Israel fires two rockets into Gaza

[Violet_Crumble]

Jerusalem (CNN) -- Israel fired two rockets into southern Gaza on Saturday night, injuring one person, according to the Israel Defense Forces.

The airstrikes were in response to the firing of a Qassam rocket from Gaza, which landed in Sdot Negev Regional Council on Saturday morning, the IDF said.

A local security official in Gaza told CNN that one of the Israeli rockets hit an abandoned underground tunnel near the Egyptian border, injuring one person. The second rocket hit an open area in southern Gaza. No injuries were reported from the second strike.


http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/11/06/israel.gaza.strikes/

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. Odd, considering that the IAF does not use rockets

I assume they were missiles or other guided ordnance. So much for journalistic accuracy.

[Violet_Crumble]

2. Do you seriously think it makes it okay if they were missiles??

Missiles. Rockets. They're all the same to me. They kill people and those who fire them and injure and kill people with them are to be condemned. It's sad that you don't appear to agree...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Perhaps the questions should be asked did the event actually occur, has the IDF said they fired

ordnance into Gaza. When basic facts are wrong, you end up questioning the entire article.

[Violet_Crumble]

4. Asking such a pathetic question would be stupid considering everyone knows Israel does attack Gaza..

Asking a 'question' like that merely comes across as reeking of desperation to try to make out Israel doesn't do anything wrong. Especially when the person doing the asking has offered such telling questions as appearing in response to an OP where an Israeli religious figure urged genocide of the Palestinians asking the 'question' about when was the last time Ereket denounced anything. Not one word speaking out against the call for genocide...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=331371#331382

Anyway, instead of asking 'questions', why don't you answer the one I asked you. It was in the title of my post.

[shaayecanaan]

5. ???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Artillery_of_Israel

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. MLRS are not fired as single shots

[shaayecanaan]

9. You said that "Israel doesn't have rockets". That is incorrect.

Israel possesses the LAR-160, MAR-240 and MAR-290 rocket systems.

"MLRS are not fired as single shots"

Absolute bullshit. I have seen 40-year old Katyusha rockets being fired as single shots. Do you really think today's rocket systems are unable to fire single shots?

You accused the article of not being accurate, and yet you make two basic errors in the space of two sentences. Do you want to retract that allegation?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. Actually I said that the IAF does not have rockets...

but the proper term would be is not using rockets for single ground strikes. They are way way too inaccurate. The do have the Hydra70 series on their Apaches and IIRC used them in ICL. But since you want to discuss ground options, here we go.

First of all, if you understood the differences between an MLRS and a Grad/Katyusha you would not make such a comparison. Katyusha launchers are reloaded one at time and have discrete launch controls. The MLRS and its clones are loaded in boxed magazines called pods. In case of a partial magazine expenditure, doctrine is to replace the pod with a full one and send the partial pod back for refurbishment. I bring this up since you failed to mention that the IDF does have US made M-270 MLRS systems. Its principal load out is sub-munition rounds, AKA cluster bombs.

The LAR-160 Lynx is a low cost and lighter MLRS clone and follows it architecture very closely and the same doctrine.

MAR-240/MAR-290 were both based on Sherman Tank Chassis none of which are in use by the IDF today. MAR-240 was never massed produced. The MAR-290, was was replaced in the 1990s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postwar_Sherman_tanks#Israeli_variants


The real reason the the IDF is not using rockets is that they are precise enough. Assuming there was a strike, it would have been an air launched PGM of some sort.

[shaayecanaan]

11. I know perfectly well what pods are...

and there is nothing stopping an operator from firing off a single rocket, as you seem to now concede. In fact, as I recall, the IDF has responded to Qassam strikes with rockets quite frequently in the past; indeed I think news items have been posted in this forum on this very issue.

There is also no suggestion that the rocket strike came from the IAF. The news story simply says "IDF". The reason that the IDF responds to Qassams with rockets is that its quicker to arrange. By the time a plane can respond the Qassam team would already have decamped.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. Our resident authority has spoken, haw haw haw.

[oberliner]

13. Wikipedia?

That seems to be everyone's resident expert.

[Crunchy Frog]

14. So what exactly are you doing? Going back and kicking all of VC's old threads?

I never realized you were that fond of her. :shrug:

[Violet_Crumble]

15. Crunchy, I've got that poster on ignore...

I don't know why all those threads of mine were kicked in such quick succession this morning, but there's worse threads that could have been kicked to the top of the forum :)

[Crunchy Frog]

16. Maybe he's hoping someone will do the same thing to his threads. ;)

though I'd alot rather see a line of your threads on top of the forum than his. (No offence Oberliner :hi:).

[oberliner]

17. What the heck are you talking about?

Kicking threads?

[Crunchy Frog]

20. Well, I just noticed a whole line of threads in a row started by VC

and I checked them out, and on all of them the last post had been at least several days earlier until the post of yours had kicked it to the top. But I'm guessing this was probably just coincidence and not intentional on your part. You must have just been kicking threads that you found interesting and worthy of continuing discussion and they just happened to be VC's threads. I didn't realize you had so much respect for a poster who has you on ignore. Maybe you two should try to kiss and make up? :shrug:

[oberliner]

21. I thought kicking a thread meant adding a reply saying "kick" just to express approval

I just went through several threads that I hadn't yet followed up on with questions or responses.

[Crunchy Frog]

22. Oh, there's where the misunderstanding is.

Kicking a thread does not necessarily involve posting the word "kick". It can refer to simply posting on an old thread to bring it back up to the top of the page. I noticed you doing that with quite alot of old threads and just kind of wondered about it.

[oberliner]

23. OK

Well, thanks for the info.

Let's go back to arguing with each other!

[Crunchy Frog]

24. I was not arguing with you, and was not aware that you were arguing with me.

I've usually found you to be a poster whom I frequently disagree with, but whose postings are nevertheless a valuable part of a real dialogue. I have not felt that way about your postings the past two days, and I may end up following VC's lead.

[oberliner]

25. I just meant in other threads

Trying to lighten the mood.

Arguing/disagreeing/debating - what have you.

[oberliner]

18. You must be thinking of another poster

Unless you are just joshing.

[oberliner]

19. One of the weirder comments I've seen

What is your take on Wikipedia?

[Dick Dastardly]

6. The IAF certainly does use air to ground rockets.

Unlike the terror rockets these are not shot willy nilly but are accurately aimed to hit specific targets

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. Which rockets do you think are in use today?

That are single shot and aimed