Hacker News Reader

Comment by sgjohnson | Hacker News Reader

Israel’s warfare system is far more advanced than the US.

Paid for by the US taxpayer of course.

When is the last time Israel was able to project power thousands of miles from it's border for nearly two decades? They have cool toys no doubt but, not really compares to our arsenal in human history.

Considering Israel is increasingly succeeding in making it illegal for Americans to protest them, I would answer your question with, "A minute ago?"

This is a very strange area to discuss. And given the grayed out text, you've already been downmodded.

I had this, err, debate on Reddit recently. I am against the actions Israel is taking against Palestine. I view it as an atrocity in its own right. (There, I said my part. Please hear the rest out.)

From that, I said I was against the actions of violence. However I was attacked and called an antisemite. And it wasn't one person. It was quite a few. Something is going on, in that criticizing bad actions makes me construed as some sort of a hater (read: racist, sexist, ageist, nationalist, etc).

Obviously this also has other broad implications. If I disagree with practices of X, means I somehow hate X, even if I don't. I also see that similar viewpoint bandied here at HN, primarily with the once-a-month article about women and tech (which devolves into flamewars and large swaths of comments being disconnected by dang).

What's going on here? It's certainly a phenomenon which I'm seeing accelerated. Is this the growing pains of having hypercommunication across the world? Is this the problem of having up-to-the-second news?

Watch "The Lobby" by The Electronic Intifada. It will shed a lot of light onto what you're describing.

Oh yeah, "Electronic Intifada", a truly quality journalistic source that totally wouldn't tell you the Jews control America or anything.

God fucking damnit I hate these conversations. No, we don't manipulate the bloody government! We're less than 2% of the population. You know who passes all those laws "outlying" criticism of Israel, none of which have stood up in court, ever? Evangelical Christian Republicans.

Not American Jews or Israeli exiles, who, again, mostly vote Democratic and make up an insignificantly small fraction of the total population.

I disagree. I'm sure they have some cool toys, but they are not even in the same league in terms of overall military capability as the US. Their military is very specialized to deal with their specific circumstances. The US can conduct full-scale warfare anywhere around the globe, in the air, sea, on land, or in near-earth orbit.

Israel's Navy is a joke. They have nothing of any relevance except a handful of subs that might be capable of launching nuclear missiles. They have no destroyers, no cruisers, and most importantly, no aircraft carriers.

Aren't destroyers, cruisers and carriers considered antiquated in a modern / all out war? A few times a year, I see articles about how these slow moving, once mighty behemoths would make easy targets for newer anti-ship missiles / tech.

Nuclear armed submarines are probably their most important defensive asset.

So is Israel smart for not wasting money on a huge naval fleet?

You can't project power across the globe with tiny ships. It becomes a matter of supply and ability to launch aircraft. You can't do the same things with a tiny ship as you can with an airwing.

Also, destroyers and cruisers are primarily used as missile-firing platforms anyway. And good luck countering enemy submarines without destroyers of your own.

And I think you are overestimating how large destroyers are. They're basically the minimum size necessary to have a warship that can sail the world's oceans independently.

> You can't project power across the globe with tiny ships

Agreed, and currently a modern Navy and it's ability to "projct power" is unmatched.

I just see a lot of commentary about how these large boats would be sitting ducks for modern missile systems. I'm not arguing that they are, just that it's been suggested and I'm wondering if Israel's decisions regarding defense are effected by this (probably not)

Your other two points were good as well - thanks for contributing.

They haven't proven to be ducks for modern missile systems yet, though. And we've used our carrier strike forces to devastating effect in many countries since WWII. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't see any major naval losses, and would have been impossible without the ability to project power and air supremacy clear across the globe that our Navy affords us. Sure, most countries don't need to be able to wage those kinds of wars and thus don't need such naval capabilities, but you're also not a first rate power if you can't do that.

There is no such thing as a modern all out war because of the massive US military and nukes.

Israel doesn’t need to worry about an invasion because it can fall back on the US.

> There is no such thing as a modern all out war

I generally agree. When I've debated this topic with others they basically say the carrier groups will be the first to go, but the response from nuclear submarines, and hidden fixed launch sites would be overwhelming.

Again, I'm not arguing this point, just suggesting that some may argue a strong Navy is antiquated.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com