Iron Dome works in combat, intercepts Grad rocket

[Mosby]

History was made on Thursday when the Iron Dome counter-rocket defense system intercepted a Grad-model rocket fired from the Gaza Strip on Thursday, proving its capabilities for the first time in combat.

IDF sources said that the rocket was detected shortly after it was launched in the direction of Ashkelon south of which a battery was deployed on Monday.

“This is a huge achievement,” one defense official said.

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?ID=215635&R=R1

[KeepItReal]

1. They only have 2 systems able to be deployed

So they can only protect 2 cities at a time.

Better than nothing, I guess.

[azurnoir]

2. Not to worry we're that is the US giving Israel

a couple hundred million for more, and if that's not enough........

[Mosby]

3. This defensive system will save Israeli and Palestinian lives

Given that fact the price seems pretty reasonable, to me anyway.

[azurnoir]

4. well I am sure it does at that

after all it's not the lives are those of say unemployed Americans or something

[henank]

5. What has Iron Dome got to do with unemployed Americans?

Iron Dome was developed in Israel by the Israeli armaments manufacturer Rafael.

Do you not like the idea of Israel being able to defend its citizens?

Ah, I see the article notes:

n May, 2010, President Barack Obama requested funding of $205 million from congress to support the development of the Iron Dome Missile Defense System

I don't think that $205m is going to solve America's unemployment problem. And if the US is involved in its development, then a whole lot of jobs are going to be created and/or saved by the workers on the project. It would seem to be a win-win situation for bot countries.

[azurnoir]

6. $205 million would not hurt either, see we here in the US are told that we're too broke

to go on funding programs that help those that are in need here

[Shaktimaan]

8. Yes, that IS what we're told.

But you should know better than that. The reason those programs are being cut is because they have been long-time targets of the American right wing. They are using the employment crisis as an opportunity to attack programs they always opposed. We aren't actually broke at all. We are shouldering a manageable amount of debt for a country of our size. Spending more now for programs to stimulate the economy would cost very little over the long-term. Deficit spending during a recession is a pretty common phenomenon. We certainly had a trillion dollars to invade Iraq when we needed it... but now all of a sudden we're broke? I don't think so.

If we're so broke then why are we still pushing through so many tax breaks for the super wealthy. Why do they pay a fraction of the taxes that they did just a few decades ago? If we really don't have any money then how could we be cutting the taxes of those who are least in need? Why do that?

Because the whole "we're broke! we have to eliminate programs we can't afford!" cry is a sham designed to kill social programs that the right have always hated. And my God, you're actually falling for it, aren't you?! You think that 205 mil might just go towards helping some poor old lady on food stamps buy a meal for herself, don't you? Give me a break. The crisis is manufactured, just like the one in health care. The problem with socialized medicine isn't that it's too expensive. It's that it's too CHEAP. No one makes any money, which is what this is really all about... breaking the backs of the few remaining useful unions, killing off effective programs like Planned Parenthood and concentrating the wealth of the nation into the pockets of those individuals and companies wealthy enough to buy elections.

We have plenty of money to fund those programs you mentioned. We just don't WANT to.

[azurnoir]

11. yes we know all of that and it is nice of you to speak

the progressive line for once shows your doing your homework nicely, albeit it sounds much like stuff that I have read of Anthony Weiner and he is the shining example of a liberal in all of his speechs

[LeftishBrit]

17. I wish I could recommend your post!

You have got to the heart of the matter, IMO.

And the same applies to a lesser extent to other countries with right-wing governments (I know that Obama is not right-wing - or by my standards very left-wing - but Congress is very right-wing). Our predominantly-Tory government is using the economic crisis as an excuse to cut whatever it can; but basically it is cutting for ideological reasons. The Thatcher government imposed cuts when there was no such economic crisis. By contrast, Attlee's post-war Labour government introduced the NHS and social welfare state *during a period of austerity, just after a WORLD WAR, when FOOD was still being rationed* - because it strongly believed in the necessity of doing so.

[azurnoir]

19. what both you and the other posters 'seem' to miss was the intent of my statement

which was " Not to worry we're that is the US giving Israel a couple hundred million for more, and if that's not enough........"

it was in reply to someone who said that Israel only had a very limited number of 'Iron Dome" shields

now it has been revved into something else quite different I must commend once again the skills it takes for that type of 'interpretation' and command of the dialog to suit a set of political ends

[Shaktimaan]

29. oh, THAT'S what you meant by this?

$205 million would not hurt either, see we here in the US are told that we're too broke to go on funding programs that help those that are in need here

Because it instead appeared that you were not beneath adopting Republican rhetoric to push your own ideological agenda. If the thread evolved at all then it is because you chose to hinge your argument upon a weak conservative talking point. Don't blame us for that.

[azurnoir]

30. I guess you failed to go back and see the entire progression of comments

but that is okay in fact I expect it, the rest of the comment is kind of nonsensical blather what Republican rhetoric?. Especially seeing as how the Republicans are falling all over themselves to support Israel and the House Majority Leader went as far to at one point suggest adding Israel to the US domestic defense budget to protect its funding while cutting all other foreign aid

eta further more the $3 billion a year we currently give Israel was instituted by Bush in final years of his second term 2007 I believe it was a 10 year package that was already in place when Obama was elected. so your accusations of Republican this and that fall short of reality. which is that support of Israel as it is called is neither a Republican or Democratic issue albeit I've read the Republicans sort of condemned Obama for his supposed condemnation of the settlements while vetoing the UNSC motin against them

[azurnoir]

20. actually no shakti 'helping some poor little old lady with food stamps' was not my point

my point is/was that it would seem that all Israel must do these days is ask and it will indeed receive, this goes equally almost for both sides of aisle and now that the Republicans have succeeded it seems into making who supports Israel more a political issue it seems even more accentuated, really the rest is simply a means of political posturing for both sides

[azurnoir]

7. "Do you not like the idea of Israel being able to defend its citizens?"

I felt this gem deserved it's own comment

Israel is of course free to defend it self, but are you saying that without American money it would not be able to do so?
or is what you really mean is that without American money Israel might have cut back on the social welfare state that seems to exist there? well at less the majority population of its citizen, you know make hard choices, tell its citizens they have to make sacrifices, tighten their belts

[LeftishBrit]

15. Israel spends more of its *own* GDP on defense-spending than most countries do

And almost all developed countries have social welfare states to a greater extent than America, including those 'making sacrifices and tightening their belts' (ugh, does the phrase sound familiar in the UK).

American military aid to Israel is not the reason why America does not have more of a social welfare state. America could easily afford the latter; it is due to ideology, not costs, that it doesn't have it.

[azurnoir]

18. Israeli expenditures on defense are high but that ignores the thrust of the comment

which is/was an insinuation that Israel would not be able to defend it self without American monies, IMO Israel would most certainly be able to do so

[LeftishBrit]

13. While I am not a fan of the military-industrial complex...

if people suddenly stopped funding it - including military aid to Israel (who are then expected to buy a lot of American weapons), it would lead to quite a few *more* unemployed Americans.

[azurnoir]

16. yes I've heard it all before but one must remember arms are really not that hard to sell

and I am sure America could find other buyers for it's wares, among its allies

how ever the manufacturer of the F-35's Israel will be 'buying' has recently closed a local operation and laid off 1000 people

[King_David]

9. Good news

[King_David]

10. Works kind of like the protective wall in the West Bank

Once it proves to be effective,

I only pray that the Enemies of Israel do not start calling it:

''The APARTHEID Iron Dome shield ''

[bemildred]

12. Even a blind pig finds a truffle now and then. nt

[King_David]

26. Nonsense

It was the 1st shot.And it hit it.

Israeli Ingenuity ;)

[bemildred]

27. Blind pigs don't find truffles?

I hardly suggested it was a miss.

[LeftishBrit]

14. Good.

This is an example of defense that really is defense, and not - as the term is so often misused everywhere - revenge-killing.

[Kurska]

21. The veiled hostility to a purely defensive system in this thread is astounding.

If you dislike the American money used to develop it, it has already been spent. The only legitimate grief with this system now seems to be that it is saving Israeli lives from rocket attack, bewildering coming from people who supposedly are in the "peace" camp.

[azurnoir]

22. no veiled hostility more a point in fact

while when it comes to Israel both sides of the aisle clamor to see who can do or give the most while when it comes to America and Americans or just about anyone else there is the usual partisan divide with some on the so called liberal side making lots noise much of it IMO rather juvenile wind with little real substance blown to appeal to 'liberals' some of whom then obediently reply 'ooh look how - talked back to-, isn't he/she coooool" for my part I'd much rather see more doing and less talking it was a critique of the current American political system rather than just Israel IMO Al Franken would be an example of less talk more action

[Kurska]

23. I understand what you're saying. Do you think the Iron dome is good for peace?

If not, why not? If so, why so?

I think neutralizing Hamas's ability to harass Israel will be good for peace. Eventually the sheer impotence of being able to do nothing besides fire mortars and missiles into a successful defense system will coax them back toward more political solutions alongside Fatah. I think their recent overtures of brotherhood with Fatah is a step in the right direction.

[azurnoir]

24. honestly it is too soon to tell whether or not Iron Dome will be 'good for peace'

if the past couple of days are an indication it surely doesn't look that way, at least 3 more grads have been fired and stopped by Iron Dome, according to Maan 14 killed including at least 5 civilians in Gaza due to Israeli retaliation

[Kurska]

25. Good point, but yes this is only the short term.

Hamas now wants to test the system and Israel is going to respond to any rocket fire. We'll see how it pans out in a couple of months.

To be fair things were already spiraling out of control before the Iron Dome was activated.

[azurnoir]

28. as for the long range it depends on how all sides react

will militants in Gaza give up firing Grads or other rockets? how will Israel retaliate? will Hamas make an effort to control the groups in Gaza? Things are spiraling out of control the future is unsure which is an understatement to put it mildly