Another Lebanon War/Gaza War is coming...

[MKSheppard]

AFP - Israel has completed tests on its Iron Dome anti-missile system, designed to provide a response to the thousands of rockets fired at Israel by Hamas and Hezbollah, the defence ministry said.

The system, which can intercept short-range rockets and artillery shells, underwent its final tests in the past 48 hours, a statement said.

"For the first time, Iron Dome faced multiple threats simultaneously. All the threats were intercepted with complete success," the statement said.

The IDF has also located positions along the Gaza border that will be used as bases for the system, which includes a launcher and radar system. After it completes the deployment of the system along the Gaza border, the IDF will begin deploying the system along the northern border with Lebanon.

MOD Dir.-Gen. Pinhas Buchris said that the system would eventually "transform" security for residents of southern and northern Israel.

"The defense establishment continues to be committed to do everything it can to provide all residents of Israel a multi-layered defense against missiles and rockets," he said.

Let me explain why I believe another war is on the way:

Iron Dome can't be deployed instantly ala Command and Conquer, and the full system won't be implemented for another year or two; it's high cost (currently $200k per interceptor) will limit initial deployment until production costs from a long production run bring it down to about $50k or below that -- and it will provide the infrastructure for a much "thickened" defenses, such as laser based ones; using the bases, radars, and C3I built for Iron Dome.

That gives Hamas/Fatah/Hizbollah a window in which to step up their attacks.

And they will. Because once Iron Dome is implemented, along with other Israeli micro-ABM measures, what will these parties be able to offer their populace?

Crippling Poverty in exchange for what, perhaps a random gunfire attack on some Israeli soldier?

It used to be that they could send a suicide bomber into Israel and blow up a disco or two, or a israeli bus.

Then Israel got wise and hardened up their homeland, built walls to restrict movement, etc.

In response, these parties began to use rockets and mortars to shell israel from what stretches of land they controlled - while the damage or casualties inflicted were minisucle, unless they got really lucky -- it was enough to sell to their captive populace as a way of "maintaining the war" on the Israelis.

So what happens when this path is closed down? They'll have nothing at all -- they'll just be a bunch of people the whole world can ignore, except for "peace" activists -- and thus why they'll try to attack to stave off irrevelancy.

[Sarevok]

Speaking of anti missile tech on the vehicle level there has been great change as well. As I understand during the 2006 war IDF's tanks and other fighting vehicles got hampered by Hezbollah rpg and anti tank missiles of all kinds. They have since then learned from the lesson and rushed the Trophy systems development time. Is there a chance we are going to see first real life use of a tank with point defense system ? If so how is Hezbollah going to react once their missiles greatly diminish in effectiveness ?

[Sarevok]

Question 2 this time about Iron Dome. 200K per interceptors sounds very expensive. With the primitive rockets Hezbollah uses you would be very lucky to hit something valuable enough to cause even ten thousands dollars of damage. Many Hezbollah rockets could not even hit a city reliably. Is not trading crude rockets for 200000 dollar SAMs an extremely lucrative way to inflict attrition damage upon Israel ?

[The Grim Squeaker]

Question 2 this time about Iron Dome. 200K per interceptors sounds very expensive. With the primitive rockets Hezbollah uses you would be very lucky to hit something valuable enough to cause even ten thousands dollars of damage. Many Hezbollah rockets could not even hit a city reliably. Is not trading crude rockets for 200000 dollar SAMs an extremely lucrative way to inflict attrition damage upon Israel ?

Any ABM (Yes, it's not a ballistic missile system and i'm butchering the term. Shut up!) variant worth a damn also tracks the missiles - it can determine roughly where it'll end up, and it's not that hard to track whether something will land near a settlement or not.

It's also still cheaper than going into the area to stop the attacks. (Never mind the PR angle, which tends to focus on "Israel brutally attacks Gaza in response to attack and only takes X casualties!!!!"

[Sarevok]

But what if Hezbollah starts the kind of missile attacks dwarfing ones seen in the last war ? They have learned that their rockets can do what arab air forces can't do (actually bombing Israeli cities) and would surely massively increase their stocks. You would have to intercept dozens perhaps hundreds of rockets. Then the price shoots up greatly. Hezbollah has to struggle a lot to kill just one tank or injure one Israeli civilian with shrapnel. Now each well aimed rocket is netting them 200000 dollars of damage on Israeli economy. What I am saying is that it is too early to put faith in a system like Iron Dome to act like an impervious city shield. Protecting vital installations is one thing but defending an entire city against large numbers of cheap weapons is too damn expensive. Israel still has to go out there and silence those rockets the old fashioned way instead of zapping them all like a star wars theater shield.

[Sea Skimmer]

Question 2 this time about Iron Dome. 200K per interceptors sounds very expensive. With the primitive rockets Hezbollah uses you would be very lucky to hit something valuable enough to cause even ten thousands dollars of damage. Many Hezbollah rockets could not even hit a city reliably. Is not trading crude rockets for 200000 dollar SAMs an extremely lucrative way to inflict attrition damage upon Israel ?

Who said that? The expected mass production cost is around 35,000 dollars, just about the same price as you pay for an anti tank missile which makes sense since the interceptor is about the same size as one. That would mean building enough interceptors to counter an attack by 10,000 rockets, about as many as Hamas fired in 2006, would only cost 350 million dollars exclusive of the costs of the fire control system. However Iron Dome is designed to ignore rockets which will not land near populated areas (which is most of them, all the more so the longer range they fly) so the actual number of interceptors required will be much less then the number of enemy rockets or mortar rounds. This is not a small amount of money for Israel but nor is it that much when spent over several years.

Direct cost comparisons are meaningless when the two sides financial resources are so disproportionate. Furthermore Israel doesn’t really need to build a defense system to repel an attack on the scale of 2006, they just need to be about to counter small scale, endless daily attacks. If another big conflict crops up then they get to throw another 5,000 offensive bombing sorties at whoever did it. In any case Iron Dome is basically an interim system until someone makes a laser cannon work well.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

Under the scenario described, Hamas will suffer most. It is effectively trapped in Gaza, its armament consisting mostly of glorified fireworks. Even if they do step up their attacks, there seems little they can do to stop this new system being deployed when the time comes. The result will probably be as MKSheppard describes.

Hezbollah is another matter. Whereas Hamas is pretty much reliant on its Gazan support base, being hemmed in by Israel and an unsympathetic Egypt, Hezbollah actually has access to the outside world, notably its main patrons Iran and Syria. As such, Hezbollah has the option of upping its game by increasing its capabilities with Iron Dome in mind.

As I see it, Hezbollah will need to increase its firepower. This will require large amounts of more advanced missiles, such as the Zelzal or Fateh-110, which Iron Dome may not be able to intercept. As seen in the 2006 conflict, such missiles are much harder to conceal than the smaller Katyushas and need more time to set up and fire, rendering them vulnerable to Israeli air strikes. Hezbollah will thus have to improve its anti-aircraft capabilities (a bigger stock of MANPADS would be necessary, but not sufficient) and/or house the missiles in hardened and preferably concealed silos. This will be expensive and difficult in itself, especially with Israel and sympathetic governments doing their utmost to prevent the actual weapons arriving. It will also require Hezbollah to significantly upgrade its infrastructures, even without the aforementioned silos. The financial aspect may be offset if Iran and Syria are willing to be generous. Whereas Hamas is a busted flush, Hezbollah proved itself a somewhat-useful catspaw by provoking the IDF and not being totally destroyed. If Iran and/or Syria want Hezbollah as a worthwhile proxy, they will have to cough up. On the other hand, a major rearmament drive on Hezbollah's part will not stay secret forever. If and when Israel finds out, a full-scale invasion of southern Lebanon with a view to destroying Hezbollah utterly is a real possibility.

All in all, this new development is highly significant. If Iron Dome works as its developers describe, it will significantly reduce the ability of Hamas and other Gaza-based groups to attack Israeli population centres. Hezbollah will have little choice but to improve its military capabilties or be defanged in the same fashion.

[Sea Skimmer]

As I see it, Hezbollah will need to increase its firepower. This will require large amounts of more advanced missiles, such as the Zelzal or Fateh-110, which Iron Dome may not be able to intercept.

Defense against very large multi ton rockets like that is already covered by Israeli Patriot batteries. The used of such heavy weapons would pretty well force Israel to go back to Beirut anyway.

[hongi]

So what happens when this path is closed down? They'll have nothing at all -- they'll just be a bunch of people the whole world can ignore, except for "peace" activists -- and thus why they'll try to attack to stave off irrevelancy.

So if this really works, will it change the political landscape significantly? Israel gets a tremendous leg up domestically and internationally, by virtue of the fact that it no longer has to respond with renewed offensives into the Palestinian territories.

[CJvR]

Well the Palestinians can always retreat back to regular terrorism if they no longer can strike Israel with conventional means so even a solid balistic defence hardly means peace for anyone. Although it will probably become more peaceful for those living within range of Gaza, for a while. Nothing really triggers man's imagination and inventiveness more than figuring out new ways to kill his fellow man.

[Darth Yan]

they won't need cause as much unnessary civillian casualties, which will help. After Cast Lead Support for israel in the US dropped to 44%, about 20%, Mainly because they came across as heartless sociopaths during the whole affair. this might allow them to regain credibility that they desperately need; my guess, Iron Dome's as much a publicity stunt saying "see, we're going to try to tone down needless civillian deaths, please support us", as it is them trying to find a deterrent. Still, this won't get rid of hezbollah. Also, I'm not sure lebanon will get another war. Israel lost big in 2006 (they accomplished nothing, so it wasn't a victory), and the 18 year occupation was also widely unpoular (correct me if I'm wrong

[[R_H]]

Found this article:

Is Iron Dome worth it?

Value of new anti-rocket system cannot be measured in purely economic terms

Alex Fishman
Published: 01.10.10, 23:54 / Israel Opinion

The examination of the Iron Dome anti-rocket system should not have to do with cost, but rather, with effectiveness. If this system is not effective enough, no sum in the world would justify its acquisition. Yet if it is operationally efficient, it’s worth every penny – and only for the simple reason that there is no alternative for it anywhere in the world.

The security fence between Israel and the West Bank cost us more than NIS 7 billion (roughly $1.8 billion) to this day. By the time it’s finished, its cost at best would total NIS 11 billion. Is it economical? Certainly not. It produces nothing. Yet would the average sane Israeli even think of arguing that the fence should not have been built because it’s not a financially sound project? Can anyone imagine life here without this barrier? Does anyone wish to go back to the days where buses were exploding here almost daily? Is it even possible to quantify, in shekels, the physical, social, and economic damages suffered by the State of Israel before the fence was erected?

Security cannot be touched. It’s not a physical product. Security is meant to create conditions that would allow progress and development, on the economic front too. How much money came into the State of Israel as result of the quiet provided by the fence in recent years?

And so, when it comes to the Iron Dome active defense system, we cannot talk in terms of immediate and direct economic viability. Iron Dome does not come with a business plan that guarantees a return on investment in 10 years. Just like there is no business plan for an F-15 fighter jet. This is not how we measure security. People who compare the price of an Iron Dome rocket to the price of a Scud missile or Grad rocket are mixing apples and oranges.

Value of diplomatic flexibility
The first question that needs to be asked is as follows: What is the alternative for the Iron Dome system in terms of active defense? At this time, there is no such alternative in the world, so we are dealing with a first-of-its kind system meant to provide a reasonable solution that would protect civilians from rockets.

Is there an effective offensive alternative? Here too the answer is negative. Had our Air Force been able to take care of the short-range rockets, we would not have had the mess in Lebanon and we wouldn’t embark on Operation Cast Lead in Gaza.

Is there a passive defense system that can replace the active defense system? Yes, there is. We can build bomb shelters that would allow civilians to stay there for whole days. After all, officials estimate that in the next clash the entire State of Israel will face a barrage of hundreds and thousands of rockets over time.

Yet can the State invest at this time billions in building such bomb shelters? Does anyone even imagine us staying in bomb shelters for weeks?

An effective active defense system grants the political leaders diplomatic flexibility. Had our leadership been able to deter or curb some of the rockets that hit populated areas in the north, perhaps we would not have needed the ground offense in the Second Lebanon War.

The moment the enemy realizes that its weapons are not effective enough and that the price it is paying for using them is greater than the benefit, it won’t be using them anymore. Is it possible to measure diplomatic flexibility in immediate economic terms? Active defense is at times an alternative to war.

Yet there is an economic index that we can use after all. We can look into how much it cost the State of Israel to rebuild the homes hit by rockets in recent years, and the damage to property expected in a future war, without Iron Dome and with Iron Dome. We should not be asking how much the rocket we launch costs, but rather, what’s the damage caused by an enemy rocket.

And we have not yet spoken about demagoguery. We have not yet spoken about morale and the rehabilitation of the injured, and about the dead. And yes, this too costs money; it is not economical. What can we do, living in the country is not economical.

[Darth Yan]

again, the conflict will only end if israel helps the arabs construct a fully functioning state THEN PULLS OUT. Hopefully, hamas's support will wane to the point where more moderate parties can come to power (provided Israel can wrangle in it's radicals.)