Prime Junta
RPGCodex' Little BRO
- Joined
- October 19, 2006
- Messages
- 8,540
Again I'll disagree - its comes down to the lethality of the weaponry if Hamas reaches a point where its able to neutralise the IDF's armour and air power things will start to look very different (and AT and AA weapons are generally much less expensive than the tanks and aircraft they negate) - again I don't see that as a near term outcome but I think the trend is towards increasingly sophisticated weapons becoming more widespread.
AT and AA weapons are defensive, not offensive. You can do sneak, hit, and run type strikes on fortified positions with AT missiles (the Hezb has some pretty cool videos of some they did in South Leb), but they won't let an irregular force seize positions from a regular one, nor breach their defensive lines. Better-guided or better-targeted rockets or other projectiles, such as the GPS-guided mortar shells Israel has been using in Gaza just now, would make cross-border strikes more lethal; OTOH the technologically more sophisticated army can quickly triangulate the source and return fire.
This would make it possible for the guerrilla army to make the conventional one less comfortable, and ground incursions like we're seeing more costly, but the regular army has lots of things to fall back on -- GPS-guided artillery shells instead of air strikes, for example, if it gets dangerous to fly sorties. Or just use jets that fly high and fast; those are very difficult to hit even with big vehicle-mounted AA missiles, let alone the shoulder-launched kind an irregular force would deploy. Means more collateral damage, naturally, but doesn't fundamentally change the equation.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 8,540