What if China decided to invade Lebanon. Will we be ready?? should we arm ourselves to mach their power??
No country invade another without an excuse. Don't give Israel the excuse and they will not dare cross the border.
Lah HezbIran will have you believe that the Jews wake up every morning and wish they had some shia babies to eat.
The Following User Says Thank You to GeaGea SkyWalkeR For This Useful Post:
This thread's main purpose is to discuss the potential and capabilities of our national army.
1-Any information about the lebanese army's Equipment, strategies, strong points and weak points are welcome.
2-When could the army be definilty ready to take the job of the resistance and be capable of pushing back the IDFs who Pose a serious threat to our national security and Sovereignty in times of Invasion.
3-What does the Lebanese army lack today From types of equipment to training and how can they make up for it and what are the obstacles that stand in the way of a capable lebanese army?
4-This thread is also related to the resistance and how they coordinate and exchange info with the army, in what ways do they serve the army and in what ways it serves them, Can we say that the lebanese resistance groups are integrated into the army and to what extent?
I am also hoping that by discussing these issues we can all realise somehow the strategic importance of the resistance.
It may be hard to answer to your questions with accuracy. Basically, the strong points are the following ones : bravery, special forces and maghawir who are well skilled and trained. Weak points : lack of political support, lack of a clear definition of the Army's doctrine and role, lack of basic and advanced equipment, may be problems with the internal organization which has to be improved (I don't know, perhaps too many people in charge with logistics vs people who are effective soldiers).
Besides the "technical" aspect, I think that the problem is a political one. We should first ask ourselves what do we want the Army for. Defending the lebanese territory ? Preventing us from civil strife and civil war ? Playing the role of a "police" ? Or just doing some parades ?
If we choose the "defend lebanese territory" option, then we will have to act accordingly and to reform and modernize the Army. But first of all, we will have to build a state...and go build a state with the politicians donkeys the lebanese chose as their representatives.
To The Following Users: "Hiram of Tyre" and "mikeys71".
I would think that if an Army Official Was to enter the thread and read your Posts, He will find that they are Madenningly Unhelpful. Please Post Helpful and informative ideas that help benefit the army and give a clear idea about the situation while taking History, geography, economy and politics into consideration.
As for the Army i think a Big issue THAT WE HAVE ENCOUNTERED BEFORE is that there is a possible chance of a Split or Division amongst it's ranks. This is due to Direct Political Influence on the Men of the Army by Some Relatively LOW RANKED officers who try to BrainWash the Minds of Our Men with Political Nonesense.
They Need to address This issue to Avoid the possible Split. Sniff Those Guys Out already And Kick them The Hell OUT!!! or are they Too Politically backed that they become Untouchable .
I tell you Guys Something, There are Low Ranked individuals THAT prefer to remain That way, and Are doing a good service to some POLITICIANS BY BRAINWASHING young, Emotional and Probably Uneducated Soldiers. Thus these individuals Stay out of The eyes of the Media and get payed Twice as much as thier Superiors.
In addition to our infantry and special forces that were extremely efficient (up to the early 90s) given their "real-life" experience (despite extremely inferior equipment), our artillary is probably one of the best in the world... the precision at which they used to hit their targets is legendary (e.g., the famous battle of Dbaye remains a "miracle" of precision... the "backbone" of the LF, per SG, was broken in a couple of days thanks to extremly precise hits by the army's artillary)
The Following User Says Thank You to L'arbalette For This Useful Post:
Any army whose forces and military doctrine are organized along conventional lines must be able to either somewhat match or exceed the brute force and power projection capability of its adversary, in addition to being able to use geography to its advantage. The Israeli army has huge advantages against any conventional force in the area in terms of:
1. The size, range, capability, and weaponry of its air force.
2. The armament of its land forces (not only in terms of tanks and APC's, but also firepower)
3. The sophistication and organization of its naval forces.
4. Its arsenal of ballistic missiles.
5. Its access/usage of military satellites.
7.. Its nuclear arsenal.
Take the recent example of the conflict between Georgia and Russia. Georgia's army was fairly well equipped with a combination of previous-era soviet and modern American war machines, and yet its land forces were literally overrun but Russian armored columns invading from the North and West, while its air capability was erased by Russia's air force. In conventional terms, unless your tactical battle plans suffer from extreme cowardice and stupidity, the side with the larger brute force will easily defeat the smaller opponent. This is because the sustainability and operational capability of a conventional force is all-important, even when the alternative is seceding the battle and giving up geography. In other words, it is better to lose geography than lose your whole army in a battle that you cannot possibly win.
Applying this precedent to Lebanon, which is a fairly tiny country with a terrain that isn't well suited for conventional land forces, any type of conventional force that the Lebanese army manages to build up will probably suffer the same fate that the Egyptian forces suffered during 1968. It is a political, fiscal, and logistical impossibility to get the Lebanese army where it needs to be to face Israel conventionally. Unfortunately, I am convinced that this is the case. It would take Israeli a matter of hours if not minutes to erase the presence of any fighter jets we manage to purchase for the Lebanese army (which would probably be few in number anyway). As for Lebanese ground forces organized as armored columns (infantry, tanks, APC's etc), that work out of clearly marked military barracks and bases, the Israeli army would be able to neutralize them without having to resort to invading until after the fact, assuming Hezbollah was not in the equation to prevent a land invasion.
For this reason, it would not do Lebanon much good to equip and train the army in line with a conventional defense doctrine, as this would be akin to setting up the army for disaster. An investment of this kind would be a waste of funds, and an even greater waste of lives in terms of our army personnel, if indeed the army is going to be tasked with defending the country against Israel.
When you cannot match the brute force of an adversary conventionally (in reasonable relative terms across the spectrum of warfare which includes strategic weapons, army, navy, and air force), you must resort to unconventional and asymmetrical tactics. SHN spoke about this issue on a couple of occasions. There is no reason to argue that just because the precedent around the world is to arm and train an army for conventional warfare, this is what is best for Lebanon. Clearly, we have unique circumstances in this country, resulting from a damaging and prolonged civil war, a devastating national debt, a current political crisis, and numerous Israeli wars against our country. We must do what is in the interest of our national security, and we must not be afraid not to follow in the traditions and norms of other countries.
The question here becomes focused on what kind of form the Lebanese army should assume, and what exactly are the hallmarks, characteristics, and facets of an unconventional and asymmetrical military doctrine. There are many sources on the internet where one can read up on these concepts (I have posted abt it before, but I'm too lazy to find the link). The important thing to remember here is that there is no single formula when it comes to such a military doctrine. Training, armament, tactical considerations, and strategic assets are measured, valued, and implemented on the basis of a number of factors including geography, the size and capability of the adversary, the availability of weapons systems and their utility within such a doctrine, the number of trained forces that can be utilized, the priority on the battle field (holding geography vs sustaining forces), etc. I have opinions on what the army should and shouldn't do in terms of these issues, but I'm no trained expert, and at this point I am unaware of any initiative on the part of the Lebanese Army or the political echelon in this country to move away from conventional doctrines in favor of unconventional and asymmetric ones. This is something that, in my opinion, should happen asap.
Any army whose forces and military doctrine are organized along conventional lines must be able to either somewhat match or exceed the brute force and power projection capability of its adversary, in addition to being able to use geography to its advantage. The Israeli army has huge advantages against any conventional force in the area in terms of:
1. The size, range, capability, and weaponry of its air force.
2. The armament of its land forces (not only in terms of tanks and APC's, but also firepower)
3. The sophistication and organization of its naval forces.
4. Its arsenal of ballistic missiles.
5. Its access/usage of military satellites.
7.. Its nuclear arsenal.
.
Well we have
1-Some Zu-23s, Zsu-23-4s Guns, Also called Anti-Sniper on RoofTop Guns =
2-And the Recoilless B-10s on Commercial Trucks
3-Some t-54 and 55 tanks And the StagHounds Roar Roar!!!
4-a Few BM-11s and 30s (I personaly like these)
5- Some TOWs RPG7s blah blah blah... (boring anti tank stuff)
6-AND Finally the Legendary M-113 that carries our Brave men to their Graves.
Can You Beat That !!!!
We seriously need someone TO GIVE US WEAPONS although it will never be without a price, We just Gotta see if It's Worth it.
We have 1 of that and we only have it because the Maghaouir did a commando operation and stole it from the palestinians in the 70s...
Our "tanks" are Amx 13, T54/55 and M48 (50+ years old)
Our troop transports are the french VABs (still in use by the French Army, relatively good) and the infamous M113
Our canons and 155mm Howitzer (American, the best, computer guided), some old BF 155mm and 105mm (french) and 130mm (russian) and mortars (120, 82 and 60mm)
We also had Milan anti-tanks rockets
What if China decided to invade Lebanon. Will we be ready?? should we arm ourselves to mach their power??
No country invade another without an excuse. Don't give Israel the excuse and they will not dare cross the border.
and dont give it a hand and a cheer !
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeys71
Under funded??? you must be kidding me. This army is the only army in the world that keep paying salary and retirement even after their death they pay their kids. What this army needs is to be loyal to their country and not their religious or political leaders.
Take for example 3amid Shouquair who is he loyal to??? The state of Lebanon or Hassan Nesrallah who saved his job back in may.
well when i know for a fact that my country is in deep S*** with 50 billions debt for the sake of the reconstruction mainly the reconstruction of a so called SOLIDERE and i see my army so poorly equipted i will call this under funded ! the salaries of ministers are also payed to the widows and kids , the salaries of MPs as well we2fit bi zal3oumak the salaries of the army who serve the country and die for it ?
1st September 2008
.
= 
