[Paul R.]

Wait a minute - 1st you complain that the Israelis are unfairly competent, then you complain (in the next sentence!) that they are either “abysmally incompetent, or there is another (undefined) objective at work here.”

That’s not gonna wash.

Further thoughts:

The Palis are just the tip of the spear, while the Israelis are mostly (mostly) their own spear. Even looking at backers doesn’t change this: If the mullahs in Iran find it to advance their objectives, they’ll burn every Pali, every Houthi, and more. The US, under any President since we began significantly supporting Israel, would not do such to Israel, hell, we would not even do it to those Iranian surrogates.

Yes, I keep in mind that the purpose of a military is to kill people and break things, should it’s deterrent objective fail.

Observation additionally shows that a significant number of Palis (and Muslim terrorists in general) are only deterred by one thing: Their own death B4 they accomplish their objectives. This is the on the ground types, not the leadership. The leadership usually value their own lives, but no one else’s.

Also it must be kept in mind that most of the Pali “missions” over the years have been suicide missions, whether immediately (suicide bomber) or otherwise. (Raiders getting cut down on the beach is but one example.) The Israelis are not suicidal.

And most of all: Proportionality arguments are nonsense.

[yelostar]

...'abysmally incompetent' - was intentional hyperbole.

Of course Israel has a top-notch military and intelligence force.

The American taxpayer has shelled out hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars in aid to Israel, yet has little to show for it, just unending conflict, and the promise of funding in perpetuity. How many billions did the Iron Dome cost? How effective was it last October 7?

Israel has not provided any plausible justification for its lapses. I don't know about anyone else, but I think that the hundreds of billions of US taxpayer dollars they have received over decades demands that they give an explanation. But no, just hand-wringing, finger-pointing, head-shaking and excuses.

https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts

What is Israel’s qualitative military edge (QME)?

QME has been a conceptual backbone of U.S. military aid to Israel for decades, and it was formally enshrined in U.S. law in 2008 [PDF]. It requires the U.S. government to maintain Israel’s ability “to defeat any credible conventional military threat from any individual state or possible coalition of states or from non-state actors, while sustaining minimal damage and casualties.” QME is based on NATO military planning vis-a-vis a potential conflict with the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries during the Cold War.

Under the 2008 law, the United States must ensure that any weapons it provides to other countries in the Middle East do not compromise Israel’s QME. In several cases, this has required the United States to provide Israel with offsetting weaponry as part of larger regional arms sales. QME has also ensured that Israel is the first in the region to receive access to the most sophisticated U.S. military weapons and platforms, such as the F-35 stealth fighter, of which Israel has fifty.

This is buried in the Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008.

And most of all: Proportionality arguments are nonsense.

Unless it's a serious misunderstanding of how of modern warfare is conducted, generally speaking - losses, casualties, fatalities - have consistently been used as a gauge of success vs failure. When the losses are mostly on the other side, then you're winning.

Based on the numbers, Israel has been successful. It is a wealthy, modern, technology-savy country, with a first-rate military and intelligence force. It is far from being a victim.