Arabs at War [Archive] - Military Photos

IDFM203

11-15-2003, 10:19 PM

“ONE” there are all sorts of reasons why the Arab’s with their latest soviet equipment and their 13 or 14 or 15 or 20 to one!! Odds (13 to 20 to one is depending on different historians) against Israel and yet they still lose or get their a** kicked at times, but I think the main factor is that besides what you said which has some truth to it, the fact is that you cant take anything away from the superior training and fighting skills and the Israeli ingenuity that the Israelis have used that has been the decisive factor to Israel’s wins more so then what the Arabs did or did not do in their defeats……….

Now with that said, one quote of yours stands out and it reminded me of a joke I posted a while back on this thread.
Here is your quote from above that’s followed by my joke that I posted before.

They were trained by the russians and had "russian tactics" wich proved to be useless in battle.

The major contribution to the Israeli Military successes in
the wars of 1967-73 was not any great superiority of Israel's
Defense Forces, or military inferiority of the Egyptian army,
but rather the too strict adherence of Egyptian commanders to
their Soviet advisors' strategy.

Dig in and wait for winter rofl

Shalom :D

Somehow im not laughing as hard as you are idfm.. haha :) ok so ill erase one of those laughs for you in my response here...I hope thats better mate ;) :D

(or perhps you didnt get it.....wait for winter rofl oh and in the middle east and its climate rofl etc.... oh well ;) )

shalom :D

EvanL

11-15-2003, 10:26 PM

No i got it., I guess joke means something else in hebrew. Because in english it means something funny. haha jk man. Im just rattling your Cage.

IDFM203

11-15-2003, 10:40 PM

No i got it., I guess joke means something else in hebrew. Because in english it means something funny. haha jk man. Im just rattling your Cage. No I was just rattling you ;) I thought you got it but I was just having fun with your response.

man you candians are fun ;)

shalom :D

One

11-16-2003, 12:50 AM

I forgot to add that the Israeli's had more technology at their disposal. And having a larger army is not always a good thing. As it requires more equipment for every soldeir.

IDFM203

11-16-2003, 02:17 AM

I forgot to add that the Israeli's had more technology at their disposal. And having a larger army is not always a good thing. As it requires more equipment for every soldeir. well the Arabs always had the latest and best Russian technological equipment and especially in the 1948 war, Israel did not have anywhere near the technological advantage that the arabs had

But later on I will concede that we had better technology for I believe that U.S. technology is superior then Russian technology (as I see you now agree as well) and with Israeli innovations and add on to that, yes Israel did achieve better technology.

But still, 13 or 15 or 20 to 1 odds and the best in Russian technology and yet the Arabs still lost every time, well credit does have to also go to the superior Israeli training and innovative and ingenious battlefield tactics and superior planning that Israel has used throughout its wars.

Shalom :D

Mr. Nielsen

11-16-2003, 09:00 AM

The following link is to a quoted article from an ealier discussion on the forum. I think it mentions some relevant issues, but don't bother yourself with reading the rest of the thread:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4225&highlight=arabs&sid=d00bfbd6c2af475ffe8f86b9e3b26ce2

Mr. Nielsen

11-16-2003, 09:17 AM

I think the basic issue is that the israelis were coming from europe bringing with them the effectiveness of western states: democracry, education, how to organize a state etc.

One has to remember that the arab states first got their independence after world war two. And they didn't have the above mentioned ballast.

I believe the one single important factor is that they arab states were and still are, third world countries.

Mr. Nielsen

11-16-2003, 09:27 AM

Another important thing to remember is that israel initiated every war apart from the one in 1973. The one one in 1973 is also the only one which ended without a decisive outcome.

As to the importance of being the attacker just look at the german accomplishment of world war two. There they used the blitzkrieg to overcome numerical disadvantages by use of surprise, and concentration of forces where the enemy were weak.

S'13

11-16-2003, 10:33 AM

Another important thing to remember is that israel initiated every war apart from the one in 1973.

The 1948 War of Independence is also a war which wasn't initiated by Israel. In this war Israel was at it's weakest.

IDFM203

11-16-2003, 10:37 AM

Another important thing to remember is that israel initiated every war apart from the one in 1973. The one one in 1973 is also the only one which ended without a decisive outcome.

. first of all besides 1973, 1948 the Arabs initiated as well. Secondly 1967 the arabs were planning on initiating and were about to attack, but Israel smartly pre-empted that.

Anyways 1973 was a decisive victory, for the Arabs did not achieve their objectives to destroy Israel or even to get any land, while Israel met theirs in holding them off and in actually turning them back and defeating them and in fact holding on to all the land. That seems pretty decisive to me!!

Shalom :D

Tom.G

11-16-2003, 11:27 AM

duck

11-16-2003, 07:59 PM

Arab forces with proper leadership can apparently achieve some success.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History of FEC and its Divisions

Corps Expéditionaire Français - CEF or French Expeditionary Corps, FEC, or also known as
Corps Expéditionaire Français en Italie - CEFI - or the French Expeditionary Corps in Italy
When the Allies landed on North Africa, the Vichy government was hostile towards the US and especially the British and planned to oppose any landings. In 1942, the Allies were planning to move American troops to North Africa to help the British fight the Germans under Rommel. General Mark Clark was sent on a secret mission to persuade the French to ally with them to open a second front in support of the British 8th Army. General Clark was flown from the GHQ in UK to Gibralter by a Major Tibbets. From there he was secretly landed on the coast by a submarine. There he met with Admiral Jean Darlan, the commander of all the French forces and a member of the Vichy government in North Africa. Soon after the landing, General Clark met General Juin at a conference with the French commanders on 10 November. Darlan ordered the end to all resistance to the Allies. The French joined the Allies' cause and a new French army was organized using American material. General Clark had high respect for General Juin as the FEC was assigned to his command. They became good friends.

At the beginning of 1943, three Algerian divisions and two Moroccoan divisions were constituted. The existing Free French Division was reorganized into two Free French brigades and other units. The north African colonial troops had their own nationalistic fervor and had little in common with each other. These unit had to learn to work and fight together as one a single unit.

The FEC was originally designated as the 1e Armée Français or the 1st French Army. This would cause problems with the US 5th Army command, to which the French army was subordinated. Therefore, General Juin decided to name the his force the CEF.

After the fall of Rome, the FEC continued to fight until it took Sienne on the 3rd July. The 1st DFL were the first to pull out of combat on the 20 June 1944. The last was the 4th DMM on the 20-22 July. All divisions were directed to Naples area for regrouping and refiting. At 00:00 on 23 July, 1944, the FEC was officialy dissolved and was absorbed into the 1st French Army under General de Lattre de Tassigny. From Naples, the divisions embarked for southern France.

1e Division Française Libre (DFL) (1st Free French Division) or 1st Division Motorisee d’Infanterie (1st Motorized Infantry Div). The 1st DFL was formed in February 1943 out of a combination of the 1st and 2nd Free French Brigades. After a reorganization in August, it was designated as the 1e Division Motorisee d’Infanterie (1st Motorized Infantry Div) and then again as the 1e Division de Marche d’Infanterie, which is a general term use by French for a mixture of diverse units. This division arrived in Italy in April 1944 and continued to be called the Free French Division and the 1st Motorized Infantry Division.

2e Division d'Infanterie Maroccaine (DIM) (Moroccan Infantry Division) The 2nd DMI was formed on 1 May 1943 and was the first French formation on active service in Italy. It arrived in Italy in end November 1943.

3e Division d'Infanterie Algérienne (DIA) (Algerian Infantry Division). The 3rd DIA was stationed near the Tunisian border when the Allies landed in North Africa. They participated in the operations that led to the liberation of Tunisia. On 3 May 1943, the Division of Constantine was redesignated as the 3rd DIA or 3rd Algerian Infantry Division. After some amphibious training it embarked for Italy and relieved the US 45th Division.

4e Division Marocaine de Montagne (DMM) (Moroccan Mountain Division) The 4th DMM was originally formed as the 3e Division d’Infanterie Marocaine but changed to the 4th DMM. Later it was renamed simply the Division Marocaine de Montagne, but it was continued to be referred to by the 4th DMM. Units of this division participated in the liberation of Corsica in September & October 1944.

Other units
The 2nd & 6th RTM (Moroccan Infantry Rgts) were redesignated, after their heavy combat losses, as the 2nd & 6th Regiments Mixtes de Tirailleurs Marocains et Algerians. Later, in August 1944, they were renamed 1st Regiments de Tirailleurs Algeriens and 6th RTM.

Morroccan Tabors - Morroccan “goums” were initially formed for internal security in 1908. They were eventually absorbed into the military with a ‘goum” equivalent to a ‘company’. A “tabor” was the equivalent to a battalion and consisted of three goums. Three tabors formed a “group”. The tabors were never used on the battlefield as a group but were deployed as replacements for infantry units. “Goumiers” were the name of those serving in these units.

Quoting from General Mark Clark's autobiography, he describes how the FEC broke through the GUSTAV Line in May of 1944.

"Meantime, the French forces had crossed the Garigliano (River) and moved forward into the mountainous terrain lying south of the Liri River. It was not easy. As always, the German veterans reacted strongly and there was bitter fighting. The French surprised the enemy and quickly seized key terrain including Mounts Faito Cerasola and high ground near Castelforte. The 1st Motorized Division helped the 2nd Moroccan division take key Mount Girofano and then advanced rapidly north to S. Apollinare and S. Ambrogio. In spite of the stiffening enemy resistance, the 2nd Moroccan Division penetrated the Gustave Line in less than two day’s fighting.
"The next 48 hours on the French front were decisive. The knife-wielding Goumiers swarmed over the hills, particularly at night, and General Juin’s entire force showed an aggressiveness hour after hour that the Germans could not withstand. Cerasola, San Giogrio, Mt. D’Oro, Ausonia and Esperia were seized in one of the most brilliant and daring advances of the war in Italy, and by May 16 the French Expeditionary Corps had thrust forward some ten miles on their left flank to Mount Revole, with the remainder of their front slanting back somewhat to keep contact with the British 8th Army.
"For this performance, which was to be a key to the success of the entire drive on Rome, I shall always be a grateful admirer of General Juin and his magnificent FEC."
(and a little further)
"The 8th Army’s delay made Juin’s task more difficult, because he was moving forward so rapidly that his right flank---adjacent to the British---constantly was exposed to counter-attacks".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One

11-16-2003, 09:07 PM

The Egyptians did win the firt couple of days in 1973. The pushed in 12 KM having complete air superiority.

Saddat wanted to implement phase 2. The plan was to push forward to help the syrian army. The Join Chief of Staff refused to proceed with plan 2 because the SAMs were still being moved to the front lines to provide another 12KM of air support.

He was kicked out of the presidents office and Saddat asked the Commander of the 2nd army to advance. As soon as the 2nd army moved out of the 12km range of the SAMs they were hunted by the IAF. This created the infamous gap wich allowed sharon and his tanks to move in.

---------

Arabs prior to 1948 had no experience in "organized" wars. All they had was some experience in gurilla warfare fighting the british and the french. While the Jews were fighting the German S.S. Some of them were officers in British and US forces along with the Canadian forces. If I'm not mistaken the 7th Armored Brigade that was in the Golan was found by a Canadian-Jew Officer.

Also we all know that US technology is far more advanced than the Russian technology.

Russians had the sagger while the US had the laser guided TOW.

IDFM203

11-16-2003, 09:55 PM

The Egyptians did win the firt couple of days in 1973. The pushed in 12 KM having complete air superiority. . yes and this just proves that they do have a few ( well a FEW is the optimal word here ;) )quality military commanders and you cant simply say that they lose wars or that one because they don’t have any

No, again even with 13 or 15 or 20 to 1 odds and the best in Russian technology and equipment, and they still lost, well credit does have to also go to the superior Israeli training and innovative and ingenious battlefield tactics and superior planning that Israel has used throughout its wars and that war.

I do in fact give arabs credit for the way they performed in the beginning of that war but alot of it also has to go to the idiocy of Israeli leadership for knowing that this war was going to happen (yes a lot of historians recognise that it was not a surprise as a lot believe it is today) but yet refused to pre-empt like they smartly did in 1967 and this refusal to do so cost Israel more then it had to.

Arabs prior to 1948 had no experience in "organized" wars. All they had was some experience in gurilla warfare fighting the british and the french. While the Jews were fighting the German S.S. Some of them were officers in British and US forces along with the Canadian forces. If I'm not mistaken the 7th Armored Brigade that was in the Golan was found by a Canadian-Jew Officer. . first of all, most of the Jews who fought in 1948 did not have any war experience in world war two. Yes there were some that came and helped and they were of a major contribution but6 most did not have that experience and besides so too did the arabs that had some people with British as well as other experience as well as military advisers that came and helped them.

Anyways regardless of all that, the Arabs in that war outnumbered the Israelis around 15 or 20 to 1 and on top of that had better and more equipment (understatement!!)

This is from armourdov who responded to you in another thread…

Here are some figures about the weapons each side had in the 1948 war in format of:
<weapon name> : <how many Israel had> vs <how many Arabs had>
Tanks: 1 (without cannon) vs 40 ;
Armoured wheeld gun cars: 2 vs 200 ;
APCs: 120 vs 300 ;
Field artillery: 5 vs 140 ;
AA and AT guns: 24 vs 220 ;
Warplanes: 0 vs 60 ;
Bombers: 0 vs 14 ;
Cargo and scout planes: 28 vs 57 ;
Armed ships: 3 vs 12 ;

(Source: Carta Atlas for Israel's History)

You must be a real idiot to loose when you have a large force and armour force and your opponent have none.

Israel had better trained and highly motivated soldiers!!!!

Also we all know that US technology is far more advanced than the Russian technology.

Russians had the sagger while the US had the laser guided TOW. yes but Israel fought three wars without U.S. technology. 1948,1956 and 1967,

In 1948 as you see above, Israel had much less technology as well as actual equipment.

And also in the1973 Yom kipper war, the gap wasn’t huge between U.S. and Russian equipment. The arabs had the latest and best Russian equipment and 13 or 20 to 1 odds and still lost!!!

That cant be explained solely by better equipment! No the fact is that again Israeli training and ingenuity and fighting spirit gets most of the credit for winning and surviving against these huge odds.

The gap now is that Israel has better technology for yes the U.S. technology is better but also Israeli innovations and Israeli inventions and add-ons which have even made that gap bigger…….(although Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia now have U.S. technology and weapons……oh well……I guess thats for anther topic)

Shalom :D

Marxist203

11-16-2003, 10:11 PM

“ONE” there are all sorts of reasons why the Arab’s with their latest soviet equipment and their 13 or 14 or 15 or 20 to one!! Odds (13 to 20 to one is depending on different historians) against Israel and yet they still lose or get their a** kicked at times, but I think the main factor is that besides what you said which has some truth to it, the fact is that you cant take anything away from the superior training and fighting skills and the Israeli ingenuity that the Israelis have used that has been the decisive factor to Israel’s wins more so then what the Arabs did or did not do in their defeats……….

Now with that said, one quote of yours stands out and it reminded me of a joke I posted a while back on this thread.
Here is your quote from above that’s followed by my joke that I posted before.

They were trained by the russians and had "russian tactics" wich proved to be useless in battle.

The major contribution to the Israeli Military successes in
the wars of 1967-73 was not any great superiority of Israel's
Defense Forces, or military inferiority of the Egyptian army,
but rather the too strict adherence of Egyptian commanders to
their Soviet advisors' strategy.

Dig in and wait for winter rofl rofl

Shalom :D

...I suppose you have a point about Israeli ingenuity, you guys did invent terrorism. Dont tell me you didn't...cause we all know its not true. You guys used to do clandestine attacks against the British before you got your homeland.

IDFM203

11-16-2003, 10:24 PM

Ok first of all you are off topic here and you know it. I guess you realise the futility of arguing for the arabs wars so you resort to this. I mean we are talking about the Arabs inability to win an all out war against Israel or even anyone else (go check the title of this thread) even after they have their huge numbers and odds on their side, and yet you come here with you off topic and inflammatory post......oh well :roll:

...I suppose you have a point about Israeli ingenuity, you guys did invent terrorism. Dont tell me you didn't...cause we all know its not true. . yes like how you put it, we all know what you just said is not true!!

Secondly, this has been talked about already in great detail but just in general, the arabs invented and were committing terror attacks (like the 1929 massacre of over a 100 Jewish man women and children) way before any Jew were attacking British targets.

No, the arabs invented terrorism.

We can go on here but being as this is off topic, I suggest you find those other threads and post there.

Shalom :D

EvanL

11-16-2003, 11:47 PM

[AFSOC]

11-17-2003, 12:12 AM

What kind of bull**** is that Arabs invented Terrorism? HATE CREATED TERRORISM.

Ichhabe

11-17-2003, 05:14 AM

The Arabs did it!!! *sob*

No, the Jews did it!!! *sob sob*

Nah... Terrorism was even by 1929 standars not news.

Ever heard of the "Black Hand" out of Serbia?
And Russian anarchists used it in the 1880-s.
And terrorism has been in use at least since 3 days after dawn of man. It is just that it has not been known under that name. So stob giving credits to them and that. This is just plain childish.

Aussie2093

11-17-2003, 05:26 PM

I think the jews provoked the 1948 war by trying to claim the land in the first place.

IDFM203

11-17-2003, 06:11 PM

Geez and this is your contribution to this thread. :roll: :bash: :roll: This thread is about the Arabs and their inability to win wars. We have enough threads that deal with the whys and whose at fault. If you want to make your one liner and false statements well do it there. I mean geez not every topic has to be an argument about this conflict. :bash:

Again this thread is about the Arabs inability to win all out wars and its on a military level not on a political or a regurgitating of the Arab/ Israeli conflict reasons, so please try to keep focused on the original theme of this thread.

Anyways I will answer very brief what you wrote for I have gone over in much more detail in other threads.
I think the jews provoked the 1948 war by trying to claim the land in the first place. that is false in both the historical record and in the context. The Jews living there only wanted to live in peace. The British were the rulers of that land at the time, a land that had both Jews and Arabs living there, then when they left the UN drew a line on a map which divided up that land, and the Jews accepted even though most of it was uninhabited desert land while the Arabs got most of the habited lush green land, and were hoping to live in peaceful co existence with the Arabs. Well they refused and seven Arab nations, where most had nothing to even do with that land (I mean its one thing to talk about the native Arabs, which are now called the Palestinians, but the other nations that attacked never lived there), attacked in an effort to seize the whole land for themselves and kill off all the Jews (all the Jewish man women and children) that were living there.

Now please get back on the original topic………………………..

shalom :D

Aussie2093

11-17-2003, 07:29 PM

OK, first off mate, youre the one who started going down the "Israel is great" bull****-road. You said Israel didn't start the 1948 war, I believe they do. Who's going off topic?? :bash: :bash: :bash:

Your blind patriotism is clouding your vision, if I wanted to go down the 'Israel-Palestine' path again I'd just call you an arrogant jew, but I didn't did I.. :roll:

Your arguments are sound and well backed-up, but your paranoia is making you excessively defensive. Chill the **** out.

IDFM203

11-17-2003, 08:01 PM

to Aussie2093,

First off mate I suggest you follow your own advise and chill out your self. I mean I am pretty calm but it seems clear with your vulgarities that your not :roll:

Second of all, when I argued about who started what before, I said it in response to someone else bringing it up first. and that person was also a bit off topic but not as blatent as your post was.

Thirdly it was in the context of the military discussion whereas that individual was trying to claim that the Arabs lost because Israel attacked first and thus the disadvantage was with them. This is incorrect as I pointed out.

Now your one liner was not in that context but was in an off topic way to rehash the whole Middle East debate that can go for pages. Your word “provoke” is a rehash of the long debate and it is not relevant to this discussion.

As for “Israel is great bull****”. I don’t know where you got that from but we are talking about the wars here and if you took my responses to mean that I implied that Israel was great, well that’s you reading of it not mine. I was simply responding in the context of this thread.

As for who started. No, the Arabs did and that is historical record. Now if you believe differently then that’s fine. Many people believe all sorts of things. I can’t stop that. But the historical record is fact and it is not belief. What I brought down was from the historical record and not some arcane belief.

As for this diatribe “Your blind patriotism is clouding your vision, if I wanted to go down the 'Israel-Palestine' path again I'd just call you an arrogant jew, but I didn't did I.. :roll: “ well I too can call you blind and call you an arrogant anti Semite, but I don’t now do I.. :roll:

Now I suggest that we get off this impending flame fest before it turns ugly
listen I am not looking for a fight here and i hope to avoid one but I will repond as to how I am being treated.

No, whats clear to me was that you were off topic and your making my responses now stay off topic as well. I ask that you please get back on topic and discuss the theme of the original thread and topic……….The Arab’s at war and the military reasoning and factors for them losing

Shalom :D

Aussie2093

11-17-2003, 08:51 PM

All is well and good, but I must say that the only thing more extreme than my anti-semitism is your 'semitism', if that makes sense. As much as you should believe what you have learnt, your view is a bit more bias than mine even when backed up by 'historical fact'. Of course youre never going to believe anything that is anti-semetic, sort of like how I'll never give you guys a fair chance ;) . I do not wish to ignite the flame war that is the Israel-Palestine conflict once again, and I certainly dont want to put you through all that typing that you would no doubt pursue :) . However, you must cease your defensive behaviour for I am only stating my beliefs. I believe that you guys caused the 1948 war that in-turn spawned all those other wars. I know the jews didn't go in there and start shooting arabs, but their mission there (forming their own state) did entice neighbouring arab countries into aggression. Israel has achieved alot and has alot of be proud of, its birth however, was not the smartest event for that time in that region. It's not exactly all your fault and whatnot, but you are responsible. And in regards to keeping it on topic....ok....hmmm....lets see. Yes, the Israeli's have fought very hard and bravely for the last 55 years. But if the Arabs could actually work together and form a tactical alliance and be smart about it (in regards to the major wars from '48-'73), then you guys wouldn't exist anymore. Thats my .02

IDFM203

11-17-2003, 09:35 PM

All is well and good, but I must say that the only thing more extreme than my anti-semitism is your 'semitism', if that makes sense. I am not sure I understand fully what your saying but as close as I do, I will just say that you are a bit out of line with that comment. If you have read my posts you will see that I have always been reasonable and I have put forth logical arguments that are based on facts. It behooves you to read carefully what I write as opposed to making these false insinuations about me :roll:

As much as you should believe what you have learnt, your view is a bit more bias than mine even when backed up by 'historical fact'. every one has their bias. Of course I have bias for I am involved in this conflict. And I understand arabs bias as well but your bias is not so understandable or explained :roll: (well to me its clear but you know where that can lead if I pursue my thoughts there ;) …..oh well :roll: )

Of course youre never going to believe anything that is anti-semetic, sort of like how I'll never give you guys a fair chance ;) . of course I am not going to believe anti Semitic falsehoods, but why aren’t you going to give me a fair chance being that it is I that is extremely and personally involved in this conflict :roll:

I mean your not, so this whole your not going to give me a fair chance is a bit preposterous, aye mate ;) ( hope I did that "aye mate" in the right contaxt ;) )

I do not wish to ignite the flame war that is the Israel-Palestine conflict once again, well you say that and yet you continue to follow up with you assertions which are again off topic and do lead into the whole Israel /Palestinian debate.

and I certainly dont want to put you through all that typing that you would no doubt pursue :) . yeah I will concede that I will perhaps do that, but that is most of the times in reponse to you (in this case) are others typing away at length their views.

However, you must cease your defensive behaviour for I am only stating my beliefs. this is a forum. You went off topic and stated a false belief (as I tried to show you), albeit yours, and all I did was respond. It seems that it is you that is pretty defensive here ;)

Anyways this is all pettiness for we can go in circles here. Fine I know what you believe and you know what I do...lets try to leave it at that :roll:

I believe that you guys caused the 1948 war that in-turn spawned all those other wars. and I repeat “that is false in both the historical record and in the context. The Jews living there only wanted to live in peace. The British were the rulers of that land at the time, a land that had both Jews and Arabs living there, then when they left the UN drew a line on a map which divided up that land, and the Jews accepted even though most of it was uninhabited desert land while the Arabs got most of the habited lush green land, and were hoping to live in peaceful co existence with the Arabs. Well they refused and seven Arab nations, where most had nothing to even do with that land (I mean its one thing to talk about the native Arabs, which are now called the Palestinians, but the other nations that attacked never lived there), attacked in an effort to seize the whole land for themselves and kill off all the Jews (all the Jewish man women and children) that were living there”

Your terms, “spawned” and “provoked” “entice” etc are all ambiguous terms in an attempt to twist and cloud the facts that the Arabs attacked, invaded, started a full-blown war in an effort to wipe out all the Jews. Those are actions that happened not some warped rationales that you are trying to give as an excuse for that behaviour.

I know the jews didn't go in there and start shooting arabs, but their mission there (forming their own state) did entice neighbouring arab countries into aggression. there was Jew’s living there for years before any intentions to create a state. Anyways that intention came as a result of anti Semitism around the world as well as the constant attacks on Jews by the Arabs way before that declaration.

Anyways all this by you is smoke and mirrors in an attempt to falsely rationalize 7 Arab nations refusing to live in peaceful coexistence with the Jews as the Jews wanted and not only that but starting a war (yes that’s a fact) to try to kill every Jewish man, women and child and to get all the land for themselves.

Israel has achieved alot and has alot of be proud of, its birth however, was not the smartest event for that time in that region. It's not exactly all your fault and whatnot, but you are responsible. yes because we are Jews we must be responsible for everything…… :roll: :roll: (that’s not paranoia but rather a correct reading of what you are trying to say or insinuate)

Yes, the Israeli's have fought very hard and bravely for the last 55 years. But if the Arabs could actually work together and form a tactical alliance and be smart about it (in regards to the major wars from '48-'73), then you guys wouldn't exist anymore. Thats my .02 phew finally. We are back on topic now woot woot

Well yes the Arabs were not always together and yes some of thier failures is due to that but again 13 or 15 or 20 to one odds and in 1948, where they had better as well as most of the equipment period (for Israel practically had nothing) and in 1973 where they had the latest soviet equipment, and yet they still lost, well a lot of credit most go to Israel and its superior training and ingenuity as well as fighting spirit that has enabled Israel to win more so then the Arab failures enabled them to lose.

Again As for fighting spirit, as golda mair once said, “Israel’s ultimate secret weapon is that we have no choice”!!

Again I don’t mean to sound rude and I am still hoping that we can be rational about things here and not let it slip out of control but I will always respond to how I am being treated, that is not paranoia or defensiveness but rather human nature and common sense.

Shalom :D

One

11-17-2003, 11:12 PM

Even I'm sick of this topic. No one will admit its his fault so there is no point of arguing. :bash:

Salam :D

IDFM203

11-17-2003, 11:33 PM

Even I'm sick of this topic. No one will admit its his fault so there is no point of arguing. hey if you admit the truth that for the most part its your sides fault then we can stop arguing ;) :bash: ;)

But seriously I hear you for believe me I am sick of it as well (remember I am not the one who made this thread go off topic and I have been begging now for it to get back on topic, which is not the whole large debate) and I understand that we are entrenched in our perspective views but with that said I do enjoy talking to you and I do listen to what you say even if I don’t agree with it, I can only hope that you show me the same courtesy as well

Shalom :D

Kingpin

11-18-2003, 06:53 AM

They were trained by the russians and had "russian tactics" wich proved to be useless in battle.

This is direct insult. Please specify which tactics and why proved to be useless in battle.

Russian Texan

11-18-2003, 09:55 AM

Here is an anecdote about Soviet assistance to arabs during arab/israeli wars.

Two tanks: an arab and israeli meet up on top of a hill. None can pass because of lack of space, someone has to back off.
An israeli tanker pops out of the hatch and says: "You stupid arab, get out of my way, I have an american advisor inside"
An arab tanker responds with: " Poshel na huj"! (Go f*** yourself would be an approximate english translation from russian). Then looks down into the hatch and asks: "Did I say it right?"

On the serious note, the statement about arabs having latest Soviet equipment is false. USSR supplied arab countries with so called "monkey" models that were stripped down versions of the same equipment in the Soviet military. Pretty much it had looks but no substance ;)

Pyle

11-18-2003, 10:10 AM

i guess arabs pray more and train less so during crunch time the best tactic they can come up is blowing themselves up and hope it will do harm to the enemy.

UoUo

11-18-2003, 10:19 AM

They "great" alla won't won the wars for them.

Deuterium

11-18-2003, 10:31 AM

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 11:17 AM

On the serious note, the statement about arabs having latest Soviet equipment is false. USSR supplied arab countries with so called "monkey" models that were stripped down versions of the same equipment in the Soviet military. Pretty much it had looks but no substance ;) that’s not exactly true. I mean the MIGs and SAMs that you gave were of the latest variant. Listen I cant account for every major piece of equipment but the fact is that up until the 80's the arabs had received for the most part the latest in soviet technology and equipments.

Also they had soviet advisers throughout all their wars that were very prevalent in their training and battle order and formation (now whether they understood what they were learning, well that’s for each one to decide on their own, but they had those advises)

On top of all that, it is a fact that Russian pilots at times flew their planes in battle on behalf of the Arabs. I don’t know if you knew this but the Israeli air force shot down russian piloted migs in the early 70's. And before. In truth we don’t know the extent of actual Russian participation so it could have been more Russian piloted jets throughout the years but what I bring down below is a fact that is known. (there are many books that have this fact writtin but this is what i found quickly on the net)

IAF pilots also faced Russian pilots who occasionally participated in the defense of Egyptian air space. Encounters between Russian and Israeli pilots reached a climax on 30 July 1970 when four Mirage IICs were sent to attack a radar base in the Nile Delta to draw the Russian pilots into the battle. At the same time, another four Mirages and four F-4s were lying in ambush at a very low altitude. The Russians sent two formations of four MiG-21s to shoot down the Mirages. A short time later, another dozen MiGs took off. In the ensuing air battle, five Russian-piloted planes were shot down.
http://cp.yahoo.net/search/cache?va=israeli+planes+shoot+down+soviet+jets&ei=UTF-8&n=20&fl=0&url=St7zTe8KRPAJ:www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1998/articles/jul_98/jul2a_98.html
I bring this down to show that while yes I can go off about the Arabs this and the Arabs that, the soviets also played a huge part and as a Russian with all your equipment and all you advisers and at times actual participation, to blame everything on the Arabs and not at all on any advice or perhaps weaker soviet technology, well it seems to me as a bit of a copout.

The fact is that yes the arabs have a lot to look at as their own fault and perhaps could have changed some things but again, 13 or 15 or 20 to 1 odds and the best in Russian technology and yet the Arabs still lost every time, well credit does have to also go to the superior Israeli training and innovative and ingenious battlefield tactics and superior planning that Israel has used throughout its wars

I end off with a repeat of my joke that fits in with the theme of this post.

The major contribution to the Israeli Military successes in
the wars of 1967-73 was not any great superiority of Israel's
Defense Forces, or military inferiority of the Egyptian army,
but rather the too strict adherence of Egyptian commanders to
their Soviet advisors' strategy.

Dig in and wait for winter rofl

Shalom :D

Kingpin

11-18-2003, 11:44 AM

Sorry - big pic

http://airbase.ru/wars/arab-israel/1973/EgyptianAirForce-2/img/Photo4.jpg

Kingpin

11-18-2003, 11:48 AM

Israeli Mirage shot down by Egiptian Mig-21. Gun camera.

http://airbase.ru/wars/arab-israel/1973/EgyptianAirForce/img/05.jpg

Kingpin

11-18-2003, 11:50 AM

Downed Israeli Mirage in sands

http://airbase.ru/wars/arab-israel/1973/EgyptianAirForce/img/foto2.jpg

Kingpin

11-18-2003, 11:56 AM

And for those who have enough patience to use online translator: memoires of soviet advisor who have been in Syria this time (1973).

http://airbase.uka.ru/wars/arab-israel/1973/jashkin/

Russian Texan

11-18-2003, 11:58 AM

The latest, fully equiped models of tanks and airplanes were never given to arabs for two reasons:
#1 They could be captured and forwarded to the US (primary concern)

#2 In order to take advantage of the latest equipment extensive training was needed and arabs didn't have it.

So like I have said before: It looked like Mig but didn't have all of the insides of the same plane in the Soviet airforce.
For example, USSR used T 64 but exported similar but less capable T 72.

Soviet pilots did fly for the arabs, although on the much much smaller scale than in Korea.

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 12:01 PM

“cockdila”
Aahhhhhhhhhh so the Russians didn’t like what I just said ;) :petting: ;) …oh well :roll:

Listen if we play this picture game I can guarantee you that you wouldn’t like the result of it. I mean besides the astronomical amount of Russian equipments and planes that we have shot down, or the tanks that were destroyed or captured which don’t even come close to the low level of Israeli equipment that was shot down or captured by Russian stuff we also have museums that have tons(not a mere few)of that crap as well as actual APC that are in service now that are converted from Russian tanks. I suggest we not go there. Your few pictures don’t have any meaning here.

I simply repeat.

On top of all that, it is a fact that Russian pilots at times flew their planes in battle on behalf of the Arabs. I don’t know if you knew this but the Israeli air force shot down russian piloted migs in the early 70's. And before. In truth we don’t know the extent of actual Russian participation so it could have been more Russian piloted jets throughout the years but what I bring down below is a fact that is known. (there are many books that have this fact writtin but this is what i found quickly on the net)

IAF pilots also faced Russian pilots who occasionally participated in the defense of Egyptian air space. Encounters between Russian and Israeli pilots reached a climax on 30 July 1970 when four Mirage IICs were sent to attack a radar base in the Nile Delta to draw the Russian pilots into the battle. At the same time, another four Mirages and four F-4s were lying in ambush at a very low altitude. The Russians sent two formations of four MiG-21s to shoot down the Mirages. A short time later, another dozen MiGs took off. In the ensuing air battle, five Russian-piloted planes were shot down.
http://cp.yahoo.net/search/cache?va=israeli+planes+shoot+down+soviet+jets&ei=UTF-8&n=20&fl=0&url=St7zTe8KRPAJ:www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1998/articles/jul_98/jul2a_98.html
I bring this down to show that while yes I can go off about the Arabs this and the Arabs that, the soviets also played a huge part and as a Russian with all your equipment and all you advisers and at times actual participation, to blame everything on the Arabs and not at all on any advice or perhaps weaker soviet technology, well it seems to me as a bit of a copout.

The fact is that yes the arabs have a lot to look at as their own fault and perhaps could have changed some things but again, 13 or 15 or 20 to 1 odds and the best in Russian technology and yet the Arabs still lost every time, well credit does have to also go to the superior Israeli training and innovative and ingenious battlefield tactics and superior planning that Israel has used throughout its wars

I end off with a repeat of my joke that fits in with the theme of this post.

The major contribution to the Israeli Military successes in
the wars of 1967-73 was not any great superiority of Israel's
Defense Forces, or military inferiority of the Egyptian army,
but rather the too strict adherence of Egyptian commanders to
their Soviet advisors' strategy.

Dig in and wait for winter rofl

Shalom :D

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 12:09 PM

The latest, fully equiped models of tanks and airplanes were never given to arabs for two reasons:
#1 They could be captured and forwarded to the US (primary concern) yes that’s a good concern for Israel did do that on a lot of occasions.

But they did get the latest in soviet air defences (which are very good indeed) and while perhaps they got a level down in other things, they did get the best. It’s like Israel gets the latest F16I While the Egyptians get the F16D which is a bit less but still top of the line.

#2 In order to take advantage of the latest equipment extensive training was needed and arabs didn't have it. exactly my point. They did get that training and advice from the Russians so they were influenced by Russian training and battle doctrine.

As such some of the failures can be attributed to that as well.

So like I have said before: It looked like Mig but didn't have all of the insides of the same plane in the Soviet airforce. yes its like the Russians had F16I and the Arabs had F16D but still both are top of the line jets (obviously my example is with U.S. jets but you get my point)

Soviet pilots did fly for the arabs, although on the much much smaller scale than in Korea. yes as I mentioned in my previous posts.

Shalom :D

Kingpin

11-18-2003, 12:11 PM

“cockdila”
Aahhhhhhhhhh so the Russians didn’t like what I just said ;) :| ;) …oh well :roll:

Listen if we play this picture game I can guarantee you that you wouldn’t like the result of it. Shalom :D

Please post links to pics here. I'll be grateful

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 12:18 PM

Well I would have to do the research and I prefer not to. ( I mean besides your types of pictures that there are as well there are also videos of the wars which show those Russian equipments all over the desert floor)

however I can suggest the websites of the Latrun tank museum and the Israeli air force museum which do have a lot of Russian equipments on display.

In fact if you were serious about you request (and not in a condesanding flame fashion) you might actually like to see those pics or visit those museums.

Shalom :D

UoUo

11-18-2003, 01:29 PM

I will try....wait a few minutes and i will bring some nice fhotos of soviet weopns.

UoUo

11-18-2003, 01:57 PM

Oh well....just for now

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/self_propelled_artillery/katyusha/katyusha.jpg

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/self_propelled_artillery/katyusha/katyusha_b2.jpg

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/tiran/tiran5.jpg

The Ti-67 is another term for the Israeli use of the T-54/55 (Tiran 4/5)
Israel's chronic lack of AFV's on one hand and it's phenomenal victory in the 1967 Six Days War on the other, brought the IDF to adopt captured enemy vehicles for it's use. The Arab armies lost hundreds of fighting vehicles - mostly Egyptian T-54 and T-55 MBT's which were abandoned by their crews.

The first combat use of captured tanks by the IDF was in operation "Raviv" (8-9 September 1969) - an amphibious raid across the Suez channel. Three T-54 tanks and six BTR-50 apc's were used to wreak havoc behind the Egyptian lines (also see the "Operation Raviv" scenarios).

In order to allow for greater standardization in it's armor corps, the IDF initiated a conversion program. The captured tanks were re-engined and re-gunned (with the standard 105mm gun used in the Centurion and Patton MBT's). Chief was the several hundred captured T-54/T-55 tanks that were taken and modified into the Tiran 4 (T-54) and Tiran 5 (T-55), called Ti-67 (Tank Israeli -1967) in the west. The main difference between the two versions is the main gun armament. The Tiran 4 having a 100 mm main gun and the Tiran 5 having a 105 mm main gun.

The Tiran 5 conversion includes: hollow cast turret with numerous IDF details cast in, empty bustle cast to the turret, IDF modified loaders and drivers hatch, 105mm gun tube. 60mm mortar and spare round box, commanders and loaders m.g. mounts, correct machine guns, .30 caliber and correct ammo boxes. Turret side storage box, four IDF jerry can racks molded empty, five IDF jerry cans, separate, rear hull storage bin with medical box attached, IDF infantry comm. box. Late pattern fuel cells, accurate pattern oil storage box, two fender storage boxes, IDF Pattern driving lights and IDF pattern mud flaps with "rubber" dust guards molded separately.

Tirans were used along Israel's borders -mostly at the Suez front. In the 1973 Yom Kippur war Tirans were used in combat in the southern front - against Egyptian T-54/55 (which caused a lot of confusion).

During the early 1980's Tiran MBT's were withdrawn from active duty. Some were sold to foreign states (including, reportedly, to Iran during it's war with Iraq), some were given to Israel's allies in Lebanon and some were converted into the Achzarit APC.

[/img]http://www.iaf.co.il/sip_storage/files/6/226.jpg

Arabs plains destroyded by israel.

..ha...i will bring more...

After all over 600 Arab Air crafts were suth down by israel..for 48.

woot

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 02:12 PM

here let me help you out there chaver :D

http://www.iaf.co.il/sip_storage/files/6/226.jpg

shalom :D

S'13

11-18-2003, 03:01 PM

http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~yakov/album/peter-99/tanks7.jpg
T-34 tank displayed in Tel-Aviv

http://www.battlefield.ru/tanks/is3/is3_19.jpg
The ex-Egyptian IS-3M on military parade in Israel, 1967.

p-)

citizen-k

11-18-2003, 04:12 PM

I've had a little experience training Arabs and Muslims. I've trained European Muslims and Arab Muslims. There is a world of difference.

1. The overriding principle for Arabs is "inshallah". This applies to whether the enemy is attacking or whether or not sandbags will be filled.

2. Arabs are industrious and inventive if pointed in the right direction. Left to their own devices all I ever saw was bickering and indecisiveness. It seems in the West that at all levels we are prepared to make decisions, even wrong ones. But decisions are made.

3. Acceptance of ineptness and poor conditions. I go on a deployment and wind up in a ****hole. I start improving on my condition on day one. I don't accept my lot and cry. I go to a local vender and ask for a service. The service is poorly given. I complain and either fix the problem by telling him my standards or I get a new vendor.

4. Jumping to conclusions and paranoia. Rampant and prevent throughout the Arab world.

These factors all combine in a military sense to form units with poor abilities to react to change, make decisive timely decisions, understand commander's intent, and separate the BS from the important tasks.

In simple words: You killed the commander - you killed the entire unit.

Another differences:

A syrian tank driver graduated 3-4 years of elementary school unlike his Israeli friend which graduated high school (12 years) or university...

The syrian air force commander is the brother/brother in law/neighbour of the Syrian president (just like all the other high ranked officers in the army). The reason is that the president wants to make sure the army will remain loyal. (A thing you won't see in Israel or the US)

One

11-18-2003, 06:28 PM

Its funny because you think the arab army is what you saw in afghanistan. A bunch of illeterate turban wearing horse riding farmers.

The egyptians and syrians are both well educated (as education is free in socialist countries). On the other hand saddam likes to appoint his buddies and family in commanding positions because he is scared for his life. Chemical Ali used to be a guard at the Ministry of Defence. When saddam came into power he became responsible for developing weapons. A former Iraqi minister was on TV and he was talking about the Saddam days. He said an Iraqi officer was sent to russia for SF training, and he graduated at the top of his class. When he returned to Iraq he got executed for no reason. Saddam didn't like anyone who is better than him.

The soldeirs were willing to die for their country and nothing could stop them.

The commanders had no choice but to do what the Commander in Chief tells them to do. So in some cases they had to lie to protect their asses.

If it wasn't for the bastard saddat giving a direct order to the Commander of the 2nd Army bypassing the Joint Chief of Staff who knows what would have happened to the Israeli army.

They egyptians fooled the Israelis for quite a long time and they moved all their equipments to the front lines without anyone noticing (well actualy Sharon noticed but it was too late). The first couple of days the Israelis were loosing massive casualties, their airforce was useless, one of the commanders in the frontline bunkers asked HQ to stop sending fighters because they are not lasting in the sky.

Yes the Syrians did get whatever they want. Brejnev(sorry for mispelling his name) asked Assad if he wanted the migs with or without pilots. But the IAF was recieving american technology in the airplanes with computers. We all know the russian planes are aerodynamicaly advanced but not computerized.

Yes the Syrians and egyptians lost 400 planes but they were all parked in the air force base they were bombed.

Back before the Yum Kippur war the King of Jordan gave Golda Meir the whole plan of attack of the arab armies, yes an arab country betrayed the rest. So when the war started the Israelis knew what was going on.

Iraq, Syria, and Egypt were trained by the Soveits. The rest are trained by the west. Mostly the gulf countries go to england. Lebanon goes to the US for their training (they've been doing so for who knows how long).

Give the arabs the same technology that Israel has and see who will win. Well that will never happen because that will be an extra fair fight.

Now there are 23 arab countries. 2 are willing to fight and the rest don't give a **** anymore. All they care about is themselves.

PS: Inshallah is the muslim way of saying "ok" or "alright". And not all muslims are arabs and not all arabs are muslims.

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 09:35 PM

They egyptians fooled the Israelis for quite a long time and they moved all their equipments to the front lines without anyone noticing (well actualy Sharon noticed but it was too late). well there is strong evidence that what you said is not true!!
There have been many books and articles that cited former Mossad and Israeli military intelligence interviews of how they had intelligence and other factors before that knew of that and that they warned Galda Mair but she refused to attack. As I said before, It is clear now that Israeli leadership was also duplicit (sp?) in the failure in the beginning for they did know that this war was going to happen (yes a lot of historians recognise that it was not a surprise as a lot believe it is today) but yet refused to pre-empt like they smartly did in 1967 and this refusal to do so cost Israel more then it had to

Yes the Syrians and egyptians lost 400 planes but they were all parked in the air force base they were bombed. yes a lot were destroyed while they were parked in the wars but a lot were also shot down in air to air battles.

In fact I believe it is a fact that the Israeli air force has the most successful air to air record based on ratios and percentages in the history of air to air battles.

I mean I don’t think you need to be remained of the 81 to 1 (yes 81 syrian planes were shot down while only 1 Israeli one was shot down), success rate that Israeli planes had against Syrian ones over the skies of Lebanon in 1982. :D

This is just one example of many of such success rates during the past fifty years of conflict between the sides.

Back before the Yum Kippur war the King of Jordan gave Golda Meir the whole plan of attack of the arab armies, yes an arab country betrayed the rest. So when the war started the Israelis knew what was going on. A, where did you get this from?? :roll:

B, so now you admit that they were not fooled for they did know before?!? make up your mind which is it :roll:

C, if it’s true then it even further proves the fault of the Israeli leadership for knowing and yet even still refusing to pre-empt as they should have done.

Iraq, Syria, and Egypt were trained by the Soveits. The rest are trained by the west. Mostly the gulf countries go to england. Lebanon goes to the US for their training (they've been doing so for who knows how long). so they had some quality training and yet they still lost.

It just goes to show…………… ;)

Give the arabs the same technology that Israel has and see who will win first of all,
In 1948, the Israelis had less equipments and less technology.
In 1967 they also had less. Remember Israel by then had French stuff and not U.S.
And in 1973 they had U.S. but at the time, U.S. equipment was not better then soviet equpment.

So yes the Arabs had the same or better equiptment in those wars and yet they still lost!!

Secondly, so you now want to give the Arabs, American as well as Israeli technology, which is what the Israeli have……..hmmmm :roll:

So lets see, they had the best in Russian equptment and their astronomical numerical advantage, and we see how they did with that, what makes you think things will be different with American and Israeli stuff?!? :roll:

Well that will never happen because that will be an extra fair fight. wow thanks for the compliment!! :D

I mean right here you admit that with the same technology, in your eye it would be a fair fight even though numerically the odds on their side are 15 or 20 to one!!!

Yes that’s still a fair fight :roll: ;) :roll:

I mean in essence you are saying that with everything being equal, the arabs will still need 15 or 20 Arabs soldiers to kill one Israeli soldier.

It seems that to you is fair :roll:

shalom :D

One

11-18-2003, 09:51 PM

Give them the same ammount of F16I loaded with the latest Python4 and then go up in an air to air battle :P

Moshe Deyan called the reserves/regulars 4 (or 5) times in 1973. When the egyptians announced for the 6th time that all reservists and regular personell to join their units Deyan thought it was another bluff, so he didnt get his troops ready. Well it turned it that it wasnt a bluff.

Sharon on the other hand recieved intel from his unit and he told them that the egyptians are preparing for a war. So if he was the minister of defenece he would of found out.

King Abdullah's actions are known thats why the jordanians are called "khawanat il arab" (translated to betrayers of the arabs), and he got assasinated. He told Meir that the egyptians want to attack Israel so they initiated a pre-emptive attack (1967).

If you want to fight the egyptian or syrian army you should remove the leadership first and then start a war. Because they will fuk everything up and if they question the leaders actions he will get kicked out.

IDFM203

11-18-2003, 10:14 PM

Give them the same ammount of F16I loaded with the latest Python4 and then go up in an air to air battle :P actually Israel now came out with the Python5 ;)

Ahhh so you want Israeli technology now ;) :roll:

I mean geee do you want us to give over the mossad for your benefit as well :roll:

Again I repeat

“wow thanks for the compliment!! :D

I mean right here you admit that with the same technology, in your eye it would be a fair fight even though numerically the odds on their side are 15 or 20 to one!!!

Yes that’s still a fair fight :roll: ;) :roll:

I mean in essence you are saying that with everything being equal, the arabs will still need 15 or 20 Arabs soldiers to kill one Israeli soldier.

It seems that to you is fair :roll: "

Moshe Deyan called the reserves/regulars 4 (or 5) times in 1973. When the egyptians announced for the 6th time that all reservists and regular personell to join their units Deyan thought it was another bluff, so he didnt get his troops ready. Well it turned it that it wasnt a bluff. yes but there were people in the intelligence community that disagreed with dayen and they told him that they had solid intelligence that he was wrong.

Either way you look at it, there was a failure in Israeli leadership to listen to what their intelligence people were rightfully telling them.

With Israel’s extreme disadvantages, even if the Arabs were bluffing again, Israel simply has no choice but to call up the reserves every time. I don’t care if they were bluffing a hundred times, they need to call them up that many times.

Sharon on the other hand recieved intel from his unit and he told them that the egyptians are preparing for a war. So if he was the minister of defenece he would of found out. first of all, there were people in the intelligence community that knew besides Sharon. Secondly what Sharon knew he passed on to the others.
Either way, the government knew and yet they still did not act.

King Abdullah's actions are known thats why the jordanians are called "khawanat il arab" (translated to betrayers of the arabs), and he got assasinated. He told Meir that the egyptians want to attack Israel so they initiated a pre-emptive attack (1967). oh so before you said the 1973 war now you change it to the 1967 war :roll:

I am sorry to say but You are clealy confused (be it on purpose or you are actually confused ;) )and don’t have your facts in order.
I mean Golda mair was not a amjor player in 1967 as you have said here :roll:

Secondly king abdullh did not do any such thing for if he did, then why did he attack during the 1967 when Israel told him to stay out of it?!? :roll: , lets not forget that in that war, it was Jordan that attacked Israel first. I mean if he was helping israel then why would he attack Israel during that war?!? :roll:

shalom :D

One

11-19-2003, 12:54 AM

Back before the Yum Kippur war the King of Jordan gave Golda Meir the whole plan of attack of the arab armies, yes an arab country betrayed the rest. So when the war started the Israelis knew what was going on.

I wasn't talking about the 1973 war. I said back before the yum kippur war.

And no I'm not saying give them 15 to 1 odds. I'm saying give them the same technology and have the same amount of soldeirs or tanks or planes and then fight it out.

And no we don't need the mossad, you can't deny that the egyptians were good in the intel war.

Russian tactics called for large amounts of soldeirs and for Egypt 300 tanks is nothing. They have a massive land to cover. But thats not the point.

I dont see anything wrong with saying that Israeli technology is better....hell its better then US technology. Like I told you before I respect any army or person that defends a cause regardles of it being right or wrong.

Salam :D

IDFM203

11-19-2003, 01:37 AM

“Back before the Yum Kippur war the King of Jordan gave Golda Meir the whole plan of attack of the arab armies, yes an arab country betrayed the rest. So when the war started the Israelis knew what was going on. “

I wasn't talking about the 1973 war. I said back before the yum kippur war.
I don’t mean to sound rude but are you not understanding what you are writing??? :roll:

In a previous post you said “King Abdullah's actions are known thats why the jordanians are called "khawanat il arab" (translated to betrayers of the arabs), and he got assasinated. He told Meir that the egyptians want to attack Israel so they initiated a pre-emptive attack (1967)”

So there you are saying the 1967 war.

Now here you say the same thing but you change it to the Yom kipper war.

You said before the Yom kipper war they gave information and then go on to say that when the Yom kipper war started, the Israelis knew. Well that’s a pretty clear link to the same war. Secondly, Golda mair, who you claim he gave the information to, was only a major part (the prime minister) in the Yom kipper war and you say that he gave her the information well that is only for the Yom kipper war.

Also, besides all that, how do you know this in the first place??? :roll:

Secondly if you are talking about the 1967 war, well it is simply implausible that the king of Jordan would do this.

I repeat “king abdullh did not do any such thing for if he did, then why did he attack during the 1967 when Israel told him to stay out of it?!? :roll: , lets not forget that in that war, it was Jordan that attacked Israel first. I mean if he was helping israel then why would he attack Israel during that war?!? :roll:”

And no I'm not saying give them 15 to 1 odds. I'm saying give them the same technology and have the same amount of soldeirs or tanks or planes and then fight it out. ohh so now you say that………………….. :roll: ;) :roll:

So all those pitched battles throughout the wars where individual Israeli units were outnumbered and yet still won and all that was do to what exactly??? :roll: ;) :roll: I mean do you remember the “zvikah force” where one Israeli tank fought alone for over 20 hours and single handily destroyed anywhere from 25 to 50 tanks (estimates vary, but that was the minimum).

Or the same amount of planes and the latest in technology and yet the Syrians lost 81 planes to Israel only losing one in air to air battles.

Listen the fact is that by the Yom kipper war and the 1967 war and the 1948 war, the wars were fought with the Arabs having the same (in 1973) or better technology (in 1967 and in 1948)!!!!! Also they had more numbers (understatement!!) and yet they still lost.

Again they had not only the same but also better technology and they still lost.

Other then your wishful thinking, the facts prove other wise as to the past and as to the future if that were to happen again or if it were to be the same numbers as well.(I mean again, if the Arabs could lose with better technology or the same, like in 1973,67,48 and with more numbers, they sure as hell would get creamed with the same amount of troops as well!!!)

And no we don't need the mossad, you can't deny that the egyptians were good in the intel war. ok besides the Russians giving you most of the intelligence, what Egyptian intelligence?!? :roll: Seriously this is not meant as a flame, I honestly don’t know of any.

Remember not Russian but actual Egyptian intelligence is what I am asking about!!

I dont see anything wrong with saying that Israeli technology is better....hell its better then US technology. my new best friend ;) :hug: ;)

Again, all this has been the case for the past 25 years, but not before that.

Shalom :D

Kingpin

11-19-2003, 02:42 AM

1982

81:1 - no
from 3:2 to 5:1 (depends of time passed since beginning of war)

1973

from 3:2 to 5:2

my approximation. Not 100% correct but your approx much worse :)

I never said that arab pilots is better than israeli but definitely not so bad as you saying.

Kingpin

11-19-2003, 02:52 AM

And I'm still waiting for pics of destroyed Soviet made arab equipment :)

Actually i can post here some by myself but i hope you provide my with new stuff :)

IDFM203

11-19-2003, 03:04 AM

It is clear to me that you are talking about the ratio of Israeli planes shot down vs. Arab ones period… well that’s faulty logic for we are talking about air to air battles and not take down by SAMs or other air defences which account for most of the Israeli losses

Remember again we are also talking about the arabs having astronomical numerical advantages in equipment as well.

1982

81:1 - no
from 3:2 to 5:1 (depends of time passed since beginning of war) first if all here you are way off. It is higher then 5:1 no matter how you look at it.

But anyways you make a mistake of including SAM kills which accounted for most of the losses of Israeli jets.

In air to air battles, which I was discussing, the Israeli’s were dominant.
That 81 to 1 success rate by Israel was just one battle and it is considered the most lopsided air to air victory in modern warfare.

Again throughout the wars, in the air to air battles, Israel has been dominant.

1973

from 3:2 to 5:2 here you are closer to the truth in terms of ratioes but again most of it was due to Russian supplied air defences (which I said before are good) and not to air to air battles.
In that war again, the air to air battles, the Israelis were dominent.

my approximation. Not 100% correct but your approx much worse :) no mine is not.

But anyways I think you misunderstood my points.

Again we are talking about air to air battles and not take down by air defence systems.

I never said that arab pilots is better than israeli but definitely not so bad as you saying. no they are as bad and Israel’s is as good!! (I know that is very arrogant of me to say but it is the truth in terms of air to air battles and pilot skills)

I repeat, I believe it is a fact that the Israeli air force has the highest success rate in modern warfare in terms of air to air battles then any one in the world. This is not on the number of kills but based on the percentage and ratios.

As for pics. We showed you; go back to the other pages. I also told you about links and about videos.
Secondly there are more out there but with the above facts, I think it is silly to play this pics game.

But wait if you want I can try although I cant guarantee you success in finding the pics of those downed Russian piloted jets that the Israeli pilots shot down. I can try to look for that. (But hey if I don’t find the pics you can believe that it never happened ;) …I guess ignorance is bliss :roll: )

Shalom :D

Kingpin

11-19-2003, 06:30 AM

Let's discuss less sensitive matters. Mig Alley for example :)

Kingpin

11-19-2003, 06:59 AM

Quote:
IAF pilots also faced Russian pilots who occasionally participated in the defense of Egyptian air space. Encounters between Russian and Israeli pilots reached a climax on 30 July 1970 when four Mirage IICs were sent to attack a radar base in the Nile Delta to draw the Russian pilots into the battle. At the same time, another four Mirages and four F-4s were lying in ambush at a very low altitude. The Russians sent two formations of four MiG-21s to shoot down the Mirages. A short time later, another dozen MiGs took off. In the ensuing air battle, five Russian-piloted planes were shot down.

As for this case i found it in Soviet records. All is correct except note that it was 4 Russian piloted planes were down (and 3 pilots died). Before and after this case Soviet pilots didn't partcipate in active dogfights until yom kippur. This case recorded as radar base mistake - they were not ready and gave wrong directions to Migs wings.

IDFM203

11-19-2003, 11:52 AM

Let's discuss less sensitive matters. Mig Alley for example :) yes Russians are perhaps good against other air forces but when its up against the Israeli one…well ;) woot ;)

(now I am not sure if you meant the game or acutall events but if actuall events, I did some reasurdh after your mention and I am still not sure as to what mig alley is.........perhaps a bit of explanation :D )

Quote:
IAF pilots also faced Russian pilots who occasionally participated in the defense of Egyptian air space. Encounters between Russian and Israeli pilots reached a climax on 30 July 1970 when four Mirage IICs were sent to attack a radar base in the Nile Delta to draw the Russian pilots into the battle. At the same time, another four Mirages and four F-4s were lying in ambush at a very low altitude. The Russians sent two formations of four MiG-21s to shoot down the Mirages. A short time later, another dozen MiGs took off. In the ensuing air battle, five Russian-piloted planes were shot down.

As for this case i found it in Soviet records. All is correct except note that it was 4 Russian piloted planes were down (and 3 pilots died). Before and after this case Soviet pilots didn't partcipate in active dogfights until yom kippur. This case recorded as radar base mistake - they were not ready and gave wrong directions to Migs wings. ok I am not even going to try to refute what you said for its pointless.

Listen of course the soviets are going to put their spin on it.(as they always do) :roll:

The fact is that in the only known air to air engagement involving Israeli piloted jets vs. soviet piloted jets was this instance, and the fact is that Israeli piloted jets shot down 5 soviet piloted jets(ok so you say 4) to Israel not getting a single jet shot down!!

Now you want to say the soviets did this and this wrong but I don’t see how that relates to when all is said and done, they were in the air engaging in dogfights and yet they still lost. Everything else is inconsequential and not relevent.

Shalom :D

Undo

11-20-2003, 07:31 PM

I think Deuterium made a valid point that has gone by the wayside, particularly where the effectiveness of Russian advisors/tactics are concerned.
I have an example. A few years ago the US gave several frigates to Pakistan. A skeleton crew of 5 US sailors was on board to monitor things, but the ship was crewed by a large compliment of Pakistanis for the crossing. En route, one of the ships had a fire in the boiler room. The Pakistanis said "insha allah" and started abandoning the vessel. The five man US crew relied on their training and put the fire out by themselves and then picked up the panicked Pakistanis. I don't think the training the Pakistanis recieved was insufficient nor were the US crew effective at all in getting the Pakistanis to employ the training. I imagine that the Russians met with the same amount of success. Even the best tactics and advisors amount to nothing if those being advised don't have the proper mindset. This is a HUGE generalization, but my personal experience bears it out, in as much as it is a plausable explanation of the ineffectiveness of the Arabs to conduct a modern war. I appologize if this offends anyone. I also don't want to take anything away from the Isrealis, who clearly have some advantage over their adversary that is difficult to quantify. It may be as both Sun Tsu and Golda Meir pointed out, that an enemy surrounded has no choice but to win. Anyway, just my oppinion.

ArmoredDov_D9

11-21-2003, 04:12 AM

Actually, the casualties rate in Yom Kippur war is about 1:7. On each Israeli soldier who got killed, 7 Arab soldier died.

In the Six-Days-War the ratio was more than 2 times higher: about 1:16.

In the battles reupted in the Golan Heights after the 1973 war, Israeli forces killed about 300 Syrian forces in 3 days battles.

StarvingStudent47

11-23-2003, 04:24 AM

In four pages of posts, I think the number one reason for the weakness of Arab militaries has been completely overlooked.

Arab dictators are afraid of military coups, and the steps they take to prevent coups also lower military effectiveness.

1) They do not train lower-level officers to have initiative, because you don't want any Corporals driving up to their palaces. During battle, though, this cripples the entire military as soon as the chain of communication and command starts to decay.

2) They limit access to live ammuntion, because they're afraid of rogue units shelling the capital. But without live ammo during practice, units don't learn marksmanship.

StarvingStudent47

11-23-2003, 04:27 AM

may be as both Sun Tsu and Golda Meir pointed out, that an enemy surrounded has no choice but to win.

But the Republican Guard couldn't hold Baghdad for more than a couple days. There's more to it than that.

fantassin

11-23-2003, 05:39 AM

Now, that's a very interesting thread...a race trying to assert it is superior to another for a lot of reasons that are, I truly believe, valid.

You've gone a long way since you were, 60 odd years ago, treated as "Untermensch"

BTW, read "Carnage and Culture", a truly excellent book by a scholar who explains why a caucasian army is very hard to beat except in a few scenarios (being far away from its home country without support being one...)

Roger Rabbit

11-23-2003, 08:29 AM

Ever thought it might be something to do with culture as opposed to race?

S'13

11-23-2003, 09:07 AM

Now, that's a very interesting thread...a race trying to assert it is superior to another for a lot of reasons that are, I truly believe, valid.

You've gone a long way since you were, 60 odd years ago, treated as "Untermensch"

Strange, the only person here who seems to introduce race into the debate and ignoring the subject of the thread is you... :roll:

perdurabo

11-23-2003, 09:35 AM

so arab armys get ass whoopin because of ****ty leaders? or maybe because something else?
i've heard that almoust all of them want to shoot only like one of panzer brigades trained wery hard shooting but almoust no manouver training no other only doing big bang... is that true?

fantassin

11-23-2003, 12:07 PM

The concept of race needs to be introduced if you want to understand how the arabs get beaten; they were beaten before by Brits, French, Spaniards....but they beat a lot of other races before.

Now if you want to get arsy about it and be paranoïd, it's not my problem.

Roger Rabbit

11-23-2003, 12:48 PM

Once upon a time there was a thing called racism. Read the following very carefully. Race is irrelevent. Culture is the important bit. Being white does not make you a better fighter than somebody who is not white. If you want to believe that then your a racist. If however you believe that the cultural differences(i sound like such a hippy) along with politics and the history of the people in question not to mention training, equipment and what not are the reasons for one people winning/losing a war then your looking in the right direction.

fantassin

11-23-2003, 01:01 PM

Racism....have you visited a Household Regiment lately? :D

According to "Carnage and Culture", race does matter; but it's just the informed opinion of a scholar.

Roger Rabbit

11-23-2003, 01:09 PM

The Army welcomes applications from young men and women no matter what their marital status, race, ethnic origin or religious belief. No account is taken of sexual orientation or social background in considering applications. The Army is fully committed to equality of opportunity.

:roll:

fantassin

11-23-2003, 01:13 PM

Mr. Nielsen

11-23-2003, 02:07 PM

What is this talk about race as a factor? Isn't the people of Israel and the arabs both from the same race?

perdurabo

11-23-2003, 03:07 PM

prabably ppl think race=culture

StarvingStudent47

11-23-2003, 03:48 PM

Try getting a commission in the Coldstream Guards if you are black, if your first name is Winston and if you come from Brixton...

There is the official version and the ground truth...with such a profile, he'd end up in a County Regiment if he's lucky.

But true, Equal Opportunity is supposed to exist...

Your military must have more trouble with that then ours, then. I have never heard of African-Americans being barred from military academies or from command positions (in modern times). Just ask Colin Powell.

fantassin

11-23-2003, 04:06 PM

The Guards division is very conservative in the way it recruits its officers; that means no minorities, no officers from poor backgrounds or areas. They prefer to recruit somebody with a name and a family history whose forbears have already served in the considered regiment before.

It is an unswritten rule but since prospective officers have to have an interview with the officers of the regiment before joining the Military Academy (RMA Sandhurst), they know exactly where they are standing. They'll never be told "we wont have you 'cause you're black"; they'll say instead "we are afraid you wouldn't feel very comfortable among us"

There has been a few isolated cases of blacks in the Guards but very few and far between.

On the other hand, you find them and other racial groups in all the other units and corps of the British Army.

StarvingStudent47

11-23-2003, 11:02 PM

I think it's sickening that Britain still has white-folks-only units. It stinks of Jim Crow.

fantassin

11-24-2003, 01:21 AM

Call it tradition of what is probably, man-for-man, the best Army in the world.

Tom.G

11-24-2003, 06:19 PM

The British power is in decline and has been for fifty years. Man-for-Man, I think Uncle Sam has the best Army in the world.

Roger Rabbit

11-24-2003, 06:21 PM

Check every forum which has anything to do with the military be it real military, airsoft or a game and you will find a thread about which army is better. Lets not turn this into another one.

After all its the Brits :lol: . Anyway everyone has their own point of view. Your not going to change anybodies mind so lets leave it at your opinion is the Americans are the best and my opinion that the British are the best man for man. :hug:

Royal

11-24-2003, 06:27 PM

The Guards division is very conservative in the way it recruits its officers; that means no minorities, no officers from poor backgrounds or areas. They prefer to recruit somebody with a name and a family history whose forbears have already served in the considered regiment before.

True 10 years ago. Not so now - I've met Guards Officers from Comprehensive schools recently.

It is an unswritten rule but since prospective officers have to have an interview with the officers of the regiment before joining the Military Academy (RMA Sandhurst), they know exactly where they are standing. They'll never be told "we wont have you 'cause you're black"; they'll say instead "we are afraid you wouldn't feel very comfortable among us"

Bollocks. You do not need a Regimental sponsor to go to Sandhurst, it may help but about a third don't have. Another third join an entirely different unit. If that interview happens at all it is in the two months prior to commissioning.

Roger Rabbit

11-24-2003, 06:32 PM

Well being at UOTC then i've been told a bit about the different ways to become an Officer. On a side note apparently 63% of Officers come from State Schools now.

You can take a Bursury, Gap Year Commision, or something which Medical, Dental and Vets can do where they get lots and lots of money. I was told you choose your particular service prior to completing your 44 weeks at Sandhurst and then you go on to do 6 months learning the more detail aspects of your particular service be it Infantry, Engineers or what not. Its also at this particular time that you choose a Regiment you would like to join but there is still a chance you will just be put where your needed.

Kingpin

12-04-2003, 10:23 AM

Javehn, my dear, translate this to our Israeli friends. :)
That how Israel win his wars - proper motivation rofl rofl rofl

"Да", - сказал Жуликович своему наводчику Шломику Декаданскому, а боекомплекта то на них всех не хватит!".

"Абрашик!" - заныл Декаданский, -"Сколько же дней можно с такой нагрузкой вкалывать? Мы же уже за последние 5 дней уничтожили танков в шесть раз больше, чем их произвели русские танковые заводы за последние 5 лет!".

"Вот что, Шломик!" - командир погрозил наводчику пальцем, - "Решение у меня уже есть! Мы будем выжидать момент когда арабские танки будут по пять штук оказываться на линии прицеливания и в этот момент будем бить их навылет!"

"Завтра шаббат, командир" - продолжал скулить наводчик.

"А ты представь, что каждый из этих 500 танков и БМП занял у тебя по 2 бакса и не отдал ничего" - мудро ответил Жуликович.

"Вот суки!!!" - коротко бросил Декаданский и прилип к прицелу...

rofl rofl

Russian Texan

12-04-2003, 01:03 PM

А вот ещё один.

Гонится Израильский танк за арабом по пустыне, араб отстреливается. Вдруг перестает стрелять и останавливается, к нему подезжает израильтянин и спрашивает, почему мол остановился и не стреляешь? Араб говорит: "Патроны кончились."
Еврей ему: "А ты у меня купи..."

Javehn

12-04-2003, 02:51 PM

Так уж и быть .... :lol:

Во время шестидневной войны попал репортер на Израильские линии обороны . Подхотит он к одному майору и спрашивает : " В чем дело , как вам удается их побеждать ? " - "а ты смотри " - говорит этот майор , и поворачиваясь кричит - "Эй Ибрагим выгляни на секунду , это я , Мустафа !" - " Что случилось , Мустафа ? " - описивается небритая рожа Арабского солдата , раздается выстрел , и солдат падает на землю уже без признаков жизни . "Невероятно"-думает этот репортер , перебирается на Арабские линии и расказывает все что он видел ( сто пудов BBC-шник :) ) . Тут арабы начинают раздумывать и решают . Один молодой солдатик начинает кричать - " Авраам Авраам выгляни ! " . " А кто зовет ? " - вопрос с другой стороны .
" Да это я , Махмуд ! " - поднимается солдат , раздаётся выстрел и солдатик падает на землю ....

Chris1

12-05-2003, 06:06 PM

I think it's sickening that Britain still has white-folks-only units. It stinks of Jim Crow.
Best soldiers I met?
Fijians
Guess what colour they are (it ain't pink mate)
Yes, I have met racially prejudiced soldiers, one particular SNCO who I would not piss on if he was on fire because of it.
I've also met some **** in good black soldiers.
Such Regiments are not racially prejudiced, they hate all 'poor' (ie anyone less than upper-upper class) people equally :)

Kingpin

12-09-2003, 05:06 AM

During Israel-Arab wars as confirmed by some sources there was not intensive digfights between Soviet and Israeli pilots. Only couple of cases disclosed and it is supposed there isn't any more at all.

From Soviet advisors memoirs i can confirm that israeli airforce proved to be one of the best in the world during these conflicts. About arabs we all agreed that they showed themselves as weak warriors and i suppose we should limit our arms supplies to them because they only discredit our weapons.

Loco

12-11-2003, 09:22 AM

King Abdullah's actions are known thats why the jordanians are called "khawanat il arab" (translated to betrayers of the arabs), and he got assasinated. He told Meir that the egyptians want to attack Israel so they initiated a pre-emptive attack (1967).

The king Abdullah you´re talking about actually died well before 1967. He was the grand-grandfather of today´s king Abdullah of Jordan. The first king Abdullah, king of the then "Transjordania", had privileded channels of comunication with jews dirigigents of the Pre-Israel. King Abdullah was friend of jews yet stablished prior to 1948, and a big rival of the Mufti of Jerusalem, well known by his simpathy of nazism. King Abdullah wanted and agreement with jews prior the decission of the UN and he had many motives for thinking it was possible and agreement, he really alerted jews of the arab plan to attack the new state of Israel, but at the end, Ben Gurion and Golda Meir felt enogh strong to not listen the propositions of king Abdullah, who the nexts years was seen as a traitor by arab people. Really, king Abdullah was betrayed by Golda Meir and Ben Gurion, who betrayed the confidence Abdullah gave them long years before the war. Ben Gurion and Golda Meir weren´t satisfied with propositions of UN, they wanted more land than they had, and at first they agreed with Abdullah but they calculated theirs rivals and asumed they could conquer more territory. They preferred the interests of their people rather than the posibility of a peaceful agreement with Transjordan. They risked and they won, that´s because I don´t blame them and they were braves. But it can´t being said that ALL ARABS where against Israel. In many ways, jews dirigigents forced the situation to the point they wanted to be. And of course, king Abdullah was a vicitim of this situation, isralies didn´t let anyother option to Transjordania than fighting, that´s was the realitiy, jews didin´t an agreement with Transjordania although they could having it, only wanted more territores. Then, talking of a surprise attack in 1948 is not exactly. BTW, Transjordania was a former british protectorate, and jordan army, specially the Arab Legion, was trained by british since the time of Lawrence of Arabia, and they did fight certainly well, in fact jordan soldiers where one of the bests in 1948, the luck of israelies is that they limited basically to being stationated in defensive positions, and they hold their positions in the most of cases.
Other thing, this began as "Arabs at war", but everybody reduced it to "Arabs at war with Israel". Arabs, if we consider all this countries a single country, have a loooong history. Hammuraby was an arab, Ramses II, too, Sargon too, Hannibal, a descendent of phoenicians(the sirians of today), was an ethnic arab, and so on. I think arabs have some of the most outstanding warriors and armies of history, but if we limit ourselves to the last 50 years they don´t. Some one talked here about the algerians and marroqs soldiers, the "goumiers", who fought in french army in the IIWW, they really were some of the best infantry of that war, even they perhaps aren´t very popular out France. But they did they duty in Italy better than others more famous soldiers, and it´s not a surprise. I don´t know if it would be exact consider algerians and marroqs as arabs, they certainly are muslims, but many of them are berbers, the originary people of North Africa. In Spain we do know they are very hard soldiers, we spent more than 1.000 years dealing with them. In 1911 Spain was engaged in a war in the north of Marroq with Rif Tribes, and organized a force of native troops to fighting against their brothers of rebels tribes, they were known as "Tropas Regulares(officially members of spanish army) Indigenas" and in 30 years they became the most condecorated unit of spanish army. They fought fiercely and with discipline against their rebels brothers leaded by Abd El Krim, and they fought in spanish civil war in 1936-39 and were some of the best troops, equaled but nor overpassed, in the battle field.
And, a last consideration: When an army usually win battles against enemies superiors in a rate of 15-1, then the enemy simply isn´t so superior. Men are men, Superman doesn´t exists, and nobody want to be sent to war for being dead without any chance. It´s as simply like that: or the equipment of enemy isn´t so superior as they say, or enemy ins´t as bigger. The problem of arabs in their history is that they developed many civilizations, not only the muslim one, but they hardly could develope an stable state through centuries, with the exception of Egypt. In the case of Europe, well, we are many countries and very differents ones of others, but one decissive thing I think is that our big luck is having the Roman Law, but well, this is totally off topic here, but : Could we talk in other thread about the step of Roman and Greeks in the europe of last 500 years?
Edited: I forgot to mention it, king Abdullah was killed in 1951 by a man who considered him a traitor to his own country.

Havoc

12-13-2003, 06:27 PM

my little opinnion is that arabs beleave too much on allah. They think that it will turn war on them if they pray really hard.

Groove

12-20-2003, 08:02 PM

well besides all the religion and training stuff - israel have a "big brother" and they helped them often with satellite imagery...

But isreal have a strong an well organized army and arabs... well read the last UN report about the development of the arabian world.

Groove

IDFM203

12-20-2003, 08:20 PM

well besides all the religion and training stuff - israel have a "big brother" and they helped them often with satellite imagery... yes and the Arabs also had a “big brother” the soviets (that gave them everything that they needed and had, including all their military equipment, soviet advisers, soviet intelligence at times).

Listen there is no doubt that Israel has gotten help from the U.S. (and before 1967 not from the U.S. but from France and Britain) and that has helped big time, but just note that a lot of what Israel uses is actually Israeli made and invented and also a lot of the foreign equipment that it uses have Israeli modifications and electronics added to them and all the tactics are mostly Israeli and the same goes for the training and intelligence that are mostly Israeli (and now even satellite imagery is Israeli from Israeli made satellites like the "ofek" versions that are in space)

So when you compare the Arabs to the Israelis in the wars, where the Arabs got ALL their stuff from the soviets and a lot of their training and tactics are either theirs or its learnt from their soviet advisers and them getting a lot of times soviet intelligence on Israel and their 15 to one numerical advantage against Israel, where israel on the other hand has made a lot of their own stuff and devised their own training and tactics and relied a lot on their own intelligence and was at a disadvantage numerically 15 to 1, well a lot (not all, for yes again they did get outside help)of the credit in Israel’s victories and the fact that it has survived and survived strong to this day, has to go to Israel!!

Shalom :D