IF tommorow the Palestinian people peacably protested in the street+did so for month

[GePap]

Continuing to arm means little: what types of weapons were being given is what matters. The soviets did not give Egypt or Syria any new capabilities. Fine, they sold tanks, jets, artillery and small arms, but not siginificant new techonologies, not until after 1967 with the delivery of SA-2's and anti-tank missiles (who's effect were seen in 1973)

The French helped Israel develop nuclear weapons at diamona, and soon aftre 1967 the US gave Israel long range strike aricraft (F-4) that could deliver them.

In 1967 Israel had, just as in 1956, the strongest army in the ME, and everyone, including Israels leaders, knew it. That the public didn't does not matter. It was this obvious superiority that made Nasser think he had to detter a possible Israeli attack on Syria, since another defeat at Israeli hands (like 1956) would greatly tarnish his leadership of the Arab wolrd versus the Saudis and Iraqis, specially if the victim was Syria, a troublesome ally but ally nonetheless. [as I said earlier, the Eyptian leadership believed that Israel was on the eve of an attack on Syria].

[Edan]

The French helped Israel develop nuclear weapons at diamona

I was unaware that Israel's nuclear weapons served any purpose in the 1967 war. It certainly didn't deter the other side, and as far as I can tell, Israel didn't nuke Cairo.

and soon after 1967 the US gave Israel long range strike aricraft (F-4) that could deliver them.

I think that speaks for itself.

In 1967 Israel had, just as in 1956, the strongest army in the ME, and everyone, including Israels leaders, knew it. That the public didn't does not matter

Even if you can claim it was stronger than each of the other countries (and I find that claim debatable), that isn't the same thing as fighting against the combined forces of 3 countries (and troops from other countries, such as Iraq and others) on three fronts on the defensive. The war woud have been entirely different.

[as I said earlier, the Eyptian leadership believed that Israel was on the eve of an attack on Syria].

And as I said earlier, he sent a general to look at the conditions of the border, and then ignored him when it didn't serve his purpose.

[Az]

Let me get this straight:

Nasser knows that Israel has the strongest army in the ME.

Nasser: I'll move my forces to threaten my strong ass-whooping neighbour, who's also a known bully, and is known to lash out at every given opportunity against it's foes, so that it won't attack my ally.

hmmm, makes great sense.

[Edan]

Originally posted by Azazel

Never? not even in 73'?

Well, in 1973, Israel did have the superior army, AFAIK, thanks to the aid that the US was giving her...

And yet, Egypt and Syria were winning that war (at the start, anyway) despite that superior army. Egypts big mistake in that war was overextending itself past protective fire too quickly (pushed into doing it by Syria and the Soviets)

[Az]

Israel DID NOT have a superior army in 73'. The Egyptians and the Syrians had Soviet "Advisors" by the thousands, working as SAM operators, and fighter pilots, this btw being one of the reasons for heavy IAF losses in that war. The Soviets armed both Egypt and Syria with top notch equipment, that was at the time superior to the US-made armament ( T-62s, SAMs, ATGMs). US did airlift lots of ammo here, but it didn't have it's own soldiers defending Israel , while it's a well-known fact that the USSR bailed the egyptians out in the end of the war, threatening to send 7 airborne divisions here, that would break the streched IDF as a house of cards.

[Spiffor]

I have a question for the Israelis here (actually, several) :

What is the stance of the big parties on :
- the Palestinian State ?
- the shape of Palestinian State (i.e cut by roads or not ?)
- the colonies (i.e should they be completely dismantled, partly dismantled, maintained, should they progress ?) ?
- the religiosity of Israel (whether Israel should be more or less religious oriented)
- their racism, if any, against the Arabs or the Palestinians in general.

I'd be very glad if you could give me this info, it'll probably help me understand what do people think

[Edan]

The Soviets armed both Egypt and Syria with top notch equipment, that was at the time superior to the US-made armament ( T-62s, SAMs, ATGMs).

Wasn't aware that it was superior. Thanks for the info.

while it's a well-known fact that the USSR bailed the egyptians out in the end of the war, threatening to send 7 airborne divisions here, that would break the streched IDF as a house of cards.

Yes, but didn't they back down due to threats by the US?

IIRC, the soviet pilots (with painted over aircraft) had participated in the abortive Syrian attack on Jordan during Black September. And IIRC, the Soviets had a nuclear sub in the area during '67 war.

[Az]

Yes, but didn't they back down due to threats by the US?

no they didn't . The US never threatened the USSR, they didn't want Israel winning a stunning victory, because it would harm their various interests in the region.

Spiffor: most of the sites are all busy with the upcoming primary elections, ( the lists of candidates to the Knesset ), but I'll give you the party for which I am voting, personally. ( polls give it 10-12 seats in the upcoming elections, from 120.)

http://www.shinui.org.il/english.html

here's another party, Meretz, the second social democrats ( in contrast to Avoda, the party that founded the country, but has lost all of it's socialist credibility IMO )

http://www.meretz.org.il/English/HomePage.htm

these parties should be the 3rd, and the 4th, respectively. I'll try to dig up some more.

oh, and racism is illegal in politics, one party even got banned , "Kach" ( they were just a bunch of nutjobs, cannot describe them differently)

Besides the parties with the links there are :

the Likud party- supposed to get around 40 seats in the upcoming elections,
the Labor party-supposed to get around 20 seats in the upcoming elections.

couldn't find english links, but I'll try.

[Az]

ok, this is the platform of the world likud, but it should be similar.

http://www.thelikud.org/Our%20Platform.htm

[Edan]

no they didn't . The US never threatened the USSR, they didn't want Israel winning a stunning victory, because it would harm their various interests in the region.

They lowered from Defcon 4 to Defcon 3. Seems threatening to me.

[Az]

"and if you dare send those paratroopers, we'll..... probably watch them on TV"

[Edan]

Here's an interview with Kissinger on the situation.

(Why else did the soviets not follow through on their threats?)

[Az]

because the Israelis have stopped?

[Edan]

Originally posted by Azazel
because the Israelis have stopped?

Yes, but I don't think that would have stopped them, especially since they were the one's pushing Sadat to war. (IIRC, Sadat threw out a number of the russian "advisors" due to that pressure).

The Russians were worried about drawing in the US, IMO.

[Az]

du-h. if the US wouldn't exist the USSR would have rolled over the world, and vice versa (like it does now ). but there was no specific threat from the US on this issue.