no need for using words like that and I will let it pass this time but believe me using bad language is easy and fun so don't make me do it
our goal was never to retake all of Sinai see my post earlier I said the objectives clearly and our army managed to do everything was asked
Your goal wasn't to retake the Sinai?
How come you started to push into the Sinai, when we captured your whole third army?
You dont understand the game, do you? Arab want entire Israel. Thats why they will shove Gaza and Westbank inside Israel (2 state solution is a ploy). More muslim live in greater palestine than jews. Israel will eventually collapse.
Ahahaha, is that why the Jordanians still want the West Bank?
Eventually every nation will collapse
But Israel will defeat the Arabs.
But Mig-21 couldn't make it to there to guard bombers ..
1200km range is more than enough to go to Tel Aviv and back from Cairo, not talking about the bases in the south, the distance between the two is only 400 kilometers.
IAF strongest fighter was F-4 Phantom II
*Fighter*? No, its a fighter bomber, this plane had worse turn rate, roll rate, acceleration and such.
How ever its top speed exceeded the MiG21s but it would take more time to reach its max speed than the MiG21, in other words, the MiG would easily out accelerate it.
Yet many IAF F-4 were shut down by EAF' Mig-21
"Many"?
I'll give you an example
the battle of September 13th 1973
12 Phantoms and 8 Mirage 3s fought against dozens of MiG 21s, 1 Mirage plane was shot down, and its pilot ejected safely, while 12 MiG 21s were destroyed.
An Israeli Centurion tank. It was considered in many respects superior to the Soviet T-54/55
No, it was not
the only better thing on the Centurion was its cannon, but it had a lack of armor, worse speed and so on
As for T-62 tanks, yes the T-62 was an effective adversary for Israeli Patton and Centurion main battle tanks armed with 105 mm tank guns. The T-62 had an advantage in its better night-fighting capability.
But The Egyptian army only received approx. 200 T-62 between 1971-73.
Unlike Syria that acquired about 500
"Only" Don't forget the fact that Egypt alone had 1700 tanks and Syria 1200 tanks (And more support troops)
and Israel had to deal with them with its 1700 tanks, that weren't even deployed because it was a holiday
In the Syrian border, Israel had 180 tanks against 800 Syrian
In the Egyptian border, it faced 1020 tanks, supported by massive amounts of ground troops and artillery, new advanced (to the time) ATGMs such as the Sagger, that did most of the damage to the Israeli armored battalions.
Everyone can see how much advanced weapons Israel had during the conflicts in the 60s-70s
Yet Egypt managed to breach and capture "Bar Lev Line" and occupy 20km east of the canal.
Egypt's losses only began after "Sadat" gave the order (even with the opposition given by war cabinet)
The Arabs had more advanced weapons and MUCH more of them, from ATGMs to SAMs to the most advanced tanks of the time.
the Israelis were still using many WW2 weapons.
the Arabs used some, but not many.
"
By the end of the war, the Israelis had advanced to positions some 101 kilometres from Egypt's capital, Cairo, and occupied 1,600 square kilometres west of the Suez Canal.They had also cut the Cairo-Suez road and encircled the bulk of Egypt's Third Army.
Despite Israel's tactical successes west of the canal, the Egyptian military was reformed and organized. Consequently, according to Gamasy, the Israeli military position became "weak" for different reasons, "One, Israel now had a large force (about six or seven brigades) in a very limited area of land, surrounded from all sides either by natural or man-made barriers, or by the Egyptian forces. This put it in a weak position. Moreover, there were the difficulties in supplying this force, in evacuating it, in the lengthy communication lines, and in the daily attrition in men and equipment. Two, to protect these troops, the Israeli command had to allocate other forces (four or five brigades) to defend the entrances to the breach at the Deversoir. Three, to immobilize the Egyptian bridgeheads in Sinai the Israeli command had to allocate ten brigades to face the Second and Third army bridgeheads.
In addition, it became necessary to keep the strategic reserves at their maximum state of alert. Thus, Israel was obliged to keep its armed force-and consequently the country-mobilized for a long period, at least until the war came to an end, because the ceasefire did not signal the end of the war. There is no doubt that this in total conflict with its military theories."
For those reasons and according to Dayan, "It was therefore thought that Israel would withdraw from the west bank, since she was most sensitive on the subject of soldier's lives." The Egyptian forces didn't pull to the west and held onto their positions east of the canal controlling both shores of the Suez Canal. None of the Canal's main cities were occupied by Israel; however, the city of Suez was surrounded
In the end We don't take many of the posts here seriously .. we know the truth .. we see it .. we live in it!
Sinai was returned back to us only by war and lots of sacrifices .. a war we fought and goals we achieved
And that considers wining .. That's victory.
How come our positions were weak, when we flanked your entire third army, destroyed and captured it?
I do not understand how two and three are against Israel, as we already defeated Syrian Air Force and army, we could go all in against Egypt
You don't understand it yet, right?
Israel was about to NUKE YOU, destroy you
That's a victory? Israel gave it to you in 1979, 6 years after the war, after you couldn't even fight by the end of 1973, your air force was destroyed, third army captured, second and first armies couldn't move on
Israel killed 10 for every one of its soldier's deaths
That's a victory.
In the same page you quoted from, you can see
"Israeli military victory" in the result.
Putting Israel on pedestal as always lol..
Israelis deserve all the credit for surviving in harsh conditions--but lets be real. They wouldn't and did not stand much of a chance against combine Arab assault.
In 1948, Israelis outnumbered Arab forces--and actual Arab military didn't even take part in action (Moreover, Israelis got weapons from Europe and their officers also had European military knowledge which was quite latest thanks to WW2).
1967--only time Israelis surprised Arabs and struck down their air forces.
1973--Egyptians destroyed half of israeli armor in Sinai within first few hours of engagement and totally got Israel by surprise.
The ONLY way Israel got upper hand was because Egyptians were forced to leave their original plan and go deep into Sinai without aircover.
Basically, even though Israel fought well, it were mainly Arab mismanagement and shortcomings that gave Israel a chance to survive.
I have studied and worked with Israeli professors who have served in israeli security establishment and what not. They agree as well.
One of my Israeli professor smiled and told "IDF isn't as lean and mean, well oiled machine as you think it is"...
For example, without foreign intervention, Israeli military---no matter how good--wouldn't stand much of a chance against powers like Turkey in the region
1948- the Israelis outnumbered them because untrained "Kibutz" members had some pistols and such that we fought the Arabs with, while the Arabs had more planes, tanks and such.
Israel didn't get weapons from Europe, it bought them. and I agree, we had much more military knowledge than the Arabs
1967- Israel strike the Arabs after they said they will destroy Israel, and after they bought a few Tupelov bombers
1973- the Egyptians were better armed and had more tanks than the Israelis that had to split its forces, AGAIN, in half, and couldn't deploy that fast as it was in a holiday, yet it destroyed its whole third army, capturing 8000 people and killing 15,000
It didn't have air cover because by that time Israel destroyed over 500 Arab aircrafts while 102 Israelis were lost,
1000 Israeli tanks were destroyed- 2300 Arab tanks were destroyed
Wait, the Arabs gave us chance to survive? Israel had NUKES at the time, they are the only reason the US rushed to supply us
If we are not that well oiled war machine, what does it say about the Arabs, that a tiny country conquered huge amounts of their land?
Israel wont stand much of a chance against Turkey?
Ahahahahaha
First solution: Nuke
Conventional solution:
Israel have superior air force, superior air defense, Israel can conquer Syria in a click of a button, having borders with Turkey and since it has superior ground troops and tanks, it will easily crush it
I was wondering the same about your sources. It was the Algerian troops that defended Ismailia.
