Hamas in Gaza (merged thread)

[William F. Owen]

Wilf: I have no idea what the answer is, but Haaretz did report it as a GPS-guided mortar:

Rex, well aware. However,

The commanders of the force instead decided to fire on the Qassam team with mortar shells equipped with a Global Positioning System for accurate fire.

But there is massive ambiguity in "mortar Shells" or "mortars" and GPS "positioning" and "guidance"

If there are now reliable GPS guided 120mm mortars, then happy days for my work, because that makes life a lot easier!

[Jedburgh]

WINEP, 14 Jan 09: The IDF in Gaza: Operational Concepts, Lines of Effort, and Effects

.....Cast Lead appears to be guided by a number of important operational concepts: continuous attacks on Hamas and associated entities, allowing Hamas little time to regroup; pervasive attacks throughout the Gaza Strip and against the entire Hamas target system; precision attacks to ensure target destruction with minimal collateral damage; isolation of Gaza from Egypt by air attacks along the Philadelphia Corridor; division of Gaza in half by ground forces; attention to humanitarian requirements while maintaining operational freedom of action; attention to information and psychological aspects of the battle; and minimizing IDF casualties through the application of heavy firepower and avoiding clashes in built-up and densely populated areas. Although these concepts are not immutable and some tension exists among them, particularly between the requirements to destroy enemy forces and facilities and to avoid civilian casualties, they shape the direction, emphasis, and intensity of IDF actions.....

JP, 18 Jan 09: Operation Cast Lead heads to the courtroom

The next battle concerning Operation Cast Lead is likely to be played out in the courtroom rather than in the alleys of the Gaza Strip.....

....According to data gathered by NGO Monitor, Amnesty International has accused Israel of "unlawful attacks," Human Rights Watch accused Israel of "indiscriminate" attacks that were against the "rules of law," and Oxfam said Israeli leaders have committed "massive and disproportionate violence... in violation of international law."

These allegations may find their way into foreign courts - with Britain and Spain likely sites for suits and even attempts at criminal prosecution. In the past, many of the allegations against Israeli military and defense leaders were filed with British magistrates, since in the United Kingdom, individuals presenting evidence can request indictments from magistrates. In such instances, Israel must rely on local lawyers to plead its case in the courts.....

[Rex Brynen]

But there is massive ambiguity in "mortar Shells" or "mortars" and GPS "positioning" and "guidance"

If there are now reliable GPS guided 120mm mortars, then happy days for my work, because that makes life a lot easier!

More on both the GPS "guided"/"targeted" mortar issue, and the use of WP in Gaza (I'm sure Wilf caught this in Haaretz, but for the benefit of others):



Haaretz, 21 January 2009
IDF probes improper use of phosphorus shells in Gaza Strip

By Amos Harel

Alkalai's probe is thus focusing on the second type: phosphorus shells, either 81mm or 120mm, that are fired from mortar guns. About 200 such shells were fired during the recent fighting, and of these, according to the probe's initial findings, almost 180 were fired at orchards in which gunmen and rocket-launching crews were taking cover.

The one problematic incident was the reserve paratroops brigade that fired about 20 such shells in a built-up area of Beit Lahiya. Many international organizations say phosphorus shells should not be used in heavily populated areas. The brigade's officers, however, say the shells were fired only at places that had been positively identified as sources of enemy fire.

The 120mm shells, a recent acquisition, have a computerized targeting system attached to a GPS. Brigade commanders say they were very effective, but they were also responsible for two very serious mishaps: a strike on a UNRWA school that killed 42 Palestinians and a friendly fire incident that seriously wounded two officers.

[Ken White]

Don't know but would bet the Israeli GPS guided 120 mortar round is NOT a WP round, that would make no sense.

The use of WP in war is 'legal' -- it is not a proscribed weapon. It is used heavily in some cases and few who engage in infantry combat will avoid getting WP burns occasionally. As they say, it only hurts for a little while...

There are those who say it should not be used at all; there are others who say it should not be used if civilians are present. Those who say that in most cases have never had to worry about getting shot and generally do not understand all they know about what they are saying.

I do not know if they Israeli's used it or not; they probably did -- I certainly would have -- and if so, the noise about it is merely spin. HE wounds and kills FAR more people than WP.

[William F. Owen]

I do not know if they Israeli's used it or not; they probably did -- I certainly would have -- and if so, the noise about it is merely spin. HE wounds and kills FAR more people than WP.

The IDF used the US M825A1 WP airburst shell, specifically designed to be used "danger close" or on own troops. The WP airburst was seen commonly on TV, and the IDF never denied they were using it.

I agree with Ken, that the use of "Smoke" is a vital tactical advantage when operating in urban terrain and almost anywhere else.

[Rex Brynen]

I do not know if they Israeli's used it or not; they probably did -- I certainly would have -- and if so, the noise about it is merely spin. HE wounds and kills FAR more people than WP.

I wasn't commenting on the rightness/wrongness of using smoke ammo in MOUT (because I agree: it is neither prohibited by CCW Protocol III nor terribly surprising)—just flagging the article.

The IDF used the US M825A1 WP airburst shell

Yes, although the article is explicitly discussing the use of an incendiary (not smoke) round by 120mm mortars (not 155mm artillery). I'm not sure whether this is the dual use incendiary/smoke M65 or M110 120mm mortar rounds, or something else.

[William F. Owen]

Yes, although the article is explicitly discussing the use of an incendiary (not smoke) round by 120mm mortars (not 155mm artillery). I'm not sure whether this is the dual use incendiary/smoke M65 or M110 120mm mortar rounds, or something else.

I don't know of any airburst WP 81 or 120mm natures. Unfortunately, WP is axiomatically a de-facto incendiary weapon. No smoke without fire.

I am not sure there are any dedicated "incendiary" rounds currently in IDF service (or in any NATO army for that matter). If there were, they would not be WP. They would use another compound, such as "Thermite"

20 years ago I saw US Thermite grenade demonstrated for fun, but I understand they are now out of production.