Peres: Israeli army was not ready for war on Hezbollah (1 Viewer)

[dam10]

Occupied Jerusalem: Vice-Premier Shimon Peres told a panel investigating the government's handling of last year's war in Lebanon that Israel's decision to invade was a mistake and the military was unprepared, according to testimony made public.
Peres also said Hezbollah did a better job of handling media coverage than the Israelis did.
The 15-page transcript of his appearance before the commission last November has large swathes deleted by Israel's military censors on security grounds, but nevertheless provides insights into the veteran statesman's thinking. The transcript was released on Thursday.
No blame game
"The greatest mistake is the very fact of war," he told the commission. "If it had been up to me, I would not have gone into this war." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appointed the commission, headed by a retired judge, under intense pressure from a dissatisfied public because of the inconclusive war.
Hezbollah rained almost 4,000 rockets on northern Israel, but Israel's military failed to achieve the war's stated aims - smashing the group and returning two captured soldiers.
Army chief Dan Halutz resigned after widespread criticism and there were calls for Olmert and Defence Minister Amir Peretz to follow suit.
While Peres refused to lay blame, he said the military "was not prepared for this war" and its inconclusive outcome harmed Israel's deterrent posture in the eyes of the Arab world.
"We are perceived today as weaker than we were before," he said.
Peres told the commission the war was neither a success nor a failure, but he said the government was wrong to publicly prioritise the return of the soldiers, snatched by Hezbollah in a cross-border raid on July 12.
'Wrong' to prioritise goal
"If you say your primary objective is to free the abducted [soldiers], you in practice put yourself at the mercy of the enemy," Peres told the panel. "Why would you say that?" He added that Hezbollah had been more effective than Israel in the battle for favourable media coverage of the month-long conflict, finding an effective spokesman in its leader Hassan Nasrallah.
"Hezbollah united around a spokesman of no little talent - Nasrallah," Peres said. "We relentlessly attacked one another. One person blamed the other and the net effect was negative."
Peres, 83, told the five-member panel of jurists and retired generals that he kept his misgivings about the war to himself for fear that arguing against it in Cabinet meetings would leak out and damage the public perception of ministerial unity.
"It would have come out immediately," he said. "I wanted to be cautious but effective and not like someone from the opposition." The panel has said it will issue partial findings in late April, including assessments of decisions taken by Olmert and other key officials. Although the commission does not have the power to dismiss Olmert, analysts say a critical report could force the unpopular premier to resign.
In February, Olmert gave seven hours of testimony and underwent intense questioning before the commission in a closed-door hearing perceived as his last chance to stave off censure. The transcript is expected to be released soon.

WHAT TYPE OF VICTORY IS THAT?

 

[S1M0]

A great insight into the Lebanon-Israel conflict.

 

[Collin]

Poorly executed war; just like the American invasion of Iraq. That isn't an attempt to necessarily refute it's moral merits, though.

 

[banco55]

As far as quality goes the Israeli army has been in decline for the 25 years or so. But quantity wise they are better off than ever. Israel's officer corps used to be able to attract the cream of Israeli society but they become lawyers, IT people etc. these days. Plus the current MTV generation isn't as hardy and motivated with regards to military service as the previous generations. However the size of Israel's army relative to the Arabs is as favourable as it has ever been and Israel's technological edge is greater than it has ever been.

They could still wipe the floor with any combination of Arab armies but they aren't what they were in '67. Anyway Israel has been very fortunate in the enemies it has had. The Arabs still can't use technology properly and it's universities are still worse than fifth rate.

 

[BritneySpears]

As far as quality goes the Israeli army has been in decline for the 25 years or so. But quantity wise they are better off than ever. Israel's officer corps used to be able to attract the cream of Israeli society but they become lawyers, IT people etc. these days. Plus the current MTV generation isn't as hardy and motivated with regards to military service as the previous generations. However the size of Israel's army relative to the Arabs is as favourable as it has ever been and Israel's technological edge is greater than it has ever been.

They could still wipe the floor with any combination of Arab armies but they aren't what they were in '67. Anyway Israel has been very fortunate in the enemies it has had. The Arabs still can't use technology properly and it's universities are still worse than fifth rate.

True but dogs can learn modern technology better than arabs. Therfore, they are doomed, regardless of their large numbers of army. Modern war is not fought on numbers but by state of the art technology and those who master the technology will always have an edge. One skilled israeli, british or american soldier is equal to 100 chinese, arabs, iranian or russian soldiers in terms of capability, fire power and effectiveness.

 

[dam10]

True but dogs can learn modern technology better than arabs. Therfore, they are doomed, regardless of their large numbers of army. Modern war is not fought on numbers but by state of the art technology and those who master the technology will always have an edge. One skilled israeli, british or american soldier is equal to 100 chinese, arabs, iranian or russian soldiers in terms of capability, fire power and effectiveness.

Iranian?