Israel v Hamas

[CPFCSaturn]

Well he's a c*** then for saying it. It only shows either a lack of understanding of weapons, or that there's a narrative to attack the IDF. "Tonnage".......this is incredibly misleading having cherrypicked locations and the progress in weapons platforms able to deliver. An F-15E fighter can carry more weight of bombs than a late war Lancaster bomber for a start, and they aren't on an 8 hour round trip night flight where only 25% of the bombs dropped even land within a mile of the target. Dresden was set on fire with incendiaries which suffocated the population, a low tonnage but massive casualty rate, Hamburg was an industrial target and actually hit pretty heavily, and Germany never had ANY heavy bombers so London was actually barely scratched. A USAAF P-47 single engine fighter could carry about the same ordnance load as a Dornier 17 bomber.

The bloke is a prick for opening his mouth with such a ludicrous analogy.

Interesting - I can't claim to know anywhere near as much as you on military equipment, but your summary seems plausible to me.

 

[HKOwen]

You're 'tabloiding' again.

I've expressed many, many times over my condemnation for the actions of October 7th and Hamas as a group.

Boring and lazy.

Indeed you are, but to be fair at least you agree Hamas are a terrorist group, which , to use one of your fave terms, is more than many on here would do

 

[HKOwen]

Interesting - I can't claim to know anywhere near as much as you on military equipment, but your summary seems plausible to me.

Yet Pape is referenced on here in total ignorance for narrative purposes

 

[HKOwen]

Genuine question; why do you find it doubtful?

The scale of the destruction to the landscape is enormous: Drone video shows striking images of Gaza before and after war

Are you an expert in damage assessment ?

If not, you are simply guessing , as any on here can do.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Yet you quote Pape in total ignorance for narrative purposes

And your contribution to the thread is swanning about calling everyone a 'jew-hater' and asking about October 7th - you clearly have no worthwhile contribution to make and hide behind others while you make your little snipes and parrot tabloid talking points.

Incredibly boring - just leave the adults to it.

 

[HKOwen]

And your contribution to the thread is swanning about calling everyone a 'jew-hater' and asking about October 7th - you clearly have no worthwhile contribution to make and hide behind others while you make your little snipes and parrot tabloid talking points.

Incredibly boring - just leave the adults to it.

Expert in nothing

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Expert in nothing

Which is all I have ever claimed to be.

You're on a football supporters forum for goodness sake - get over yourself.

 

[ASCPFC]

Genuine question; why do you find it doubtful?

The scale of the destruction to the landscape is enormous: Drone video shows striking images of Gaza before and after war

Indeed - it looks terrible.
However, again you can look at wars and see this kind of thing before. I think the Blitz on Britain would give some insight into this, and the bombing campaigns of the second world war.
Figures off of the top of my head as I don't like looking things up. I think the Blitz killed maybe 40,000 people in Britain. There were, as would be expected, many more injuries - maybe 100,000: possibly, both figures would be just slightly higher - approximately. ( As I said off the top of my head).
There were two million homes destroyed - very apt here.

At first glimpse, it looks like all those wonderful shelters and tube stations and brilliant organisation and spirit saved everyone.

Yet, Tube stations were locked shut and people cleared until the government just stopped enforcing it.
There were hardly any shelters. I don't think there were shelters for even five percent of people - until much later on. Obviously, priority people had shelters: The Admiralty/ Whitehall/ Parliament etc.
There was little in ground to air defences: I don't think that improved vastly until the V1s etc.
As for spirit, unfortunately (as one would expect) there was widespread looting and clearly crime. But I will accept the unquantifiable way that people could handle more hardship in the past. They were somewhat more stoic than now. (I watched everyone have a meltdown here over a power cut).

So even with two million buildings destroyed (crazy right?) there were 40 odd thousand dead across the country.

There are a variety of reasons for this. People tend to find shelter wherever they can - tube stations are an example of that. It was not a government idea - the opposite in fact. So where we see Gaza flattened - it does not demonstrate that everyone, or even a large percentage are dead.

As said, there are always miles more wounded than killed. If the Gaza figures are true then there are also well over 100,000 wounded - what would that look like? I can kind of tell you, that's people limping and laying down everywhere you look. That's people bleeding, people lining most streets on stretchers, blood streaming in the gutters. There aren't hospitals anywhere that can handle that. I haven't seen this - I've seen snippets, but what I'm talking about is more than what we're seeing.

Also today's weapons are more precise, although not quite as much as people think. If there's an Hamas guy in one flat - there will be collateral damage (to use such a blank phrase) but it will not be like carpet bombing a population for the sake of it. Israel are not just flying over Gaza dropping bombs everywhere. Otherwise the footage and photos would be, unfortunately, far worse than we're seeing.

People are largely in camps - and although people do get hit by stray munitions (or even targeted ones), Israel isn't just randomly napalming camps or anything like that. There are also obviously tunnels and basements. I could go on but I presume you can see what I mean.

Just informed opinions based on past experiences really. Obviously, I could be totally wrong.

 

[HKOwen]

Which is all I have ever claimed to be.

You're on a football supporters forum for goodness sake - get over yourself.

In the news and politics section, you seem to be asserting football forum posters are experts in nothing.

Well at least one we are sure of.

Have fun

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Indeed - it looks terrible.
However, again you can look at wars and see this kind of thing before. I think the Blitz on Britain would give some insight into this, and the bombing campaigns of the second world war.
Figures off of the top of my head as I don't like looking things up. I think the Blitz killed maybe 40,000 people in Britain. There were, as would be expected, many more injuries - maybe 100,000: possibly, both figures would be just slightly higher - approximately. ( As I said off the top of my head).
There were two million homes destroyed - very apt here.

At first glimpse, it looks like all those wonderful shelters and tube stations and brilliant organisation and spirit saved everyone.

Yet, Tube stations were locked shut and people cleared until the government just stopped enforcing it.
There were hardly any shelters. I don't think there were shelters for even five percent of people - until much later on. Obviously, priority people had shelters: The Admiralty/ Whitehall/ Parliament etc.
There was little in ground to air defences: I don't think that improved vastly until the V1s etc.
As for spirit, unfortunately (as one would expect) there was widespread looting and clearly crime. But I will accept the unquantifiable way that people could handle more hardship in the past. They were somewhat more stoic than now. (I watched everyone have a meltdown here over a power cut).

So even with two million buildings destroyed (crazy right?) there were 40 odd thousand dead across the country.

There are a variety of reasons for this. People tend to find shelter wherever they can - tube stations are an example of that. It was not a government idea - the opposite in fact. So where we see Gaza flattened - it does not demonstrate that everyone, or even a large percentage are dead.

As said, there are always miles more wounded than killed. If the Gaza figures are true then there are also well over 100,000 wounded - what would that look like? I can kind of tell you, that's people limping and laying down everywhere you look. That's people bleeding, people lining most streets on stretchers, blood streaming in the gutters. There aren't hospitals anywhere that can handle that. I haven't seen this - I've seen snippets, but what I'm talking about is more than what we're seeing.

Also today's weapons are more precise, although not quite as much as people think. If there's an Hamas guy in one flat - there will be collateral damage (to use such a blank phrase) but it will not be like carpet bombing a population for the sake of it. Israel are not just flying over Gaza dropping bombs everywhere. Otherwise the footage and photos would be, unfortunately, far worse than we're seeing.

People are largely in camps - and although people do get hit by stray munitions (or even targeted ones), Israel isn't just randomly napalming camps or anything like that. There are also obviously tunnels and basements. I could go on but I presume you can see what I mean.

Just informed opinions based on past experiences really. Obviously, I could be totally wrong.

An interesting post.

The Blitz did kill around 40,000 in total across the country - around 20,000 of those in London. It's relevant that London continued to operate during the Blitz and hospitals continued to treat the wounded, which is not the case in Gaza.

The fact media are not permitted to report in Gaza is hugely relevant as to 'what it would look like' - the reality is, we don't know what much of Gaza looks like currently, beyond social media clips and snippets. Certainly some of the footage I have seen is in line with what you describe.

Today's weapons are more precise, but Israel don't always use them - many reports state that nearly half of all bombs dropped in Gaza have been 'dumb' or unguided.

Most estimates suggest that 90%+ of buildings in Gaza have been destroyed, which very much supports the assertion that Israel are just dropping bombs everywhere. Biden described their campaign as 'indiscriminate' which is not something a US President would do lightly.

Israel have targeted hospitals and camps numerous times.

As we have both said previously, we will probably never know an exact answer - Russia have managed to kill north of 10,000 civilians in Ukraine and the destruction visible there is not comparable to the scale of that in Gaza.

 

[ASCPFC]

An interesting post.

The Blitz did kill around 40,000 in total across the country - around 20,000 of those in London. It's relevant that London continued to operate during the Blitz and hospitals continued to treat the wounded, which is not the case in Gaza.

The fact media are not permitted to report in Gaza is hugely relevant as to 'what it would look like' - the reality is, we don't know what much of Gaza looks like currently, beyond social media clips and snippets. Certainly some of the footage I have seen is in line with what you describe.

Today's weapons are more precise, but Israel don't always use them - many reports state that nearly half of all bombs dropped in Gaza have been 'dumb' or unguided.

Most estimates suggest that 90%+ of buildings in Gaza have been destroyed, which very much supports the assertion that Israel are just dropping bombs everywhere. Biden described their campaign as 'indiscriminate' which is not something a US President would do lightly.

Israel have targeted hospitals and camps numerous times.

As we have both said previously, we will probably never know an exact answer - Russia have managed to kill north of 10,000 civilians in Ukraine and the destruction visible there is not comparable to the scale of that in Gaza.

Quite a bit I could say but I won't bore everyone.
Nevertheless, there are towns/ cities totally destroyed in Ukraine would be one point. Put them altogether and there's likely to be more destruction than Gaza overall. Yet, 10,000 dead overall. It makes me think that death tolls in Gaza really are more political than actual. I think really that backs my points pretty well. It's also quite interesting as it's a contemporary war so comparable type of targeting and ordnance in some ways. However, I can't say for sure. It isn't going to me going over and counting everyone. Nor anyone probably. It's clouded for a reason though isn't it?
The original point on casualties is: Hamas have something to gain from exaggerating - like Goebbels did for a really bad analogy. I'm trying to think of Saddam and Tariq Ali now - I think they did this too but my memory is fading?
And obviously Israel will play down civilian deaths. It isn't going to look good for them. So it isn't getting any easier to say anything certain.
I think we can say - don't believe either figure really. Which would be my opinion on it.

 

[Spindle]

Indeed - it looks terrible.
However, again you can look at wars and see this kind of thing before. I think the Blitz on Britain would give some insight into this, and the bombing campaigns of the second world war.
Figures off of the top of my head as I don't like looking things up. I think the Blitz killed maybe 40,000 people in Britain. There were, as would be expected, many more injuries - maybe 100,000: possibly, both figures would be just slightly higher - approximately. ( As I said off the top of my head).
There were two million homes destroyed - very apt here.

At first glimpse, it looks like all those wonderful shelters and tube stations and brilliant organisation and spirit saved everyone.

Yet, Tube stations were locked shut and people cleared until the government just stopped enforcing it.
There were hardly any shelters. I don't think there were shelters for even five percent of people - until much later on. Obviously, priority people had shelters: The Admiralty/ Whitehall/ Parliament etc.
There was little in ground to air defences: I don't think that improved vastly until the V1s etc.
As for spirit, unfortunately (as one would expect) there was widespread looting and clearly crime. But I will accept the unquantifiable way that people could handle more hardship in the past. They were somewhat more stoic than now. (I watched everyone have a meltdown here over a power cut).

So even with two million buildings destroyed (crazy right?) there were 40 odd thousand dead across the country.

There are a variety of reasons for this. People tend to find shelter wherever they can - tube stations are an example of that. It was not a government idea - the opposite in fact. So where we see Gaza flattened - it does not demonstrate that everyone, or even a large percentage are dead.

As said, there are always miles more wounded than killed. If the Gaza figures are true then there are also well over 100,000 wounded - what would that look like? I can kind of tell you, that's people limping and laying down everywhere you look. That's people bleeding, people lining most streets on stretchers, blood streaming in the gutters. There aren't hospitals anywhere that can handle that. I haven't seen this - I've seen snippets, but what I'm talking about is more than what we're seeing.

Also today's weapons are more precise, although not quite as much as people think. If there's an Hamas guy in one flat - there will be collateral damage (to use such a blank phrase) but it will not be like carpet bombing a population for the sake of it. Israel are not just flying over Gaza dropping bombs everywhere. Otherwise the footage and photos would be, unfortunately, far worse than we're seeing.

People are largely in camps - and although people do get hit by stray munitions (or even targeted ones), Israel isn't just randomly napalming camps or anything like that. There are also obviously tunnels and basements. I could go on but I presume you can see what I mean.

Just informed opinions based on past experiences really. Obviously, I could be totally wrong.

I want to expand on a few bits of this.

Firstly, the Blitz. Hitler wasn't going for military strategic targets, it was purely a spite campaign and it simply followed on from the failure of the Luftwaffe to gain enough control to invade Britain against a small raid on Berlin in 1940 to stick two fingers up to Hitler. So he was out to kill people, and he did. The shelters were inadequate and Churchill refused to open the tubes, he was against it. It was only when one of the unions went and forced their way into the Savoy private for rich people only air raid shelter and subsequent protests did they relent. And shelters were not always safe either, there is at least one incident of a bomb hitting one and killing hundreds. I don't think people realise just how much a bomb will penetrate when dropped from 15,000 ft - it'll go through the asphalt and deep underground. So what the Luftwaffe would do is put a timer on some from the "stick" of bombs so that after the devastation when the rescue was under way another would go off, sometimes a week later. Raids were also timed for low tides so the fire crews couldn't put the fires out. They really went out of their way to kill general population and that is not what the IDF are doing - it's just not a win for them.

As for modern precision, well yes, and no. Your standard NATO Mk82 500lber is not guided, and it is CHEAP. The pilots can use 2 methods to drop it, either "CCIP" (Constantly Computed IMPACT Point) or "CCRP" (Constantly Computed RELEASE Point), but both are essentially a fancy modern bombsight and the bomb is UNGUIDED.

IF you want to hit something down it's throat then it costs way more money and then you use a JDAM which is a GPS guided bombkit on the bomb and it'll hit a location, or even more accurately you lase the target with a targeting pod and drop a GUIDED bomb, which essentially is your Mk82 with a Boeing kit on it, and it costs ten fold what an unguided bomb costs.

So if they are not going to drop guided bombs on cheap targets, those are going to be for better value targets, otherwise their fight is unaffordable.

One thing for certain it that the are not carpet bombing, that simply doesn't happen anymore.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Quite a bit I could say but I won't bore everyone.
Nevertheless, there are towns/ cities totally destroyed in Ukraine would be one point. Put them altogether and there's likely to be more destruction than Gaza overall. Yet, 10,000 dead overall. It makes me think that death tolls in Gaza really are more political than actual. I think really that backs my points pretty well. It's also quite interesting as it's a contemporary war so comparable type of targeting and ordnance in some ways. However, I can't say for sure. It isn't going to me going over and counting everyone. Nor anyone probably. It's clouded for a reason though isn't it?
The original point on casualties is: Hamas have something to gain from exaggerating - like Goebbels did for a really bad analogy. I'm trying to think of Saddam and Tariq Ali now - I think they did this too but my memory is fading?
And obviously Israel will play down civilian deaths. It isn't going to look good for them. So it isn't getting any easier to say anything certain.
I think we can say - don't believe either figure really. Which would be my opinion on it.

The implication here seems to be that Gaza isn't totally destroyed, which I would disagree with.

"
The United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) estimated the amount of debris in Gaza at 37 million tonnes in mid-April, or 300 kilogrammes per square metre.

"Gaza has more rubble than Ukraine, and to put that in perspective, the Ukrainian front line is 600 miles (nearly 1,000 kilometres) long, and Gaza is 25 miles (40 km) long," said Mungo Birch, head of the UNMAS programme in the Palestinian territories.

"

 

[beak]

I want to expand on a few bits of this.

Firstly, the Blitz. Hitler wasn't going for military strategic targets, it was purely a spite campaign and it simply followed on from the failure of the Luftwaffe to gain enough control to invade Britain against a small raid on Berlin in 1940 to stick two fingers up to Hitler. So he was out to kill people, and he did. The shelters were inadequate and Churchill refused to open the tubes, he was against it. It was only when one of the unions went and forced their way into the Savoy private for rich people only air raid shelter and subsequent protests did they relent. And shelters were not always safe either, there is at least one incident of a bomb hitting one and killing hundreds. I don't think people realise just how much a bomb will penetrate when dropped from 15,000 ft - it'll go through the asphalt and deep underground. So what the Luftwaffe would do is put a timer on some from the "stick" of bombs so that after the devastation when the rescue was under way another would go off, sometimes a week later. Raids were also timed for low tides so the fire crews couldn't put the fires out. They really went out of their way to kill general population and that is not what the IDF are doing - it's just not a win for them.

As for modern precision, well yes, and no. Your standard NATO Mk82 500lber is not guided, and it is CHEAP. The pilots can use 2 methods to drop it, either "CCIP" (Constantly Computed IMPACT Point) or "CCRP" (Constantly Computed RELEASE Point), but both are essentially a fancy modern bombsight and the bomb is UNGUIDED.

IF you want to hit something down it's throat then it costs way more money and then you use a JDAM which is a GPS guided bombkit on the bomb and it'll hit a location, or even more accurately you lase the target with a targeting pod and drop a GUIDED bomb, which essentially is your Mk82 with a Boeing kit on it, and it costs ten fold what an unguided bomb costs.

So if they are not going to drop guided bombs on cheap targets, those are going to be for better value targets, otherwise their fight is unaffordable.

One thing for certain it that the are not carpet bombing, that simply doesn't happen anymore.

Those pesky direct hits were hard to cope with,a bit of falling masonry was really what shelters dealt with.

 

[Spindle]

Before shelters they use places like cinemas and theatres, I read of one hit with significant casualties. Iirc it is recalled in the book "Forgotten voices from the Blitz" which is one of a series of books on various war topics where ordinary people are interviewed and recall their personal experiences. I might be wrong on detail because I read the book some years ago.

 

[Spindle]

 

[Stirlingsays]

An interesting post.

The Blitz did kill around 40,000 in total across the country - around 20,000 of those in London. It's relevant that London continued to operate during the Blitz and hospitals continued to treat the wounded, which is not the case in Gaza.

The fact media are not permitted to report in Gaza is hugely relevant as to 'what it would look like' - the reality is, we don't know what much of Gaza looks like currently, beyond social media clips and snippets. Certainly some of the footage I have seen is in line with what you describe.

Today's weapons are more precise, but Israel don't always use them - many reports state that nearly half of all bombs dropped in Gaza have been 'dumb' or unguided.

Most estimates suggest that 90%+ of buildings in Gaza have been destroyed, which very much supports the assertion that Israel are just dropping bombs everywhere. Biden described their campaign as 'indiscriminate' which is not something a US President would do lightly.

Israel have targeted hospitals and camps numerous times.

As we have both said previously, we will probably never know an exact answer - Russia have managed to kill north of 10,000 civilians in Ukraine and the destruction visible there is not comparable to the scale of that in Gaza.

War means innocent children and babies die under rubble in the worst ways imaginable.

The only honourable war is one on the battlefield between soldiers in uniform.....and even then the word honourable is debatable considering what you have to do.

Personally my view of Mossad is pretty low and I suspect that select top brass knew that the 7th October was coming.....Collateral damage for the larger aim so to speak.

Having said all that I understand why Netanyahu is doing what he's doing.....The chattering classes and 'pass the sugar' doesn't result in national survival.

If your long term aim is the continuance of Israel certain threats are just going to have to go away because of population birth numbers.......The Arab womb would defeat Israel, even within Israel itself.....Just like the foreign womb is defeating Europe.

The difference being that Israel don't have a ruling class who hate who they are and aren't just going to watch it happen and gaslight their people about it.

 

[ASCPFC]

The implication here seems to be that Gaza isn't totally destroyed, which I would disagree with.

"
The United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) estimated the amount of debris in Gaza at 37 million tonnes in mid-April, or 300 kilogrammes per square metre.

"Gaza has more rubble than Ukraine, and to put that in perspective, the Ukrainian front line is 600 miles (nearly 1,000 kilometres) long, and Gaza is 25 miles (40 km) long," said Mungo Birch, head of the UNMAS programme in the Palestinian territories.

"

That wasn't what I implied at all. Plus, have a look at some of the Ukrainian towns and cities. It's nothing to do with how long a front line is. There isn't a front line in Gaza as such.
I would think that there's relatively equal destruction overall - plus I can't pretend to worry too much about stats when they're that flawed to begin with.
But even if I took what these stats say at face value, it's not explaining how one has five times the casualties of the other. You must be able to see that? I'm not here to support one side or the other - which I think you now are.
I'm quite objective really - I'm a historian and former defence analyst. But maybe there's an unconscious bias that we all have? If it's unconscious, I'm not going to be able to consciously change it.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Good post.

1948 was an injustice but the Palestinians are also an ultimately pain in the arse that no Arab country in the region wants for various reasons.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

That wasn't what I implied at all. Plus, have a look at some of the Ukrainian towns and cities. It's nothing to do with how long a front line is. There isn't a front line in Gaza as such.
I would think that there's relatively equal destruction overall - plus I can't pretend to worry too much about stats when they're that flawed to begin with.
But even if I took what these stats say at face value, it's not explaining how one has five times the casualties of the other. You must be able to see that? I'm not here to support one side or the other - which I think you now are.
I'm quite objective really - I'm a historian and former defence analyst. But maybe there's an unconscious bias that we all have? If it's unconscious, I'm not going to be able to consciously change it.

You're comparing a civilian death toll in Ukraine with a general death toll in Gaza.

If you include all people killed in the conflict, Ukraine's total death toll would also be north of 50,000, and that's a war where there are actually two sides fighting - and no one seems to disbelieve Ukraine when they publish such numbers.