Don't Underestimate Syria's Military

[Saladin45]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

While the Knesset heard about potential scenarios for reaching peace with Damascus on Thursday, senior defense officials warned of an unprecedented military buildup in Syria and said that prevailing in a war with Israel's northeastern neighbor would not be as simple as some might have been led to believe.

Following the Second Lebanon War, IDF Military Intelligence noticed a change within the Syrian military. Syria feels empowered by Hizbullah's surprising success last summer and Damascus now believes it can use Hizbullah-like tactics in a future confrontation with Israel and possibly even defeat the once-thought-to-be invincible IDF.

"For years we thought that the IDF had a clear upper hand over Syria's military," a top official told The Jerusalem Post. "After the war in Lebanon we now know that this assumption was not accurate."

Syria has emphasized missile development in recent months. According to Western sources, Syria has the ability to independently manufacture Scud missiles, and it has 300 of them deployed just north of the demilitarized zone in the Syrian part of the Golan Heights.

A division of some 10,000 troops is responsible for operating the missiles, which include an small number of Scud D's with a range of 700 kilometers and said to be capable of carrying nonconventional warheads. Syria has close to 30 launchers for its Scud missiles, according to foreign sources.

Syria keeps the projectiles in bunkers at several locations; most are in a valley near Hama, where it has built a missile electronic and assembly facility.

Syria has a massive military divided into 12 divisions and totaling close to 400,000 soldiers at full mobilization.

One of the divisions is made up of 10,000 elite commandos, a formidable force that would serve as Syria's first line in an offensive against the IDF.

Since the Second Lebanon War, Syria has established new commando units and is said to have increased urban and guerrilla warfare training.

"Syria saw the difficulty the IDF had during the fighting inside the southern Lebanese villages and now the military there wants to draw us - in the event of a war - into battles in built-up areas where they think they will have the upper hand," explained a source in the IDF Northern Command.

Over the last year, the Syrian military has made only two major acquisitions: a number of advanced Russian anti-aircraft systems called Stretlets. It has not received new fighter jets, tanks or armored personnel carriers for a number of years.

According to Yiftah Shapir - a researcher with the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University - the Syrian military plans to use short-range Katyushas alongside the long-range ballistic Scuds in any future conflict with Israel.

"Syria was impressed by Hizbullah's strategic success, with its use of small rockets and Israel's inability to neutralize them," Shapir said. "This is a weapon that is not traditionally used in conventional wars, but can be."

While Ibrahim "Abe" Suleiman - the Syrian national who appeared before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Thursday - might be right in his prediction that peace between Israel and Syria is possible, war, officials said, was no longer impossible.

Both militaries have raised their level of alert along the border and while the IDF has increased its presence on the Golan Heights - mostly with troops who are training - the Syrians have also moved units as well as military infrastructure closer to the border.

In satellite images broadcast this week on CBN News in the US, reporter Chris Mitchell revealed Syria's three major missile sites. One site - referred to as the "heart" of Syria's missile program - is in Hama, where a weapons factory is surrounded by more than 30 hardened concrete bunkers that house multiple launchers and missiles. In just minutes, experts said, these launchers could deliver more than a ton of nonconventional warheads anywhere in Israel.

Another missile site near Homs contains a previously undisclosed chemical warhead facility where a drive-through building leads to a facility where warheads are installed on ballistic missiles.

These images do not necessarily indicate that Syria plans to attack Israel, but they do send a clear message to the IDF and the Israeli leadership: Do not underestimate us.

[jankren]

But if there was a full scale declared war between Israel and Syria the far superior Israeli Airforce will pound Damascus with bombs with no mercy unlike during the conflict against Hizbollah in which Israeli Army showed some restrain due to international pressure because Lebanon was innocent so Israel could not pound the country as ruthless as they wanted to do.

[Saladin45]

Would not Syria do the same type of damage to Israel? They own thousands of Eskander E rockets given to them by Russia. Along with SCUDS which they are making now. Don't forget the 10,000 commando's they have in operation and their military which could definately do quite some damage. I am sure that though Israel can pound Damascus, Syria could pound Haifa and Tel Aviv just as hard. These missiles have the ability to reach any target in Israel easily.

So not only would the IDF have to deal with bombings that are harsh to their own major cities, they would have to deal with 10,000+ commando's running around behind the lines blowing things up and causing havoc while they're fighting the main battles in the Golan Heights. (Or wherever else the war takes them)

-Saladin

[danzig]

Would not Syria do the same type of damage to Israel? They own thousands of Eskander E rockets given to them by Russia. Along with SCUDS which they are making now. Don't forget the 10,000 commando's they have in operation and their military which could definately do quite some damage. I am sure that though Israel can pound Damascus, Syria could pound Haifa and Tel Aviv just as hard. These missiles have the ability to reach any target in Israel easily.

Anytime someone posts shouldnt underestimate <insert middle eastern military here> the only suitable response is one shouldnt base what they see as success in combat against western nations that fight wars with one hand tied behind their back. What you are suggesting here is pretty much a full blown, no political constraints on Israel war with Syria which would result in Syria being wrecked. What is being OVER estimated here is the preceived weakness of Israel and the success of Hezbollah during the Lebanese fiasco. Why is it that the bulk of your posts seem centered on military conflict and Israel. You seem to have some hidden feelings to see your 'brothers' suffer.

So not only would the IDF have to deal with bombings that are harsh to their own major cities, they would have to deal with 10,000+ commando's running around behind the lines blowing things up and causing havoc while they're fighting the main battles in the Golan Heights. (Or wherever else the war takes them)

No if what you are suggesting happen the Israelis wont be in the Golan Heights, they will be in Damascus. Do you think an exchange that involves bombing of civilian centers (what cities generally are) is going to be "won" vs Israel? Everyone, *everyone* would be losers since there would be no international (aka US) restraint placed on the Israelis.

But if there was a full scale declared war between Israel and Syria the far superior Israeli Airforce will pound Damascus with bombs with no mercy unlike during the conflict against Hizbollah in which Israeli Army showed some restrain due to international pressure because Lebanon was innocent so Israel could not pound the country as ruthless as they wanted to do.

Exactly, no winners in that type of conflict just losers both Israeli and Syrian civilians.

[Da Skinna]

Who's Hizbullah?






I don't know about anyone else, but these are two relatively small in size countries, so would not this kind of conflict if it were to occur, be a) very horrible to civilians on both sides (given...) and b) drag others into this vacuum in the region? (also a given...)

I guess I just wanted to make that crack about Hezbollah, as I have nothing important to say...

[Saladin45]

Who's Hizbullah?






I don't know about anyone else, but these are two relatively small in size countries, so would not this kind of conflict if it were to occur, be a) very horrible to civilians on both sides (given...) and b) drag others into this vacuum in the region? (also a given...)

I guess I just wanted to make that crack about Hezbollah, as I have nothing important to say...

Well, Russia supports Syria. And Israel is supported by America. Both of their supporter's can easily get into the conflict rather easily. Seeing as how Russia is right there and America's bases in Iraq are on Syria's eastern border. It could definately be a tricky factor. However, it depends on if other nations like Iran jump in. And Syria might be able to try what Saddam tried in the 90's and drag other nations into the conflict. It's possible they could drag Egypt into it. That is, if Hosni Mubarak thinks that Syria might have a chance of winning and would want to jump in.

[Rapax]

But why exactly would Syria try to set the middle east aflame?

[Saladin45]

Israel owns the Golan Heights. Plus, Israel is the one who's assessing this. They're the ones opening most of these can of worms lately due to their aquisition of Syrian and Lebanese land.

[Saladin45]

Well, majority of my posts are centered around this topic and topics like it because I find them quite interesing. I have never expressed any love for my neighboor's in the south of my country. Nor have I expressed extreme hate. However, I am intrigued on the subject. And here on these forums I find the debates about them quite interesting.

Sure, they were fighting with one arm tied behind their back. However, does that mean that it is in the same respect good to under-estimate the syrians? Have they not weapons that can do tantamount damage?

See, what you tend to do is think that just because the Israeli's have western technology, that it automatically means they're going to have the advantage and win. Their Armies are quite superior to many in the Middle East and are quite dangerous to deal with. Now I admit, the superior AirForce of the Israeli's is obvious. They have the largest one in the middle east as of now, seconded by Egypt and Saudi Arabia. However, this does not mean victory.

They may be able to bomb Damascus, however, that means nothing. It remains to be seen as who would win through military tactics and strategy. It would be a fight in the Golan Heights, whoever can control them controls the war. Because from there, you can launch any type of attack all over the northern Israel or southern Syria. See?

It just remains to be seen on who would be attacking first. If Syria can surprise Israeli positions in the Golan, they can take them out and begin operating out of the Golan. If Israel strikes first, it will be a defensive war for Syrian forces and may end in loss of land or maybe no gain at all but a successful defense. Who knows.

Give me one reason why you say Syria would lose. They have not fought a conventional war against one another in over 30 years. So how can you judge their military's against one another by those particular standards?

-Saladin

[danzig]

See, what you tend to do is think that just because the Israeli's have western technology, that it automatically means they're going to have the advantage and win.

Western technology and they know how to use it so you have Israel a country with superior technology, regarded as one of the finest trained military in the world and fighting for its own survival. All those factors would indicate a war would go in their favor. Tech, quality, determination of self defense.

They may be able to bomb Damascus, however, that means nothing. It remains to be seen as who would win through military tactics and strategy. It would be a fight in the Golan Heights, whoever can control them controls the war. Because from there, you can launch any type of attack all over the northern Israel or southern Syria. See?

Well you are talking about bombing of Israeli cities...how does THAT mean anything in winning?

It just remains to be seen on who would be attacking first. If Syria can surprise Israeli positions in the Golan, they can take them out and begin operating out of the Golan. If Israel strikes first, it will be a defensive war for Syrian forces and may end in loss of land or maybe no gain at all but a successful defense. Who knows.

Initially sure but in case you havent noticed the Israelis are pretty good with not being suprised sneak attacked considering past attempts to do it.

Give me one reason why you say Syria would lose. They have not fought a conventional war against one another in over 30 years. So how can you judge their military's against one another by those particular standards?

Because the Israeli military is superior to Syrian in nearly every way? Your setup for a what if conflict here is limited to Syria vs Israel and in a type of conflict that would take the handcuffs of Israel. Sorry but you have to provide reasons on how a superior force, fighting once again for its right to exist could be defeated by minor middle eastern power.

The IDF's poor performance in the last war was completely the fault of the international media who waged a propaganda campaign against Israel far more effective than any that Hezzbollah could.

This is why if you are going to fight a war/conflict you do it with 110% effort because if you dont and allow yourself to be held back by media and international pressure it will encourage your enemy who sees a half assed effort that makes you appear weak. So much of these new Israel vs XXX posts are based on Lebanese conflict much like many of the Iran vs US threads are based on results of Iraq. Its why imo if you are going to start a bloody war you do it to win with full effort or you shouldnt even consider engaging it because it will make things worse...one of the fatal mistakes of Iraq.

[Da Skinna]

Either way, Syria is much better equipped now then decades ago. But either way again, they'd get tooled by Israel.

And either way once more, it will only be the innocent civilians that will ultimately pay for it. And then the political fallout all over the Middle East...

[Sétanta]

Syria couldn't defeat Israel when they had the upperhand in any war they have ever fought with Israel. Now, finally Israel has the upper hand. I have no doubt that the Israeli Air Force would anhilliate the Syrian Air Force like it has every time since '48. If Syria uses long range missiles against Israeli civilians, I don't doubt the Israeli's would hesitate to carpet bomb Damascus.

Don't overestimate Syria's Military.

[Icefrisco]

truthfully, i doubt the strength of syria's military. in every conflict they are involved in they are said to be "new and improved". well, maybe but guess who is a lot more improved, israel.not just that but no matter how well and trained the syrian army may be, the syrians obviously care little for their nations wars. why? well, if they did, they would fight hard instead of retreating/routing after only a few days worth of fighting.living in an undmodernized country with an oppresive government is not something that most people really enjoy.i dont blame them for retreating, i would do the same.

the idea of israel attacking damascus is very far-fetched. they could have easily taken damascus in the yom kippur war but decided not to.if they wouldnt take it then why would they take it now? the reasons why they didnt take it then and wouldnt take it now are the same reasons. if they took damascus the entire muslim world would be extremely angry. as it is one of the holiest places in islam, it is very important to muslims. witnessing its loss would fuel unrelenting jihads against the west. even if israel handed it back after a ceasefire the attacks would not stop. to many muslims the whole idea of "they took our city" would cause anger that would last decades.

however, one thing that i noticed in this thread are the constant statements greatly exagerrating israel's lack of a amazing victory over hezbollah. it is pretty obvoius hezbollah isnt nearly as strong cause there are no longer the cosntant cross border attacks from hezbollah.i heard more then enough stories from people and on the news of hezbollah attacks however, they seemed to have stopped.if they won a great victory how come they arent attacking anymore?any good commander would have attacked now while israel is rebuilding its strength for the next conflict.yet, that good commander would only do that if he had won a victory.so, from a military point hezbollah suffered a defeat.i think the syrians would have attacked israel if hezbollah had won the war.if hezbollah had won then only a stupid syrian commander wouldnt have attacked. i mean really stupid. fit they had own the victory that everyone on this thread is talking about, then syria and hezbollah both missed the chance of a lifetime.

[Thanatos]

If all the muslim nations couldn't drive Israel into the sea at its conception back in the day, they certainly aren't going to do it now, attacking Israel one by one.

[NaptownKnight]

It seems to me you are over estimating Syria's millitary power and under estimating Israel's. Saladin, is it safe to say you are completely anti Israeli and want the entire country gone?

[Da Skinna]

It seems to me you are over estimating Syria's millitary power and under estimating Israel's. Saladin, is it safe to say you are completely anti Israeli and want the entire country gone?

By God, let me answer that for him.

YES. Yes he does want to annhilate Israel.

He just said it.

[Saladin45]

By God, let me answer that for him.

YES. Yes he does want to annhilate Israel.

He just said it.

Pray tell, where have I made those statements?

Where have I ever said the statement you just wrote that I allegedly said?

NaptownKnight

I am not under or over-estimating anybody.

I am merely making an assumption of each nation's capabilities and adding in the factor of what I think would be what they might do. If they were to go about things as tactically as they could from the position they are fighting in, tehn sure, it's possible to have a victory. However, if they have incompetent General's at the helm, then they're completely screwed.

And either side has showed that they have incompetant Generals.

[Da Skinna]

Pray tell, where have I made those statements?

Where have I ever said the statement you just wrote that I allegedly said?

Oh, I was just kidding. I just claimed you said something that you probably wouldn't have agreed had you even heard the statement...

Unless of course, you have a dislike for Israel in general, and do actually not want it there...?

[Your Lame Sister]

for now, syria is just playing around with the idea of conquering the golan heights. while the recent war gave them some new ideas for fighting israel, they know that they can't risk it. the syrian regime is so fragile, that if damascus will fall for israel, or will be seriously damaged, the regime will fall. this means that syria won't be so confident about her abillity to win, and therefore it won't rush to a war. anyway, I'm not worried about the IDF's ability to win. the conventional syrian army has no chance of wininng, and if syria will bomb israeli cities, israel could simply bomb damascus and other cities to dust, and will force the syrians to a ceasfire.

[NaptownKnight]

Pray tell, where have I made those statements?

Where have I ever said the statement you just wrote that I allegedly said?

NaptownKnight

I am not under or over-estimating anybody.

I am merely making an assumption of each nation's capabilities and adding in the factor of what I think would be what they might do. If they were to go about things as tactically as they could from the position they are fighting in, tehn sure, it's possible to have a victory. However, if they have incompetent General's at the helm, then they're completely screwed.

And either side has showed that they have incompetent Generals.

Well of course both sides may have incompetent generals, but the Israelis have the advantage in troop quality, tanks, airplanes, and just about any other category you can think of. They also probably have more competent generals than Syria does.