Why did Israel attack Syria last night?

originally posted by: JoeP2247
What do you guys make of this?

This is coming just a few weeks after our intelligence had special meetings with Israel's people, so is it related?

I thought Israel was not opposed to leaving Asad in power.

And I sure don't think they would have attacked without our approval.

Before Israel supporters pipe up, that's a violation of international law and an act of war... Not the first time they've done it to Syria.

originally posted by: Winterpain
a reply to: the2ofusr1

I believe each attack has been with f-15's using standoff air to ground missiles. No need to risk their brand new F-35's when they can attack the Syrian capital without ever entering their airspace. Think air-launched cruise missile.

Winter

Cruise missiles are very expensive ordinance. They are self guided and fly distances under their own navigation without close air support. I suspect that you mean more standard air to surface missile/s like the Maverick or Popeye (if they were Israeli missiles at all).

The Syrians are saying that they were launched from Israeli jets. If they were cruise missiles, how could Syria know what planes they came from?

a reply to: chr0naut
Would they have been able to track the planes on radar, to see where they came from?

a reply to: DISRAELI

With Russian s300/s400 systems one would think so .

I know…

It’s the Syrian false flag operation; they’ve done it in order to blame the Israelis and then boom start the war.

/end of sarcasm

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I am not an Israel supporter - but just how many acts of war has Russia committed??

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: chr0naut
Would they have been able to track the planes on radar, to see where they came from?

If the planes came in at altitude or if the terrain was dead flat.

But the Israeli strategists would know that and so they would attempt to send the jets in low and not in an obvious beeline from Israel to target.

That being said, with multiple well placed radar arrays, who knows?

a reply to: JoeP2247

Against Israel? None.

Syria did nothing to justify this either. They're just attacking government forces in support of their Islamic State friends.

a reply to: chr0naut

Why do some of you guys think this was air to ground?? Cause some of you are right - even their radars would pick up planes launching.

I really think this was ground to ground - and that does mean cruise missiles - and almost certainly US supported to me.

Maybe I am wrong. But I think this has to be viewed in a larger context -

originally posted by: JoeP2247
a reply to: chr0naut

Why do some of you guys think this was air to ground?? Cause some of you are right - even their radars would pick up planes launching.

I really think this was ground to ground - and that does mean cruise missiles - and almost certainly US supported to me.

Maybe I am wrong. But I think this has to be viewed in a larger context -

I think it was ground to ground or was some booby-trap bombs left behind by the rebels.

The photo released by the Syrians does not look like the damage left by a high explosive missile but looks more like the standard home-made low concussion antipersonnel explosive (with shrapnel).

In the picture in this linked RT article, there doesn't seem to be much damage to the building but there is sign of shrapnel damage. Also, from the fire in video of a previous post, I'd assume that the fuel stores (and perhaps the aircraft on the ground) were the primary target/s, not personnel or other infrastructure. The fact that Syria has not released a list of casualties, I would take as an indicator that there were none.

I think that is a safe assumption as to the intended targets.

My kid was at firebase fox - when they got a lucky shot off that hit the ammunition dump in Iraq - 155s bouncing on the roof - looks similar to me. That was a mortar that hit them- but looks like similar damage.

a reply to: JimNasium

If One were to actually peruse the info I've provided, they would glean the FACT that it is against The Torah

Nowhere in the Torah does it say Jews cannot return to the land of Israel. It says they should not transgress sins, sure.

The Neviim and Ketuvim (prophets and writings) are the texts you refer to when talking about the FRINGE sects of Judaism e.g. Neturey Karta (not the entirety of Orthodox jews, as you so deceivingly claimed) who say Jews cannot return to ISrael. But Neviim and Ketuvim are not Torah.... before you talk about gleaning fact.... get your own facts straight!

Therefore, It is not against the Torah!! Misquoting the Torah is a sin... Ignorance is a sin... deny it bro!

Shabbos

a reply to: JoeP2247

"Why did Israel attack Syria last night?"

Sport or possibly they are felling left out?

a reply to: combatmaster

You mean besides these? :

Tractate Kesubos 111a
The Biblical book Song of Songs says: “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles or the deer of the field, not to arouse or awaken the love before it is desired.” This oath occurs three times in the Song of Songs (2:7, 3:5 and 8:4). The Talmud interprets this metaphorical language to mean as follows: the speaker here is G-d, and the “daughters of Jerusalem” are the Jewish people and the nations of the world. During the Jewish exile, which began with the destruction of the Temple in the year 69 CE, G-d placed three oaths upon the world, two upon the Jewish people and one upon the nations. The Jewish people were foresworn not to immigrate as a wall (i.e. en masse) to the Holy Land, and not to rebel against the other nations. The nations were foresworn not to afflict the Jews too much.

Midrash Rabbah on Song of Songs 2:7
The reason for the oath against mass immigration is that if the Jews were to do this on their own, why would the messiah have to come to gather in the exiles of Israel?

Midrash Rabbah on Song of Songs 8:14
The redemption of the Jewish people is compared to the grain harvest, the grape harvest, the spice harvest, and to a woman giving birth. The common thread of all these metaphors is that they cannot be done too early. If grain is cut too early, it will not be good even as animal feed. If grapes are cut too early, they will not even be good to make vinegar. If spice is picked too early, it will not have a smell; it must be allowed to dry out on the tree. And if a woman gives birth prematurely, the baby will not live. So too, if the Jewish people hurries the end, they will not be successful, but at the proper time, may it be soon, they will be successful.

Tractate Shabbos 63a
The difference between the present era and the days of messiah is that in the present era Jews are in exile under the nations and in the days of the messiah they will be independent.

Or these:

Precedent: Other Moments in History When Jews Attempted to End Exile in an Unauthorized Way

The Tribe of Ephraim
The Midrash Rabbah on Exodus (20:11) states that part of the tribe of Ephraim left Egypt thirty years before the Exodus, and met a bitter end: 300,000 of them were killed by the Philistines. The Midrash Rabbah on Song of Songs 2:7 says that these descendents of Ephraim transgressed the Oath.

The Invaders
The Book of Numbers (14:44) relates that a group of Jews undertook an unauthorized invasion of the Holy Land after the sin of the spies. Moses warned them, "Why do you transgress the command of G-d? It will not succeed!" The end was that "the Amalekites and the Canaanites who dwelt in that hill country came out, and smote them and smashed them to utter destruction." The Targum Yonasan on Song of Songs 2:7 says that these invaders transgressed the Oath.

Bar Kochba
In the year 130 CE, Simeon Bar Kochba led a Jewish revolt against Rome and established a Jewish kingdom. This is another one of the cases listed by the Midrash when the oaths were transgressed. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 93b) says that when the Jewish Sages of that time realized that Bar Kochba was not the messiah, they killed him, putting a stop to his revolt.

And from various Rabbis from previous years:

Rabbi Yonasan Eybeschutz (1690-1764)
The Jewish people cries out to the nations, "Do not awaken an early ingathering of Israel! Even if all the Jews are ready to go to Jerusalem, and all the nations agree, still, G-d forbid that I should go there!” (Ahavas Yonasan)

Or even from Benny:

Rabbi Chaim Ben Attar (1696-1743)
The verse “I will scatter you among the nations” refers to the first oath, which mandates that the Jews remain scattered and not immigrate as a wall, with a strong hand, to resettle the Holy Land. (Ohr Hachaim Commentary to Leviticus 26:32-33)

Somthing very fishy going down there.. and no statements fro syria at all?

I hear all the answers here and I appreciate them.

There is only one conclusion to me - we are going to war and it is imminent. If this is WWIII and our opponent is really Russia - we are so lucky. If the opponent was China it would really scare me. But all China is going to do now is sit back and laugh at us. FIne. They can laugh all they want.

We got Israel in there to test defenses - that is all. All the while we targeted Russian naval possibilities and forced them to withdraw. We have one h-ll of a force on their border - maybe 587 Abrams tanks and god knows how many propelled guns and other armor pointed directly at Russia. We are sending at least reinforced battalions all over the baltic - ex-USSR countries - why the h-ll do you think we are doing that??? That is why Putin is pulling his best air defense system (which sucks by the way) around Moscow.

This is no game.

Putin is a gambler and he just rolled snake eyes. Boy are we going to teach him a lesson now.

a reply to: JoeP2247

To be blunt Russia fields a far larger, far superior nuclear ICBM force than China does.

So i cant see why you fear China over Russia.

Truth is America and NATO could probobly wipe the floor with regards to a first strike nuclear conflict with China, Russia however is a whole other kettle of fish, Europe would be reduced to ashes as would rather a few of the US cities.

a reply to: andy06shake

This will never go nuclear - we do not intend to destroy Russia - only their actions. It is very Clausewitz - politics by other means.

In conventional war - Russia cannot last much past 14 days - gamed it in war college maybe 10 years ago - I am sure it is shorter now.

To some extent the perception of the games had to do with how one viewed theories of vertical envelopment maybe.

Does not matter much now.

a reply to: andy06shake

This will never go nuclear - we do not intend to destroy Russia - only their actions. It is very Clausewitz - politics by other means.

In conventional war - Russia cannot last much past 14 days - gamed it in war college maybe 10 years ago - I am sure it is shorter now.

To some extent the perception of the games had to do with how one viewed theories of vertical envelopment maybe.

Does not matter much now.

a reply to: andy06shake

This will never go nuclear - we do not intend to destroy Russia - only their actions. It is very Clausewitz - politics by other means.

In conventional war - Russia cannot last much past 14 days - gamed it in war college maybe 10 years ago - I am sure it is shorter now.

To some extent the perception of the games had to do with how one viewed theories of vertical envelopment maybe.

Does not matter much now.