My reply was to the Wikipedia link you posted regarding the Khartoum resolution. You posted that link, not me. So I was addressing that part. In that link it states that the
first offer for
peace by the Israelis was the following:
Benny Morris wrote that the Arab leaders "hammered out a defiant, rejectionist platform that was to bedevil all peace moves in the region for a decade," despite an Israeli offer on June 19, 1967 "to give up Sinai and the Golan in exchange for peace."
2 weeks after the war. This is a well known claim and was before the Ben Gurion one you quoted and my point to you was that from that first alleged offer and from then on, including up to a few months prior to the war when Golda Meir made a similar offer it always entailed giving up territory. These weren't genuine offers compared to the real offer that Sadat actually came through with. The Israelis had to immediately come out with something to quell the international condemnation of the six day war, and from then on, none of the offers made were genuinely offers of peace since they came with utterly unacceptable conditions of giving up portions of land. Hence they weren't interested in real peace.
What Sadat ended up offering and giving up led to Egypt being chastised by the rest of the Arab world, being boycotted by them and labeled as a traitor and ended up costing him his life. That was an example of sacrifice for peace.
You seem to gloss over many of these particular details that encompass a very complex conflict and generalize the situation. If you think my detailed arguments and opinions are wrong, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.
Many people before you have tried for several decades, my friend, and I have simply argued your points. For example, you claimed that old funny claim about Israeli troops being 100 km from Cairo, obviously insinuating that they could have taken Cairo if they wanted. Many Israelis have been using that false argument for 30+ years. I debunked it immediately when I told you the entire war was fought roughly 120 km from Cairo and that the 3 Israeli divisions couldn't even take Ismailiya or Suez City which were right in front of them and were beaten by militia and some of the residents in the latter, and you expected them to march another 101 kms and take a city 28 times larger than those two?
We did win the war.
And I even mentioned Sadat's mistakes and how he didn't listen to Shazly. I don't mean to offend you, but you should pay more attention to the points in the posts of the people you want to debate.
When did I ever blame the outcome of the war to the US? Besides, the outcome was completely in Egypt's favor so that doesn't make any sense. Again, you don't read my posts very well. Besides, it's quite the opposite. Look at that last post of mine you quoted; I said what Israel did in 1967 was incredible. What it did in 1973 was also incredible. It beat Syrian, but it lost to Egypt and had to withdraw while Egypt maintained all its gains.
The only reference I ever made to the US was the SR-71 recon flight they made and how they were the ones who discovered the gap between the 2nd & 3rd Armies and informed the Israelis about it. This is a fact but I never used that as some unfair advantage. This is war and you get whatever advantage you can.
BTW, another fun fact regarding the SR-71 flight - Israel was 1 of 5 countries to have actually fired on an SR-71 Blackbird in the history of that aircraft, and that was during the mission I just mentioned. No one knew (not even the Israelis) that it was going to fly this mission until after the US delivered the information. Once it flew over Sinai it was picked up by Egyptian radars and Shazly was asked if they should fire an SA-2 at it. He said nah, it was too fast and it would be a waste of time. Once it flew out over Israel heading back, the Israeli radars picked up on it and they fired at it but it simply went into mach 3+ and bolted out.
That portion begins at 3:05
