nope, only shot down like 8, they even admit it wont stop attacks. Not that Palestinian attacks usually hit Israeli citizens in the first place. Hopefully this potential cease fire will lead away from the increasingly hawkish attitudes on both sides.

but i doubt it, I dont have much hope any more

i thought they actually built an iron dome over pop centers.

if anyone would do it itd be the israelis

This is a great idea. It obviously won't stop the attacks, but it will stop many of them from causing damage and inflaming Israeli government and public opinion. Just the existence of a system like this could prevent a repeat of the small wars Israel has fought in Gaza and Lebanon over the last few years over missile attacks.

And should a more dramatic showdown between Israel and the hostile groups surrounding it occur (all too probable should Iran go nuclear and Egypt/Syria get less friendly), then this system will go a long way to minimizing the effectiveness of a major tool of Israel's non-state enemies. If the terrorist groups can't effectively target Israeli cities from outside Israel then that obviously improves the IDF strategic position.

This won't end attacks and it won't bring peace, but anything that makes Israel feel safer means there's less of a chance of a proper shooting war getting started and more of a chance an agreement on a Palestinian State can be reached. In and of itself it will probably have only a small impact, but a system like this could alter the paradigm in a positive way. This system won't get those things done on its own by any means, but it's a welcome development.

"... it is like tossing an expensive BMW car into the air to knock down a basic Ford."

I think that sums it up pretty well.

Well, if the basic Ford's headed for a group of civilians I'd say it's money well spent.

@Invictus - " it will stop many of them from causing damage and inflaming Israeli government and public opinion."

It may reduce the damage, but it isn't the damage that inflames the Israelis, it's the act itself, even if unsuccessful and this won't stop Israel from bullying their neighbors and the terrorists (and inflicting collateral damage beyond reason). If anything, their perceived "invulnerability" will embolden Israel's leadership so that their retaliation will be even more excessive than it already is.

I argue it will alter the paradigm in a negative way as Israel will feel safe to step up their retaliation and have less of a reason to respect the various cease fires and accords that they already ignore.

I'm sorry Draug, when Hamas terrorists shot a Stinger at school bus and Israel retaliates, you can hardly call this "bullying their neighbors". When I need to run to a bomb shelter after Hamas fires yet another missile on the city I live in, and Israel retaliates - it is not "bullying their neighbors", it is defending its citizens.

You are not aware of it, but many dozens of mortars and missiles hit Israeli cities every week. How can you write that Israel bullies its neighbors?

In addition, regarding the cease fires - in the last 48 hours, Hamas and other terrorists organizations declared cease fires several times, almost immediately followed by yet another missile - and may I remind you, that all Palestinian missiles target civilian population.

I doubt it. A successful act with dead Israeli children on TV is much more likely to make military action palatable in Tel Aviv than just rockets being fired and shot down. If the Israel leaders are so set on "bullying" as you say then they'll keep that up regardless, but if the rocket attacks are now ineffective then public support for preventive wars will be dramatically lower.

As for this leading to excessive retaliation, a "perceived invulnerability" would be beneficial to the peace process. The major obstacle to Israel agreeing on a Palestinian State is that it fears it won't be safe from terrorists operating from territory under the control of another sovereign state where they cannot easily respond. If the system makes Israel feel more secure from possible attacks, then an agreement is much more likely. And once there is a Palestinian State the main reason (and only legitimate one) for attacking Israel is gone, likely leading to a further reduction in attacks.

Obviously this system will not do any of this on its own and it could end up being a worthless boondoggle, but you'll only see peace once Israel feels secure and this could be an important factor.

That's to Draugnar.

I suggest you watch the following official IDF video in Arabic language. It describes the events of the past days:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoIil0-8vcA

"Official IDF video" - Yeah, that is really an unbiased source.

Israel does bully it's neighbors. It doesn't just target terrorists, but recognized legit governments. April 7th, 2011, Israel attacked the entire Gaza Strip. Were there really terrorists across the entire strip that they needed to try bombing them back to the stone age? July 2006, Israel bombed the living fuck out of South Beirut. They didn't go in with a surgical strike after terrorists and with Lebanon's approval, but bombed a major city of a neighboring nation, destroying all three runways of the International Airport there and stranding innocent civilians in the middle of the hostilities.

Why everyone apologizes for the Zionist agression I will never know. It is time the UN stepped in and smacked the fuck out of Israel when they attack a neighbor under the pretext of "taking out terrorists." The US gets heat if we do surgical strikes in Pakistan while chasing known terrorists cells across the border from Afghanistan, so why doesn't Israel get smacked down for blatant attacks on their neighbors.

Draugnar:

April 7th, 2011 - are you talking about the retaliation after Hamas fired a Stinger on a school bus, followed by dozens of mortars at Israeli cities? And yes, Draug, missiles are being fired from the whole Gaza strip. Don't judge the IDF video by its source, but by the facts it displays.

July 2006 - are you talking about the war Hezbollah started? Wikipedia: "The conflict began when militants from the group Hezbollah fired rockets at Israeli border towns as a diversion for an anti-tank missile attack on two armored Humvees patrolling the Israeli side of the border fence."

And the usage of this word, "Zionist". Do you even know what it means?

This definition?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

And I think Britain was wrong to take territory belonging to others and give it away and the world was wrong to recxognize the state of Israel in 1948.

To quote your link:

"Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות‎, Tsiyonut) is a Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland.[1] Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to advocate on behalf of the Jewish state and address threats to its continued existence and security. In a less common usage, the term may also refer to 1) non-political, Cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am; and 2) political support for the State of Israel by non-Jews, as in Christian Zionism.

Zionism does not have a uniform ideology, but has evolved in a dialogue among a plethora of ideologies: General Zionism, Religious Zionism, Labor Zionism, Revisionist Zionism, Green Zionism, etc. However, the common denominator among all Zionists is the claim to Eretz Israel as the national homeland of the Jews and as the legitimate focus for the Jewish national self-determination (as shown, among others, by Gideon Shimoni).[2] It is based on historical ties and religious traditions linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.[3]"

So, why do you use the word couple "Zionist aggression", when Zionism is "the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland", and "aggression" was started both by Hamas and Hezbollah - in both cases?

And why do you ignore the fact that Hamas fires missiles and mortars on peaceful Israeli cities and citizens?

I don't. But we hear how these missles are rarely effective anyhow. Is using top of the line US built aircraft to carpet bomb an entire area on par with second rate missiles launched by extremist who, quite honestly, have a valid complaint that they want their homeland back? Britain took it away irresponsibly and gave it to a bunch of refugees and the whole world has been paying ever since.

To whom exactly that territory belonged to? To what nation? What state ruled this territory prior to the state of Israel?

I'll answer the questions for you:
This territory historically belongs to Israel. In the last 2000 years, the land we now call Israel has never been recognized as a part of a state. Here is a brief run-down of the rulers of the land:

Early Israelites (1200 BCE - 950 BCE)
Israel and Judah (950 BCE to 576 BCE)
Babylonian, Persian and Greek rule (586 BCE to 2nd Century BCE)
Hasmonean kingdom (2nd century BCE to 64 BCE)
Pre-Christian Rome (64 BCE to 324 CE)
Christian Roman rule (324 to 636)
Arab rule (636 to 1099)
Crusader rule (1099 to 13th century)
Mamluk rule (13th century to 1517)
Ottoman rule (1517 to 1917)
British Mandate of Palestine (1917–48)
Establishment of the state of Israel (1948)

There was never such thing as the Palestinian state. Yes, the Palestinians need their own state (and too bad they rejected the UN proposal in 1947 - I wish they hadn't), but to claim that the British took the land from somebody and just gave it to Israel - it's plain wrong.

Draugnar, they are ineffective because every time Hamas fires a missile, I have to run to a bomb shelter! They are ineffective because Israel develops systems like the Iron Dome to protect its citizens, while the Hamas does nothing for its own population!

In addition, Israel doesn't use carpet bombings - only precision strikes. Stop recycling lies.

Since we are quoting history...

The preamble to the British Mandate is as follows:

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Intersting how Israel decided to declare themselves a state just before the British Mandate expired and now wish to eradicate the Palestinians. They have never truly come to the table interested in giving Palestine anything. It is goign to take UN intervention (like in Korea) if we are ever to draw a line and set up a Palestinian state.

Draugnar, learn some history. Start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War

To quote:

"In the immediate aftermath of the United Nations' approval of the Partition plan, the explosions of joy amongst the Jewish community were counterbalanced by the expressions of discontent amongst the Arab community."

"Five of the seven countries of the Arab League at that time, namely Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, backed by Saudi Arabian and Yemenite contingents invaded[98] territory in the former British Mandate of Palestine on the night of 14–15 May 1948. The forces of Syria and Egypt launched attacks outside of the proposed Arab section of the Partition Plan.[99] Jordan invaded the proposed "Corpus Separatum", which had yet to be instituted, including the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem."

"The British Mandate over Palestine was due to expire on 15 May, but Jewish leadership led by Ben-Gurion declared independence on 14 May (because 15 May was a Shabbat). The State of Israel declared itself as an independent nation, and was quickly recognized by the United States, Iran, the Soviet Union, and many other countries. Within hours, Arab forces invaded Palestine. In an official cablegram from the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States to the UN Secretary-General on 15 May 1948, the Arab states publicly proclaimed their aim of creating a "United State of Palestine", in place of the Jewish and Arab, two-state, UN Plan."

Besides, notice how you justify attacks on peaceful population (this is including myself) by your claim that Israel should not even exist!

Arabs have more political, civil and religious rights in Israel then they have in Saudia Arabia. There is a significant Arab population in Israel that can vote, participate in the political processes and live freely within the society.

There is no legal discrimination between Arabs and Jews in Israel. Some of my friends are Arabs.

The problem is with Hamas who is focused on destroying Israel, instead of helping the population that elected it.

"Why everyone apologizes for the Zionist agression I will never know. It is time the UN stepped in and smacked the fuck out of Israel when they attack a neighbor under the pretext of "taking out terrorists." The US gets heat if we do surgical strikes in Pakistan while chasing known terrorists cells across the border from Afghanistan, so why doesn't Israel get smacked down for blatant attacks on their neighbors."

Um, they get "smacked down" the same way the U.S. does and worse.

Hamas just fired a laser guided missile at a yellow school bus, there's your squeaky clean freedom fighters.

I in no way condone all of Israel's actions, but to chalk the fighting purely up to "Zionist aggression" is laughable. Those aggressive Zionists unilaterally evacuated Gaza in the first place which helped lead to the current mess anyway.

And I don't necessarily agree with the above poster's rosy portrayal of Israel's part in Israel- Palestinian relations so don't lump me in with it