After TV interview with captured arms ship captain, PA stops denying relation to ship

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Sprayber
I'm afraid that people on both sides just are itching for full confrontation. Except for Arafat maybe. Because lets face it, either way he doesn't live much beyond a full blown arab Israeli war.

Yah, except that it likely wouldn't be an Arab-Israeli war. The PA would be annihilated before any Arab allies (If they are actual military allies?) could/would be able to intervene - not that Arab offensives against Israel have an outstanding record of success...

Arafat and the PA, by the act of forming a Government are now a nice easy (and valid) target should it ever come to hostilities. A big difference from the shadow war they fought before and were used to fighting. And now they have something to lose ...

[Sprayber]

Well, I'm sure there would be no great mourning in Damascus or Bagdad for the Palastinian people in the event of a war. They support them because they are a thorn in the side of Israel. Beyond that, I wouldn't put too much faith in brotherhood from the likes of Syria and Iraq. It seems strange to me that the one country that might have legitiment concerns about the Palastinian people wants to stay out of it. Why isn't Jordan up there with Syria and Iraq banging on the table demanding action against the evil Israelies? The Saudies seem more concerned about Arafat then the Jordanians.

[Eli]

Originally posted by faded glory
Well Sirot, the missiles were hardly an annoyance, they were an escalation. They could of done serouis damage. Make the mortars look like fire-crackers.

Like I said, all they need to do is go on a grassy hill. Set up a katuysha, take about 20 minutes, and aim it in a general direction of city 10-15 miles away. Shoot it, and run like hell, hope Israeli army doesnt come looking.

Damage done.

If Katyushas start falling on Tel-Aviv, Israel will have to disable them using all possible means. And this wont be fun for the Palestinians.

[faded glory]

Originally posted by ravagon
not that Arab offensives against Israel have an outstanding record of success...

Yes, 48, 56, and 67 were indeed routes. But the whole reason why Eygpt and Israel are at peace now, is because the arab's were finally learning how to fight. In 1973, I recall the arab's were finally on even footing with Israel (militarly and technologically) and were able to inflict tremendous damage on the Israel army... Something like 400 Israeli tanks were destroyed, 2,000 casualties and about 150 aircraft in the first 4 days of the war.

It wasnt until the Israeli's were able to recover and devolop ways of dodging those Pesky surface to air missiles did they once again regain the upper hand. And at that point, we know theres no place to hide in the desert. And then of course, under a massive air bombardment. Ariel Sharon's Tank Brigade broke through after heavy fighting and emerged on the opposite side of the Suez canal and fought a large battle at a Chinese Farm plantation for control over a bridge head over Suez.

At that point, 40,000 eygptians were cut off in Suez. And Eygpt made peace.

Israel knew, that it had to make peace with Eygpt. Otherwise, Eygpt's own booming oil-economy would eventually be able to create a war machine the Israeli's could not match. Especially with Iraqi's and Syrians Still in the picture. So there was a huge strive for peace with eygpt after yom kippor war. Otherwise, another war would have erupted 10 years down the road. And would have been even more costly then the prevouis.

[Az]

Egypt's booming oil economy ?

the only thing that kept the arabs from loosing was the elite soviet SAM crews that kept israel from establishing air superiority .

[faded glory]

Right, but Israel was worried about the success of the arabs during that war. If Eygpt, Syria, and Iraq had say attacked again 1983 some years down the road. It would have a disaster for Israel.

Ya those SAM's where a *****. But once Eygptian mechanized troops and tanks got out of the protection Zone's of the Suez. It was tough. The T-62's, were no match to your American made M-60 tanks. Plus Israeli crew's were elite and had an expierenced commanders like Sharon. But Eygpt fought very hard.....however the Syrians and Iraqi's in Golan did not fair so well.

[faded glory]

If I remember correctly, Eygpt was able to smash the Bar-Lev line on the suez garrisoned bye about 2,000 Israeli troops......and were able to push the Israeli's back about 30 miles into the Suez Desert. Except one weak spot, where Sharon attacked.

[Az]

That's right ! 2000 troops ! that's like nothing to stop about 2 armies , the 3rd and 2nd Egyptian armies. The Bar-Lev line was great , when Bar-Lev built it . but then , suddenly , less troops were stationed , and so it happened . The egyptians had the new soviet ATGMs , NATO designated AT-3 Sagger. and the T-62 were equal if not superior to the M60s . you better doublecheck on this one. their crews on the other hand...


P.S. and btw the egyptians never managed to get out of their SAM cover....

[Sirotnikov]

According to a book I read about (yeah I know, it's amusing, didn't read it, have no money to buy), in 73, Syria parked it's forces and stopped advancing into Israel because they feared a rumor about us having some kind of bombs that make a fungus like cloud when they blow up and take a town with them.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by faded glory


Yes, 48, 56, and 67 were indeed routes. But the whole reason why Eygpt and Israel are at peace now, is because the arab's were finally learning how to fight. In 1973, I recall the arab's were finally on even footing with Israel (militarly and technologically) and were able to inflict tremendous damage on the Israel army... Something like 400 Israeli tanks were destroyed, 2,000 casualties and about 150 aircraft in the first 4 days of the war.

It wasnt until the Israeli's were able to recover and devolop ways of dodging those Pesky surface to air missiles did they once again regain the upper hand. And at that point, we know theres no place to hide in the desert. And then of course, under a massive air bombardment. Ariel Sharon's Tank Brigade broke through after heavy fighting and emerged on the opposite side of the Suez canal and fought a large battle at a Chinese Farm plantation for control over a bridge head over Suez.

At that point, 40,000 eygptians were cut off in Suez. And Eygpt made peace.

Israel knew, that it had to make peace with Eygpt. Otherwise, Eygpt's own booming oil-economy would eventually be able to create a war machine the Israeli's could not match. Especially with Iraqi's and Syrians Still in the picture. So there was a huge strive for peace with eygpt after yom kippor war. Otherwise, another war would have erupted 10 years down the road. And would have been even more costly then the prevouis.

True enough. I think the important thing about the Israeli casualties/losses however was that they were able to recover. The introduction and use of (good) SAM systems (It was the SA-6 that did most of the damage IIRC?) marked one of those "breakthrough" moments in war where the offensive/defensive balance decisively changes. The Israelis had the wherewithall (and the need) to adapt and counter after initial arab successes, which (IMO anyway) contributed greatly to breaking the back (morale-wise) of the Egyptian forces. All this in response to (and in spite of) the Arabs "learning how to fight".
(And they ended up occupying a fairly large tract of Egyptian territory as a bargaining chip - Hence also knew Egypt would make peace for it )

More importantly today, they are at peace with Egypt - the most powerful of the Arab nations and have a virtual alliance with the most powerful Muslim nation. An offensive against Israel nowadays could only come from/through Jordan or Syria/Lebanon and would have to consider possible Turkish intervention, making it a very "different ballgame" (Aaaarrgh! I used an Americanism
).

[faded glory]

Actually the Syrians just sucked. And they still do.....there air defenses couldnt hit an unarmed cargo plane flying high at 300 mph..

According to a book I read about (yeah I know, it's amusing, didn't read it, have no money to buy), in 73, Syria parked it's forces and stopped advancing into Israel because they feared a rumor about us having some kind of bombs that make a fungus like cloud when they blow up and take a town with them.

Actually 100 Israeli's and a single british 6 pounder anti-tank gun held up 100 Syrian tank's for 2 days on the approach to an Israeli Farm.

And then in 1980's the Syrians threatened to "Shoot down Israeli aircraft" over Lebananon. That was a joke, Israel sent like a 1,000 unmanned drones and blasted like 300 Sam sights to Smitherines

[Faeelin]

items for the the enemies of israel to remember.
1) The US public, according to public opinion polls, supports the destruction of any nation state, or pretense thereof, that supports terrorism. Smuggling katyushas is not going to get US support.

2) Israel will use nuclear weapons if necessary. Not many in the west would shed a tear.

3) If links are found to Iraq, Saddam won't live out the year.

[chequita guevara]

From what I heard, much of the weaponry was anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry. Can't say that blame the Palistinians for wanting such things. It wouldn't stop Israel, but it would be able to bloody Goliath some.

1956 and 1967 were indeed routes, because they were suprise attacks launched by the Israelis. The Egyptians weren't expecting war either time, and in '67 were hoping merely to scare the Israelis into not and then the Eground of fighting, the Israelis were able to win because they got to pcik and choose which Arab country they were going to attack and break the truce against. Thus they could mass all their forces against the Egyptians, then the Syrians, the the Lebanese, then the Egyptians again, and finally then the Egyptians again invading the Sinai. Only the UN yanking Israel's chain (backed by the US) stopped the Israelis from taking it in '48. They tried again in '56, and finally got away with it in '67. Eventually they had to give it back because the PLO was begining to become something of an annoyance and they needed peace on their Southern border so they could mass the troops for an invasion of Lebanon (an abortive attempt was made in '77, but they got their leash yanked by the US again).

In 1973, the major difference was the Soviet SAMs based in Egypt. When the Egyptian forces finally moved beyond the range of these weapons (10 miles, not 30) to put pressure on the Israelis who were busy clobbering Syria and Iraq, they were sitting ducks for the air force. If it weren't for the USSR threatening to start WWIII (by militarily intervening to save their allies), the Israelis would have taken Damascus and Cairo (it was the US yanking Israeli's leash, having no wish to escalate this to WWIII). For his troubles, Nixon was blamed at home for trying to take attention away from Watergate.

[Natan]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
From what I heard, much of the weaponry was anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry. Can't say that blame the Palistinians for wanting such things. It wouldn't stop Israel, but it would be able to bloody Goliath some.

Knowing the "National and Islamic forces," the anti-tank weapons and Katyusha rockets will be used to attack civillian cars and neighborhoods. Didn't hear anything about anti-aircraft guns. But besides, if the Palestinians are going to start preparing for war, I think Israel has every right to preempt them and take out the PA.

1956 and 1967 were indeed routes, because they were suprise attacks launched by the Israelis. The Egyptians weren't expecting war either time, and in '67 were hoping merely to scare the Israelis into not and then the Eground of fighting, the Israelis were able to win because they got to pcik and choose which Arab country they were going to attack and break the truce against. Thus they could mass all their forces against the Egyptians, then the Syrians, the the Lebanese, then the Egyptians again, and finally then the Egyptians again invading the Sinai.

Another way to say this would be that the Egyptians and Syrians thought that killing Israeli civillians and blockading the country wouldn't result in war (actually, Nasser considered the possibility and decided he could win) and that the Arab states were never able to act in concert.

Only the UN yanking Israel's chain (backed by the US) stopped the Israelis from taking it in '48. They tried again in '56, and finally got away with it in '67. Eventually they had to give it back because the PLO was begining to become something of an annoyance and they needed peace on their Southern border so they could mass the troops for an invasion of Lebanon (an abortive attempt was made in '77, but they got their leash yanked by the US again).

The other thing is that Sadat genuinely convinced the Israelis that he was willing to make peace. And though I can't find the source right now, I think it's actually a matter of debate whether needing the troops in Lebanon was a motive for Begin's signing the Camp David accords.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
From what I heard, much of the weaponry was anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry. Can't say that blame the Palistinians for wanting such things. It wouldn't stop Israel, but it would be able to bloody Goliath some.

You'll be surprised that those "defense" weapons are used often as attack weapons.

Hezballa killed quite a few Israeli conscripts with anti-tank missiles. They aim it at bases, not tanks.

Also, 2.5 Tons of high quality explosives.

Why would they need it unless they are providing it directly to Hamas and Jihad and PFLP?