet.

I suppose we all could speculate until dooms day the motive behind it but I doubt we will know for sure
the intent behind it.

 

[Gray_Fox_86]

That is plainly false, as the absolute majority of the ultra radicals here, like those who refuse to acknowledge anti-Israeli terrorist organizations as terrorists and those who justify their actions for example, are on the anti-Israeli side.

You are either with me or against me And by that I mean you being an Israeli are obviously bias and supportive of anyone on this forum who backs Israel. For I have rarely read or seen posters post anti-Israeli statements like the ones that are often made by pro Israel. In fact, I am almost certain that most posts defend Isael and call Muslims deregatory names and usage of words that would not be tolerated if it were used against Israel. That is why I believe most posters refrain from being too critical of Israel because even on this forum our MODS are pro-Israell over anti-hate. But that is a whole other topic.

Once more, plainly false, while this history revisionism and propaganda becomes more and more welcomed due to the campaigns by those who wish to demonize everything Israel does, the fact remains that Israel's attack on Egypt was but a pre-emptive strike in a war started by Egyptian (and also Syrian) moves such as the blockade on the Israeli port, the strains of Tiran.
Anything else that does not fit these historic facts is but a crude attempt to deceive and rewrite history.

History is written by the winners.

Absolute bollocks. Hezbollah has always targeted Israeli cities and its leader did not deny that when he has spoken about reaching more and more cities and sending innocent Israeli civilians to the shelters.
There's really no argument here that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization like Hamas and al-Qaeda, and by rejecting it a terror supporter needs to deny its leaders' own words and claims.

Hezbollah does not make up the majority of the Lebanese or Syrians. Most people are alike around the world. They all want to feel secure and safe. But it is not possible with having domestic terrorists around with an infinite amount of black market money to protect themselves. And then you have Israel with an infinite amount of protection and support by the US of A. Those people would turn towards hatred not even terrorism. But hatred why? Because most people do not want to loose their life. Life is too precious to loose and most people know that. So when you have a nation who doesn't care about killing innocentts what then?