How about a moat?

[Jimmy Higgins]

One problem may exist would be the environmental problem of introducing salt water into the local groundwater basin, if groundwater is shallow enough.

Which leads to the next avenue. If detonating the bottom of the moat to drown a tunnel would work, why not just drown or grout the existing tunnels? Certainly, it'd cost a lot to grout them, but honestly, it'd have to be less than a military operation.

Grout? It would be trivial to remove it?

Maybe in the Shawshank Redemption, but in the real world? Concrete is easy to remove?

Flood it with what?

Water?

 

[Bronzeage]

Anti-tunnel warfare has not relied on moats since castles became obsolete. In modern times, when tunnels are a concern, sensitive microphones are used to detect underground activity. Once a tunnel is suspected, it's a simple matter to drill a hole in the ground and place explosives near the works. This is very effective for tunnels under your own territory.

Israels real concern is not tunnels into Israel lands. The tunnels provide a base for Hamas which is shielded from Israeli eyes. Gaza is not a big place. Hamas can operate and travel from place to place through their tunnels, safe from detection and missiles. I suspect most of the Hamas top leadership has spent most of their recent time underground.

Emphasizing the tunnels which crossed the border is good PR, but that's not the real threat of the tunnels.

 

[laughing dog]

And even a military operation to destroy the tunnels that concentrated on finding them from their openings in Israel would be less costly than invading Gaza.

Destroying the parts in Israeli territory would still leave the parts in Gaza unscathed.

Who advocated leaving the parts of the tunnels underneath Gaza unscathed?

You dig a canal. The water moves in by itself. The volume is infinitesimal compared to the total and doesn't effect the Mediterranean at all and neither does it affect the amount of water in situ.

There may be significant environmental effects from the canal, the water flow and salt water leakage into the ecosystem.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The OP makes about as much sense as Hamas positioning millions of hot air balloons around Israel and lifting it up off the map and watching drift off into the sea.

 

[Bronzeage]

The OP makes about as much sense as Hamas positioning millions of hot air balloons around Israel and lifting it up off the map and watching drift off into the sea.

Now there is an idea we can get behind.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The OP makes about as much sense as Hamas positioning millions of hot air balloons around Israel and lifting it up off the map and watching drift off into the sea.

Well, the moat honestly makes more sense than that. Just not that much more.

Of course, if Hamas did the balloon idea and it worked, Israel would probably float right over Palestine and land on it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Let's see. A moat in a desert where the annual rainfall is less than 20 inches a year and open water evaporates at a rate of 50 inches a year? I can't see a problem.

That wouldn't be a problem. Remember what's nearby? An ocean!

There's another problem, though: Going along the border and spot-checking altitude I find the ground isn't flat enough for a moat.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ok, I admit I wrote it partly tongue-in-cheek. It might not be very practical (cost, international opposition) but it would be effective anti-tunnel and generally anti-infiltration defense.

Which leads to the next avenue. If detonating the bottom of the moat to drown a tunnel would work, why not just drown or grout the existing tunnels? Certainly, it'd cost a lot to grout them, but honestly, it'd have to be less than a military operation.

Grouting isn't an option--they're normally booby-trapped. That's why Israel is bombing them.

Simply flooding them without an ongoing source of water wouldn't do any good, Hamas would just pump it out.

What I've wondered about is locating them where they enter Israel, blocking them just inside Israel and then pumping a fuel-air mixture into the tunnel and detonating.

 

[Bronzeage]

Which leads to the next avenue. If detonating the bottom of the moat to drown a tunnel would work, why not just drown or grout the existing tunnels? Certainly, it'd cost a lot to grout them, but honestly, it'd have to be less than a military operation.

Grouting isn't an option--they're normally booby-trapped. That's why Israel is bombing them.

Simply flooding them without an ongoing source of water wouldn't do any good, Hamas would just pump it out.

What I've wondered about is locating them where they enter Israel, blocking them just inside Israel and then pumping a fuel-air mixture into the tunnel and detonating.

The point where the tunnels enter Israel is the easiest thing to solve. The problem is the tunnels form a bomb proof communication network for Hamas. Israel makes a big deal about the cross border tunnels, but that is the least of their worries.

 

[ZiprHead]

Prisoners dig tunnels. Didn't anyone see The Great Escape?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Ok, I admit I wrote it partly tongue-in-cheek. It might not be very practical (cost, international opposition) but it would be effective anti-tunnel and generally anti-infiltration defense.

Maybe the Israelis should try doing whatever it was they were doing in 1966? They didn't seem to have much of an infiltration problem OR a tunneling problem back then.

Just saying.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Which leads to the next avenue. If detonating the bottom of the moat to drown a tunnel would work, why not just drown or grout the existing tunnels? Certainly, it'd cost a lot to grout them, but honestly, it'd have to be less than a military operation.

Grouting isn't an option--they're normally booby-trapped. That's why Israel is bombing them.

Have you heard of drilling rigs that can core a hole into the tunnel from the surface. If this is that big of a deal, get some Geophysical exploration going to find the tunnels. Then drill some holes and backfill the tunnel with grout. This isn't rocket science.

Simply flooding them without an ongoing source of water wouldn't do any good, Hamas would just pump it out.

How about digging shafts, installing a couple barriers, filling with water and then freezing it. That'd be cool. And it'd throw Hamas for a loop. Or they could bore a hole, and blast in some fine sugar dust... light a match... BOOM!!! Even cooler!

What I've wondered about is locating them where they enter Israel, blocking them just inside Israel and then pumping a fuel-air mixture into the tunnel and detonating.

Or maybe just fill it with hundreds of thousands of copies of Mark Levin, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter books that the CATO Institute buys to drive up the publication numbers.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ok, I admit I wrote it partly tongue-in-cheek. It might not be very practical (cost, international opposition) but it would be effective anti-tunnel and generally anti-infiltration defense.

Maybe the Israelis should try doing whatever it was they were doing in 1966? They didn't seem to have much of an infiltration problem OR a tunneling problem back then.

Just saying.

They were still under attack, just by different means.

Originally it was attack by armed bands. This was becoming less and less viable as their power grew--they were more and more able to hit the attackers bases. The Arabs switched from overt attack to terrorism because of this.

Israel built the wall and pretty much blocked potential combatant Palestinians from the country, this greatly cut down on the terrorism and they responded by tunneling.

 

[bilby]

Let's see. A moat in a desert where the annual rainfall is less than 20 inches a year and open water evaporates at a rate of 50 inches a year? I can't see a problem.

That wouldn't be a problem. Remember what's nearby? An ocean!

...

The nearest ocean is the Indian ocean, and it is 1,000 miles away from Gaza.

I think you'll find that the Mediterranean is a sea.

 

[Derec]

There's another problem, though: Going along the border and spot-checking altitude I find the ground isn't flat enough for a moat.

So you'd have an artificial canyon No, as I said before the suggestion was tongue in cheek anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

The OP makes about as much sense as Hamas positioning millions of hot air balloons around Israel and lifting it up off the map and watching drift off into the sea.

No, the moat idea would at least be possible even if technically difficult and expensive. Now had I said that upon completion of the moat you could just push Gaza into the sea until it eventually hits Cyprus I'd approach your hot air balloon idea in absurdity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That wouldn't be a problem. Remember what's nearby? An ocean!

...

The nearest ocean is the Indian ocean, and it is 1,000 miles away from Gaza.

I think you'll find that the Mediterranean is a sea.

Technicality. They're all interconnected, plenty of water could be drawn from it.

The geography is another matter, though, making a non-flat mote isn't one bit easy.

 

[Togo]

Maybe the Israelis should try doing whatever it was they were doing in 1966? They didn't seem to have much of an infiltration problem OR a tunneling problem back then.

Just saying.

They were still under attack, just by different means..

Citation needed.

 

[Derec]

Citation needed.

 List of attacks against Israeli civilians before 1967

 

[Togo]

Citation needed.

 List of attacks against Israeli civilians before 1967

Your source confirms the point made by Crazy Eddie.

It lists 5 attacks in 1966, one in the West Bank, 3 on the border with Syria, and one where the location is not specified.

In other words, they had no infiltration or tunnelling problem in 1966, and were not suffering from constant attacks from Palestine.

 

[Derec]

 List of attacks against Israeli civilians before 1967

Your source confirms the point made by Crazy Eddie.

It lists 5 attacks in 1966, one in the West Bank, 3 on the border with Syria, and one where the location is not specified.

In other words, they had no infiltration or tunnelling problem in 1966, and were not suffering from constant attacks from Palestine.

The point is, there were attacks even before 1967 so to say that "occupation" is the sole cause of terrorism is very naive. And there is of course the thwarted military attack by Arab states that led to the Six Day War and occupation in the first place.

Second, one can not go back to status quo ante in Gaza even if one wanted. For one, there are many more people living there now (1.8 million vs. 370,000 in 1970), due to Palestinians breeding like rabbits. Even during these latest hostilities there were more than twice as many births as there have been deaths.
Also, Egypt doesn't want to take Gaza back and who could blame them?