Talk:Military operations of the 2006 Lebanon War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lebanon Portal

This article is part of WikiProject Lebanon, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Lebanon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Military operations of the 2006 Lebanon War article.
Article policies
This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.
Israel Portal
Military operations of the 2006 Lebanon War is part of WikiProject Israel, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Israel articles.
Project Israel To Do (Drop-Down Menu):
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Date Order

Because so many things were being repeated, I put it into date order. This should make things easier to understand. --Irishpunktom\talk 16:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

This is great! Could other editors please respect this format? It is somewhat related to a timeline, but more detailed.--Cerejota 16:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Out of Date

The work done by many contributors is valuable, but the entire article is in need of a complete re-write. Not only does much of the content have a strong pro-Arab POV, much of the article is written in the present tense (as if the Military Operations are continuing), there are numerous quotes from articles that came out while the war was in progress - and that have since been shown to be inaccurate, and so on. Georgeaz (talk) 00:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Related to 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict

Please verify that you edit doesnt belong there before editing.--Cerejota 16:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV Check

As this page inherits the bulk of its info from a page with a POV Check at the time of the move, 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, putting it up here.--Cerejota 19:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Equiment and forces

I would like to see a listing of the military capabiliities of IDF, Hezbollah, and Lebanese Armed Forces: Numbers of regulars and reserves, number of tanks, planes, ships, and artillery, type of automatic weapons used, type of rifles and sidearms used, type of antitank, antiaircraft, rockets, etc. In any conflict this is very important, along with training and motivation, anas well as quality of command and control.Jane's Defence Weekly and allied publications tabulate such info, so it's not all a deep dark defense secret. Edison 00:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

CIA Factbook https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/le.html says:
For Lebanon: Population: 3,874,050 (July 2006 est.). Lebanon's military expenditures are $540.6 million per year(2004) at 3.1% (2004) of GDP. Manpower fit for military service: males age 18-49: 821,762,females age 18-49: 865,770 (2005 est.) No info on size of military or equipment.
For Israel, the figures are Population: 6,352,117; Military expenditures: $9.45 billion (2005 est.)
Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 7.7% (2005 est.); Manpower fit for military service: males age 17-49: :1,255,902, females age 17-49: 1,212,394 (2005 est.) No info on size of military or equipment.

Well, I'd like to correct the airplane info. All the Phantoms have been retired from service for example. Egghead 09:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Please go ahead and provide an accurate and up to date source. The one in the article is from July 18, so recent but according to your sources not accurate. Jane's Fighting Ships seems ok for the navy but maybe we can do better than "Common Dreams" for the air force. Seeing IDF planes firing off flares seems to imply (sorry if logic smacks of OR)that the IDF pilots think Hezbollah has heat seaking missiles, but so far no one has listed any verifiable sources for good estimates on Hezbollah weapons. Edison 05:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
No Hezbollah info. Edison 01:06, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


  • 6,000+ Elite fighters
  • 20,000+ Trained fighters
  • 15,000+ Katyusha rockets
  • Sagger anti-tank missiles
  • Rocket- propelled grenades

No original source is given for these figures so I am reluctant to add them to the article but put there here so others can comment. Troop/fighters figures seem to be vastly inflated compared to number cited in article currently. Source of figures:[1] 82.29.227.171 09:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

A militia may have people with different degrees of membership, "official" members with uniforms for parade, down to irregulars, and persons watching to see which way the wind blows and making occasional warlike actions, or rising up when they see occupation forces, or to exact revenge for bombings.Edison 05:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Is this information "Israel's vaunted tanks are succumbing to Hezbollah's powerful missiles"abot Hezbollah anti-tank-missile relevant for this site ? Or should it be place some other place ?imi2, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


A verifiable source for the types of antitank and antiaircraft weapons available to the Hezbollah combatants is very desirable in the brief section on resources. The type and quantity of antitank weapons would seem very relevant when there is fighting in the villages. RPGs have been effective in Iraq. When fighters have had no antitank weapons, (as in Hungary 1956) they have been forced to use improvised Molotov Cocktails and stickybombs with the need to expose themselves to fire from the infantry accompanying the tank. Edison 21:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Now the Lebanese army will be facing Hezbollah forces, whose RPG-29 antitank weapons were apparently effective against the Israeli Merkava Mk 3 tank, which is claimed to have armor equal to any in the world. But the Lebanese army has tanks designed in the 1940's lacking composite or reactive armor, and therefore likely much more vulnerable to Hezbollah's antitank weapons. They also lack fixed wing aircraft and have limited numbers of helicopters. It will be interesting to see their effectiveness so equipped.Edison 20:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move

This may need to go somewhere here: On July 20, 2006, Democracy Now! reported:

At least 72 civilians died in Lebanon on Wednesday making it the deadliest day of the Israeli assault. In the village of Srifa, Israeli warplanes flattened an entire neighborhood. 15 homes were destroyed. At least 17 civilians died including several children. The local mayor described the attack as a massacre.[1]

The southern city of Tyre has so far buried 86 Lebanese civilians that died in Israeli airstrikes into a mass grave . More than half of the victims were children, according to local hospital staff.[2] The Los Angeles Times reported: “Civil structure appears to have broken down almost completely. Ambulances haven't been able to operate. The dead are rotting in the rubble of smashed homes. Food and clean drinking water are running out.”[2] In addition to the 500,000 already displaced Lebanese civilians, Israel warned some 300,000 Lebanese to abandon their homes. The Israel Defense Forces was preparing to call up thousands of reserve troops. Lebanese Defense Minister Elias Murr told the Arabic television network Al Jazeera Thursday, July 20, Lebanon would resist an Israeli attack.[3]

Meanwhile, the bombardment of Lebanon continued. At least thirty Lebanese were killed Thursday, July 20. The Lebanese death toll stood at around 320 -- almost all civilians. Earlier that day, Israeli warplanes attacked Lebanon’s main highway to Syria. Several passenger buses were set on fire but no casualties were reported. The World Food Program said damage to roads and bridges has almost completely disrupted the food supply chain, hurting large numbers of the estimated 500,000 people displaced by the attack. The situation in the southern Lebanese village of Tyre is getting worse by the day.[2]

Cheers, TewfikTalk 06:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure how this can be considered "military operations". In the chronology I have only noted things like artillery strikes, bombings, where/when, clashes with hezbollah, and any target details, death/wound figures if any. 82.29.227.171 15:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] irrelevant sentence in Military resources of Israel and Lebanon?

This seems to belong somewhere else, it has nothing to do with military resources: United Nations Resolution 1559 calls for Hezbollah to be disarmed and the Lebanese Army to be deployed to southern Lebanon, which has not been implemented[96]. It is already mentioned in 2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict but without the reference. -213.219.151.76 22:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

It needs to be there somewhere in this article or the main one. It is the great untried military operation. I guess there is the unstated question, if one listed the forces of Lebanon and Hezbollah, is the national army capable of enforcing the UN resolution? The question of Hezbollah being heavily armed bears on their legal right so to be. Israel and Lebanon are sovereign nations and UN members and as such can arm up and can buy weapons on the open market.Edison 23:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rocket Counts

Does anyone have information on number of Hezbollah rockets fired into Israel by day (for every day of the conflict?) E.g., around 100 most days, I think there was 82 today (so far). It might be interesting to look at the trend, esp. on how/if it changes as this unfortunate situation continues. TJ0513 15:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3rd August

Added detail from WSJ ticker on casualties as they stand- they arent specific military operations but might be useful to readers wondering about figures at this point. Also some quotes from Hezbollah which probably dont belong either except to give an idea of what they are saying right now. 82.29.227.171 10:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

"Hezbollah spokesman Hussein Rahal told al Jazeera television: "Declaring a cease-fire is not the concern of the people of Lebanon as long as there is one Israeli soldier on Lebanese soil -- even one meter (into Lebanon).. We will not accept any (Israeli) soldier staying on Lebanese territory, and it is the right of every Lebanese to fight until liberation."[128]" This is in regards to ground vs ground military combat. I think this quote should be added in regards to the rocket attacks and air bombings http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1154641813052&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1112101662670 Stating that Hizbollah will cease rocket fire if Israel does the same: "at any time you decide to stop your attacks on our towns, cities, civilians and infrastructure, we will not fire rockets on any settlement or Israeli city," Nasrallah added, addressing the Israeli people and government. "We prefer that, if there's going to be fighting, it be military versus military."

I also think mentioning this attack is important: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1214552.ece it is nearly as big as the Qana event....

[edit] becoming disorganised

Hi guys.

  • this article together with [Timeline of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict] are becoming just a list of events.
  • the 2 articles (this article and [Timeline of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict]) kind of are duplicates of each other. both are just day to gay account of the actions undertook by both sides.

i think that this article should have a summary of the events in a "history of coflict" or something, and the actual timeline be left to [Timeline of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict]. this article should be left alone for analysis and stuff.

i dont really want to start editing it to the plan outlined above, as its the events are on going and i am sure people are watching this article. so i just wanted to build up a consensus.

in short, leave the time line to the timeline article, concentrate on analysis in this article.

leave me a message --Greg.loutsenko 20:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The "Timeline" article contains a lot of material which is not about the military conflict, such as speeches at the UN and elsewhere, diplomatic negotiations, Israle calling up reserves. It looks likt ehtere is a place for two articles. The Timelines article should not, then, contain details of the fighting, and this article should stick to the fighting.Edison 21:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

I propose we merge all other articles related to military operations of all combatants to Military operations of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict and that we reformat said article to be less of a timeline and more of an explanatory article with a timeline. --Cerejota 07:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, although I fear that such an article will be extremely long. --GHcool 08:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
The we must make NPOV sub articles rather than POV forks as those two articles are.--Cerejota 21:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
The current article is already twice above the recommended Wikipedia size, so I think it's better to do a major cleanup of the other two sub articles. Unfortunately, most regular users have been concentrating their efforts on the main article while it was semi-protected, leaving the anon users free to run amok in the unprotected subarticles. Thomas Blomberg 23:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I strongly disagree. The rocket campain of Hizballah is not a "military" operation. It is an operation designed specifically to hit civilians. To kill as much Jews as possible, to put it simple. Aleverde 19:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Dropping the two atomic bombs on Japan in WW2 and the firebombing of Dresden were also most certainly "designed specifically to hit civilians" and "To kill as many Japanese and Germans as possible" and were certainly military operations.Edison 04:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
No really? Do you think that there is any resemblance between the two situations? Killing Germans and Japanese in the end of that war was to cause them to surrender, to end the war, not an aim by itself. And certainly not to destroy their countries and make them American, Russian or British. Hizballah's declared aim is to destroy Israel and killing its population is an aim by itself. So no, it is not "military". Deadly, but not military. --Aleverde 16:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. Mainly because of the length of the two articles imi2 10:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Many of the material is redundant, so it should be merged. And who cares about the recommendation for the length? I guess most readers aren't on modems anymore. --213.155.224.232 10:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Merging and rewriting are necessary to transform news into history. The verifiable citations will include more than the news stories presently cited. The article now reads sort of like "Day 10. There was a lot of fighting. Day 11. There was more fighting. etc. " Military and political historians will write books analyzing what were the brilliant battleplans, what were fiascos, what reactions were unexpected, what surprise attacks carried the day, where was heroism, what generals were wise or foolish, what war crimes were committed. The truth may not come out for a generation. Edison 04:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Agree--Paraphelion 07:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
But that's the whole catch. It ain't military. It's killing Jews for the sake of killing Jews. Hizballah's fights with soldiers in Lebanon are military, but this one isn't at all. --Aleverde 16:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Aleverde: any use of military force, even against civilians is a military attack. It might or might not have the omnious connotation you give it, but the fact is it wasn't civlians launching the rockets.--Cerejota 09:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I think both article are too long in and of themselves, should be shortened and merged into a re-written Military operations article.--Cerejota 09:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


Merger complete as per rough consensus and enough time passing.--Cerejota 17:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge timeline

I am suggesting we merge the "Operations by date" with the Timeline of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict where it should be. There is no logical reason to divide the timelines into two separate pages, as timelines are precisely meant to be quick go to resources rather than prose explanations.

This will result in plenty of space for the two propossed mergers, and help incredibly with the rewriting tasks.--Cerejota 10:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW, please discuss this merger in the Timeline page... sorry for the confussion...--Cerejota 10:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hersh Allegation

I'm adding the Hersh Allegation about prior preparations. This has been extensively debated in the main 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict article talk-page, and this has been identified as the best place to put the information. Fig 08:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV?

Why is Israel's military referred to as "Israel Defence Forces" and the Lebanese military as "Lebanese Armed Forces"? We have a department of defence in the UK too, however the name is a bad joke.

Because that's its name. Some sources prefer the term "Israeli Occupation Forces", but that opens a whole can of worms whereby people start renaming the PLO the "Palestinian Terrorism Organisation", etc, so in my humble opinion it's easiest to give groups the names they choose for themselves.

[edit] Pictures

What is the copyright status of pictures from the human rights watch page? Some of these may be useful:

[3] [4] [5]