[Gondring]

Contrary to previous reports, Friedler said, the Hizbullah fighters were not lying in ambush.

So the UN didn't help set up an ambush. Well, whatta you know! That surprises me!

As for leaving buildings standing, read up on some military history...leveling buildings can make an assault even more difficult, as there are lots of unpredictable hiding places. Many good soldiers have learned the hard way that "softening up" can be overdone.

[JewishRighter]

Seriously speaking, I really try to understand these things. Any titles you can suggest about this particular issue? Ie: softening up pros and cons? It just looks from the report like the Hizzies had an easy time getting the jump on the IDF by virtue of having standing structures to give them a commanding vantage point.

[baiamonte]

God bless them!

[JewishRighter]

I left out one thing. I don't mean softening up: I mean leveling the playing field--literally.

[GSlob]

Yes, if there is some place for the bad guys to hide and then move to the freshly made ruins [i.e. if the destruction is rather gradual in time]. No, if the area destruction happens very quickly, so there's no place in that area to hide and wait it out. The area is reasonably small, so time-compressed destruction is feasible.

[A message]

.leveling buildings can make an assault even more difficult, as there are lots of unpredictable hiding places. Many good soldiers have learned the hard way that "softening up" can be overdone.

Agreed, rubble can cause all kinds of new issues in a battle.

Not only can rubble provide easy to hide places for the enemy, it can clog streets and limit maneuver. It can block flanking movements, it can stop tanks from penetration, plus it is difficult for infantry to storm.

[middie]

You are correct.The U.S. doctrine developed after the Monte Cassino bombing in the Italian Winter of 1943-44. The rubble of the monastery gave the Germans a better and more effective field of fire on the allied troops (primarily Polish) advancing up the mountain after the air strike that destroyed every building.

History has several examples of the effect. The British learned that lesson after their artillery leveled an enemy town in the Crimean War---I believe it was the seige of Taganrog. The Russian riflemen used the rubble as cover to exact a toll from the British.

[brazzaville]

Good evening.
"As for leaving buildings standing, read up on some military history...leveling buildings can make an assault even more difficult, as there are lots of unpredictable hiding places."

The battle for Monte Cassino is a prime example of that.

The Allies bombed the monastery on top to prevent the Germans from using it. The German paratroopers turned the rubble of the old monastery into a fortress and stalled the Allied advance in Italy for months.

Michael Frazier

[Valin]

As for leaving buildings standing, read up on some military history...leveling buildings can make an assault even more difficult, as there are lots of unpredictable hiding places.

Indeed. Urban fighting is the worst!

[jan in Colorado]

Thanks for the ping. I'm not convinced about it NOT being an ambush, but there is a lot of great information posted on this thread.

[MinorityRepublican]

Nazi snipers found rubble an excellent place to hide and shoot at the Allied troops.

[thinkthenpost]

Another thought is Israel maybe trying to preserve evidence (weapon caches) that will prove the extent of Hezbullah preparedness and equipment available to them.

[LibWhacker]

That's exactly why we need the neutron bomb. But political correctness did away with that one, too.

'Course, no one's close to using nuclear weapons yet. But that's only because muslims don't have a lot of them so far.