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

71–80 of 80 posts

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

#71

Post by KMag »

larrys wrote: post #2

Of note: "“The Iron Dome system and its impressive success thus far have had a strategic impact on managing the campaign. It gives us wide options,” said Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon. “Having said that, we cannot become complacent.”" Reminds me of when I first read many years about the potential paradox of using a firewall and security - that it also meant you couldn't ignore individual security settings (turning of…

How is that a paradox?[1] I fail to see the contradiction in putting up a defense and yet remaining cautious. Did you instead mean that it is ironic? I don't find it ironic or paradoxical, but I think irony is closer to the word you're looking for.

Taking one precaution and yet remaining cautious is rather common. We wear seat belts, yet drive carefully. We practice good hygiene, and yet get vaccinations, etc.

[1]http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox

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

#72

Post by pbh101 »

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…

My general impression before reading the article is the Iron Dome, while technically impressive, wouldn't help ease the systemic problems, because if rockets become ineffective enough, other means of enacting violence/getting the point across will be used.

Meanwhile, aggressive action gets cheaper for Israel from a human casualty perspective if they don't have to worry about further pissing people off who have rockets. Cynically speaking, lowering the cost of something makes it more likely to happen :(

If, however, Iron Dome gets to a point where Israel feels safe enough to delay/attenuate/cancel a ground invasion as a mitigating/retaliatory tactic, one possibility the article mentioned, then it could be a net benefit. Does require self-control, though. And I don't know how safe people will feel if rockets are being fired in their general direction, even if you get very good at shooting them down; I doubt it is something you get complacent about.

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

#73

Post by waps »

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…

If you look at what the organisation that is Hamas does to it's own people, I really question any one-sidedness. Plus, let's face facts here : it's a war. Hamas has declared it's intent to hunt down every Jew on the face of the planet (and atheist, incidentally), and they do stuff like this :

E.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQtZ9DY3MnU

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using violence against these people. There I've said it. Are the Israeli's innocent ? No. But that doesn't mean they are morally on the same level as the Palestinians.

I agree that you should read many different news sources, but keep in mind who owns Al Jazeera just as much as you'd take who owns the BBC into account.

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

#74

Post by waps »

dngr7512 wrote: post #56
forgotAgain wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You gotta admire the utter delusion of people using the "give it back" argument. Islam is a religion that spread through military conquest and massacres. There is no such thing as a square meter on this planet where islam spread peacefully.

So can we please give back all the land ? Of course, there would be nowhere for muslims to live at all, least of all Palestina. It was not arab land, it was not muslim land. Nor was Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt. Can we give back the land, kick out everybody who currently lives there.

The truth is as sad as it is obvious : nobody is clamoring for the land to be given back because ... they're all dead. Egypt was mined for "black gold" (slaves for muslims). Anything south of the delta was black in ancient times. Carthago (Tunisia) was filled with black people. Mined to death. Palestine, in ancient times, was filled with Jews (as everybody knows I guess), and so was Saudi Arabia. Before that ... we don't really have any data, but given the location of the region, I would imagine it changed hands many times. Iraq was a nation of Indians, not arabs.

I find it hard to believe people using arguments like that can be reasoned with at all. The utter absurdity of it.

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

#75

Post by ibisum »

omonra wrote: post #59
CamperBob2 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Depends if Washington or London were facing a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions on account of repressive blockades from a neighbor. I'm quite sure Washington or London would be sending missiles towards any country promoting invasion, destruction of hospitals, repression of the general population ..

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

#76

Post by larrys »

KMag wrote: post #71
larrys wrote: post #2

Of note: "“The Iron Dome system and its impressive success thus far have had a strategic impact on managing the campaign. It gives us wide options,” said Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon. “Having said that, we cannot become complacent.”" Reminds me of when I first read many years about the potential paradox of using a firewall and security - that it also meant you couldn't ignore individual security settings (turning of…

How is that a paradox?[1] I fail to see the contradiction in putting up a defense and yet remaining cautious. Did you instead mean that it is ironic? I don't find it ironic or paradoxical, but I think irony is closer to the word you're looking for. Taking one precaution and yet remaining cautious is rather common. We wear seat belts, yet drive carefully. We practice good hygiene, and yet get vaccinations, etc. [1] ht…

I don't know but I think it is a paradox.

Here is why:

You put up a firewall to make you secure. So you should be secure. But by putting up a firewall you fail to secure something else or you are lax in another area of security. Because you think "it's been take care of. So I see it as a paradox. Although it could be ironic if someone put up a firewall but then was hacked because of something they didn't do thinking they didn't need it if they had a firewall. That would be an irony.

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

#77

Post by jpeavy1 »

reuven wrote: post #68

As a programmer and person in high tech, I'm in awe of the Iron Dome. The speed with which it has to make decisions, and with which it does so, and the number of rockets that it has knocked out the sky, demonstrate what an amazing piece of technology this is. I've been programming for a long time, but still can't begin to imagine the complexity of the calculations that these systems are doing, and how well they've ma…

Perhaps you should re-watch the Star Trek episode A Taste of Armageddon wherein a country engages in a sanitized war and the effect that has on their ability to find real, sustainable, long-term solutions.

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

#78

Post by reuven »

jpeavy1 wrote: post #77
reuven wrote: post #68

As a programmer and person in high tech, I'm in awe of the Iron Dome. The speed with which it has to make decisions, and with which it does so, and the number of rockets that it has knocked out the sky, demonstrate what an amazing piece of technology this is. I've been programming for a long time, but still can't begin to imagine the complexity of the calculations that these systems are doing, and how well they've ma…

Perhaps you should re-watch the Star Trek episode A Taste of Armageddon wherein a country engages in a sanitized war and the effect that has on their ability to find real, sustainable, long-term solutions.

An interesting point, even if that episode depicts something quite different from our current situation. I don't think that HN is quite the place for such a discussion; I'd be happy to take it offline, and explain my viewpoint as well as hear yours.

Believe me, I have a huge amount of criticism for the current Israeli government. I voted for opposition parties. I disagree with a large number of their policies, most of which have nothing to do with the Palestinians.

But I have nothing but praise for a government policy that results in fewer civilian deaths. Those might have long-range, unexpected effects, but less death is a good thing, I'd like to think.

Indeed, I would encourage all governments -- including that of Hamas in Gaza, which isn't exactly an enlightened democracy -- to spend time and money on ways to protect their people, and avoid death, injury, and destruction.

Given that Hamas has a stated policy of killing as many Israeli civilians as they possibly can, and that they have worked to achieve that goal to the greatest possible degree, I can only express delight and gratitude that Iron Dome exists, and that it is effective.

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

#79

Post by Fourowls »

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…

Gaza has no "dome" there, naturally, because if it did (with the big-oil money of their ideological brethren easily to pay) then Hamas could not play the victim card in the global press by counting up the civilians Hamas explicitly puts at risk of cross-fire even when Israel provides humane advance warning. Also given what operates as taqiyya tactics among the ideological brethren on display for the rest of the world, Israel would be unwise to trust that Eqypt had actually sealed any Hamas tunnels that could hurt Israel. Mossad hopefully is smarter than to believe what may be just a pack of Eqypt/Hamas lies in what is actually a monolithic ideology of terror and conquest. (Because, like, well, duh, uh, in a digital age Hamas didn't get the smoke signals from Eqypt a few days ago proposing truce that Israel was wiling to accept.) IDF may be on the ground to find out and fix the tunnel situation if necessary.

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

#80

Post by Fourowls »

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…

Go, Bibi!!!!! Stay strong. May God be with you!
Post reply on HN