Middle East Defence & Security

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
Counter examples, Big Z?
Excuse me for defaulting to the example I know best - Israel.
Netanyahu met with him quite frequently, and there were even more frequent exchanges of high ranking figures.
This likely contributed greatly to the significant increase in US-Israel cooperation and alignment on the middle eastern war.
 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
So Trump is again doing his ping pong rhetoric, but the common theme in every message is "the war must end soon".
I think we're all in agreement, on all sides, that wars should ideally be quick and if it could end then it'd be good.

But the way things are headed, I think the final outcome may be bad for all sides.
IDF is moving to implement early stages of the Gaza City campaign. It could choose to stop at the outskirts, or go for the whole city and flatten it.
Regardless, it's shaping up to a situation where the IDF permanently holds a significant, deep perimeter around Gaza, and corridors dissecting it.

Why is it bad for Israel? Because that forgoes several critical war objectives, particularly those referring to a day after.

Why is it bad for Hamas? Because they're exhausted and their potential for reconstitution is just a fraction of its pre war condition. No construction materials and machinery are coming in, hence no terrain modification.

And there's the wildcard that is the hostages. Most of the remaining ones are dead, so less valuable no matter how cruel that sounds.
We don't know what Hamas is asking for them. But it can only be bad for Israel.
The universal truth is that the fewer remain, the more difficult they are to get out. It is possible the last hostage deal has shut that door in our faces. And so it is realistic that Israel will for the first time say "No, there's a price too high."


In the situation described, does the war really end?
I think it'll be more of a media perception thing.
The next stage may initiate. Not one between Israel and Hamas, but a Gazan civil war between Hamas and other factions. Factions that need time and resources to recruit, train, and take action, yet need to be on a leash to not turn into another Hamas.

Even if they win, it won't result in a demilitarized Gaza. It will just be differently militarized. Going forward from there will be a difficult challenge that will require a lot of hands on approach from Israel and the US (if the latter wants to shape things).

Important visual context to this post:


I also recommend following him:
 
Last edited:

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
Regarding Gaza City campaign, it's generally assumed that it'll culminate in the city being flattened, and tunnels being methodically demolished or sealed.
For that, the IDF is reportedly rushing additional M113 based VBIEDs.
Since the entire city is boobytrapped, there is no option but to scan, map, and demolish every building individually. To risk fewer soldiers, who have already died from such traps, the army is using VBIEDs on a larger scale. I assume to create more controlled blasts on precise locations.



To clear an entire city, however, you need to move its people out. For that purpose, various aid organizations brought in large amounts of tents, and Israel is setting up a second power line for water desalination in Gaza. Additionally, water pipes are being laid from Egypt to Gaza.
And as you can see in the post above, Israel operates a desalination plant along the Gaza coastline.
The goal is to get ~800,000 people to evacuate to humanitarian zones, otherwise the operational tempo will come to a crawl.

 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
IDF is now targeting high rise buildings.

We've seen this tactic in Operation Rising Dawn in 2022, but for a different purpose. Then it was a counter-value strike.
Today the considerations are different. Palestinians are refusing to leave Gaza City, so I'm assuming the IDF conducts high profile deterring strikes, and to reduce living space in Gaza City to make it a worse QoL alternative to Mawasi.
 
Top