Why is Israel So Successful Against Arab Armies

[The SC]

Turkey: Cyprus invasion, Korean war and numerous peace keeping ops. Including incursions and invading Arabs in Syria and Iraq. Has not lost a conflict since its founding.

Pakistan: 3/4 major wars with India.

Iran: Also defeated Arabs in the Iran - Iraq war despite all odds.

Do you Arabs live on another planet?

All three nations would wipe the floor with any Arab army.

Turkey; Cyprus, what an achievement.. Korean war.. that was NATO, Turks were canon fodders.. peace keeping "war", Syria.... all major wars
Iran vs Iraq+ no winner.. both lost too many men and material.. Iraq got out much stronger than before..
Pakistan fought valiantly but couldn't win the wars, did not lose either, but fighting against a more than 10 to 1.. they did well but no victory as such.. you can't claim that for Turkey..

Go play in some kindergarten little rot boy..

 

[Gomig-21]

The end result of the war, was that Egypt was prepared to make peace with Israel,
which is a major stategic win for Israel.

In the end, peace is good for everyone. But many would disagree with the premise of what you just said. If Israel was waiting for Egypt to make peace, then why didn't it offer anything remotely close to peace in the 6 years prior? It's very well known that Sadat made overtures and offers of peace after he came to power in 1970 in exchange for all of Sinai but was rejected. There are stories that Golda Meir was offering "most" of Sinai in secret for peace through Willy Brandt (the chancellor of Germany) earlier in 1973, but who in their right mind would give up any portion of their land -- no matter how small -- to those who took it forceably in a war? I would say it's quite arguable that Israel wanted peace in return for ALL of Sinai and would've kept it for as long as they could until they could annex it. This war forced them to return the entire Sinai for peace, not most of it.

 

[Ceylal]

Most? Not true. Only the southern sector. The 3 divisions and 60,000 of the 2nd Army were in the north of the bitter lakes was perfectly fine. They had their SAMs and by diverting some of them further south to northern Ismailiya, they could've protected the northern portion of the 3rd Army which could've also moved a bit north. The hypotheticals are endless. The point is, it wasn't a done deal and Israel withdrew in the end, not Egypt.



People assume the EAF was completely destroyed or just vanished in the air. It had successfully fended off the Israeli Air Force which was attacking its airfields in the delta to prevent it from attacking the Israeli divisions on the west. The EAF still had potential to inflict serious damage on the Israelis, not to mention several other armored options from the 4th Infantry division and elements of the 2nd Army if it had to or was forced to do it if the cease fire didn't take effect. It was by no means a safe situation for the Israelis, either. Hence why they really couldn't impact the 3rd Army in a disastrous way. What gave the impression of some Israeli victory was that the war ended on that note. No one knows how exactly things would've developed had the war continued. Bottom line, they withdrew and Egypt kept its gained territories = victory.



There's no denying that. Sadat should have listened to General Shazly who wanted to pull a few units from the 2nd Army to close off the corridor for the Israeli crossing before it was too late. Sadat (who wasn't a full fledged military commander) didn't want to give the impression that any of the armies were giving up territory on the east to defend the west and ignored the Israeli penetration. This is where the Egyptian army failed. The command structure was not left to the generals and Sadat had the final say. Fail.



When you put it that way! It was still a solid victory for Egypt. The outcome was indisputably obvious in Egypt's favor, so any twisting or excusing of that has no credence. Every one should now realize and know Egypt was the victor, hands down.

Gomig 21, what ever your are smoking , send me some!
For SC the Canadian wahabi, in your comment, Sharon was facing the Algerian tanks, not the 3rd army, since she was already surrounded and starved to death..

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

In the end, peace is good for everyone. But many would disagree with the premise of what you just said. If Israel was waiting for Egypt to make peace, then why didn't it offer anything remotely close to peace in the 6 years prior? It's very well known that Sadat made overtures and offers of peace after he came to power in 1970 in exchange for all of Sinai but was rejected. There are stories that Golda Meir was offering "most" of Sinai in secret for peace through Willy Brandt (the chancellor of Germany) earlier in 1973, but who in their right mind would give up any portion of their land -- no matter how small -- to those who took it forceably in a war? I would say it's quite arguable that Israel wanted peace in return for ALL of Sinai and would've kept it for as long as they could until they could annex it. This war forced them to return the entire Sinai for peace, not most of it.

Arabs rejected any Peace plans prior to the October War.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution

The Khartoum Resolution of 1 September 1967 was issued at the conclusion of the 1967 Arab League summit convened in the wake of the Six-Day War, in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan. The summit lasted from 29 August to 1 September and was attended by eight Arab heads of state: Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, and Sudan. The resolution called for:

• A continued state of belligerency with Israel
• Ending the Arab oil boycott declared during the Six-Day War
• An end to the North Yemen Civil War
• Economic assistance for Egypt and Jordan.

It is famous for containing (in the third paragraph) what became known as the "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it..."

Israel was not "forced" to hand over all of Sinai, but was prepared to do so.

https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/unbound/flashbks/mideast/yost.htm (1969)

"Even David Ben-Gurion has recently said (in an interview with Cyrus Sulzberger) that he would be prepared to accept the 1967 frontiers of Israel if that would bring permanent peace and cooperation with the Arabs (although he of course does not believe it would do so)."

don't eat fast food too often, but I think Burger King burgers taste better. But McDonald's has much better french fries.

Exactly my opinion...
I would even state that McDonalds can't make Burgers...
Neither of them beat a Marriott Burger.

 

[Aramagedon]

In what sense? Iraq ended up having the largest military in the region, if the US wouldn't have stopped Saddam in taking Kuwait and consolidating more gains he would present an even bigger threat to Iran in the long run. It was a stalemate.

No. If it wasn't Suadi American help for Iraq Iran would conquer half of Iraq very easily. Iraq was getting American help + unlimited suadi petrodollars while Iran didn't even have enough bullets!!!!

 

[TheCamelGuy]

No. If it wasn't Suadi American help for Iraq Iran would conquer half of Iraq very easily. Iraq was getting American help + unlimited suadi petrodollars while Iran didn't even have enough bullets!!!!

Iran was armed heavily by the US throughout the 70's as it was an important American ally under the Shah. Iraq had to catch up, that was done through armament funded by the Gulf states. Hence Iraq ended up stronger in the end of the war.

You can come with this, I can come with that. In the end the global powers ensured that both sides kept a balance, in the beginning Iraq had to catch up to ensure that balance was kept. In the end Iraq threatened the regional power balance as we saw when they took Kuwait wielding over 800 fighter jets and 6000 tanks.

 

[Fenasi Kerim]

Yet lost many tanks lost in a small scale Syria operation against IS, an area which is not a major IS stronghold to start with.

Turkey has not faced a major conventional opponent in modern warfare. Iran would be a major conventional opponent for you, the US/Western powers. Yet all you can come with is Cyprus which equals to Iraq taking Kuwait, it's like an adult beating up a kid. You can't wipe any floor, okay.

Your Iraqi, you cowards were cheering Americans into your country, you lost to IS half your country in a matter of weeks. You have no right to compare your junk of an army to Turkey, Iran or anyone, war or not they would rip you part. Turkey still has troops stationed in Iraq, will you go free your country? or from the numerous invaders? Iran, Turkey, US, IS, Kurds etc

And yes we lost tanks in a environment full of atgm's unlike you Arab's we try to learn from our mistakes and adapt, Turkey had minimal casualties captured 5000square km of land in Syria with limited involvement of the Turkish army.

 

[Gomig-21]

Arabs rejected any Peace plans prior to the October War.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution

The Khartoum Resolution of 1 September 1967 was issued at the conclusion of the 1967 Arab League summit convened in the wake of the Six-Day War, in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan. The summit lasted from 29 August to 1 September and was attended by eight Arab heads of state: Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, and Sudan. The resolution called for:

• A continued state of belligerency with Israel
• Ending the Arab oil boycott declared during the Six-Day War
• An end to the North Yemen Civil War
• Economic assistance for Egypt and Jordan.

It is famous for containing (in the third paragraph) what became known as the "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it..."

Israel was not "forced" to hand over all of Sinai, but was prepared to do so.

https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/unbound/flashbks/mideast/yost.htm (1969)

"Even David Ben-Gurion has recently said (in an interview with Cyrus Sulzberger) that he would be prepared to accept the 1967 frontiers of Israel if that would bring permanent peace and cooperation with the Arabs (although he of course does not believe it would do so)."

If you think that the Israelis were offering to give back the entire Sinai, Golan and East Jerusalem in exchange for peace less than two weeks after their incredible victory in 1967, I have some land to sell you on the moon.

There was nothing remotely close to an exchange of territory to pre 1967 borders for peace that came from the Israelis during the entire 6 years between the 1967 and 1973, let alone 2 weeks after the 6-day war.

What was true and genuine peace offerings was from Sadat, on several occasions and included detailed options to ensure peace in exchange to returned territories. The proof is what he actually did after winning the war. He went to Israel and offered peace. Doesn't get any more genuine than that. Prior to the war, even the bending backwards by Sadat wasn't enough for Israel and like I mentioned, this is evidenced by Golda Meir who didn't even want to talk directly to Sadat and used Germany to offer only a portion of the Sinai back and that was Israel's stance throughout the 6 year period. Of course that's unacceptable. This is what led to this war. This war was never meant to achieve a military return of taken lands, but to convince the Israelis they needed to come to the table.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

If you think that the Israelis were offering to give back the entire Sinai, Golan and East Jerusalem in exchange for peace less than two weeks after their incredible victory in 1967, I have some land to sell you on the moon.

There was nothing remotely close to an exchange of territory to pre 1967 borders for peace that came from the Israelis during the entire 6 years between the 1967 and 1973, let alone 2 weeks after the 6-day war.

What was true and genuine peace offerings was from Sadat, on several occasions and included detailed options to ensure peace in exchange to returned territories. The proof is what he actually did after winning the war. He went to Israel and offered peace. Doesn't get any more genuine than that. Prior to the war, even the bending backwards by Sadat wasn't enough for Israel and like I mentioned, this is evidenced by Golda Meir who didn't even want to talk directly to Sadat and used Germany to offer only a portion of the Sinai back and that was Israel's stance throughout the 6 year period. Of course that's unacceptable. This is what led to this war. This war was never meant to achieve a military return of taken lands, but to convince the Israelis they needed to come to the table.

The comment from Ben Gurion was in 1969, and that shows that you are wrong on several accounts.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

Your Iraqi, you cowards were cheering Americans into your country.

Failed to name any didn't you, better for you to keep quiet

 

[Ilay]

If you think that the Israelis were offering to give back the entire Sinai, Golan and East Jerusalem in exchange for peace less than two weeks after their incredible victory in 1967, I have some land to sell you on the moon.

There was nothing remotely close to an exchange of territory to pre 1967 borders for peace that came from the Israelis during the entire 6 years between the 1967 and 1973, let alone 2 weeks after the 6-day war.

What was true and genuine peace offerings was from Sadat, on several occasions and included detailed options to ensure peace in exchange to returned territories. The proof is what he actually did after winning the war. He went to Israel and offered peace. Doesn't get any more genuine than that. Prior to the war, even the bending backwards by Sadat wasn't enough for Israel and like I mentioned, this is evidenced by Golda Meir who didn't even want to talk directly to Sadat and used Germany to offer only a portion of the Sinai back and that was Israel's stance throughout the 6 year period. Of course that's unacceptable. This is what led to this war. This war was never meant to achieve a military return of taken lands, but to convince the Israelis they needed to come to the table.

Repeating the same thing over and over again will not make it the truth. I did not expect an Egyptian of all people to accept that they lost the war so I would not even try to convince you. Though You could win the war if Sadat had not royally screw up in the end of the war - but unfortunately for you he did and it cost him a victory. Last thing I absolutely can't understand why you always blame Israel's winning outcome of this war on the US, I mean it's the Arabs who can't fight Israel in a country vs country war, but instead the attacked us on not one but two fronts on the same time and on the holiest day of the year for the Jews. You had Moroccans, Algerians, some soviets and even north Korean pilots on the Egyptian front while Syria had Iraqis, some Cubans and Jordanians in the end of the war.

 

[Fenasi Kerim]

Failed to name any didn't you, better for you to keep quiet

Truth hurts? Iraqi's were cheering American's like cowards, the Iraqi army surrendered like cowards, ran away from 3 IS pick up trucks and your here talking crap about other countries armies lol. Before you compare Iraq to Turkey remember the Turks are occupying your lands lol.

Unique to Iraqi's cheer your invaders and act macho while your country is still under invasion.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

Truth hurts? Iraqi's were cheering American's like cowards, the Iraqi army surrendered like cowards, ran away from 3 IS pick up trucks and your here talking crap about other countries armies lol. Before you compare Iraq to Turkey remember the Turks are occupying your lands lol.

Then why are you trying so hard to say you're better than Arabs? If you're so convinced.
Yet all your attempts so far i've been trashing, the one now has already been trashed.

A tiny base in Bashiqa, and you're jumping up an down. That's the entire point of that tiny base which holds no strategic value, it can be surrounded with ease. Erdo bets on this policy, that way he rallies many of you around him. very stupid people

You need US approval for everything, even to strike the PKK. PKK has killed many Turks yet you allow the white man to use your base to aid the PKK, no shame. Now get angry again.

 

[Fenasi Kerim]

Then why are you trying so hard to say you're better than Arabs? If you're so convinced.
Yet all your attempts so far i've been trashing, the one now has already been trashed.

A tiny base in Bashiqa, and you're jumping up an down. That's the entire point of that tiny base which holds no strategic value, it can be surrounded with ease. Erdo bets on this policy, that way he rallies many of you around him. very stupid people

You need US approval for everything, even to strike the PKK. Now get angry again

Typical Arab mentality, blame, blame, blame blame everyone else, even your loses, change subject, blame blame blame.

Bashiqa is not the only deployment Turkey has in Iraq, are you going to come with your flying camels and kick them out? No? I thought so. Why were Iraqis cheering American invaders lol never seen this one before.

Go free your country instead of giving us lip service.

 

[TheCamelGuy]

Typical Arab mentality, blame, blame, blame blame everyone else, even your loses, change subject, blame blame blame.

Bashiqa is not the only deployment Turkey has in Iraq, are you going to come with your flying camels and kick them out? No? I thought so. Why were Iraqis cheering American invaders lol never seen this one before.

Go free your country instead of giving us lip service.

Those in Qandil are not cared about, Kurdish infested area's which we don't want back.

You're Arab yourself, Turkish identity is more influenced by Arabism than Arab identity is. Now can you deny that? No, enjoy.

Besides, the PMU is going to take Tal Afar, will erdogan bark or do something.