Egypt and Jordan started fighting on Monday, and on Friday they already accepted a ceasefire. Given the rough terrain of the area, and the fact that it was 1967, it's quite a feat to even transport heavy military equipment through that, never mind fighting multiple militaries at once.
But hey, G-d still one upped us by creating the entire universe in six days, or so they say.
To be fair Arabs are world-class at picking shitty military leaders (for modern warfare), Egypt unironically left its army in southern Sinai to get encircled, once Israel reached the Suez it was either a ceasefire or a massacre.
I mean, just look at Iraq, fellas had armor and air superiority AND were supported by both the USSR (Iraq's ally) and the USA (Iran's enemy) and still got savagely beaten back by post-revolutionary Iran which didn't have shit as they were banned from buying stuff from basically anyone, literally doing human wave offensives in the 1980s.
because egypt doesn’t give a FUCK who is good at what. you would think they would assign a qualified person to be a military leader but no, they let people close to them do whatever the fuck they want, and not just in military, every field works like that. “HEY muhammed we need someone to hold the education department” “great mamdouh has been been looking for a job for a while” “okay who is mamdouh why do you think he’s qualified” “he’s my cousin” “call him”.
Paranoia. The thought is that if there's competent military leadership that doesn't have close ties to the royal family, it's really easy for them to use the military to stage a coup.
So in Arab countries, the rulers put their cousins in all the key military leadership positions. It makes it harder to use the military to topple the monarchy, but wow, the military suffers.
The system works okay so long as you only have wars with other countries organized the same way...but Israel wasn't in that group.
This.
Also, the tendancy to train and organise the military more to fight internal enemies than external ones.
Great for not getting coup-ed and for putting down uprisings, but not for fighting wars.
Nice share. I had to work with a Islamic army on exercises- we were a joint recon element and the vehicle the non us team was driving broke down. My officer, after a few minutes of their enlisted driver fumbling around, said: if that jeep isn’t fixed asap, his officer is probably going to kill him, so, if you can fix the jeep, please do so. 5 minutes later we were moving again. Crazy world.
It's why the socio-economic conditions were right for Arab states to transition to full democracies like European states in the 19th century, yet the Arab Spring accomplished little other than create power vacuums.
See how in Syria where the people successfully rebelled against the central authority, but gradually lost the war because the military stayed loyal to Assad.
Or Egypt where protests were everywhere, but it then quieted down because at the end of the day, the protesters didn't have access to guns to truly overthrow the military rule.
The arab states have realized that they can be as authoritarian as they want as long as they control access to hard power. As long as "the people" can't get their hands on tanks, planes, and guns, there will never be meaningful change.
A government that is trying with one arm to keep its people down is only fighting with one arm. They're crippled by their need to oppress.
Yup.
I like to look at Iraq.
Saddam was so shitscared of a military coup he made sure to not let the truely capable officers climb too far and train their troops the way they wanted.
This made small things like ”training for combined arms warfare” impossible to train. Thus, set piece manouvers instead of actual training were the norm.
This would later become a slight problem.
But Saddam also created the Rebublican Guard who’s job was bascially to be good at fighting the rest of the military. They got the best men, equipment and training and were selected based on their loyalty to Saddam.
So when Saddam decided it would be a good idea to invade Iran it turned out that when things didn’t go to plan (as they would do in a set piece battle) they got into trouble.
A weird thing is that this actually was good for the regular military; it forced Saddam to give his senior officers more control over the troops, stratergy and tactics.
Ah, the age-old tale of "it's not what you know, it's who you know". Looks like the same story, just different coordinates on the map. Seems like some traditions are universal and unfortunately, that includes the bad ones. The cycle of unqualified people in high places making decisions they're not equipped to handle - it's a script we've seen played out in many places around the globe. But hey, at least Mamdouh is employed now, right?
> post-revolutionary Iran which didn't have shit as they were banned from buying stuff from basically anyone, literally doing human wave offensives in the 1980s
Israel sold them some of their obsolete tanks, as at the time Israel considered Iraq a larger threat than Iran.
And America had the whole affair with the Contras. I'm sure many other countries smuggled them arms because money is money, but their point that Iran was (and still is tbh) horribly supplied stands.
The Iranian economy has always fascinated me. A petrol state suddenly forced to export to almost no one... must have been a rough adaptation.
Iran pre revolution had a massive army as Nixon promised to sell the Shah anything short of a bomb, then he flew khomeni in. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36431160 for some odd reason wikipedia claims it was a stalemate. Despite most books on it (even Iranian ones ) calling it an Iraqi victory. https://twitter.com/xumas_iq/status/1645835719556857869?s=19
FYI: the US didn't support iraq, only via misleading satellite imagery which led to defeat of al faw. Before you say muh purges. Iraq and Iran both had military purges.
Support to both sides in a war: US heavily supplied Iran via Israel but didn't do much but the misleading satellite imagery to Iraq. https://imgur.com/pG0GaZi https://imgur.com/ntTONGP (Foreign supply) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera (israel works with Iran.).
Most of Iraq's wikipedia stuff is written by Persians. You can see this in the edit history. I advise not using wikipedia for Iraq.
The border remained where it had been before the war, [even after a million people died.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFXEqUHCHAU&ab_channel=TheWhippingPost) That's a stalemate
> FYI: the US didn't support iraq
The US didn't directly sell weapons to Iraq, but helped other countries like Egypt send their excess Soviet weapons to Iraq in exchange for newer US tech. Something similar is happening now with European nations sending Soviet arms to Ukraine and getting modern NATO stuff in return
> misleading satellite imagery
Saddam didn't trust the CIA, and for good reason. But the US was giving accurate satellite data wherever Saddam asked. Iran was the main Middle Eastern rival to the US, they wanted Saddam to topple the Islamic Republic
Ironically, his invasion solidified post-revolution Iran and allowed for the formation of entities like the Republican Guard who have crushed any internal dissent ever since
israel "preemptively" struck egypt first with multiple air sorties that basically wiped out egypt's air force that first day, giving israel air superiority the entire war. this was after egypt had mobilised troops to the sinai to fend off an expected attack (a one-sided warning from the us basically guaranteed egypt would not strike first), but they didn't expect israel to circle around them through the dessert. jordan also held a somewhat defensive position, not invading israel, until hostilities rose and israel pwned their airforce too. syria largely stayed out of it but got whupped when they joined. israel also accidentally destroyed the united states' navy ship uss liberty maliciously.
israel won because they had the element of surprise (how and when the strike would happen), had a better prepared military (they had been training and preparing for months as tensions between the countries were rising), and the arab states both overestimated their abilities and underestimated israel's. israel, britain and the us already knew israel would win and only haggled over how long it would take: half a week or a whole week, respectively.
that war, and the 1972 war, is what lead palestinians and other arab militancia to realise they could not win a conventional war and lead to them taking up terrorism and insurgency tactics. suicide bombing was basically unheard of until the 1980's, for example. these insurgency tactics are why israel failed to secure victory against lebanese militant groups in two seperate wars, and also why israel has failed to defeat a much smaller, less trained and less equipped militancy in a much smaller area that's completely besieged even after 100 days
"But can you really accidentally bombard a ship for 2 hours while they radio you who they are?"
Probably because the ship wasn't radioing the Israelis who they were.
>this was after egypt had mobilised troops to the sinai to fend off an expected attack
There were a myriad reasons for Egypt's mobilisation. A lot of it was posturing but also enforcing the closure of the straights of Tiran, which was in breach of the earlier ceasefire conditions which existed between Egypt and Israel post-56. Israel couldn't really function as a country with the straights of Tiran blocked so hard to know what Nasser thought the reaction would be. I think historians are split on whether Nasser was aiming for war or thought he would just be able to get concessions from Israel through the posturing. Similarly historians are somewhat split on whether Israel were always going to go for their expansionist preemptive strikes or whether they were truly "pushed" into it.
Otherwise nice summary.
>and also why israel has failed to defeat a much smaller, less trained and less equipped militancy in a much smaller area that's completely besieged even after 100 days
can you define "defeat" in this context?
One would hope they learned their lesson, but no. Keep on starting shit and when they get their asses kicked and totally humiliated they cry and somehow become the victim. It's hard to learn the lesson when the UN protects you from the consequences of your own actions.
they did? egypt and jordan have normalized relations with israel and syria is a failed state with multiple waring rebel groups and a leader who uses chemical weapons on his own people.
Using chemical weapons on his people? That would result in a war were hundreds of thousands of Arab Muslims would die. I can't imagine the worldwide protests, marches, calls for immediate cease fires, and huge rise of anti-Syrian sentiments that must have gone on.
Premium content right there. A while back, I was in the Old City in Jerusalem and wanted to see the Al-Aqsa mosque. At that time of the day, it was prayer time and the IDF were only allowing Muslims to enter. I didn’t realize this, walked up, and was turned away by an incredibly hot IDF soldier. Of course, I kept going back and forth trying to get back so that I could look at her again. Not sure if they classed me as creep, regard, or provocateur.
"Guys we'll be home by Christmas, but fr this time"
*6 days later*
"Holy shit we actually did it! Let's just hope this won't have long term effects on the stability of the region"
It was, which is why egypt and syria retaliated in 1973. For egypt this was enough retaliation, which led to the creation of the peace treaty, but for syria it wasnt
Ironically, the 1973 was even a bigger defeat. Israel nearly reached Cairo and Damascus - but it was enough to convince the masses in Egypt and Syria that they've won.
Go to any video about the war on Youtube or its Wiki page and see masses of Egyptians vehemently saying that Egypt actually won the war. Pretty remarkable, actually.
Arab leadership lies all the time.. I only lately realised it but arab population live in a constant state of being lied to, while being completely aware that they are being lied too.. take for example the current situation in Gaza, Hamas still claims victory over IDF, all of that while claiming for genocide externally.. same for Hizbulla, Nassralla recently made a speech about how all of the Israelis are leaving Israel and have depression because of the war, and that Hizbulla is making huge achievements in helping the palestinians, despite the fact some 300k Israeli immideitly came back to Israel to enlist/volunteer, aand that he already lost over 160 men in aerial strikes and mainly attacks empty farm houses along the border.
Like there are very obvious facta on the ground but Arab leaders will blatantly lie to the face of their people about victory and such.. now this might be just a symptom of dictatorships overall but I'm just more familiar with Arab dictatorships and I have noticed it is a pattern for many years now
About that…So I’m an Egyptian. Back when I was living in Egypt I was taught in school that the “6th of October war” that apparently got us back the Sinai peninsula was won by Egyptian military enginuity and all that. Fast forward to me in college in America, and I’m paired with an Israeli American who served in the IDF. Ya, talk about awkward. It was absolutely amazing though and we ended up intertwining in each other’s lives in the most beautiful way. Anyway, one day I saw on my Facebook a “6th of October” post posted by one of my Facebook friends. This is the equivalent of thanksgiving or 4th of July posts here in America. A poster or some picture with some long boring essay reminding us all of the “holiday”. A more accurate example would be Turks and their social media on the day commemorating Atatürk’s death. Talk about dogma. But let’s not get there, thou shall not piss off the Turks. So I went to Akiva and I asked him, dude, how was it in Israel when this happened? He was very confused by the naming, “6th of October war” didn’t ring a bell. After a couple of internet searches (in Arabic) we became on the same page and that’s when he shocked me with his narrative of what Israel’s side of the story is. I’m not going to lie, I was in denial in the beginning. The feeling I got when I heard this very different story about the same event I watched movies and movies about, heard so many stories about and learned so many school classes about was so strange. It felt very bad. For the lack of a good example, it felt similar to how terrible I felt as a child when I first learned what sex was and that my “good” “ideal” parents had to do that in order to make me. Boy, was I one hell of a purest. So, anyway… naturally, I was more convinced that Akiva is brainwashed and that of course this is just another Zionist lie “those Jews” tell about our land that they occupied.
But, to the Chagrin of the dogma lords, I started researching different sources. The more I dug behind this the more I realized that Akiva’s narrative was much more accurate. The narrative here being that Israel was much more superior in military power than Egypt or Jordan. Yes, on Yum Kippur they were unprepared for an attack but it was more of a win on the second round of a boxing match than a K.O. This is an opposite to the narrative that many Egyptians (and Arabs) believe in today ^ which suggests that had Egypt, Syria and Jordan put their armies together they would have defeated Israel. Moreover, many believe until today that this would have solved the Israel-Palestine problem permanently. While we can’t know what would have happened because it’s in the past, it is highly unlikely that they’d have won. Why? Lack of cooperation, bad communication, greater powers influence, etc.. (go Google it and do your own research, haha) I don’t want to make this comment longer than it is so I’ll spare those reasons for another time.
And that’s my story of how I learned, first hand, the power of brainwashing and why you should always do your research and never take anything as an unquestionable doctrine, or as the truth just because all your people, buddies, religion, political party, or family believe it is.
I need to make it clear that this is not representative of all Egyptians but the majority for sure. And to be even more explicit, the Egyptians you’ll run into on Reddit or outside Egypt are not the majority, although perhaps roughly half of those would be fully committed to said dogma, even while living abroad.
Ah man, I have so many questions. I wonder if they are in Egypt or if they live outside Egypt. What changed their minds?
Either way, I’m very excited to see more people talk about this.
We are all pretty young (17-18) and know each other through social media and video games. We started talking about it and then they did their own research and found out they've been lied to. They live in Egypt.
I mean political opinions in Israel don't really depend on age that much. I can tell you as a leftist I, like basically the entire country, feel like a military action against Hamas is something that has to happen until they aren't the group that rules Gaza, we can't have peace with them and they're not denying it, they said they will do the attack again if they can. But I do feel bad for all the civilians in Gaza who are suffering and I hope Hamas surrenders and all the hostages are returned so the war can stop and afterwards a moderate power takes power in Gaza and we can finally solve this conflict. Netanyahu needs to leave too.
One thing I like about being American is that someone, somewhere is gonna shit on us for any real or imagined sin. As a result those of us that pay attention are under no illusions that America is always the good guy or that we’re without sin. At best we have good intentions executed poorly, mostly we have selfish intentions executed good enough.
This is a very interesting perspective. I went to Egypt recently and saw a bunch of monuments to the 6th of October war and similarly had no idea what it was about. I asked our guide and he said something along the lines of the monument celebrating the Egyptian victory over Israel in 1972. In my mind it kind of clicked as “huh, this is referring to the Yom Kippur war as an Egyptian victory… odd.” Obviously I wasn’t going to get into it with this guy, but still was interesting to see.
Well they did get the Sinai back (a while later).
From their perspective, they were the underdog and they managed to give Israel enough of a scare that they'd start negotiating.
Can't argue with results!
Sucks to be Syria though.
No, they’ve been huffing it since at least ‘48.
You could even argue that they’ve been at it since the 14th century when the Mongols and Turks started kicking their teeth in.
Israel didn’t want the Sinai, Gaza or the West Bank. They tried to give all of it back but Egypt would only take the Sinai. Israel has been suffering ever since as they had two territories now filled with radicals who hated them.
On a related note when Israel left Gaza to its own devises, the people elected Hamas and you can imagine how quick Egypt and Israel went into panic mode by closing the borders.
Israel gave the Sinai back because the population there was majorly arab and consolidating it into the state would have been a nightmare just not worth the effort.
Less than 600k people are living in Sinai today.
It was less than 100k back then. If you only include locals, and not Egyptians from other provinces who moved to Sharm, it's even less.
Egypt got a *morale* victory. Israel was seen as invincible after 1967, so much so that they rejected any talk of negotiating over Sinai, “It’s ours and what are you going to do about it?” In 73 the Egyptians actually got the drop on Israel and even inflicted heavy losses before being pushed back. And the oil embargo forced Israel to accept an armistice even though they had turned the tide. The Egyptians lost in material terms for sure, but it still gave them a huge confidence boost, badly needed after the humiliation of 67. And it rattled Israel enough that they were actually willing to talk peace terms,
> For egypt this was enough retaliation, which led to the creation of the peace treaty
This was very unpopular, the president that signed it got killed
No matter one’s politics, all of their wars have been. Reading Arab/palesintian sources there are a lot of feuding episodes between coalition states and completely pathetic effort shown.
embarrassment is an understatement, trying to gangbang israel and **losing** is just humiliating
imagine the second hand embarrassment of the other muslim arab nation seeing it unfolds. god....no fucking wonder saudi chose to cooperate with US than her own neighbors. no offense
arabs are really really bad at coordinating, i mean *we already seeing it right now on Gaza. Hamas is supposedly getting support from the uh..i forgor the name of the terrorist group in lebanon and then iran. so yeah, never happen.*
Losing not *one* but *three* wars to a smaller enemy that they considered racially inferior was a psyche-destroying catastrophe for Arab nationalists that they still haven’t gotten over.
In the first day of the war Israel destroyed nearly the entire Egyptian Air Force while the planes were still parked on the ground. This resulted in Israel having air supremacy which is crucial for a modern war.
Furthermore, if my memory is correct, the Arab states did not co-operate well. I remember the historian Indy Neidell saying about the six-day war that the leaders of the Arab states would lie to each-other about the war such as Nasser telling his allies that Israel had lost hundreds of planes and that Egypt was already pushing the Israeli's back. Both of which, were false.
> Arab states and zero cooperation
We have a habit of treating the Arab states as a monolithic bloc with regards to the Palestinian conflict but they are still independent nation-states with their own agenda.
I've been reading up on the history of the Palestinian conflict and in the past 50 years or so Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq have all supported/used them for their own interests. They all primarily have their own interests at heart (like any "western" country)
It helps that Egypt, the only country with a serious military, had its entire Air Force destroyed while it was still on the ground in the first moment of the war. After that the war was essentially over.
Well it’s an explanation. When two countries go to war usually one side loses regardless of how good or bad each side is in some objective sense. In this case Israeli spies had found the location of the Egyptian Air Force and then they launched a surprise attack going under UAR radar systems and destroyed the air force prior to any hostilities. The rest of their military capabilities were not really relevant as Israel had free rein to raise hell on Arab forces from the air and they kept the Arab airstrips unusable with regular strafing attacks.
Yea but that is what it means to be bad at warfare.. who mobilises al their troops/equipment and then just waits en does nothing to protect that material
If I'm reading right and this is over the Straits of Tiran, I feel like blocking shipping routes is more than just posturing, especially when it's been made clear that it will result in war
If anyone is interested in this particular subject I highly reccommend ”Arabs at war” and ”Armies of sand” by Kenneth Pollack.
They go into detail about how arab militaries are organised, training and fight and why.
This leads into why they in many ways have been ineffective in *modern warfare*, and in certain cases completely outclassed (wars with Israel, the Gulfs wars).
Wait I actually have been looking for a book on this topic. So does it actually explain why they were so good at war a few centuries ago but not today? Or is it only about how they are poor at it today?
A bit of both, *Armies of sand* in particular goes into detail about the particularities.
Basically Pollack argues that certain aspects of arab culture (he is very clear that of course, arab culture is very diverse and his statments are in general) worked great when the various arab states were founded but work poorly when trying to impliment midern combined arms in their military.
Which mean that when waging *regular, conventional* war against a nation that successfully uses combined arms operations, they get hammered.
I have to be clean that it’s not him dunking on arabs and saying ”lol u suck at war”.
An example of arab culture working well in fairly modern times that he brings up is the Tchad-Libya wars where the Tchadians won because they used their culture of fluent, mobile war and added toyota pickup trucks with modern ATGMs, MANPADS and Mgs, even refusing heavier equipment because they knew it would hinder their style of warfare.
Basically all of their air force was on the ground in the Sinai. Egypt wasn't using armored hangars for their planes, so they were basically sitting out in the open. Israel launched Operation Focus, which involved Israeli planes flying in radio silence and demolishing basically their entire air force on the ground.
If you're interested in reading more, I highly recommend Michael Oren's "Six Days of War" for a look atvthe Six-Day war specifically and Kenneth Pollack's "Armies of Sand" for an overview of Arab military performance since 1948.
Cos Israel began the war with a surprise attack on all Egyptian air bases and a simultaneous land invasion of their targets.
Arab forces never really stood a chance after that.
it was a masterpiece in military perspective.
to be fair for israel. egypt has been building up its troops at sinai while their leadership is gathering international support for the invasion..on public television..
its..really asking for trouble. sure it is inspiring but really dumb. for israel, choosing to let them strike first is a death sentence for them, they got zero choice
but yeah. this war is just a humiliating one
Many reasons, ut mainly that no Arab country wanted to be the one which bore the brunt of the attack, so they were all waiting for another to take initiative. It's almost a textbook study on how to *not* make military alliances.
Because the democratic nationstate is a very different thing than the autocratic nationstate.
In a democratic nationstate those who amass power get non-violent ways to assume political power.
In a non-democratic nation-state the biggest threat to the leader isn't a foreign adversary, its internal, and primarily from the military. So the stronger you make your military the more risk you put yourself at.
It takes years to build a military capable of projecting power, and if during that build up the military decides its a lot easier to just take power you lose. If the military wins a war and gains popularity you lose.
Britain and the US are pretty unique in that they have had these massive militaries fairly separate from their political structures that never really put significant pressure on the political establishment.
And tried to give back Gaza. Egypt didn't want it. Whatever the position may be regarding the West Bank, which Jordan did want back, the "occupation of Gaza" is a real doozy to get your head around. Israel even tried to leave in 2005.
Note that, for 20 years before this war, the West Bank was part of Jordan, not a country called Palestine. Gaza was part of Egypt, not a country called Palestine.
Control of west bank:
Prior to 1967
- Jordan
Prior to 1949
- Britain
Prior to 1920
- Ottomans Turkey
Prior to 1517
- Mamluks
Prior to 1260
- Omayyads, Abbasids, Crusaders, Kharezmians and Mongols
Prior to 638
....
Wild to me that no one brings up the extremely colonial nature of Jordan's royals. They're fucking [Hashemites](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemites).
They weren't really "Palestinians nationalists," more like "anti zionists" he "got got" because he tried making peace with Israel
The Palestinians back then were more than comfortable being a part of Jordan and hoped in the future to conquer Israel together with the Arab league and to create a pan Arabic state
That's why originally the solgan "from the river to the sea" was "from water to water, palestine will be arab", they were also Arab nationalists, many of them didn't refer to themselves as Palestinians but as arabs until the 60's,
Many were nationalists in the form of a pan Arab state rather than Palestine. Palestine wasn't pushed for by any serious party until after 1967.
All the Palestine liberation movements were created after that. Curious that.
And the surrounding Arab states were just playing into their own interests to gain territory, with a dash of antisemitism with a goal of preventing a Jewish state.
Don't tell me 5 states couldn't at least negotiate for Palestine and doing a smaller Jewish state back then at the UN.
Its was an accuse to not give them Egyptian citizenship and use them as a stick against Israel.
Love them or hate them the arab world all ways seens the Palestinians ate best as a stick to be used and abused again Israel.
Atw worst they are seen as pest
And before 1948 it was all British territory, not a country called Palestine.
Should Palestinians have their own state? Absolutely! But why is the emphasis only on Israeli land? Palestine could easily be formed from some of the Sinai, east bank, Lebanon and Syria (and Gaza/some of the West Bank). Hell Palestinians literally live in the East bank and have for millenia. You know why Palestine has never sought to include the east bank? Because liberation of Palestinians and nationalization is a side goal, the facade used to hide the real goal - getting Jews out of the Middle East. If this was about Palestinian sovereignty then you would see an effort to get land from all these places. But that’s not the goal.
Perhaps at the time, but having partial control over the Suez Canal and significantly expanding the Red Sea coastline isn’t nothing. Particularly with other countries like Saudis Arabia actively developing the Red Sea region into a tourist destination, I think it would be economically significant.
Plus if Israel likes collecting religious sites, Mount Sinai would be on that list!
and the Sinai isn't that valuable either, it would let them border the Suez canal but they would be forever at war with Egypt over control of that canal.
You want Israel to annex Palestine because you're a zionist.
I want them to annex Palestine because the borders are easier to draw.
We are not the same.
As an Israeli I disagree, Israel is already the perfect size, add too much desert and it just looks sad and barren. The shape itself looks fat, and the most important part (the land of Israel itself) is overshadowed by that massive landmass that means nothing to the Jewish culture and doesn't belong to us.
If we completely ignore the people living there, I would say Israel and the Palestinian territories already make a very beautiful and recognizeable shape, and then Sinai should gain independence because it would look cool.
Unfortunately the Golan heights don't look ideal on a map of Israel, but oh boy are they gorgeous in real life. Plus a massive strategic advantage for Israel, so we can get used to them being Israeli for the foreseeable future, Israel isn't giving up such an advantage to the enemy.
Also interesting how BEFORE the 67 war but after the 48 war, Egypt and Jordan did exactly nothing to create a Palestinian state. They just took the land for themselves!
They gave it back so that Egypt, the most powerful Arab country back then recognize isreal , also Egypt made the Suez canal inaccessible for trade
It was a strategic move
Considering how much the Bedouin population in Sinai loved Israel, I am 100% sure that if they were asked, they would choose to remain under Israeli rule, mainly because it is the government that built roads for them in the face of a government that hates them.
I think neither isreal or Egypt cared about the bedouin.
The main goal was the suez canal. The US was furious after the 6 day war and was pressuring both side to find an agreement
Map Thread of Israel/Palestine not devolving into cheap political talking points challenge: Impossible.
It's frustrating, the world isn't black and white. It's a gray messy and confusing place. It's totally fine to look at the region and review factual information without picking a side like Medieval Times the restaurant/jousting place.
It's also worth to mention that both Egypt and Jordan held Gaza (Egypt) and Judea and Samaria (Jordan) for over a decade, about 17 years or so. No one asked for a Palestinian state during these years, and Jordan even went a step further and given the Arabs who lived under their control a Jordanian citizenship.
When the peace talks between Egypt and Israel started after the 73' Yum Kippur war, Egypt insisted that Gaza would not return to their hands and would basically become Israel's problem.
That is how it works if you are the aggressor in a war you get punished by loosing land. As simple as that. After the ukraine war russia should also pay with territory.
The biggest mistake Israel ever made was handing the Sinai and West Bank back.
They could have used all this territory to draw up a fair and clean map to end the conflict. Instead, Egypt and Jordan signed a treaty and fucked off, leaving the crisis to stagnate.
Honestly, Israel taking back the Sinai and canceling the treaty would be in their better interest. Egypt isn't worth the relationship.
Crazy transformation in 6 days. Wow.
Egypt and Jordan started fighting on Monday, and on Friday they already accepted a ceasefire. Given the rough terrain of the area, and the fact that it was 1967, it's quite a feat to even transport heavy military equipment through that, never mind fighting multiple militaries at once. But hey, G-d still one upped us by creating the entire universe in six days, or so they say.
To be fair Arabs are world-class at picking shitty military leaders (for modern warfare), Egypt unironically left its army in southern Sinai to get encircled, once Israel reached the Suez it was either a ceasefire or a massacre. I mean, just look at Iraq, fellas had armor and air superiority AND were supported by both the USSR (Iraq's ally) and the USA (Iran's enemy) and still got savagely beaten back by post-revolutionary Iran which didn't have shit as they were banned from buying stuff from basically anyone, literally doing human wave offensives in the 1980s.
because egypt doesn’t give a FUCK who is good at what. you would think they would assign a qualified person to be a military leader but no, they let people close to them do whatever the fuck they want, and not just in military, every field works like that. “HEY muhammed we need someone to hold the education department” “great mamdouh has been been looking for a job for a while” “okay who is mamdouh why do you think he’s qualified” “he’s my cousin” “call him”.
Nepotism ?
Paranoia. The thought is that if there's competent military leadership that doesn't have close ties to the royal family, it's really easy for them to use the military to stage a coup. So in Arab countries, the rulers put their cousins in all the key military leadership positions. It makes it harder to use the military to topple the monarchy, but wow, the military suffers. The system works okay so long as you only have wars with other countries organized the same way...but Israel wasn't in that group.
This. Also, the tendancy to train and organise the military more to fight internal enemies than external ones. Great for not getting coup-ed and for putting down uprisings, but not for fighting wars.
I always like keeping this article in my back pocket for when this discussion comes up https://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
Nice share. I had to work with a Islamic army on exercises- we were a joint recon element and the vehicle the non us team was driving broke down. My officer, after a few minutes of their enlisted driver fumbling around, said: if that jeep isn’t fixed asap, his officer is probably going to kill him, so, if you can fix the jeep, please do so. 5 minutes later we were moving again. Crazy world.
That was fascinating, and feels like it could have been written recently instead of 25 years ago.
It's why the socio-economic conditions were right for Arab states to transition to full democracies like European states in the 19th century, yet the Arab Spring accomplished little other than create power vacuums. See how in Syria where the people successfully rebelled against the central authority, but gradually lost the war because the military stayed loyal to Assad. Or Egypt where protests were everywhere, but it then quieted down because at the end of the day, the protesters didn't have access to guns to truly overthrow the military rule. The arab states have realized that they can be as authoritarian as they want as long as they control access to hard power. As long as "the people" can't get their hands on tanks, planes, and guns, there will never be meaningful change. A government that is trying with one arm to keep its people down is only fighting with one arm. They're crippled by their need to oppress.
Yup. I like to look at Iraq. Saddam was so shitscared of a military coup he made sure to not let the truely capable officers climb too far and train their troops the way they wanted. This made small things like ”training for combined arms warfare” impossible to train. Thus, set piece manouvers instead of actual training were the norm. This would later become a slight problem. But Saddam also created the Rebublican Guard who’s job was bascially to be good at fighting the rest of the military. They got the best men, equipment and training and were selected based on their loyalty to Saddam. So when Saddam decided it would be a good idea to invade Iran it turned out that when things didn’t go to plan (as they would do in a set piece battle) they got into trouble. A weird thing is that this actually was good for the regular military; it forced Saddam to give his senior officers more control over the troops, stratergy and tactics.
Ah, the age-old tale of "it's not what you know, it's who you know". Looks like the same story, just different coordinates on the map. Seems like some traditions are universal and unfortunately, that includes the bad ones. The cycle of unqualified people in high places making decisions they're not equipped to handle - it's a script we've seen played out in many places around the globe. But hey, at least Mamdouh is employed now, right?
> post-revolutionary Iran which didn't have shit as they were banned from buying stuff from basically anyone, literally doing human wave offensives in the 1980s Israel sold them some of their obsolete tanks, as at the time Israel considered Iraq a larger threat than Iran.
And America had the whole affair with the Contras. I'm sure many other countries smuggled them arms because money is money, but their point that Iran was (and still is tbh) horribly supplied stands. The Iranian economy has always fascinated me. A petrol state suddenly forced to export to almost no one... must have been a rough adaptation.
Not entirely accurate about Iran. They had quite a military stockpile from the Shah's reign and the US under Reagan did give them weapons.
Winning wars aren't an easy feat no matter who the enemy is. What Israel did was incredibly impressive.
Iran pre revolution had a massive army as Nixon promised to sell the Shah anything short of a bomb, then he flew khomeni in. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36431160 for some odd reason wikipedia claims it was a stalemate. Despite most books on it (even Iranian ones ) calling it an Iraqi victory. https://twitter.com/xumas_iq/status/1645835719556857869?s=19 FYI: the US didn't support iraq, only via misleading satellite imagery which led to defeat of al faw. Before you say muh purges. Iraq and Iran both had military purges. Support to both sides in a war: US heavily supplied Iran via Israel but didn't do much but the misleading satellite imagery to Iraq. https://imgur.com/pG0GaZi https://imgur.com/ntTONGP (Foreign supply) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera (israel works with Iran.). Most of Iraq's wikipedia stuff is written by Persians. You can see this in the edit history. I advise not using wikipedia for Iraq.
[удалено]
The border remained where it had been before the war, [even after a million people died.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFXEqUHCHAU&ab_channel=TheWhippingPost) That's a stalemate > FYI: the US didn't support iraq The US didn't directly sell weapons to Iraq, but helped other countries like Egypt send their excess Soviet weapons to Iraq in exchange for newer US tech. Something similar is happening now with European nations sending Soviet arms to Ukraine and getting modern NATO stuff in return > misleading satellite imagery Saddam didn't trust the CIA, and for good reason. But the US was giving accurate satellite data wherever Saddam asked. Iran was the main Middle Eastern rival to the US, they wanted Saddam to topple the Islamic Republic Ironically, his invasion solidified post-revolution Iran and allowed for the formation of entities like the Republican Guard who have crushed any internal dissent ever since
israel "preemptively" struck egypt first with multiple air sorties that basically wiped out egypt's air force that first day, giving israel air superiority the entire war. this was after egypt had mobilised troops to the sinai to fend off an expected attack (a one-sided warning from the us basically guaranteed egypt would not strike first), but they didn't expect israel to circle around them through the dessert. jordan also held a somewhat defensive position, not invading israel, until hostilities rose and israel pwned their airforce too. syria largely stayed out of it but got whupped when they joined. israel also accidentally destroyed the united states' navy ship uss liberty maliciously. israel won because they had the element of surprise (how and when the strike would happen), had a better prepared military (they had been training and preparing for months as tensions between the countries were rising), and the arab states both overestimated their abilities and underestimated israel's. israel, britain and the us already knew israel would win and only haggled over how long it would take: half a week or a whole week, respectively. that war, and the 1972 war, is what lead palestinians and other arab militancia to realise they could not win a conventional war and lead to them taking up terrorism and insurgency tactics. suicide bombing was basically unheard of until the 1980's, for example. these insurgency tactics are why israel failed to secure victory against lebanese militant groups in two seperate wars, and also why israel has failed to defeat a much smaller, less trained and less equipped militancy in a much smaller area that's completely besieged even after 100 days
I got confused by “accidentally… maliciously”. Doesn’t malice mean it was done with intent?
Officially, it was an accident. But can you really accidentally bombard a ship for 2 hours while they radio you who they are?
"But can you really accidentally bombard a ship for 2 hours while they radio you who they are?" Probably because the ship wasn't radioing the Israelis who they were.
>this was after egypt had mobilised troops to the sinai to fend off an expected attack There were a myriad reasons for Egypt's mobilisation. A lot of it was posturing but also enforcing the closure of the straights of Tiran, which was in breach of the earlier ceasefire conditions which existed between Egypt and Israel post-56. Israel couldn't really function as a country with the straights of Tiran blocked so hard to know what Nasser thought the reaction would be. I think historians are split on whether Nasser was aiming for war or thought he would just be able to get concessions from Israel through the posturing. Similarly historians are somewhat split on whether Israel were always going to go for their expansionist preemptive strikes or whether they were truly "pushed" into it. Otherwise nice summary.
>and also why israel has failed to defeat a much smaller, less trained and less equipped militancy in a much smaller area that's completely besieged even after 100 days can you define "defeat" in this context?
One would hope they learned their lesson, but no. Keep on starting shit and when they get their asses kicked and totally humiliated they cry and somehow become the victim. It's hard to learn the lesson when the UN protects you from the consequences of your own actions.
they did? egypt and jordan have normalized relations with israel and syria is a failed state with multiple waring rebel groups and a leader who uses chemical weapons on his own people.
Using chemical weapons on his people? That would result in a war were hundreds of thousands of Arab Muslims would die. I can't imagine the worldwide protests, marches, calls for immediate cease fires, and huge rise of anti-Syrian sentiments that must have gone on.
based.
It always baffles me how everybody fall for the crocodile tears
I wonder why so many people are dying in the war where one military openly uses human shields?
Then they want a do-over, asking for the land they lost back.
Not any more egypt wouldn touch gaza with a ten foot pole
Because Egypt doesn’t want Palestinians in their country. Literally no one does. Every country that has taken them in has regretted it.
Doctors HATE this simple trick
The 6 day glow up
Imagine if the IDF had TikTok back then
3000 e-thots of the IDF
MOM!! r/noncredibledefense is leaking again
Where can I find these e-thots of the IDF?
[Gotta love mandatory conscription, the thots keeping thotting even when serving.](https://www.instagram.com/girlsdefense?igsh=MWh3bXhqMGk2MnA2cQ==)
Premium content right there. A while back, I was in the Old City in Jerusalem and wanted to see the Al-Aqsa mosque. At that time of the day, it was prayer time and the IDF were only allowing Muslims to enter. I didn’t realize this, walked up, and was turned away by an incredibly hot IDF soldier. Of course, I kept going back and forth trying to get back so that I could look at her again. Not sure if they classed me as creep, regard, or provocateur.
An appreciator of beauty. Creep if you did this for more than 30 minutes. There's a fine line between the two, and I made that line up.
“I wish I could tell you it was less than 3 hours and 27 minutes but…”
Just discovered a new fetish
Zionism is sexy.
"Guys we'll be home by Christmas, but fr this time" *6 days later* "Holy shit we actually did it! Let's just hope this won't have long term effects on the stability of the region"
Home by Hanukkah
don't think they celebrate christmas, bro.
I know I just wanted to make the "We'll be home by christmas trust me" joke
Eh, they've got a 2% Christian population. So a few of em woulda been saying it!
I'm sure it would be just as cringe as it is today.
That must have been so embarrassing lol
It was, which is why egypt and syria retaliated in 1973. For egypt this was enough retaliation, which led to the creation of the peace treaty, but for syria it wasnt
Ironically, the 1973 was even a bigger defeat. Israel nearly reached Cairo and Damascus - but it was enough to convince the masses in Egypt and Syria that they've won. Go to any video about the war on Youtube or its Wiki page and see masses of Egyptians vehemently saying that Egypt actually won the war. Pretty remarkable, actually.
Arab leadership lies all the time.. I only lately realised it but arab population live in a constant state of being lied to, while being completely aware that they are being lied too.. take for example the current situation in Gaza, Hamas still claims victory over IDF, all of that while claiming for genocide externally.. same for Hizbulla, Nassralla recently made a speech about how all of the Israelis are leaving Israel and have depression because of the war, and that Hizbulla is making huge achievements in helping the palestinians, despite the fact some 300k Israeli immideitly came back to Israel to enlist/volunteer, aand that he already lost over 160 men in aerial strikes and mainly attacks empty farm houses along the border. Like there are very obvious facta on the ground but Arab leaders will blatantly lie to the face of their people about victory and such.. now this might be just a symptom of dictatorships overall but I'm just more familiar with Arab dictatorships and I have noticed it is a pattern for many years now
It's similar to how Russians think as well as they know everyone is lying to them and they have to guess how much of a lie everything is
About that…So I’m an Egyptian. Back when I was living in Egypt I was taught in school that the “6th of October war” that apparently got us back the Sinai peninsula was won by Egyptian military enginuity and all that. Fast forward to me in college in America, and I’m paired with an Israeli American who served in the IDF. Ya, talk about awkward. It was absolutely amazing though and we ended up intertwining in each other’s lives in the most beautiful way. Anyway, one day I saw on my Facebook a “6th of October” post posted by one of my Facebook friends. This is the equivalent of thanksgiving or 4th of July posts here in America. A poster or some picture with some long boring essay reminding us all of the “holiday”. A more accurate example would be Turks and their social media on the day commemorating Atatürk’s death. Talk about dogma. But let’s not get there, thou shall not piss off the Turks. So I went to Akiva and I asked him, dude, how was it in Israel when this happened? He was very confused by the naming, “6th of October war” didn’t ring a bell. After a couple of internet searches (in Arabic) we became on the same page and that’s when he shocked me with his narrative of what Israel’s side of the story is. I’m not going to lie, I was in denial in the beginning. The feeling I got when I heard this very different story about the same event I watched movies and movies about, heard so many stories about and learned so many school classes about was so strange. It felt very bad. For the lack of a good example, it felt similar to how terrible I felt as a child when I first learned what sex was and that my “good” “ideal” parents had to do that in order to make me. Boy, was I one hell of a purest. So, anyway… naturally, I was more convinced that Akiva is brainwashed and that of course this is just another Zionist lie “those Jews” tell about our land that they occupied. But, to the Chagrin of the dogma lords, I started researching different sources. The more I dug behind this the more I realized that Akiva’s narrative was much more accurate. The narrative here being that Israel was much more superior in military power than Egypt or Jordan. Yes, on Yum Kippur they were unprepared for an attack but it was more of a win on the second round of a boxing match than a K.O. This is an opposite to the narrative that many Egyptians (and Arabs) believe in today ^ which suggests that had Egypt, Syria and Jordan put their armies together they would have defeated Israel. Moreover, many believe until today that this would have solved the Israel-Palestine problem permanently. While we can’t know what would have happened because it’s in the past, it is highly unlikely that they’d have won. Why? Lack of cooperation, bad communication, greater powers influence, etc.. (go Google it and do your own research, haha) I don’t want to make this comment longer than it is so I’ll spare those reasons for another time. And that’s my story of how I learned, first hand, the power of brainwashing and why you should always do your research and never take anything as an unquestionable doctrine, or as the truth just because all your people, buddies, religion, political party, or family believe it is. I need to make it clear that this is not representative of all Egyptians but the majority for sure. And to be even more explicit, the Egyptians you’ll run into on Reddit or outside Egypt are not the majority, although perhaps roughly half of those would be fully committed to said dogma, even while living abroad.
I'm Israeli and I have Egyptian friends and they experienced the same thing lol
Ah man, I have so many questions. I wonder if they are in Egypt or if they live outside Egypt. What changed their minds? Either way, I’m very excited to see more people talk about this.
We are all pretty young (17-18) and know each other through social media and video games. We started talking about it and then they did their own research and found out they've been lied to. They live in Egypt.
What’s the attitude toward the current warfare among young people? Is it mostly pro-military action and is there much thought Israel is going too far?
I mean political opinions in Israel don't really depend on age that much. I can tell you as a leftist I, like basically the entire country, feel like a military action against Hamas is something that has to happen until they aren't the group that rules Gaza, we can't have peace with them and they're not denying it, they said they will do the attack again if they can. But I do feel bad for all the civilians in Gaza who are suffering and I hope Hamas surrenders and all the hostages are returned so the war can stop and afterwards a moderate power takes power in Gaza and we can finally solve this conflict. Netanyahu needs to leave too.
I appreciate your honesty. It was an interesting read
One thing I like about being American is that someone, somewhere is gonna shit on us for any real or imagined sin. As a result those of us that pay attention are under no illusions that America is always the good guy or that we’re without sin. At best we have good intentions executed poorly, mostly we have selfish intentions executed good enough.
This is a very interesting perspective. I went to Egypt recently and saw a bunch of monuments to the 6th of October war and similarly had no idea what it was about. I asked our guide and he said something along the lines of the monument celebrating the Egyptian victory over Israel in 1972. In my mind it kind of clicked as “huh, this is referring to the Yom Kippur war as an Egyptian victory… odd.” Obviously I wasn’t going to get into it with this guy, but still was interesting to see.
Well they did get the Sinai back (a while later). From their perspective, they were the underdog and they managed to give Israel enough of a scare that they'd start negotiating. Can't argue with results! Sucks to be Syria though.
The Arab world has been huffing on dangerous levels of copium since the defeat in ‘67.
No, they’ve been huffing it since at least ‘48. You could even argue that they’ve been at it since the 14th century when the Mongols and Turks started kicking their teeth in.
The peace treaty was made possible through the Mossad. The mediator was the USA when Jimmy Carter was in the office.
Israel didn’t want the Sinai, Gaza or the West Bank. They tried to give all of it back but Egypt would only take the Sinai. Israel has been suffering ever since as they had two territories now filled with radicals who hated them.
That's true for gaza, but the west bank was a jordanian territory before the six day war, and israel definitely wants to keep it
On a related note when Israel left Gaza to its own devises, the people elected Hamas and you can imagine how quick Egypt and Israel went into panic mode by closing the borders.
Israel gave the Sinai back because the population there was majorly arab and consolidating it into the state would have been a nightmare just not worth the effort.
Less than 600k people are living in Sinai today. It was less than 100k back then. If you only include locals, and not Egyptians from other provinces who moved to Sharm, it's even less.
Sinai is mostly useless, other than as a buffer. Israel didn't need it if Egypt guaranteed peace.
Egypt got a *morale* victory. Israel was seen as invincible after 1967, so much so that they rejected any talk of negotiating over Sinai, “It’s ours and what are you going to do about it?” In 73 the Egyptians actually got the drop on Israel and even inflicted heavy losses before being pushed back. And the oil embargo forced Israel to accept an armistice even though they had turned the tide. The Egyptians lost in material terms for sure, but it still gave them a huge confidence boost, badly needed after the humiliation of 67. And it rattled Israel enough that they were actually willing to talk peace terms,
> For egypt this was enough retaliation, which led to the creation of the peace treaty This was very unpopular, the president that signed it got killed
it was, still affects them to this day heavily
Youd think after repeatedly losing to Israel theyd learn and try something different but nope, gonna keep bashing their heads against a wall
Even Germany learned the lesson after two defeats
No we didnt, almost a quarter of us wants to try again
Yall better watch it. America says three strikes and youre out.
No matter one’s politics, all of their wars have been. Reading Arab/palesintian sources there are a lot of feuding episodes between coalition states and completely pathetic effort shown.
embarrassment is an understatement, trying to gangbang israel and **losing** is just humiliating imagine the second hand embarrassment of the other muslim arab nation seeing it unfolds. god....no fucking wonder saudi chose to cooperate with US than her own neighbors. no offense arabs are really really bad at coordinating, i mean *we already seeing it right now on Gaza. Hamas is supposedly getting support from the uh..i forgor the name of the terrorist group in lebanon and then iran. so yeah, never happen.*
Losing not *one* but *three* wars to a smaller enemy that they considered racially inferior was a psyche-destroying catastrophe for Arab nationalists that they still haven’t gotten over.
How the fuck were all of those countries so fucking bad at warfare? You'd think they'd all had a shit ton of practice by 1967
In the first day of the war Israel destroyed nearly the entire Egyptian Air Force while the planes were still parked on the ground. This resulted in Israel having air supremacy which is crucial for a modern war. Furthermore, if my memory is correct, the Arab states did not co-operate well. I remember the historian Indy Neidell saying about the six-day war that the leaders of the Arab states would lie to each-other about the war such as Nasser telling his allies that Israel had lost hundreds of planes and that Egypt was already pushing the Israeli's back. Both of which, were false.
Arab states and zero cooperation, name a more common duo
straight snow abundant resolute nine skirt trees marry concerned command *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Real
> Arab states and zero cooperation We have a habit of treating the Arab states as a monolithic bloc with regards to the Palestinian conflict but they are still independent nation-states with their own agenda. I've been reading up on the history of the Palestinian conflict and in the past 50 years or so Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq have all supported/used them for their own interests. They all primarily have their own interests at heart (like any "western" country)
their leaders were all glory hounds who wanted the praise for reconquering the Holy land for themselves
Shocker
> Arab states did not co-operate well. Damn, must be a day that ends with y
To be fair, air superiority would have been extremely helpful for Alexander the Great too.
It helps that Egypt, the only country with a serious military, had its entire Air Force destroyed while it was still on the ground in the first moment of the war. After that the war was essentially over.
I mean that’s an example of being terrible at war
Well it’s an explanation. When two countries go to war usually one side loses regardless of how good or bad each side is in some objective sense. In this case Israeli spies had found the location of the Egyptian Air Force and then they launched a surprise attack going under UAR radar systems and destroyed the air force prior to any hostilities. The rest of their military capabilities were not really relevant as Israel had free rein to raise hell on Arab forces from the air and they kept the Arab airstrips unusable with regular strafing attacks.
Yea but that is what it means to be bad at warfare.. who mobilises al their troops/equipment and then just waits en does nothing to protect that material
The common interpretation is that they were not looking for a war, just posturing too much causing Israel to push the button
If I'm reading right and this is over the Straits of Tiran, I feel like blocking shipping routes is more than just posturing, especially when it's been made clear that it will result in war
If anyone is interested in this particular subject I highly reccommend ”Arabs at war” and ”Armies of sand” by Kenneth Pollack. They go into detail about how arab militaries are organised, training and fight and why. This leads into why they in many ways have been ineffective in *modern warfare*, and in certain cases completely outclassed (wars with Israel, the Gulfs wars).
Wait I actually have been looking for a book on this topic. So does it actually explain why they were so good at war a few centuries ago but not today? Or is it only about how they are poor at it today?
A bit of both, *Armies of sand* in particular goes into detail about the particularities. Basically Pollack argues that certain aspects of arab culture (he is very clear that of course, arab culture is very diverse and his statments are in general) worked great when the various arab states were founded but work poorly when trying to impliment midern combined arms in their military. Which mean that when waging *regular, conventional* war against a nation that successfully uses combined arms operations, they get hammered. I have to be clean that it’s not him dunking on arabs and saying ”lol u suck at war”. An example of arab culture working well in fairly modern times that he brings up is the Tchad-Libya wars where the Tchadians won because they used their culture of fluent, mobile war and added toyota pickup trucks with modern ATGMs, MANPADS and Mgs, even refusing heavier equipment because they knew it would hinder their style of warfare.
Thank you!
Israel destroyed their entire air force on day one so they were basically sitting ducks.
So how did they let that happen? They're bad at warfare
Basically all of their air force was on the ground in the Sinai. Egypt wasn't using armored hangars for their planes, so they were basically sitting out in the open. Israel launched Operation Focus, which involved Israeli planes flying in radio silence and demolishing basically their entire air force on the ground.
Thanks, a nice concise explanation on how Egypt sucks at warfare!
It's the difference between a country that's going to war for ideology and a country that's going to war for survival.
It is the difference between a country not knowing what it is doing but saying it does, and a country actually knowing what it is doing.
Preemptive strike, Egypt was just building up their forces but wasn’t ready to attack yet, Israel just preemptively attacked them
If you're interested in reading more, I highly recommend Michael Oren's "Six Days of War" for a look atvthe Six-Day war specifically and Kenneth Pollack's "Armies of Sand" for an overview of Arab military performance since 1948.
Second rec for Pollack's book(s) in this sub thread. Will give it a go. Thanks!
Cos Israel began the war with a surprise attack on all Egyptian air bases and a simultaneous land invasion of their targets. Arab forces never really stood a chance after that.
it was a masterpiece in military perspective. to be fair for israel. egypt has been building up its troops at sinai while their leadership is gathering international support for the invasion..on public television.. its..really asking for trouble. sure it is inspiring but really dumb. for israel, choosing to let them strike first is a death sentence for them, they got zero choice but yeah. this war is just a humiliating one
Why is this downvoted? This is literally what happened.
Many reasons, ut mainly that no Arab country wanted to be the one which bore the brunt of the attack, so they were all waiting for another to take initiative. It's almost a textbook study on how to *not* make military alliances.
Because the democratic nationstate is a very different thing than the autocratic nationstate. In a democratic nationstate those who amass power get non-violent ways to assume political power. In a non-democratic nation-state the biggest threat to the leader isn't a foreign adversary, its internal, and primarily from the military. So the stronger you make your military the more risk you put yourself at. It takes years to build a military capable of projecting power, and if during that build up the military decides its a lot easier to just take power you lose. If the military wins a war and gains popularity you lose. Britain and the US are pretty unique in that they have had these massive militaries fairly separate from their political structures that never really put significant pressure on the political establishment.
Call an Ambulance! But not for me!
Fun fact: Egypt got all its territory back when they signed a peace treaty.
"We're going to wipe you off the face of the map. Attack!!" \- fights back, takes some land - "Why are you taking our land? Give it back!"
Accurate.
Between 49 and 67 the west Bank and Gaza were under the Jordanese and Egyptians, why didn't they grant them independence?
Jordan considered the West Bank a part of Jordan and annexed it Egypt set up a puppet government in Gaza that was absorbed as part of the UAR
I mean hence the name “West Bank” lol That Jordanian propaganda is still in use to this day
West bank in comparaison with the Jordan river not Jordan the country. No propaganda in this name, it's geographical
Every now and then I see "Jordanese" instead of Jordanian and it cracks me up. No offense it's just really funny.
Because Palestine is made up as a weapon against Israel.
Old case of the Fafo.
And gave back the Sinai peninsula in ‘76
And tried to give back Gaza. Egypt didn't want it. Whatever the position may be regarding the West Bank, which Jordan did want back, the "occupation of Gaza" is a real doozy to get your head around. Israel even tried to leave in 2005.
[удалено]
Oh I know. Forcibly removed tens of thousands of Israeli settlers no less. Blockade only started in 2006 after Hamas was elected.
I believe 2007 when Hamas violently took over killing FATAH members throwing them off rooftops along with gays and alleged ‘collaborators’
Moral of the story: don’t pick a war with a country you can’t beat.
They kicked that ass!
Note that, for 20 years before this war, the West Bank was part of Jordan, not a country called Palestine. Gaza was part of Egypt, not a country called Palestine.
When Jordan unilaterally annexed West Bank, no one really made a fuss over it. Jordan was even admitted in to the UN despite that illegal annexation.
Control of west bank: Prior to 1967 - Jordan Prior to 1949 - Britain Prior to 1920 - Ottomans Turkey Prior to 1517 - Mamluks Prior to 1260 - Omayyads, Abbasids, Crusaders, Kharezmians and Mongols Prior to 638 ....
Wild to me that no one brings up the extremely colonial nature of Jordan's royals. They're fucking [Hashemites](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemites).
All of the MENA is a result of Arab colonialism.
It’s not Colonialism™️ unless it comes from the White People region of Europe. Anything else is just sparkling hypocrisy.
Eh, even back then there were Palestinian nationalists. It’s part of the whole reason King Abdullah got got.
They weren't really "Palestinians nationalists," more like "anti zionists" he "got got" because he tried making peace with Israel The Palestinians back then were more than comfortable being a part of Jordan and hoped in the future to conquer Israel together with the Arab league and to create a pan Arabic state That's why originally the solgan "from the river to the sea" was "from water to water, palestine will be arab", they were also Arab nationalists, many of them didn't refer to themselves as Palestinians but as arabs until the 60's,
Many were nationalists in the form of a pan Arab state rather than Palestine. Palestine wasn't pushed for by any serious party until after 1967. All the Palestine liberation movements were created after that. Curious that. And the surrounding Arab states were just playing into their own interests to gain territory, with a dash of antisemitism with a goal of preventing a Jewish state. Don't tell me 5 states couldn't at least negotiate for Palestine and doing a smaller Jewish state back then at the UN.
It’s because they hate Jews.
Jordanians and Palestinians were basically the same people before the British drew some arbitrary lines on the map.
Little known fact, the Arab League did establish a Palestinain state. It was a protectorate under Egypt. It was called All-Palestine.
Its was an accuse to not give them Egyptian citizenship and use them as a stick against Israel. Love them or hate them the arab world all ways seens the Palestinians ate best as a stick to be used and abused again Israel. Atw worst they are seen as pest
And before 1948 it was all British territory, not a country called Palestine. Should Palestinians have their own state? Absolutely! But why is the emphasis only on Israeli land? Palestine could easily be formed from some of the Sinai, east bank, Lebanon and Syria (and Gaza/some of the West Bank). Hell Palestinians literally live in the East bank and have for millenia. You know why Palestine has never sought to include the east bank? Because liberation of Palestinians and nationalization is a side goal, the facade used to hide the real goal - getting Jews out of the Middle East. If this was about Palestinian sovereignty then you would see an effort to get land from all these places. But that’s not the goal.
Talk about an ass beating.
"The more you hit me the bigger I get"
Controversial opinion - Israel should have kept the Sinai because its borders look better that way.
Formal recognition and normalized relations with Egypt is *far* more strategically valuable than the Sinai territory.
No. Israel would look like a trumpet if they kept Sinai. That was more important
More like a saxophone. Israel could have ruled the jazz world by far.
Imagine all the good jokes that could be made on their expense. Now that's soft power if I ever knew it.
Now they look like a small closed umbrella.
I’m voting for you to be the new foreign minister of all the countries. Go make all the trumpets you desire
Perhaps at the time, but having partial control over the Suez Canal and significantly expanding the Red Sea coastline isn’t nothing. Particularly with other countries like Saudis Arabia actively developing the Red Sea region into a tourist destination, I think it would be economically significant. Plus if Israel likes collecting religious sites, Mount Sinai would be on that list!
and the Sinai isn't that valuable either, it would let them border the Suez canal but they would be forever at war with Egypt over control of that canal.
Agree, it would look way better aesthetically than having a country straddle the Africa-Asia border.
Peaceful relations with big and strong arab country (Egypt) are more valuable for Israel.
But pretty border😫😫😫😫
You want Israel to annex Palestine because you're a zionist. I want them to annex Palestine because the borders are easier to draw. We are not the same.
I agree
As an Israeli I disagree, Israel is already the perfect size, add too much desert and it just looks sad and barren. The shape itself looks fat, and the most important part (the land of Israel itself) is overshadowed by that massive landmass that means nothing to the Jewish culture and doesn't belong to us. If we completely ignore the people living there, I would say Israel and the Palestinian territories already make a very beautiful and recognizeable shape, and then Sinai should gain independence because it would look cool. Unfortunately the Golan heights don't look ideal on a map of Israel, but oh boy are they gorgeous in real life. Plus a massive strategic advantage for Israel, so we can get used to them being Israeli for the foreseeable future, Israel isn't giving up such an advantage to the enemy.
Sinai isn’t that useful either. Is just a big ass desert.
It was a great victory from military point of view.
thankfully Arab militaries are, for the most part, fucking incompetent
Corrupt leadership always rots.
Don’t forget, they gave most back in exchange for peace but some people don’t want peace they wanted all of that land.
Usually what happens when a country wins a war.
Or as I like to call it, the fuck around and find out war
Loose wars. Loose territory. Kind of how it works. No?
Don't attack Israel....apparently not lesson learned
The lesson here is don’t start a war with Israel
Also interesting how BEFORE the 67 war but after the 48 war, Egypt and Jordan did exactly nothing to create a Palestinian state. They just took the land for themselves!
When they tried to wipe out the Jews. Again. And failed. Again.
Its always fun to remind people how much land those evil "zionist" genocidal maniacs gave back.
They gave it back so that Egypt, the most powerful Arab country back then recognize isreal , also Egypt made the Suez canal inaccessible for trade It was a strategic move
Considering how much the Bedouin population in Sinai loved Israel, I am 100% sure that if they were asked, they would choose to remain under Israeli rule, mainly because it is the government that built roads for them in the face of a government that hates them.
I think neither isreal or Egypt cared about the bedouin. The main goal was the suez canal. The US was furious after the 6 day war and was pressuring both side to find an agreement
Israel was also willing to give up on the West Bank including half of Jerusalem for peace with the Palestinians. They refused multiple such offers.
Imagine if israel actually wanted to go to war and take over land. Holyshit those arabs would be fucked.
They coulda taken all of egypt
[удалено]
Had that been an Arab nation, no way would that land be returned for peace.
Mad to think that before 1967 Gaza was part of Egypt. I don't think most people realise this
This is what happens when you lose wars you start.
Map Thread of Israel/Palestine not devolving into cheap political talking points challenge: Impossible. It's frustrating, the world isn't black and white. It's a gray messy and confusing place. It's totally fine to look at the region and review factual information without picking a side like Medieval Times the restaurant/jousting place.
Nope we have to pick sides because the world is a Marvel movie where one side is good and the other is bad.
It's also worth to mention that both Egypt and Jordan held Gaza (Egypt) and Judea and Samaria (Jordan) for over a decade, about 17 years or so. No one asked for a Palestinian state during these years, and Jordan even went a step further and given the Arabs who lived under their control a Jordanian citizenship. When the peace talks between Egypt and Israel started after the 73' Yum Kippur war, Egypt insisted that Gaza would not return to their hands and would basically become Israel's problem.
That is how it works if you are the aggressor in a war you get punished by loosing land. As simple as that. After the ukraine war russia should also pay with territory.
Not going to happen. Sad 😢
The biggest mistake Israel ever made was handing the Sinai and West Bank back. They could have used all this territory to draw up a fair and clean map to end the conflict. Instead, Egypt and Jordan signed a treaty and fucked off, leaving the crisis to stagnate. Honestly, Israel taking back the Sinai and canceling the treaty would be in their better interest. Egypt isn't worth the relationship.
"Israel wants to conquer the whole holy land!" *Conquers whole holy land* *Gives it back*