Israel invades Lebanon.

[therealUT]

IRAN

By 2004 the Army was organized in four corps, with four armored divisions, six infantry divisions, two commando brigades, an airborne brigade and other smaller independent formations. Each Iranian division has a different organization. Only the 92nd Division has enough equipment to be a true armored division, and two of the armored divisions are much larger than the others. The 28th and 84th infantry divisions are much more heavily mechanized than the others. Smaller formations in the army include the 23rd Special Forces Division, established in 1993-1994, and the 55th Paratroop Division. One source reports that the 23rd Special Forces Division is the most professional units in the Iranian Army, with 5,000 regulars soldiers [no conscripts].

 

[therealUT]

SYRIA

In 2002, the Syrian army has roughly 215,000 soldiers. The generall readiness and effectiveness of the Syrian Army is fairly low despite the generally good readiness of its special forces, roughly two armored divisions, one mechanized division and the Republican Guard division. Syria has a significant quantity of armor numbering some 4,700 tanks, though 1,200 are placed in static defensive positions and another 2,000 are T-55s and T-62s. Syria does however have some 1,700 T-72/72Ms.

Virtually all of Syria armored reconnaissance vehicles (600 BRDM-2s and 125 BRDM-2 RKHs) are out-dated as is their 2,000 BMP-1s, though the 200-350 BMP-2s and BMP-3s are more modern.

Syria's artillery capability is significant, as it is armed with 122mm Type 2S1s and 152mm 2S3s. Its towed artillery is comprised mostly of 122mm, 130mm and 152mm weapons. Its multiple rocket launcher inventory consists of Type 63 107mm and BM-21 122mms. According to Anthony Cordesman Syria relies principally on static massed fires and is unable to rapidly shift fires. Accuracy beyond line of site is also lacking as their ability to maneuver and exploit counterbattery radars and targeting systems.

 

[therealUT]

NORTH KOREA

North Korea continues to position forces into the area just north of the DMZ— in a position to threaten Combined Forces Command and all of Seoul with little warning. Seventy percent of their active force, including approximately 700,000 troops, over 8,000 artillery systems, and 2,000 tanks, is postured within 90 miles of the Demilitarized Zone. This percentage continues to rise despite the June 2000 summit. Most of this force in the forward area is protected in over 4,000 underground facilities, out of over 11,000 nationwide. From their current locations, these forces can attack with minimal preparations or warning. The protracted southward deployment follows a tactic of “creeping normalcy”—a significant movement over a period of many years that would attract too much international attention if accomplished over weeks or months.

 

[therealUT]

JAPAN

With nearly 240,000 military personnel and an annual budget of close to $50 billion, Japan's military outstrips Britain's in total spending and manpower, while its navy in particular scores high among experts for its sophistication.

Japan is a major world economic and political power, with an aggressive military tradition, resisting the development of strong armed forces. A military proscription is included as Article 9 of the 1947 constitution stating, "The Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as a means of settling international disputes." That article, along with the rest of the "Peace Constitution," retains strong government and citizen support and is interpreted as permitting the Self-Defense Forces (SDF), but prohibiting those forces from possessing nuclear weapons or other offensive arms or being deployed outside of Japan.

 

[therealUT]

SOUTH KOREA

The army possesses component units including 11 corps, 49 divisions, and 19 brigades, some 560,000 troops, some 2,360 tanks, 5,180 pieces of field artillery, and 2,400 armored vehicles.

 

[therealUT]

And, last but not least...

CHINA

Since the mid-1990s, the army has shrunk from about 100 divisions to approximately 50, with many of the units downsizing to brigades. The PLA also has three Airborne divisions and two Marine brigades. However, the army’s ability to project force much beyond China’s land borders remains limited due to a shortage of amphibious ships, heavy cargo carrying aircraft, long-range transports, and other logistical shortcomings. Although the PLA has improved its amphibious attack capabilities in recent years, there are no signs that Beijing is serious about increasing its heavy lift capacity or conducting sustained ground operations.

In September 2003 China announced more cuts to its military, currently the largest standing armed force in the world. Former President Jiang Zemin, who heads China's Central Military Commission, announced the government plans to cut 200,000 troops from its force by the end the year 2005. The newest cuts would bring the size of the People's Liberation Army to 2.3 million

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Time to rock and roll!

UT can you find any thing about the countries fuel reserves?

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Quotes from around the world.

July 14, 2006 - "Hezbollah and its backers have instigated the current fighting and should be held responsible for the consequences."
—The Washington Post

"An act of war. This is how Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has correctly described the Wednesday morning attacks on soldiers defending Israel's sovereign border in the North."
—Jerusalem Post, Israel

"We argued earlier this year that Hamas must recognize the state of Israel and renounce terrorism, and that Israel must also recognize the Palestinian right to a viable state. Brutalizing each other and negotiating through sheer force of terror, on both sides, is not the way forward to that recognition."
—The Age, Australia

"The clashes across Israel’s borders with Gaza and Lebanon will continue unless there is an honorable peace. The fundamentals of this peace are that Israel should withdraw from the occupied territories so that a sovereign Palestinian state could come into being."
-The Dawn, Pakistan

"Israel has reacted hysterically to the Palestinian operation at Kafr Salem in which three Israeli soldiers were killed, four wounded and one captured. The reason it did so is that this operation exposed how fragile Israel's security plans are."
—Al-Ahram Weekly, Egypt

"Every country has a right to self-defense. But after all these years of strife, Israel, the only nuclear power in the region, should recognize that force alone cannot win peace ... The US and European Union, who have great leverage over Israel, need to prevail upon Israel to accept a diplomatic solution."
—The Standard, Kenya

"While [G8 leaders] must urge Israel to show restraint in the face of terrorist provocations to draw it into war, it is imperative that they also flex their enormous economic and political muscle to persuade the Lebanese government to clamp down on radical militias, and the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority to renounce terrorism and accept Israel's right to exist."
—The Toronto Star, Canada

"Israel's reprisals this time are disproportionate, illegitimate under international rules that outlaw the collective punishment of entire populations and have already resulted in heavy loss of civilian life, especially of children."
—The Financial Times, Britain

"What else could Israel have done after the Hezbollah attack? It is insupportable for Lebanon's theoretical independence to provide a smokescreen and safe haven for Syrian-backed Palestinian militias."
—The [Montreal] Gazette, Canada

"Both the US and their Western allies are keen to cover up the blatant Israeli aggression carried out under false pretexts such as self-defense and fighting terrorism. ‏"
—Syria Times, Syria

"The bullying reaction of Israel in Lebanon in retaliation to a brazen operation by the Hezbollah fighters shows the Hebrew state still thinks in the same old way: flexing its mighty muscles to spread more destruction and casualties to squash resistance."
—Gulf News, United Arab Emirates

 

[therealUT]

I had an eerie dream last night that Isreal landed a nuclear missile in the middle of Tehran.

 

[jdsa]

For the consiricy theorists out there: do you think Israel and the Bush administration are colluding to draw Iran and Syria into a war with us?

 

[GAVol]

I think it's pretty clear that it's the other way around.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

I had an eerie dream last night that Isreal landed a nuclear missile in the middle of Tehran.

That would make for an interesting day.........................

As far as conspiracies............the best one I could come up with was the U.S. attempting/trying to strangle Iran by invading Iraq and Afghanistan.

New conspiracy theory, Israel is implementing military plans that were made as far back as 10-15 years, because U.S. military forces are in Iraq and can give aid.........I love CT---aka Conspiracy Theories.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

QUOTE
Iran aside, there hasn't been a really noisy response from the Moslem world about Israel's military operations against Lebanon. Notably subdued is the response from the Arab countries; it's mostly been mumbling about the plight of the Palestinians and such. Could this mean that the principal Arab leaders are not all that unhappy to see Hizbollah get it in the neck? After all, most of the Arabs are Sunni, while Hizbollah and Iran are Shia. The exception that proves the rule is Syria, which has a Shia leadership. But most Arabs fear Iran, not because most Iranians are Shia, but because Iranians are not Arabs. Iran has been the regional superpower for over three thousand years. Iran is building nuclear weapons. Iran is backing Shia Arab factions in Iraq that would support turning Iraq into an Iranian ally. Also scary is the fact that Iran is currently run by a religious dictatorship. Most Arabs have noted how that worked in Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan and want no part of it. Worse, the Iranian religious leadership believes that they would do a better job running the Hejaz (the region of Saudi Arabia containing Mecca and Medina and the most holy places in Islam). For centuries, the Turks kept the Iranians out of the Hejaz. But who would keep nuclear armed Iranians out? Perhaps worst of all, what if Iran tried attacking Israel with nukes, and both nations went at it with nuclear weapons. Iran has loudly proclaimed its aim of destroying Israel, but Israel has nuclear weapons, and no desire to be destroyed. The Arabs would be caught in the middle of all this.

The Sunni Arab world always saw Hizbollah as an Iranian branch office on the Mediterranean. Hizbollah was also seen as one of the reasons the Lebanese civil war, that began in 1975, went on for so long (until 1990, when everyone called it quits, mainly because of sheer exhaustion). Sunni Arabs also take a dim view of how the Shia Alawite sect has controlled Syria (a majority Sunni country) for two generations. The Syrian Alawites hang on via subsidies from Iran. Sunni Arabs have always despised Shia, and would like to see the Lebanese and Syrian Shia put in their place (subordinate, very subordinate). Having Israel do a lot of the heavy lifting is seen as an added bonus.

The increasing openness of the Lebanese government about wanting to disarm militias may have sparked Hizbollah's cross-border raid into Israel. Hizbollah leadership may have decided that the best way to avoid being disarmed was to provoke a crisis with Israel. There's a chance that all Lebanese would unite to defend against the Israeli attacks. In the wake of that, Hizbollah would again be national heroes, not a private, Islamic radical militia run by Iranian religious fanatics. While Hizbollah has a lot of support in the Lebanese Shia community (35 percent of the population), there was resentment from Lebanese Shia political parties and militias. Hizbollah, unable to shed its Iranian and Syrian ties, was wearing out its welcome. Lebanese were tired of foreign influences, and Hizbollah was the last one left on Lebanese soil.

Hizbollah can't take on Israeli troops with any chance of success, but they have several thousand rockets (reportedly 10,000 or more), and about 400 of them have been fired into Israel so far. This has killed a dozen Israelis and wounded nearly a hundred. The rockets range in size from small 42 pound 107mm ones with a range of six kilometers, to larger 150 pound 122mm models, with a range of 20 kilometers. Apparently Hizbollah has even larger rockets, perhaps a hundred that can hit targets 40-50 kilometers away, and perhaps twenty with a range of 100 kilometers or more. These rockets have been shipped in from Iran over the last five years, and this was no secret. Hizbollah hid many of the rockets in private homes, and had teams that launched the rockets from next to these homes, forcing the Israelis to "attack civilians" if the launching effort was spotted and attacked with bombs or artillery.

 

[OWB]

For the consiricy theorists out there: do you think Israel and the Bush administration are colluding to draw Iran and Syria into a war with us?

Nah, Bush would never do anything like that. :shades:

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Nah, Bush would never do anything like that.

OWB I thought your premise would be that Bush would not be intelligent enough to orchestrate such a plan.

Or is Bush only cunning at starting wars?

Personally I would think your stance on Bush would be best desribed as nefarious.

 

[OWB]

OWB I thought your premise would be that Bush would not be intelligent enough to orchestrate such a plan.

Or is Bush only cunning at starting wars?

Personally I would think your stance on Bush would be best desribed as nefarious.

It doesn't take a brilliant person to start a fight....

However, it might take one to get out of one.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

It doesn't take a brilliant person to start a fight....

I would agree with that particular statement, but going back to the conspiracy, Bush's plan was to strangle Iran by invading Iraq and Afghanistan.

Then the second conspiracy would have Bush acting secretly with Israel to wage war on Syria and Iran.

If either are true, on any moral/ethical disagreement, Bush cannot be all that stupid.

*Where is smoke to compare Bush to Hitler........?* It is 1939-1941 all over again..... :ermm:

However, it might take one to get out of one.

Naturally it could only be a democrat? Just like it is supposed only a Republican can fight a war..........

 

[jdsa]

If either are true, on any moral/ethical disagreement, Bush cannot be all that stupid.

Bush can be plenty stupid. It's his team of advisors (aka the literati or knights templars to conspiracy theorists) that has the brains (or lack thereof) and are likely running the show.

 

[therealUT]

Bush can be plenty stupid. It's his team of advisors (aka the literati or knights templars to conspiracy theorists) that has the brains (or lack thereof) and are likely running the show.

Glad you are taking as historical fact, what has been presented in a fictional novel...

 

[jdsa]

Glad you are taking as historical fact, what has been presented in a fictional novel...

Well, you know what they say, life imitates art. . .
or maybe it's the other way around, I can never remember.


Don't get me wrong, I don't take this conspiracy stuff seriously. However, I was surprised to learn that there are at least a few people that take that Dan Brown novel as literal truth (never read it myself). I guess some people will believe anything they read.

 

[WA_Vol]

The question I have is, can Israel take on both Syria and Iran? I think the only reason they don't attack is because they are afraid of the U.S. becoming involved.

Its true the U.S. gives hundreds of millions of dollars to Israel for defense. I'm not sure I support the U.S. continued support of Israel. Its done nothing but cause all the arab terrorists in the world to hate us and I don't believe Israel can continue to exist without U.S. support.

This to me, is the crux of the problem. At what point are you willing to take on the entire arab world to support Israel, or do you allow nature to take its course and allow Israel to be overtaken by its Arab neighbors?

 

[utvolpj]

The question I have is, can Israel take on both Syria and Iran? I think the only reason they don't attack is because they are afraid of the U.S. becoming involved.

Its true the U.S. gives hundreds of millions of dollars to Israel for defense. I'm not sure I support the U.S. continued support of Israel. Its done nothing but cause all the arab terrorists in the world to hate us and I don't believe Israel can continue to exist without U.S. support.

This to me, is the crux of the problem. At what point are you willing to take on the entire arab world to support Israel, or do you allow nature to take its course and allow Israel to be overtaken by its Arab neighbors?

The US also gives lhundreds of millions of dollars to the UN which has done nothing to stop this. They have been allowing the Palestinian "refugee" issue to drag on for 60 years. I would say this is not really good for a peace process. The UN has proven itself a corrupt, anti-US, and anti-semitic entitiy. If they care so much about peace for Israel they could have solved this a while ago.

The question is not WHAT you choose but why there must be a choice in the first place. Why must the radicals seek the elimination of Israel? Do you think if they were allowed to do it then the world turns into a magical, happy place? Come on man, they will never stop until they are dealt with. They do not believe in diplomacy. Israel scares the crap out of the ME and I think we should support them. Tell those radicals to take some reading comprehension lessons along with their Quran lessons and we might get somewhere.

 

[therealUT]

Hundreds of millions...try $3 BILLION in contributions to the UN.

Total U.S. Contributions to the UN System,
Both Assessed and Voluntary -
Estimated at $3.0 Billion

Humanitarian/Human Rights - 39%
Environment - 2%
Development - 8%
Weapons of Mass Destruction - 3%
UN Regular Budget - 9%
UN Peacekeeping - 31%
Open Markets - 4%
Health - 4%

*Figures are based on FY 2002, excluding U.S. arrears payment.
Percentages reflect how U.S. dollars are divided within the UN system.

--US Department of State website
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/24236.htm

U.S. Financial Contributions to the United Nations
The United States is the largest financial contributor to the UN, and has been every year since its creation in 1945. U.S. contributions to the UN system in 2003 were well over $3 billion. In-kind contributions include items such as food donations for the World Food Program.

The U.S.-assessed contribution to the UN regular budget in 2003 was $341 million, and to UN specialized agencies was over $400 million. The United States also contributed $686 million in assessments to the peacekeeping budget; $57 million for the support of the international war crimes tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia; and $6 million for preparatory work relating to the Capital Master Plan to renovate the UN Headquarters in New York. Moreover, each year the United States provides a significant amount in voluntary contributions to the UN and its affiliated agencies and activities, largely for humanitarian and development programs.

http://www.state.gov/p/io/fs/2004/36416.htm

 

[Arclight]

1. Israel cannot take Iran because they do not have a big enough army. They would also be too far away to have a good logistical supply line.

2. Israel could militarily take Syria.

3. The UN is a group of third-world socialist thugs who always want money. The UN is against any type of free government. It is anti-American and anti-Israel.

The more Hezbollah Terrorists that are eliminated by Israel will save US the effort later.

Good luck to ISRAEL, it's IDF and it's people.

ROLL THAT ARMOR!!

 

[therealUT]

While Israel cannot conquer Iran, the Hel Avir(Air Force) could take out many targets of opportunity across Iran.

Also, like the toy tank, but remember, there are only 2 military branches: Infantry and infantry support!