U.S. Army uses Israeli tactics in Iraq

[Javehn]

Article from www.globalsecurity.org

Israeli Tactic used in Iraq



US tactics in Baghdad in coming days may be similar to urban warfare used by the Israeli army in Palestinian villages, some experts say.

Images broadcast in the past few days on US television already reveal a similarity between the two: house-to-house searches, roadblocks, arrests, soldiers in flak jackets creeping along walls, fingers on triggers.

And USA Today recently alluded to Israel's secret role in training Marines for urban warfare in the latter half of last year.

"Israel is secretly playing a key role in US preparations for possible war with Iraq, helping to train soldiers and Marines for urban warfare," it said.

The paper said that the Israelis built two fake cities at a secret venue -- complete with mosques, clothes hung out windows, and donkeys wandering down alleys -- for use in the exercises.

Since the start of the Al-Aqsa intifada in September 2000, and Palestinian use of automatic arms, Israeli commandos generally take Palestinian towns by advancing in a rapid zig-zag towards the center, backed by F-15 or F-16 airplanes, or Apache or Cobra helicopters.

Control of the town is established in the interior of a city, then spread to its outer limits. To minimize their casualties, troops move under cover, often knocking holes in walls and entering houses, while elite snipers are posted on rooves.

"The technique the Americans are going to use will be a lot like ours. And like us, they will use tanks and rely on air support," Meir Payil, a military historian and reserve colonel with the Israeli army, told AFP.

"You won't see street-to-street fighting. They will go after pockets, and only hit certain areas," said retired Army major general David Grange.

"The Americans will use this tactic for one good reason: to avoid a maximum of losses on their side and to cut Saddam and his circle from the rest of the world," Payil said.

The goal, according to Patrick Garrett of the US military think tank GlobalSecurity.org, is to isolate regular troops and paramilitary forces from civilians "slowly but surely."

"The Israelis have no compunction whatsoever about knocking buildings down to get to whatever it is they need to get to," whereas the Americans will try to conduct "much more of a clean operation," Garrett said.

US military experts say that, like the Israelis, coalition forces will erect barricades at entrypoints into Baghdad in an effort to control movement and to locate soldiers trying to hide among civilians.

In a second stage, military authorities will try to establish contact with city authorities, a practise also used by the Israeli military in Palestinian towns.

In yet another similarity, Americans are hoping to get "collaboration" from civilians, to help locate weapons caches, fedayeen hideouts and Republican Guard units.

"As the population becomes more comfortable with the US military presence, we will get tips from the civilians," Garrett said.

Since the early years of its 1967 occupation of the West Bank and Gaza strip, the Israeli army has depended on a network of Palestinian "collaborators" who risk their lives by providing information to Israel

So , what do you say ? Good , not good ? I personnaly think , that it shouldn't be implemented in Iraq , sence it's disturbing to the "Big picture" . But what do you say ?

[Midav]

I think it's good what they are doing.

Learn from experience and Israel has a whole lot of it.

[StarvingStudent47]

Should the US Army use Israeli advisors to steepen the learning curve for this sort of combat? Of course. The last thing we want is a repeat of the Mogadishu debacle.

Should our use of Israeli advisors be widely publicized? No, that would be a public relations disaster. Call it hypocritical, but it's true.

[usa320]

Indeed. Israel is THE authority on MOUT, they have the most extensive combat MOUT experience, so who better to train our guys on it then them.

ANd about all this trigger on the finger stuff... ill tell you what, if i was standing out in the middle of a road with buildings on all sides, id sure as hell have my trigger on the finger too.

[He219]

Nice article, Javehn...

... but it is quite dated (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030405-israreli-style-warfare01.htm) and originates before the fall of Baghdad. References to 'future' MOUT activity in Iraq support this notion.

The part in the article ...

The paper said that the Israelis built two fake cities at a secret venue -- complete with mosques, clothes hung out windows, and donkeys wandering down alleys -- for use in the exercises.
... reminds me of this interesting image:
http://charleston.net/images/033103/4312_512.jpg


Conclusions in that article are hardly unique to Israel alone. Lesseons in Urban Warfare are indeed beneficial when learned from Israeli actions in the Occupied Territories as well as from the British experience in Northern Ireland and others. The theme would have to be that information gained by those who have employed MOUT tactics from experience can be of great benefit to the US. It should also be noted that Modern Urban Fighting techniques were implemented from Stalingrad through Belfast and and were Politically handicapped by the Clinton Administration in Mogadishu with the restriction of proper armor and Spectre-Gunship support.


The following comes from an article dated Nov. 23, 2003:

"There are routine channels that have been there for years, and those channels have been energized," an Israeli official said. "The American military has been very interested in our lessons ... in how do you do surgical strikes in an urban zone, how do you hit the bad guy with minimum collateral damage."

Some U.S. officials acknowledge that they blanch at the idea of the Pentagon adopting tactics from Israel, a nation regularly criticized for the sometimes brutal security tactics it uses to battle armed groups it has never managed to quell. And Israeli officials acknowledge that they are somewhat reluctant to give advice.

"After all," one Israeli official said, "we've made plenty of mistakes ourselves."

Criticism of the army's tactics against Palestinians has been increasing within Israel. Chief of staff Moshe Yaalon, a group of retired leaders of the Shin Bet internal security service and some active-duty soldiers say they have been unduly harsh and threaten to destroy Israeli and Palestinian society if no solution is found to the conflict.

But such concerns have not slowed the flow of information between Washington and Jerusalem.
http://www.sunspot.net/news/nationworld/bal-te.bang23nov23,0,729142.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines

It's a pertinent article and I highly recommend reading it.

Shanah tovah!
:)

[papasmerf]

I think it's great stuff. I can't wait to work with some of these fine Israeli soldiers, seems like they know how to punch so it hurts.

[papasmerf]

Actually their tactics are being deployed by American infantry battalions, I wonder if they train with US Special Operations too, in whatever area.

[IDFM203]

First regarding Israel’s help to the U.S. before the Iraq war,

Israel did not actively participate in fighting however it was nonetheless involved in an indirect way in a few areas.

One of the area’s of Israeli indirect involvement is the U.S. military employing Israeli technology in the Iraq war (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/world/iraq/2003-03-24-israel-tech_x.htm)

Then there is the direct help through Israeli training to various Marine and army units in Israel on Israel lessons and tactics in MOUT warfare.

Israeli infantry units with experience in urban warfare during the Palestinian uprising helped train U.S. Army and Marine counterparts this summer and fall for possible urban battles in Iraq, a foreign defense official says. The Israelis have built two mock cities, complete with mosques, hanging laundry and even the odd donkey meandering down dusty streets. A defense official said the sites far surpass U.S. facilities. The location of the training centers is classified.

for more click Here. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-11-03-israel-usat_x.htm)
Though this pic was taken on another occasion couple of years back, I figured it has some relevance to this topic.
http://www.isayeret.com/overview/training/marinefr.jpg

U.S. Marines Corps Force Recon during CQB training in Israel

Now as for after the war……………..(this is from a prior post of mine but it nonetheless has full relevance to this thread……I also added a few sentences)


I’ll say this is a rather interesting issue.. This obviously works big time with regards to Israel’s security. Remember that before Israel went in the middle of 2002 with its own get tuff policy; there was constant shopotings and a major homicide attack almost weekly (if not at times, two or three a week)…now a year and half later. It has been dramatically reduced (big understatement!!) and it has indeed been very successful. Also it’s important to remember that the Israeli campaign is a controlled get tuff policy and it’s very surgical with the least amount of civilians as possible to be killed. (Remember in all the worlds harping about Israel, in this whole conflict, only 3000 Palestinians have been killed and much more then half were people that had Israeli blood on their hands and the rest were tragic but was not intentional for Israel never intentionally targets civilians)

Now with that said the problem is that it is not a hearts and minds campaign. In Israel’s case they already tried that big time in the whole Oslo process when Israel gave them 95 percent control over their own lives and the “occupation” was much reduced and it was leading to Israel pulling out all together or at least close to it BUT they rejected all that and the killings never stopped and then after Barak offered much more land, they responded by starting a war. So in Israel’s case we are reluctantly passed a pure hearts and minds and are due to the absence of a sincere and willing peace partner on the other side no matter what Israel does or doesnt do, and as such, we are in the territory of personal defence from what was constant shooting attacks and constant homicide bombers blowing themselves up in Israeli cities killing Israeli civilians.

ALL THAT NOW HAS BEEN DRAMTICLY REDUCED ONLYDUE TO THE IDF OPERATIONS AND INTELIGENCE SERVICES, THAT HAVE SUCCESFULLY STOPPED THE CONSTANT ATTACKS!! (Just note its “funny” when hamas says its willing to do a truce as if its sincere when in reality it is badly damaged and needs time to regroup….I mean we have seen all this before already)


Now Israel nor anyone cant be a 100 percent for that’s almost impossible and there will be more homicide attacks in Israel but it has been dramatically reduced!!.

Now as for the U.S. military and hearts and minds…. well ill concede that perhaps its not the best for that BUT the U.S. needs to counter this outside terrorist influence or from the bathsists (SP?) that is spreading its claws in that country and needs to defeat it or radically reduce it so it can work freely in their good work of hearts and minds and helping the Iraqi people. Right now the U.S. is being greatly hindered from doing that due to this terrorism.

-Edit- This is an article, which was written on Dec. 8, 2003 and it is a good article on the post war help that Israel has given to the U.S.


Since adopting the new strategy US officials have noticed a sharp decrease in the number of attacks against US forces deployed in Iraq. The report quoted Lt.-Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, the top military commander in Iraq, who recently said that attacks on allied forces or gunfights with adversaries across Iraq had dropped to under 20 a day compared to 40 two weeks earlier
For more click Here. (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1070775782233&p=1006688055060)


Shalom :D

[Jack Mehoff]

Current Iraq situation is a lot like Israel/Pals conflict. I wouldn't mind if we're learning a few things from IDF.

[papasmerf]

I don't know if we're doing this already or not, but our combat pilots should take some lessons from IAF pilots as well. Israeli pilots are excellent.

[budanski]

This is nothing new, really. For example, the US has gotten military hardware tweaked by Israel for years - a new design will come out, it will be tested and refined by them. Then, of course, the process works both ways: new designs will be made by Israel, and tested (and adopted) by the US.

France tried to get into having Israel tweak its stuff a while back, and got a no, which teed them off to no small degree.

[DPGLAW]

The Isrealis are definitely the best teachers to show the US Marines the best way to fight in an Urban combat zone. They have been successfully, and brutally defending their nation against terrorists for years and have the necesssary experience to win the type of battle we are currently engaged in, I just hope that these tatics work well in our war and save American lives, which I presume they will

[duck]

You mean, the forthcoming Jewish minority in Israel will be able to keep the Arab majority in check by military means, just like it used to be in South Africa?

[Javehn]

Yes , you're on to us , pal . We want to rule the world .

But what i am asking is : while the MOUT tactic is very good for keeping soldiers allive ( that it's main purpoce in Israel ) , it have couple of negative sides . If not being carefull , on not trained hands ( like U.S troops that just starting to use it ) , it can bring quiet a big collathoral damage ( like the use of tanks in build areas , not trained tankers can destroy half of villadge / city before they even notice it ) . Second , jumpy soldiers can do "nasty" things . Third , some uneccary meassures ( at list for me ) done to make soldiers secure - deploying barb wires around the cities , and make checkpoints . While we in Israel have no other choice , and have to do so (the distance between Israeli cities , and Palestinian are ver very small , and sometimes in matter of 20 minutes walking you can get from PA city inside Israel) , U.S troops just do it , to assure even better , that the soldiers wan't get harm .

Just for sake of interest , if there are any brits in here , what tactic the British forces deployed in NI ?

[oldsoak]

MOUT/OBUA/FIBUA tactics are not necessarily applicable in NI, simply because civil law still applies. The British experience is not quite the same as the Israeli one because towns and cities were not controlled by the armed forces of an unfriendly power. The IRA were classified as criminals, not as soldiers. Because of this, there are levels of force you cannot use - helicopter gunships launching missiles being one example. The British experience emphasised constant surveillance, presence, humint, heart-and-minds and careful application of force. Yep, we made mistakes. We are still learning as the game evolves. Tactics developed to isolate snipers or handle civil disturbance are not necessarily those that apply to engaging a platoon of blokes holding a building. Yes there is some crossover, but it all depends on the situation.
rgds

[StarvingStudent47]

To my knowledge, the last time the IRA used the sorts of widespread guerilla attacks we're seeing in Iraq nowadays was the Easter Rebellion of 1916. The Irish generally didn't fight in the same way that Arab insurgents fight. And the British response to the Easter Rising (artillery, artillery, and more artillery--hey, it was 1916, people fought differently then) isn't exactly a model that anyone would want to follow nowadays.

I could be missing something about the history of fighting in Northern Ireland, but this is my understanding.

[StarvingStudent47]

You mean, the forthcoming Jewish minority in Israel will be able to keep the Arab majority in check by military means, just like it used to be in South Africa?

What on earth does this have to do with counter-insurgency in Iraq?

Troll.

[duck]

Ah, this aggressivity again. It has, because of several reasons. Can you think of them, student?

[OldRecon]

Should the US Army use Israeli advisors to steepen the learning curve for this sort of combat? Of course. The last thing we want is a repeat of the Mogadishu debacle.

Should our use of Israeli advisors be widely publicized? No, that would be a public relations disaster. Call it hypocritical, but it's true.

That's spot on dude! :|

During a chat-session on the internet version of a national newspaper here, a former marine jaeger (the Norwegian variant of SEALS/SBS) having just completed a crossing of Antarctica with another ex marine jaeger was asked (this was at the time of the US intervention in Afghanistan) about his opinion on the politics of the Middle East. Upon which he answered that he personaly didn't have any pros and cons, but that on the other hand he didn't aggree with those who wanted to treat Al Qaida and the troubles surrounding Israel as two separate entities. As in his opinion most Arabs/muslims don't make that distinction.
And anyway why should they? Without US financial and material support Israel would be broke long time ago.
The history surrounding the creation of the state of, Israel when you look at the face of it, is more than ample fuel for any arab conspiracy theorist with a grudge. And it's also a convenient vehicle for Arab rulers with regards to channeling anger over personal poverty and/or hardship away from themselves.
So what better vehicle could Osama possibly use in order to gain support for his "cause"?
That said besides his perception of Islam and grudge against Israel and the West (with regards to the birth and survival of the jewish state), I think there's also a personal (and rather subconcious motive driving him on his path).
To qoute from "Heart of darkness / Apocalypse now".
"Out there on his own with the natives I guess it may be tempting to become God sometimes."
Personaly I think Osama, during his time as a CIA-sponsored advisor/mercenary to the Afghan resistance against the Soviet occupation, was more than temted by the idea of becoming a God (or at least a new Muhammad). Though if you ask the man himself about that, it wouldn't surprise me if he would flatly deny it to be so.
That Osama furthermore to many arabs nowdays constitute a "beacon of hope against the oppresion, injustices and insults from the Christian Crusaders and their jewish lackeys" (not my words - just to make that clear), hasn't exactly lessened his taste for being a "mighty prophet" I guess :(.

As for MOUT I must admit I'm more impressed with the British effort in Northern Ireland, than with the Israeli effort in Gaza and on the Gaza strip.
For 31 of the 34 years of the conflict in Northern Ireland, the intensity of violence on the ground may not have been on the same scale as that facing IDF today in the Palestinian aereas. But in the days before operation "Motorman" it wasn't exactly "that quite" in NI either.
Though the Brits may have been in a better position in terms of resources and a smaller cultural divide, with regards to reducing levels of violence, than what the Israelis are today vs. the Palestinians.

[StarvingStudent47]

As for MOUT I must admit I'm more impressed with the British effort in Northern Ireland, than with the Israeli effort in Gaza and on the Gaza strip.
For 31 of the 34 years of the conflict in Northern Ireland, the intensity of violence on the ground may not have been on the same scale as that facing IDF today in the Palestinian aereas. But in the days before operation "Motorman" it wasn't exactly "that quite" in NI either.
Though the Brits may have been in a better position in terms of resources and a smaller cultural divide, with regards to reducing levels of violence, than what the Israelis are today vs. the Palestinians.

Northern Ireland may have "not been quiet," but you didn't have jihadists coming in from halfway across the world to try and kill people. And Irish Republicans didn't believe that they'd go to heaven and get 90 virgins if they died while killing Unionists.

In my eyes, the differences in establishing peace between Northern Ireland has much more to do with the nature of the terrorists than the tactics of the counter-terrorists.

[Javehn]

MOUT/OBUA/FIBUA tactics are not necessarily applicable in NI, simply because civil law still applies. The British experience is not quite the same as the Israeli one because towns and cities were not controlled by the armed forces of an unfriendly power. The IRA were classified as criminals, not as soldiers. Because of this, there are levels of force you cannot use - helicopter gunships launching missiles being one example. The British experience emphasised constant surveillance, presence, humint, heart-and-minds and careful application of force. Yep, we made mistakes. We are still learning as the game evolves. Tactics developed to isolate snipers or handle civil disturbance are not necessarily those that apply to engaging a platoon of blokes holding a building. Yes there is some crossover, but it all depends on the situation.
rgds

Ok , i see . Then you tottaly missunderstanding what is going on there . Palestinian cities have they law , have they police , and have they civil authorities . They shurely don't have any millitary law whatsoever (i think i allready explained here in another thread how does Israeli army presence in there works ) .

And any terror groups are probihited by Palestinian law . There was even a time , when some weak attempts made by PA police to arrest terror activists , but that effort was stoped by Araphat himself ( long political story , rival between security chief, and Araphat himself ) .

Israeli army presence there , was as the same more or less , as between different naighbours in Ulstar . That was situation at list until the first Intiffada , and the main part of it during second Intifada . On second Intifada , some Israeli units entered inside PA cities in order to arrest the bombers themselfes , and incountered heavy fire ( not only rocks ) . That required new tactics build , new tactics required new bigger forces , and that fact draw more bigger fire , and new tactics was done , and so on ...

So , Israeli army have actually not so long MOUT experience with large units (mostly3 last years) , and British troops have actually much larger experience there , specially in the late 60 and early 70 . As i know , British formed Ulstar Royal Constabulary in late 70's , replacing regular army units , leaving some small force of soldiers , something like a battalion , and SAS battalion .

I just want to know , if the conduction of regular British troops at that time ( 60 , 70 ) is available to be deployed on Iraq. I know they learned the tactic of a little dedicated teams - like DET , or SAS , and also deploying local Police force. However , i want to know if U.S. army learned some tactics of large units , and task forces , from British forces .

[ShotOver]

Yeah, Go the IDF woot

[martinexsquaddie]

there was and still is rather more than a battalion of soldiers in NI :D.
while IDf Mout tactics may be useful I.e.(how to take the bad guys out in a buliding) the overall outlook may not be as useful. the IDF generally operate in an area where virtually everyone is a potential hostile.
Iraq isn't the US are not suppoused to be a hostile ouccupation the goal is to rebuild iraq and get out.

[Javehn]

there was and still is rather more than a battalion of soldiers in NI :D.
while IDf Mout tactics may be useful I.e.(how to take the bad guys out in a buliding) the overall outlook may not be as useful. the IDF generally operate in an area where virtually everyone is a potential hostile.
Iraq isn't the US are not suppoused to be a hostile ouccupation the goal is to rebuild iraq and get out.

Yes , exactly , you hit one of the spots , that what i was reffering , more or less .
About the ammount of soldiers , i was talking about Ulstair . I have no idea , how many British soldiers there in Ireland all together .

[UoUo]

The day until the all iraqi people will be hostile is not far...sad but true.

[OldRecon]

Northern Ireland may have "not been quiet," but you didn't have jihadists coming in from halfway across the world to try and kill people. And Irish Republicans didn't believe that they'd go to heaven and get 90 virgins if they died while killing Unionists.

In my eyes, the differences in establishing peace between Northern Ireland has much more to do with the nature of the terrorists than the tactics of the counter-terrorists.

Well:

1) There's a limit to how many suiciders the community can sustain.

2) The Palestinians don't have the option of traveling to Liverpool or somewhere else in Europe in the search of a job. In Ireland it's almost been a tradition for a large part of the young going abroad in search for work (both north and south of the border). Thus the Palestinians don't have much options between sittin' around in apathy, jobless and taking it. Or blow themselves up. Which has proven to be the only way they can hit back. As the Israelis else are "somewhat superiour" to put it mildly in terms of firepower at their disposal.
If the Israelis changed their overall strategy in ways that would make the Palestinians channel their energy into trade and bussines (in a way that could benefit both communities). I'm most sure that over time (maybe 30 years or more as in NI) most off the violence would slowly settle.
Though in relation to how sour relations have become between the two communities, such changes would have to be implemented in a careful, deliberate and subtle way.
It's my experience at least that wether an Arab like you or not he will not rock the boat if there's money to be made.
Of that I'm most convinced, as I rather doubt I would be sitting here writing these very lines, if they hadn't made some money on me through local trade during my time down there rofl.
I'll be the first to admit flatly that the Indians who replaced us were probably more "professional" as soldiers than we ever were. But on the other hand the Indian soldiers had rather less money to spend, and thus the locals were not very happy with the change when we finaly left (and still ain't from what I've heard rofl).
During my time there not only the Ghanean Unifil troops but also the Nepalese had a reputation for being bribable (though the Nepalese were definitely better than the Ghanese) and were thus looked upon with some suspicion by the locals. And I guess many of the locals in our AO feared that the Indians would be of the same vein.

[Javehn]

That's it . I give up . That's one of most ignorant idiotic responces i have ever read here . Clearly that this forum is no good for those discussions.
Have a nice duscussions, if you can call it this way , on this forum . It's a shame that this nice site have people like you .

Edit : You know , if you would read some of the thread, you find out i am not comparing between British and Israelies . I just asking what tactics from both sides implemented in Iraq , that's all . Do you really had to turn it into hell knows what ( and all bunch of typical BS also ) ?

[OldRecon]

I just want to know , if the conduction of regular British troops at that time ( 60 , 70 ) is available to be deployed on Iraq. I know they learned the tactic of a little dedicated teams - like DET , or SAS , and also deploying local Police force. However , i want to know if U.S. army learned some tactics of large units , and task forces , from British forces .


The experience of the British in Aden (especially in the city of Aden itself) during the mid to late 60's I think indeed have a lot in common with the situation the Israelis find themselves in today vs. the palestinians.
No suiciders though (?), yet I think the British employed more "force" there than later in NI.
No keeni meeni squads in NI as in Aden (at least not with the same high profile as in Aden). No Saladin armoured cars either.
Though their efforts in Aden were rather undermined when the British government publicly announced a fixed date of withdrawal from the colony, however the outcome. No Saladin armoured cars or Centurion tanks either (though a few Centurion AVREs where employed for pulling down barricades during operation Motorman).
Not that the principle of "minimum force", "yellow cards" etc. have been all that popular with the ordinary Tom, but British troops do seem to have benefited from their ability for restraint in the long run (though facing a British battalion released from all stops in "high intensity" operations is no joke either).

[OldRecon]

Though with regards to British troops in NI and "restraint". They'll allways have to live under the shaddow of the Bloody Sunday incident.
It take 12 goods to retchtify 1 ill isn't that how the saying goes?
Though the fact that more people have been killed by the various terrorist groups in NI than by British soldiers and RUC perhaps can be viewed as proof for that it isn't allways the side with the biggest "score" that winns in the end.

[Javehn]

I am very sorry to say to you , mr OldRecon , that not only your comments about Israel are made from your ass , and lack every reality base what so ever , but it's also very disturbing to me ( not to you as i see ) . I am also not appreciate , that you trying to drug this thread to the direction . I don't want respond to you about your most idiotic comments about Palestinians , cose i don't want to take the thread there .

But what the hell it has to do with my thread? I am talking about foreign tactics that U.S. army implemented in Iraq after the major fights over , how some of them good , and some of them less . I don't speak of integrity of British soldiers , on they restraint , on yellow cards , and i don't know what . And i am most surtainly not comparing between British troops in Ireland , and IDF (nothing much to compare even really ) actions in west bank . EDIT : I don't know **** about Brits actions in NI , but that's why we here , no ? Holly Muhamad , people , please , read for crying out lowd what other people writting .

I AM TALKING ABOUT U.S. ARMY THAT USING DIFFERENT TACTICS IN IRAQ , THAT LEARNED FROM OTHER COUNTRIES .

And about the battle of Aden , first of all , that was in 50's . If allready , bring me then the 1956 operation in Sinay peninsula , where by the way a lot of brits and france forces had MOUT fighting going on .

[duck]

What I tried to carve out of AngryStudent before were the long-term effects of these tactics on the target population. Do they bring lasting peace and stability with them?

[Argyll]

Javehn,you need to get that chip off your shoulder and deflate that ego of yours a bit,and your not the only one!
1st off I couldn't care if it was the Russians in Chechnya who has provided the US with training!
2ndly knowing they were going into 2 TAO's without having done that type of warfare was a fatal mistake,it's called the 5 P's
Oaldsoak and other's have pointed out the British Army have been employed on IS roles in NI since 69,you have never served there,so how can you even say half the things you do,you think **** didn't happen on a daily basis?
There were 100's of incidents weekly that went unreported on National TV or the media networks,because it simply was not newsworthy to do so,and done so not to give the PIRA/INLA a propaganda victory of any scale.
The difference in NI and Gaza was the IRA were not fanatical enough to blow themselves up,but the shot and bombed daily,they went after soft targets daily,and as for your misinformation about no foreign recruits it was well known that there were ex US military within their ranks,it was also common knowledge that IRA terrorists were located in Middle East Training camps,and that some of these guys filtered into the IRA ranks for some "experience"

The US tactics should have been clear from the start,but if the IDF have been role models then success should be more abundant in the future!

[oldsoak]

Whoa, Javehn, chill mate :) - some of us will try to answer !I think its safe to say that the US army are more than willing to learn from other peoples mistakes - after all, why re-invent the wheel ? Ideas and tactics learnt in NI would be shared with NATO allies by the Brits. I have even come accross one instance where army officers from the Republic of Ireland were being trained by the Brits. Going back to the US in Iraq, they operate at a severe disadvantage in one area - they dont speak the language and are culturally quite different. This means that its difficult for them to "read" an event. The Brits in NI spoke the same language and were culturally similar to the locals - this brings obvious advantages. The Israelis have a similar advantage ( appreciate that Hebrew is nt the same as Arabic ) - this is why the Israeli intelligence services are so successful. BTW I'm suprised that the Israelis have had only a few years experience in MOUT - I thought their experience went way back to Lebanon. I think you would have to give a particular example and then we'd look at it and say - yeah, we'd do that or not, not like that. Out of interest, how does Israel prosecute a terrorist ? Example - you've got this guy in the Palestinian administered area. Do you charge him like a common criminal or is it regarded as a political crime ? We dont have the distinction here - a UDA/IRA man who blows someone up is charged with murder - politics doesnt come into it.

[He219]

Pertinent to the discussion...

http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/images/misc/police_academy1_tn.jpg
Hi-Res (http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/images/misc/police_academy1_hr.jpg)

Mr Stephen White, an Assistant Chief Constable with the Police Service of Northern Ireland, who is responsible for the policing of southern Iraq, presents a PSNI crest to the Dean of the new Academy

I think lessons can be learned from all sides; Israeli military operations in urban terrain and British experience policing in conflict zones etc....
:D