Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 80 posts

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#51

Post by icebraining »

akie wrote: post #30
adventured wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a smaller adult is swinging a knife at you, and you're able to mostly avoid being hit by the knife by holding him at arms length, is it acceptable to respond with force to disarm the knife-wielding lunatic? Yep.

You're conveniently ignoring motives here. If the lunatic adult is wielding a knife because (he claims that) you took his house and land and started living in it and don't want to leave, then do you still think it's acceptable to hit him? It seems to me that you're oversimplifying the situation. Nothing is black and white, and certainly not the Israel-Palestina conflict.

I think ende was also oversimplifying the situation, though.

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#52

Post by [deleted] »

hn_politics145 wrote: post #39
ibisum wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, in this case.. the post seemed to be about a new cool technology. So the article is little more than a straw man to divert from the real atrocities being committed by the Israelis' in Gaza today. And that is entirely the point of the OP - that this article is little more than a technocratic diversion to feed the fetish of a homogenous target group, rather than real reporting on the issue.

Why is everything an Israeli conspiracy?

[deleted]

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#53

Post by paletoy »

denom wrote: post #4

The "Iron Dome" will not change the current situation in a way that, say, political negotiation will. It's really frustrating to watch the same process play itself out. Throw a few more bombs in, stir the ashes (so to say) and repeat in 2 years. Is the ongoing plan to degrade the operational capacity of Hamas _just so_ that they cannot seriously threaten? Does the Iron Dome entail perpetual open warfare? It's clear t…

It is not an israeli plan. Basically hamas have chosen the wrong side in the syrian conflict, so it lost the support of iran and syria(and maybe saudi-arabia). He also lost the support of egypt due to the regime change. And he is in bad relations with fatah on the west bank.

All this put the hamas with very little political and monetary support and with inability to pay operatives. They are near collapse.

So how do hamas wants to get the support of the people of gaza? By creating a common enemy.

So they shoot missiles at israel, israel has no choice but to respond, political support of hamas increases and the cycle continues.

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#54

Post by [deleted] »

kenrikm wrote: post #8
gcb0 wrote: post #3

the oppressed people on the other side now engage in a financial war. for the price they would build one rocket with explosive payload, now they can build some 4 dummy ones. making the invading state pay 20k x3 more than before. while also recruiting more people, who would be averse to the violence before.

Or.. you know, stop firing rockets and maybe then more people will come and hear what you have to say.

[deleted]

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#55

Post by icebraining »

hn_politics145 wrote: post #33
asadlionpk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what if Israel paid the other side to fire rockets at them to create the excuse of invading Gaza. How unlikely is that?

Considering that Israel pulled its citizens and troops out of Gaza in 2005 in the hopes of peace, I'd say not only is this an insane conspiracy theory but also just obviously dumb.

It may be false, but I don't see why would it be "obviously dumb". 2005 was nine years and a few governments ago; enough time for policies to change. After all, just eight years before that, the current PM, who was also the PM back then, presented a plan that included annexation of most settlements.

I'm not saying the theory is correct, again, I have no idea, but that argument seems weak.

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#56

Post by dngr7512 »

forgotAgain wrote: post #45
hn_politics145 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 'occupation' of course being the existence of Israel.

Nice try but no sale. The occupation being the land taken by Israel in the 1967 war.

what about the land stolen from the Indians in america? why not give their land back??

Every country in the world is the making of occupation, if you want your land back, don't shoot rockets, that simple.

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#57

Post by paletoy »

jds375 wrote: post #16

The software design is particularly interesting. I recommend this article: "Typical command-and-control software for military gear is highly customized and hard to modify. The key to MPrest’s success, Barak says, is that the command-and-control software is simple and modular, so customers can quickly adapt it without reprogramming. The Israeli army was able to recalibrate Iron Dome batteries almost immediately, witho…

From the article: "Microsoft’s Windows and .NET architecture make up the base layer of the system .. The same basic technology is being used for civilian purposes, including for a vehicle fleet management system"

This raises two questions:

1. What is the commonality between missile defense and fleet management ?

2. How does a system that is most likely real-time run on windows/.net ?

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#58

Post by omonra »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #9

Wow, what an unbalanced article! No mention of casualties on the other side. Disgusting one-sided coverage. I am really disappointed in the Washington Post. Bad job. I find that Israeli news sources like Haaretz are more balanced re: the middle east than the US news is - strange. Al Jazeera is another reasonable source for middle east news. Forget about US news coverage of the middle east. As an American, I find I of…

The article is about defensive technology, hence it doesn't mention the casualties on the other side.

Arabs also have a way to prevent missiles raining on them - by not lobbing missiles at Israel.

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#59

Post by omonra »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #47
hn_politics145 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is everything an Israeli conspiracy?

Because if this stuff were happening anywhere else, people in the Western world would be genuinely upset about it.

Good point - I want to know how long Washington or London would wait before wiping off whichever opponent was sending missiles at them.

Re: Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ changes the face of battle

#60

Post by youngtaff »

paletoy wrote: post #53
denom wrote: post #4

The "Iron Dome" will not change the current situation in a way that, say, political negotiation will. It's really frustrating to watch the same process play itself out. Throw a few more bombs in, stir the ashes (so to say) and repeat in 2 years. Is the ongoing plan to degrade the operational capacity of Hamas _just so_ that they cannot seriously threaten? Does the Iron Dome entail perpetual open warfare? It's clear t…

It is not an israeli plan. Basically hamas have chosen the wrong side in the syrian conflict, so it lost the support of iran and syria(and maybe saudi-arabia). He also lost the support of egypt due to the regime change. And he is in bad relations with fatah on the west bank. All this put the hamas with very little political and monetary support and with inability to pay operatives. They are near collapse. So how do h…

This appears to be a good analysis of the current situation - http://forward.com/articles/201764/how-politics-and-lies-tri...

It appears the politicians created the current war against the army's wishes, and that Hamas were actually keeping the peace on the ground

Post reply on HN