What the Hiz folks are shooting at Israel.

Ball bearings in the warheads. Fun stuff.

15 Responses to “What the Hiz folks are shooting at Israel.”

1. The_Real_JeffS says:

   July 21, 2006 at 2:59 pm

   Converting an indiscriminate, inaccurate rocket into an indiscriminate, inaccurate, anti-personnel rocket. This looks a poor man’s version of of the submunitions in the multiple launch rocket system (MLRS). Except, of course, that the MLRS is very accurate (even without GPS), and we use to destroy enemy formations….not civilian targets.
   That is just too evil for words. Still, I expect the moral equivilency to start soon enough.
   I’ve also noticed that for a part of the world that has imported virtually all of their technology since the 14th century (and even then borrowed a lot), the Middle East certainly has a lot of clever people when it comes to hands-on stuff. Especially when it comes to killing people.

2. Mr. Bingley says:

   July 21, 2006 at 3:04 pm

   Yeah, I would imagine those ball bearings are useless against military targets.

3. Crusader says:

   July 21, 2006 at 3:16 pm

   It would put a hurtin’ on troops and soft skin vehicles.

4. Mike Rentner says:

   July 21, 2006 at 3:39 pm

   I find it odd that people are fixating on this. Ball bearings work just fine against military targets. People are in the military, plus these chunks of steel will penetrate 3/8″ or thicker steel like it was butter. In Iraq our vehicles were generally only armored with steel that thick or thinner.

5. DirtCrashr says:

   July 21, 2006 at 3:50 pm

   Idn’at illegal? Shouldn’t the anti-war protestsores protest this?

6. The_Real_JeffS says:

   July 21, 2006 at 4:11 pm

   ‘Scuse me, folks, but I guess I wasn’t clear enough. I was speaking about “civilian targets”….especially since the photos were of a civilian neighborhood. Other people focused on the military aspect.
   No kidding, there are soft targets in the military. They’re called “soldiers”, it’s just that they are legitimate targets under the Geneva Convention. Except, of course, Hezbollah isn’t signatory to the GC.
   DirtCrashr — that’s debatable. The GC does prohibit certain types of weapons; some argue that the submunitions that I linked to above are included. And this is not much different in concept from the Claymore mine, which sends 600 ball bearings ripping through people and thin-skin vehicles up to 100 meters away in a 60 degree arc. Think of an huge shotgun, and you get the picture. That, I think, is legit under the GC.
   Of course, a directional anti-personnel weapon that shoots ball bearings aimed at near by targets is somewhat different in application than from an indiscriminate, inaccurate, anti-personnel rocket fired from beyond the horizon.
   Except, of course, Hezbollah isn’t signatory to the GC. Which really renders this aspect of this discussion completly moot.

7. Mike Rentner says:

   July 21, 2006 at 8:28 pm

   Why do you think the Hizbollah are aiming at civilian targets? You’re assuming they can hit what they aim at! 🙂
   Their justification for bombing Israeli cities is as legitimate as our bombing of any place in WWII. We couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn either back then.
   Not that I’m sympathetic in the least, but that they are bombing a city is not in and of itself a crime.

8. Ken S, Fifth String on the Banjo of Life says:

   July 21, 2006 at 9:57 pm

   Mike, deliberately targetting civilians is a war crime. Hitting military targets that happen to have civilians there is not.
   The only possible Allied bombing raid in WWII that might (MIGHT) be considered a war crime was Dresden. But, in fact, the Germans started terror bombing, then the Allies gave it back to them in spades.
   There is no moral equivalency between the Allies and Hezbollah.

9. The_Real_JeffS says:

   July 21, 2006 at 11:01 pm

   Not that I’m sympathetic in the least, but that they are bombing a city is not in and of itself a crime.
   I guess I missed the part where Hezbollah became a recognized government, Mike, rather like Hamas did. Can you point me to some URLs that describe this happy occasion? Last I heard, Hezbollah was a terrorist organization, so I really need to do some catching up on world events.
   Or are you thinking about the fact that Hezbollah members have ministerial posts in the Lebanonese government? If so, when did Lebabnon declare war on Israel? As I recall, Hezbollah pulled the pin on this one.
   I have no sympathy at all for terrorists, you see. That includes not excusing their tactics.
   And to amplify on Ken’s excellent point:
   Haifia is a seaport, and can be considered a military target, so I suppose you have a point there. I just have a hard time believing that cramming ball bearings into an over-the-horizon missile is strategic in nature. The only way I can follow that reasoning is to assume that that the shooter want to kill lots of people, which means that the purpose of the missiles is terror. Sort of like an IED that flies.
   That’s not solid reasoning, of course. But then, neither is moral equivalency.

10. The_Real_JeffS says:

    July 21, 2006 at 11:22 pm

    From Human Right News, a related story. FWIW.

11. Mike Rentner says:

    July 22, 2006 at 12:21 am

    I’m not making excuses for them at all. I’m on record very clearly as saying all the rag heads need to be exterminated.
    But just because they don’t have a form of government that you like doesn’t make their use of force, without regard for motive which is despicable, illegitimate in its own right.
    In all wars there are aggressors and victims. Only one side is right, and in this case it is clearly Israel. But throughout the millenia people have been allowed to wage wars whether their cause was just or not. This is a war that has started, they are allowed to fight it. Since they are fighting it they are perfectly justified in shooting rockets at the infrastructure (i.e., port facilities, power plants, airports) of Israeli cities.
    If they can’t do it, then neither can Israel. And Israel most certainly can. If it’s good for the goose it’s good for the gander, this is war. The goal is to be better at it than the enemy is, not to cry “foul” when one side uses the same tactics against the other.

12. Gunslinger says:

    July 22, 2006 at 1:21 am

    “In all wars there are aggressors and victims. Only one side is right, and in this case it is clearly Israel. But throughout the millenia people have been allowed to wage wars whether their cause was just or not. This is a war that has started, they are allowed to fight it. Since they are fighting it they are perfectly justified in shooting rockets at the infrastructure (i.e., port facilities, power plants, airports) of Israeli cities.”
    Mikey, get a grip on reality.
    Hizbullah only cares about killing the maximum amount of Israelis possible (hence, the shotgun warhead). Israelis are their targets, not infrastructure.
    Trying to draw equivalency between terrorists and soldiers is very unbecoming (not to mention the incessant use of the word “allowed”)

13. The_Real_JeffS says:

    July 22, 2006 at 2:18 am

    But just because they don’t have a form of government that you like doesn’t make their use of force, without regard for motive which is despicable, illegitimate in its own right.
    Huh. So the terrorists have the right to kill civilians, yes? Or do I oversimplify your generalization?
    But what it sounds like is that you really don’t care who kills who in this latest conflict. Is this what you meant by “…all the rag heads need to be exterminated“?
    If so, I accept your perspective. It’s just that I do care who gets killed. You know — the side that’s right? Israel?
    Since they are fighting it they are perfectly justified in shooting rockets at the infrastructure (i.e., port facilities, power plants, airports) of Israeli cities.
    Mike, did you look at that slide show? Tell me those buildings are infrastructure. Last I heard, apartments are not classified as infrastructure.
    Yeah, yeah, the rockets are inaccurate. Got it. They aimed at the port and hit an apartment complex, completely by accident. Using an inaccurate rocket, of course.
    Never mind.
    Of more interest, this is similar to the V1 and V2 missiles in WWII in many ways. Hitler launched them at random civilian targets strickly to create terror. They were not militarily effective.
    So, Hezbollah takes a page from Hitler’s book…..and the Israeli’s from the Allied book. Says a lot about the Hezbollah terrorists, don’t it?

14. Mike Rentner says:

    July 22, 2006 at 2:15 pm

    I didn’t say they have a “right” to kill civilians. I said they have just as much right to fight a war by targeting infrastructure as the Israelis do.
    And Americans have a very long history of targeting civilians, from the Civil War to WWII. You could just as easily say that Hezbollah is taking a page from the American book.
    Throughout all of history civilians have been legitimate targets as well, especially in siege warfare.
    It’s a big scary world. The answer to the hezbollah/Syrian/Iranian war is not to complain about how mean they are. The answer is to kill them.

15. Mr. Bingley says:

    July 22, 2006 at 3:23 pm

    The answer to the hezbollah/Syrian/Iranian war is not to complain about how mean they are. The answer is to kill them.
    I’m with you there.