How do you think the coverage of this story would be if it was Iran's military building a fake Israeli town?


IDF builds fake Muslim city to prepare for war
SHELLY PAZ, THE JERUSALEM POST Jan. 22, 2007

The IDF unveiled an Urban Warfare Training Center (UTC) on Monday in a mock city that simulates an Arab town, four months after the second Lebanon war ended.

The unit's commanders firmly stated that the city was planned eight years ago and that construction began a year ago. They added that the current pace of the training was two battalions each week.

The mock city is located in the southern Tze'elim military base. From a distance, it looks like any Arab urban center.

Around 500 structures were built for a maximum capacity of 5,000 residents. "Just like in every real city we built mosques, a Casba and even a refugee camp," said Lt.-Col Arik Moreh, the second in command of the Tactical Training City (TTC), part of the UTC, following a large urban warfare training exercise Monday morning.

Arab music was played in the background throughout the entire exercise, to get everyone in the mood.

In the center some of the houses' walls have holes, an imitation of those soldiers leave behind after breaking into houses and taking them over.

"This place was built as close as possible to reality. The density of the houses, the stores, a central plaza," said Moreh, adding that the exercise included mainly cadets from a commanders' course.

During the exercise, 350 soldiers were spread out in the fake town, some playing the role of civilians while a few women, dressed in American uniforms and armed with laser target rifles, acted as Hizbullah fighters.

"This is a routine breaker," said two of the women following a short demonstration in which soldiers broke into a house - successfully, of course.

"Usually we are Hummer operators but this exercise is fun because you have a chance to shoot these laser rifles," the girls explained.

"The main difficulty of such urban combat is to keep track of the location of each and every soldier, because as soon as the forces get into a town like this, they disappear in the houses and become invisible," said Moreh.

According to the IDF, the city's structures were influenced by many Arab cities, but mostly by Ramallah.

Every house is equipped with surveillance cameras which start filming as soon as the forces step inside, for debriefing purposes.

All field units will be trained in the UTC, including the Air Force, the special canine unit, DCO officials and even media representatives.

Brig.-Gen. Uzi Moskovich, the head of the Ground Training Center (GTC), said that the facility "is the largest one of its kind in the world" and stretches over 20 sq.km.

"In addition, the resemblance to a real urban center helps us prepare our forces better," he added.

"Most important are the debriefing capabilities the UTC is equipped with. This way we can reach the best conclusions."

Parts of the UTC are still under construction and will open in July 2007. Both regular and reserve units will train there and practice possible scenarios of urban fighting, from kidnappings to various terror activities and ambushes.

"Lessons will be learned together with all the participating units. We know that training is a process we will have to work on gradually," said Moskovich, adding that in the future, the IDF will host foreign armies.

"This kind of massive training in an environment that simulates a real fighting situation is one of the conclusions from the last war," said Moskovich.

According to Moskovich, there is no problem of demoralization among the soldiers. "The collective mood is that we made some mistakes which have to be taken into consideration, but all in all, the atmosphere is good," he said.

However, two paratroopers who, as reservists, took part in the exercise said the problem during the Lebanon war was the conduct of the political echelon.

"There is no forecast for another war soon, but the area we live in is not stable and the IDF has to be ready as soon as possible," concluded Moskovich.

After the photogenic simulation for the visiting journalists, First Lieutenant Effi said that a major differences between the UTC and a real combat situation is the live ammunition.

He added that "the fear factor is missing because this is only a simulation. But it helps improve our abilities. This is a more accurate tool for us and we hope we'll do better" in the next war.•

We know, of course, the screams of anti-semitism would be heard across the galaxy.

To even ask such a question would be anti-semitic.

well we all know im a jew by now

and i would not find it anti semitic. all countries build models to practice warfare. if iran planned to invade israel, they would be stupid not to build a model.

dont put words into the mouths of jews. not everything is anti semitic. its a war, get over it

So True!

I didn't ask what Jews would say. I asked how people thought the coverage would be. People are responding to that. No one put any words in the mouths of Jews.

I must have missed the part where people were putting words into the mouths of Jews. Shucks!

Who is talking about jews? I'd say at least half the US would make this assertion considering how many members of Congress are in bed with AIPAC.

Where is there a war? You mean the one the IDF is waging against poor, oppressed people with no homes or jobs. OK, well, at least we know what it's called now.

who would be doing the "oh its so anti-semitic then"? the arabs? the general american population who spent the last lebanon war complaining that the jews were the initiatiors and such?

no im pretty sure the above posters didnt mean those groups

oh and the war, as it says in the article, is the recent war with lebannon. or gaza, take your pick

So maybe you missed the part where you don't assume what people are thinking or what they mean by their posts. You might have noticed we say what we mean around here.

Americans spent the engagement with Lebanon doing what? Are we reading the same news?

I don't know what media you watch, but by far Lebanon was blamed for starting the war. Israel was blamed for extensive use of force.

The media throws anti-semitic around all the time. Don't make assumptions about the above posters because you really don't know them at all.

no the OP was not refering to any of those groups, stick around VJ long enough and you will see who comes screaming.

Wein A'Ramallah, Wein A'Ramallah......


Allah Ywafeghom

In reality, it's LESS newsworthy than PRC's mil training models of Aksai Chin (an area occupied by PRC since 1962)

Second Link.

that is correct. even the usa has plenty of these sites. one in ft hood was modeled on a german town. does that mean we'll invade germany? no, we had expectations of fighting a war there. there are also general models of middle eastern towns (i.e. not modeled after a specific town) for the same reason. they are to familiarize the soldiers with the average layout, architecture, and the pros and cons of those buildings. it's called training, for those who are clueless. in the army we have a saying. if you fail to train you are training to fail. any professional army has a similar outlook.........

Good point; but why would a country build a model of an area where NO enemy (or potential) soldiers or civilians are present (of course, I'm only referring to the Aksai Chin scale-models here)?

I'll strongly suggest you read Clive Cussler's "Vixen 03".

While it is fiction, it confirms that almost every country has war/invasion plans about other countries (even if they are absurd).

the ignorance on this board never ceases to amaze me.

The point is not whether a country has war plans or fake towns. Let's assume Iran finished building such a town, only Israeli, a few months ago and FoxNews caught wind of it. How do you think the coverage of this would play out? Do you think it would be dismissed as every country having war plans, or do you think it would be blown into a big story, furthering the claim that Iran is a threat to peace?

look, i'm not saying i agree or disagree with you. you're probably right. but how are arab news handling the story of israeli building an arab town, hmmm? it goes both ways. who watches CNN, al jazeera, or Fox anyway? sooooo distorted. i hope you get your news from a lot more than those sources.

and futhermore... i think the claim that iran is a threat to peace is a pretty accurate one! that nutcase in charge has made some pretty serious statements. americans and jews are apes and pigs. they should wipe us off the face of the earth. etc. how is that NOT a threat to peace? it has been recorded with him saying those things and much much more...............you tell me how that is not a threat?

It was an Israeli paper that covered it. I haven't seen it on Arab news. Do you have an issue with this discussion?

ig·no·rance /ˈɪgnərəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ig-ner-uhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1175–1225; ME < L ignōrantia. See ignore, -ance]



I don't think many people on this board could be described as people who lack knowledge, learning and information. People certainly maintain different points of view, but most of the time, these points of view are grounded in their life experiences, knowledge, learning and information.

an issue with a discussion? never. you don't know my views nor do i care to really share most of them here. but i do think there are two sides to every story. i'm sure once there is a story in the arab news about this they will rant and rave too.
fox news, cnn, etc need a story. period. of course they are going to rant and rave. i just think its important people get their news from a wide variety of sources.

Why are you flipping out? You came in this thread and called people ignorant. I posted a question about press coverage. Would this story be used to push to war with Iran if Iran had built this town?. Would it be treated as something that all countries do or would it be different?

A leader saying outrageous things doesn't necessarily make him a threat. Chavez says crazy things all the time too. Just a few years ago, an EU poll had Israel as the biggest threat to peace. Threat is often perception.

maybe i shouldn't have made my comment about igorance. if i could edit it, i would. i don't want to be one of those posters who says mean things to the others. yuck.

good point. threat is definitely in the eyes of the beholder...
I hope it would be treated as just the same as all countries do. I hope they aren't looking for any little excuse to attack. We all hope.

so if george bush made some provacative statements about morocco, or egypt, you'd just dismiss such as the raving of a lunatic and not be up in arms?

Agreed. I hope no country would look for any *excuse* to attack any other country but only do so when absolutely necessary.

I also wish the media would treat things impartially, but it seems the art of simply reporting the news is long gone and all are pushing a message they believe appeals to their target audience (and I include Arab media in this as well). Too often the media attempts to create outrage where none should exist.

i agree 100% with you. thats why i think its really important we get our news from all kinds of sources. there are more honest reporters out there.... but unfortunately the news most people get their info from all seem to have their agenda.

I think this is why some of the blogs are great. Clearly they can also have an agenda, but often the discussion that can ensue will bring in new/alternative information relative to what is being discussed, and there is usually a wide array of perspectives. Different points of view instead of one (or one with the so-called other side being represented weakly) help readers to form their own opinions rather than accepting the so-called "expert" pundit's one as fact.

Actually I find Al-jazzera quite good for a television news source. They have a much better track record at allowing a diversity of opinions on a subject on air. Much better than US sources. I was abroad this summer when the conflicts happened in Lebanon. Even the English language US owned international sources (CNN international ABC international etc) were much better at reporting than the local us national version.

and just as quick as you discount fox news, i discount cnn and abc

and reporters are being presurrred by the business minded owners to report or not report. Media needs some reforms for sure.

Anyone every see amy Goodman talk about the failure of media in a time of war? You can view the video free online here....
http://www.democracynow.org/static/IMIATOW.shtml

Select Indepent media in a time of war - 30 minutes long and if you have DSL downloads immediately as you watch

I'm just wondering....Those of you that say Al Jazeera is not a good news source, do you have it? Do you watch it regularly? Do you even understand it?

That is true without a doubt. However I do watch Al Jazeera and I think its quite good. I tend to watch many channels, BBC, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and I read the articles. I figure the truth is in there somewhere.

I access to al-jazeera but there is the language barrier. I have to reply on other sources to help me understand what i am seeing. Everything points to the fact that they are a top-notch media outlet. One interesting way to measure television media is to wath it witht he sound turned off- look at the graphics, who the guests are, what topics are being covered.

What we see in the America media does not even compare to what we see in the international version of the same companies. CNN vs CNN international for example. I was shocked by what I heard ABC international say about the events in Lebanon this summer because you woul dnever have heard these things on ABC at home. These companies know and understand who their audience is.

Good for both of you. Research shows that all of us tend to gravitate to the media that closely represents our own views. That is never a good thing if it is your only surce of news.

An interesting study showed that when a control group watched the same story on CNN- those with conversaie views denouced it as liberal bias and the liberals denoucned it as conservative bias. facinating to me

Remember this study here.

The site has a link to the full report.

I agree, I'm glad that you do see the quality in Al Jazeera. I think that most people on VJ who claim that Al Jazeera is not a good media outlet didn't come to that assesment by watching it. I would be willing to assume that most here don't understand what they are saying and I just can't figure out how they came to that assesment.



I have never been the kind to follow one crowd. More interesting is that if you do watch several news channels you will find that alot of them report pretty much the same stuff, with a few minor differences.

Now, I'll need to figure out a way to Can-divert this thread.

You can always talk about hummos!

So no one really answered what would happen in the media were the subject changed from building a fake Arab town to building a fake Israeli town.

Yank and Canuck media, with the exception of The Globe And Mail, is notorious for missing such stories.

In London papers or BBC, probably would get a few letters-to-editor and then interest would disappear (little reaction in US or Canada as only a few people even peruse Brit media here).

That doesn't surprise me at all.

You're saying the US media wouldn't pick this up and go to town with it, should say, Hezbollah built a town like this after an Israeli town, make pictures of it available to the press, announcing their new tactical training Fake Israeli Town?

As someone said earlier, if you know a country keeps talking about getting rid of your existence, who wouldn't build towns to practice war with those specific locations?



Of course people in the media here would be mad about it. The same way people get mad about Iranian leaders when they say they want to destroy Israel. And are non-Israelis in the region there happy about this(Israel building the fake towns)? I doubt it. But I don't see what's so odd about it. There probably ARE fake towns in places like Iran for them to practice war with Israel. I'd be surprised if there weren't.



I have to say that I think it's bold of wildroze to get involved in any of these political topics.

First of all, the MENA board is so baised towards the Arabic Middle Eastern issues and not Israel's issues. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest the opposite so if there is, I would be willing to read it. People can say, "oh everyone is welcome here.." but who would want to post here when the bias is towards something they don't agree with? And when they happen to be a small minority who don't agree?

Secondly, there is a bias towards Islam in the MENA forum. Yes there are some non-Muslims, but with the bias towards people's home country or SO's countries, which are mostly Arab or Middle Eastern(sorry if I don't have the terms 100% correct but you know what I mean), which are mostly Muslim countries, it seems it would be very hard for a Jewish Israeli to participate in this forum without drama.

I looked at some of the pictures thread, and how wildroze was jumped on for being upset at seeing negative politically charged pictures about Israel killing Palestinians, etc. After all the pretty pictures posted. It was not the time nor place. I was annoyed as well. And just imagine if she had posted pictures of dead Jewish people killed by Palestinians first...that would have gone over well... Yet when she is upset about the pictures that are posted, people jumped down her throat. I don't get it. It's a double standard.

This forum is also very left leaning, which also would discourage any "conservatives" to participate a lot unless they want to face daily political battles. That can be seen clearly in the SOTU thread (left leaning I mean).

I participate because I have been doing it for awhile, have gotten used to the way certain things go, and know what might happen if I say certain things. But I try to say things respectfully if I need to disagree. I do respect many members here. I just wonder why people can't see how unwelcoming they are being to people like wildroze.

Will you clarify your use of bias because the way I am reading it, it is highly insulting. Bias means an impartial judgement or an unfair policy rooted in prejudice. Is this what you mean? I will refrain from replying further until you clarify.