Isreal Learned of the Attack a Year Ago

[martin]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-attack-intelligence.html

Did I miss it or has it taken two days for this bombshell to go off here?

"...Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. The document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse in paragliders, on motorcycles and on foot — all of which happened on Oct. 7.

The plan also included details about the location and size of Israeli military forces, communication hubs and other sensitive information, raising questions about how Hamas gathered its intelligence and whether there were leaks inside the Israeli security establishment.

The document circulated widely among Israeli military and intelligence leaders, but experts determined that an attack of that scale and ambition was beyond Hamas’s capabilities, according to documents and officials. It is unclear whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top political leaders saw the document, as well...."

 

[Bigdog]

Why do you think this is a bombshell, Martin?

The time and place are not even mentioned.

 

[martin]

Why do you think this is a bombshell, Martin?

The time and place are not even mentioned.

Best then not to warn the settlers along that limited border, huh? Or leave yourself so unprepared it takes two days to respond to the terrorists?

p.s. Anyway, the answer reportedly is that the information wasn't believed. Israeli intelligence concluded Hamas hadn't the ability to pull it off. Hamas then did pull it off almost exactly as predicted.

 

[QP!]

I personally hate this type of hindsight expertise. I see not an ounce of "bombshell" in reports like this.

Yes, if a thing ends up happening, it can look 'obvious to some that others should have known...because look at this evidence'.

If you were to look back a year or more, the number of 'Intel Filings' Israel would have over 'discussed', 'reported' or other 'insights' in to Hamas, or other terrorist organization, schemes, would be massive.

The vast, VAST majority of them, never able to be carried out and just 'pen on paper wishcasting'.

The very fact it sat on paper for over a year is the reason why it would be taken less seriously.

But it is human nature to use the fallacy of Results Based Thinking, and see what has happened, to then determine that the prior answer and action should have been clear.

 

[Bigdog]

Best then not to warn the settlers along that limited border, huh? Or leave yourself so unprepared it takes two days to respond to the terrorists?

p.s. Anyway, the answer reportedly is that the information wasn't believed. Israeli intelligence concluded Hamas hadn't the ability to pull it off. Hamas then did pull it off almost exactly as predicted.

Warn them? ... so they should have cancelled the concert? ... they should have fled their homes? I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The Jews live constantly under the threat of attack.

Even if the IDF "believed" it was possible, what should have been done to prevent it? Are you suggesting Israel should have launched a preemptive strike?

We were forewarned about 9/11. It still happened.

 

[Walt]

Warn them? ... so they should have cancelled the concert? ... they should have fled their homes? I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The Jews live constantly under the threat of attack.

Even if the IDF "believed" it was possible, what should have been done to prevent it? Are you suggesting Israel should have launched a preemptive strike?

We were forewarned about 9/11. It still happened.

I do not know that Israel was warned, but if they were, they could have had more forces on hand to handle the attack. They had almost nothing to keep the Hamas militants out. The Hamas militants were shocked by how easy their attack was. The diversion, that was supposed to be easily wiped out, actually found no opposition.

Bush decided to do nothing about 9/11. If Clinton had still been in office, you would have had the daily meetings to put the pressure on everyone to go out and catch the terrorists before they can get us.

 

[martin]

Another reason the intelligence may not have been believed is that besides being deeply immoral and sure to arouse international outrage such an attack would be strategically insane. What could Hamas expect from Israel other than the brutal payback it is getting?

 

[martin]

Warn them? ... so they should have cancelled the concert? ... they should have fled their homes? I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The Jews live constantly under the threat of attack.

Even if the IDF "believed" it was possible, what should have been done to prevent it? Are you suggesting Israel should have launched a preemptive strike?

We were forewarned about 9/11. It still happened.

Absolutely the report should have been shared. Letting the country know while preparing to defend against it is the government's duty to the people it claims to openly govern, and might have kept the attack from happening.

 

[Bigdog]

Absolutely the report should have been shared. Letting the country know while preparing to defend against it is was the government's duty to the people it claims to openly govern, and might have kept the attack from happening.

Israel did not know where or when the invasion would happen. Just like with 9/11. The intelligence was not detailed enough to be actionable.

I'm surprised you endorse a preemptive strike.

You're suggesting they should have fled their homes a year ago.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-attack-intelligence.html

Did I miss it or has it taken two days for this bombshell to go off here?

"...Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. The document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse in paragliders, on motorcycles and on foot — all of which happened on Oct. 7.

The plan also included details about the location and size of Israeli military forces, communication hubs and other sensitive information, raising questions about how Hamas gathered its intelligence and whether there were leaks inside the Israeli security establishment.

The document circulated widely among Israeli military and intelligence leaders, but experts determined that an attack of that scale and ambition was beyond Hamas’s capabilities, according to documents and officials. It is unclear whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top political leaders saw the document, as well...."

The anti-Israel version of Loose Change? That Bush knew about 9/11?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I do not know that Israel was warned, but if they were, they could have had more forces on hand to handle the attack. They had almost nothing to keep the Hamas militants out. The Hamas militants were shocked by how easy their attack was. The diversion, that was supposed to be easily wiped out, actually found no opposition.

Bush decided to do nothing about 9/11. If Clinton had still been in office, you would have had the daily meetings to put the pressure on everyone to go out and catch the terrorists before they can get us.

QED.

Bush was in office for less than 9 months on 9/11. Clinton had been President through the first WTC attack and the entire planning of 9/11.

https://www.britannica.com/event/September-11-attacks

In 1996 Khalid Sheikh Mohammed met bin Laden in Tora Bora, Afghanistan. The 9-11 Commission (formally the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), set up in 2002 by U.S. Pres. George W. Bush and the U.S. Congress to investigate the attacks of 2001, explained that it was then that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed “presented a proposal for an operation that would involve training pilots who would crash planes into buildings in the United States.” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed dreamed up the tactical innovation of using hijacked planes to attack the United States, al-Qaeda provided the personnel, money, and logistical support to execute the operation, and bin Laden wove the attacks on New York and Washington into a larger strategic framework of attacking the “far enemy”—the United States—in order to bring about regime change across the Middle East.

 

[martin]

The anti-Israel version of Loose Change? That Bush knew about 9/1?

If the reporting is accurate it's anti government secrecy, not anti Israel.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

If the reporting is accurate it's anti government secrecy, not anti Israel.

....just like Loose Change!

Here's the problem: intelligence agencies get a lot of intel. Sorting which is relevant and/or actionable and which isn't is a major problem. Clinton had reports of Arabs learning how to fly but not how to land. He knew al-Qaeda wanted to strike on American soil...since they'd already done it in 1993 and hit multiple American targets around the world. Clinton even launched a few cruise missiles at them but took no other action. Would you accept if some RWNJ claimed that Clinton knew about 9/11 and then deliberately did nothing about it? Or would you accept that Hindsight is 20/20?

 

[martin]

Israel did not know where or when the invasion would happen. Just like with 9/11. The intelligence was not detailed enough to be actionable.

I'm surprised you endorse a preemptive strike.

You're suggesting they should have fled their homes a year ago.

These 9/11 comparisons are foolish. Bush is said only to have known terrorist hijacks were being planned, not where, but the public was acquainted with terrorist hijacks which had been happening for years. There are so many daily flights, thousands of them, that
air passengers lived with this possible danger every time they took a flight knowing the odds of their plane being targeted were too small to take seriously. This they had done for years and on rare occasions been rudely surprised. The Hamas threat to the small region neighboring its borders was altogether different.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

These 9/11 comparisons are foolish. Bush is said only to have known terrorist hijacks were being planned, not where, but the public was acquainted with terrorist hijacks which had been happening for years. There are so many daily flights, thousands of them, that
air passengers lived with this possible danger every time they took a flight knowing the odds of their plane being targeted were too small to take seriously. This they had done for years and on rare occasions been rudely surprised. The Hamas threat to the small region neighboring its borders was altogether different.

A year prior Israeli intell comes across a plan. How many other plans did they come across during that time period. You're saying only one or so few that they should have acted on it?

Okay, what should the IDF have done? Bomb Hamas? LOL How many antisemites would have denounced Israel for "unprovoked attacks"?

All I see here is an antisemitic/pro-Palestinian version of Loose Change. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

If the reporting is accurate it's anti government secrecy, not anti Israel.

No, it's typical bureaucratic inefficiency. Okay, Israel's intelligence agencies had some knowledge of the methods Hamas might use in an attack. They had no date or timing of such an attack available. What were they supposed to do? Even the scale of the attack wasn't known. That is would it be 10, 50, 500, combatants? It's entirely possible that the intelligence agencies and military worked through those scenarios and decided that there'd be time to respond if such an attack happened so they didn't do anything overt or new to counter the possibility, complacent in their analysis.

This is like parsing through everything in hindsight and claiming those in charge should have known it was coming. No different than 9/11 or Pearl Harbor for that matter. Just another case of applying a McNamara fallacy to data after the fact. An alternative is it's a Ludic fallacy where you are applying the results of a simulation run by the Israeli military to actual events and saying the Israelis come up short and should be pilloried for it.

Either way, it isn't some major, earth shaking, blockbuster piece of news.

 

[martin]

A year prior Israeli intell comes across a plan. How many other plans did they come across during that time period. You're saying only one or so few that they should have acted on it?

Okay, what should the IDF have done? Bomb Hamas? LOL How many antisemites would have denounced Israel for "unprovoked attacks"?

All I see here is an antisemitic/pro-Palestinian version of Loose Change. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

What you see is your own problem. I figured when I started this thread there would be crap like yours.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

What you see is your own problem. I figured when I started this thread there would be crap like yours.

What did you want the IDF to do with this intelligence a year ago, Marty? Level Gaza? Commence a preemptive ground attack?

 

[martin]

What did you want the IDF to do with this intelligence a year ago, Marty? Level Gaza? Commence a preemptive ground attack?

No, Dutchy.

Inform the administration which claims it wasn't informed, let the report out generally instead of hiding it, move some existing forces into the region. Could that be worse for the villagers and the civilians of Palestine than what has happened to them?

 

[Phyllis Diller]

No, Dutchy.

Inform the administration which claims it wasn't informed, let the report out generally instead of hiding it, move some existing forces into the region. Could that be worse for the villagers and the civilians of Palestine than what has happened to them?

dick ditch is a programmed robot designed to bootlick.