What's new

Yom Kippur War 1973: The Egyptian Revenge

There I disagree. Saying that it was never a one to one war is propaganda.

First, Israel was attacked on two fronts simultaneously by overwhelming forces. The advantage lay with Egypt and Syria.

If there was US hardware behind Israel, Egpyt and Syria were loaded to the brim with the latest Soviet hardware.

The claim of US pilots on the Israeli side has never been proven, is propaganda and is likely false IMO.

On the other hand we do know that Egypt and Syria were supported by a formidable number of Muslim countries with men and materials, including Pakistan.

The fact is that Israel pulled off a major battlefield achievement. If it was not a one to one war it was only because Israel's enemies had overwhelming support.

US participation in 1973 war is a known fact and well documented.
I don't know what sort of proof are you asking for.
one can see US retaliation to those Muslim majority states whom Israel consider as a threat.
Due to Yom Kippur War, US have always bombed Muslim states in month of Ramadan. Till todate US is fighting Yom Kippur War.
You clearly seems to miss the point, 1973 war's objective was to take back the occupied territory. hence Egypt got it and today both states are living peacefully sideby side, sensibly enough.

i never read that any other army supported Egypt or Syria in 1973... so please elaborate, how you claim so?
How you relate Pakistan to 1973 war?

Of course you forgot that volunteres from all across the globe (holy warriors) came to Israel to fight this war.
 
But we should not forget that tremendous Soviet supply to Egypt and Syria either.

On the Egyptian side it was always said that russian support for them never matched American support for Israel. I am giving Sadat's view.
I believe the view was that russian support was conditional and limited. American support was unconditional and unlimited. They were of different scales. This is the Egyptian view.
 
You have misunderstood what I wrote.

In any case I will elucidate- It is claimed that 1973 was not a one to one battle because the Israelis outgunned the Egyptians through overwhelming support.

I am against that position, for the reasons I described- because the Egyptians and Syrians were fighting one enemy. Because they also had other nations behind them. Because they were also supported by Soviet arms. Because they attacked first.

So to the extent it was ' not a one to one battle' it was the Israelis who were with the disadvantage of fighting larger numbers rather than the other way round.

US bases in Israel is an undeniable fact, and hastly US reinforcement during 1973 war are well known.
When you say nations behind syria and egypt i hope you meant morally not militarily. As we know Jordan never participated in that war.
Soviet union is a major arms supplier, what is the big surprise?
When we talk of US support, we meant US men and tanks flew to Israel in the middle of war!
 
what ever happen there but we can say that for certain with the outcomes that
PAF is for more better than Arab air forces
and also superior to israeli air forces
:pakistan::pakistan::pakistan::pakistan::pakistan:
 
eyeless, for your eye...only:
Economist tallies swelling cost of Israel to US

By David R. Francis Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor / December 9, 2002

Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person.

This is an estimate by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting economist in Washington. For decades, his analyses of the Middle East scene have made him a frequent thorn in the side of the Israel lobby.

For the first time in many years, Mr. Stauffer has tallied the total cost to the US of its backing of Israel in its drawn-out, violent dispute with the Palestinians. So far, he figures, the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War.

And now Israel wants more. In a meeting at the White House late last month, Israeli officials made a pitch for $4 billion in additional military aid to defray the rising costs of dealing with the intifada and suicide bombings. They also asked for more than $8 billion in loan guarantees to help the country's recession-bound economy.

Considering Israel's deep economic troubles, Stauffer doubts the Israel bonds covered by the loan guarantees will ever be repaid. The bonds are likely to be structured so they don't pay interest until they reach maturity. If Stauffer is right, the US would end up paying both principal and interest, perhaps 10 years out.

Israel's request could be part of a supplemental spending bill that's likely to be passed early next year, perhaps wrapped in with the cost of a war with Iraq.

Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. It is already due to get $2.04 billion in military assistance and $720 million in economic aid in fiscal 2003. It has been getting $3 billion a year for years.

Adjusting the official aid to 2001 dollars in purchasing power, Israel has been given $240 billion since 1973, Stauffer reckons. In addition, the US has given Egypt $117 billion and Jordan $22 billion in foreign aid in return for signing peace treaties with Israel.

"Consequently, politically, if not administratively, those outlays are part of the total package of support for Israel," argues Stauffer in a lecture on the total costs of US Middle East policy, commissioned by the US Army War College, for a recent conference at the University of Maine.

These foreign-aid costs are well known. Many Americans would probably say it is money well spent to support a beleagured democracy of some strategic interest. But Stauffer wonders if Americans are aware of the full bill for supporting Israel since some costs, if not hidden, are little known.

One huge cost is not secret. It is the higher cost of oil and other economic damage to the US after Israel-Arab wars.

In 1973, for instance, Arab nations attacked Israel in an attempt to win back territories Israel had conquered in the 1967 war. President Nixon resupplied Israel with US arms, triggering the Arab oil embargo against the US.

That shortfall in oil deliveries kicked off a deep recession. The US lost $420 billion (in 2001 dollars) of output as a result, Stauffer calculates. And a boost in oil prices cost another $450 billion.

Afraid that Arab nations might use their oil clout again, the US set up a Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That has since cost, conservatively, $134 billion, Stauffer reckons.

Other US help includes:

• US Jewish charities and organizations have remitted grants or bought Israel bonds worth $50 billion to $60 billion. Though private in origin, the money is "a net drain" on the United States economy, says Stauffer.

• The US has already guaranteed $10 billion in commercial loans to Israel, and $600 million in "housing loans." (See editor's note below.) Stauffer expects the US Treasury to cover these.

• The US has given $2.5 billion to support Israel's Lavi fighter and Arrow missile projects.

• Israel buys discounted, serviceable "excess" US military equipment. Stauffer says these discounts amount to "several billion dollars" over recent years.

• Israel uses roughly 40 percent of its $1.8 billion per year in military aid, ostensibly earmarked for purchase of US weapons, to buy Israeli-made hardware. It also has won the right to require the Defense Department or US defense contractors to buy Israeli-made equipment or subsystems, paying 50 to 60 cents on every defense dollar the US gives to Israel.

US help, financial and technical, has enabled Israel to become a major weapons supplier. Weapons make up almost half of Israel's manufactured exports. US defense contractors often resent the buy-Israel requirements and the extra competition subsidized by US taxpayers.

• US policy and trade sanctions reduce US exports to the Middle East about $5 billion a year, costing 70,000 or so American jobs, Stauffer estimates. Not requiring Israel to use its US aid to buy American goods, as is usual in foreign aid, costs another 125,000 jobs.

• Israel has blocked some major US arms sales, such as F-15 fighter aircraft to Saudi Arabia in the mid-1980s. That cost $40 billion over 10 years, says Stauffer.

Stauffer's list will be controversial. He's been assisted in this research by a number of mostly retired military or diplomatic officials who do not go public for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic if they criticize America's policies toward Israel.

Editor's note: A previous version of this story incorrectly reported the amount of housing loans guaranteed by the US.
 
US participation in 1973 war is a known fact and well documented.
I don't know what sort of proof are you asking for.
one can see US retaliation to those Muslim majority states whom Israel consider as a threat.

'Proof of participation 'to me would mean US fighters / soldiers on the ground. If by participation you mean that the US was against Muslim majority states, well the USSR was against Israel. At that level it balances out.

Actual US retaliation in the 1973 war? I d not know if that happened.

Is there any reading material you have or source that you could point to? Would be most appreciated.

Due to Yom Kippur War, US have always bombed Muslim states in month of Ramadan. Till todate US is fighting Yom Kippur War.

I do not understand. Please explain?

You clearly seems to miss the point, 1973 war's objective was to take back the occupied territory. hence Egypt got it and today both states are living peacefully sideby side, sensibly enough.

I agree. Thus my very initial statement some strategists say that both sides won the war. Egypt got back the Golan later.

i never read that any other army supported Egypt or Syria in 1973... so please elaborate, how you claim so?

This is from Wikipedia. I know that wikipedia isn't exactly the last word in reliability, but the sources are Shazly and Abramovich

several other Arab states were also involved in this war, providing additional weapons and financing. Algeria sent a squadron of MiG-21s and a squadron of Su-7s to Egypt, both of which arrived at the front between October 9 and October 11. It also sent an armored brigade of nearly 200 tanks, the advance elements of which began to arrive on October 17, but it arrived at the front only on October 24, too late to participate in the fighting. Libyan forces were stationed in Egypt before the outbreak of the war. Libya provided one armored brigade and two squadrons of Mirage V fighters, of which one squadron was to be piloted by the Egyptian Air Force and the other by Libyan pilots. Morocco sent one infantry brigade to Egypt, and one tank regiment to Syria.[105][106] An infantry brigade composed of Palestinians was in Egypt before the outbreak of the war.[7][106] Saudi Arabia and Kuwait gave financial aid and sent some token forces to join in the battle.[106] Pakistan sent sixteen pilots and an ambulance unit to Egypt and another to Syria. Bangladesh sent a medical team and relief supplies.


How you relate Pakistan to 1973 war?

Pakistan sent fighter pilots.

Of course you forgot that volunteres from all across the globe (holy warriors) came to Israel to fight this war.

Of course Jewish organizations did help; some individuals did volunteer. However, I doubt if this was of the scale of the state support I have quoted above.
 
On the Egyptian side it was always said that russian support for them never matched American support for Israel. I am giving Sadat's view.
I believe the view was that russian support was conditional and limited. American support was unconditional and unlimited. They were of different scales. This is the Egyptian view.

Far enough. While I believe otherwise, I do not have the competence to question that opinion.
 
Before I go further, let me add that the initial Egyptian military performance, i.e the breach of the Canal line, was brilliant. It shattered for ever the myth of Egyptian military incompetence (from the 67 war). It, more than anything else, won the respect of the Israelis.
 
The War started on October 6.

By October 10, the Egyptians had halted in Sinai and Syrian attack in Golan was defeated and Syrians were back at their starting position.

American Aid to Israel only arrived on October 14 and was not absorbed by the Israeli Military for several days later.

Egypt launched its disastrous attack on Sinai passes on October 14 which was totally defeated to support the Syrians. Soviet Union supplied 60,000 tons of supplies to Syria and Egypt while Israelis got 20,000 tons of supplies.

So what this means, Israel defeated the Syrians on its own without outside help and Egyptians were defeated due to their own stupidity of launching an attack outside their SAM cover.

The American Aid allowed the Israels to expend what they have more freely and thus enabled them to launch the counter-attack on the Egyptian 3rd Army.

The Soviets heavily supplied the Syrians and they halted the Israelis.

So in conclusion, the Egyptians and Syrians fought well and had a good plan but they should have realized that the Syrians would bear the brunt of the fighting and the Syrians should have had more troops, tanks, weapons initially to hold back the Israeli counter-attack.
 
On the contrary, the decision of the Egyptian Army to halt was part of the initial strategic plan as envisaged by its chief designer Gen Saad El Shazly.

The idea was to stay under the SAM missile cover at all times.

Shazly strongly opposed any Egyptian army movement outside this limited area to the East of the Suez Canal.

However, after the stunning initial gains, Sadat overruled him and insisted that the Egyptians push forward. Thus deprived of the SAM missile umbrella, the Egyptian Army suffered huge reverses.

very well put this is the actual truth! not what others here would like to believe! once the egyptians left the cover of their SAMs the israeli airforce had a meal!
 
What a revenge... i m not a nationalist but i dont think that arab brothers are suitable for army =) i cant remember even a single war they won in last millenium...
 
Back
Top Bottom