Yom Kippur War
-
Heng@, no point arguing with this fellow.Some people are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves.And how often have we seen this sort of behaviour flying around like a demented vampire?Lots.Countless even.I've been denudated with such crap all my life.
-
Moderator, looks as if order needs to be restored here. This thread has been hijacked and has degenerated into flaming war
-
right, i can now see why some of the more original established and reputable members chose to migrate to another forum. let me see, if i leave, heng will sing "aww i dun normally taunt, but where did frauddy go now? did i make him cry already". If i stay, others will still not accept logical reasoning and facts, rather they will state that "Some people are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves". hmmmm....
let's see how this has gone? dear tankee asked if anyone have any links to the YK war? Heng said "the one lesson sg can learn is to never underestimate your enemy. the way our leaders talk today, they make it sound like we have a military that can overrun the whole of malaysia and indonesia in 48 hours when in reality perhaps we can hold out against malaysia OR indonesia for 48 hours n pray for someone to come to our aid(fat chance of holding out if malaysia ANd indonesia decides to join forces)" w/o citing any sources or substantiating his arguments. he later explained that he was referring to Israel's enemies not singapore's. er... ok...
he then contradicts himself by saying he does not normally taunt but still does anyway...
sarcasm? well, let's see what dear ole heng posted: "here's a nice tip. go see what "sarcasm" means here: www.dictionary.com"
unable to answer coherently, he then claims he did and calls pple names.... he then get's upset becos he used his name in his nick and pple see that. he also challenges others to reveal themselves.... hmm....
from out of nowhere, he then drags Hu's death in here and proceed to be another know-it-all championing his personal agenda. he claims to know who were responsible and refuses to name anyone, but repeatedly challenges others to mention names. he instead alleges that every single one who testified in public court were merely saying what SAF wanted them to say.
he also alleges that MINDEF did not release his cause of death within 72 hours. hmmm.... how do u think Hu's parent would have felt? instead, heng claims credit for making the first announcement....
"arrogance and loss of composure in you"? - well, i apologise if it came out that way, but perhaps u missed the very same elements from heng?
Lazerlordz, "your arrogant, down-the-line shoveling of your self-professed opinions down the mouth of another fellow human really takes the cake." doesn't that sound so familiar? oh wait... it's coming out of your own mouth right back at you...
"A real man does not need to nitpick the arguments of others to win his case.From the beginning to the end, all I've seen is a tape recorder looping over and over again. " - dear, i only point out the fallacies of the argument, but u seem to have a bone to pick wif a personality you cannot agree wif. yup, all i've seen so far is heng's recorder too...
"Unless you've had a friend die like Heng did, please don't assume you have the moral nor the social high ground to shoot missiles at others.Rage of a familiar hath its privilege.You dont.Simple enough."
unless u've done and seen the things i did, pls dun assume u have the moral nor the social high ground to lecture others. i have the privilege of mourning a fellow family member who passed on, u dun. simple enuff for u?
"who's the one flooding MN with sarcasm six feet deep and three feet wide?"
perhaps u meant to ask heng abt sarcasm... who will then refer u to a dictionary?
"Heng@, no point arguing with this fellow.Some people are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves.And how often have we seen this sort of behaviour flying around like a demented vampire?Lots.Countless even.I've been denudated with such crap all my life."
well, at least we agree on some point. yes some pple are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves. this just abt describes heng's and your postings here so far. and yes, i do sympathise u for having been denudated with such crap all your life. -
well, IAF has a good point here. the topic is abt the YK war, not some obscure NE talk that Heng attended 4-5 years ago or Hu's death.Originally posted by IAF:Moderator, looks as if order needs to be restored here. This thread has been hijacked and has degenerated into flaming war
Heng and lazerlordz, tell you both what, i'll take it that we come from different angles and will never see eye to eye. if we cannot agree on any of the earlier postings, at least let's agree to disagree. go ahead, take your last shots. it is your given right anyway, altho i suspect it'll be more of the "where did frauddy go now? did i make him cry already?" variant...
IAF and Mod: my apologies for the hijack and degeneration. -
Firstly, I would like to say I'm not taking either Heng or Freddy's side. I think Freddy is a little bit too agressive.
But Heng's position is highly problematic. Initially this was not about Singapore at all, but Israel. And Heng had to say something negative about SAF?
So what's some stupid talk in a JC? What bigshot? Would they send a bigshot to JC to talk?? I studied in SIngapore all the way to a master's degree, and never seen "top brass". What's a f$$king JC? So what if some officer said some stupid stuff. You must understand that this guy just go there to do his job, which is pretty boring.
But would any of Singapore's leaders say anything stupid like "our armed forces are so strong, they can march into KL in one week"?
It is the Malaysian leaders who once in a while say pretty bad things about Singapore.
And I've served my 2 and a half years too. I've met real people in the forces, and most of them don't think SAF is super strong.
But is it true we are stronger than Malaysia militarily? Yes!
In a war, can we conquer the whole of West Malaysia? No!
And that is never the intention!
Are the officers in SAF arrogant? Not for most of the folks, although SOME may be arrogant.
In any large organisation, you're bound to have some who are stupid or arrogant.
But Heng's response was unnecessarily negative, and in the first place, what happened in a JC talk is utterly insignificant.
Would that one officer at the talk be representative of SAF as a whole? I think not. I have friends who are regulars, and they certainly don't think along the lines of "we can take KL in two weeks".
Come on, as singaporeans living in Singapore, surely you guys know what it is like over here. That most regulars don't think too highly of the SAF.
Our military leaders underestimating Malaysia or Indonesia? Unlikely. -
this is well off topic.....
but all of ya have to admit some of the SAF officer is really some dime wits and they think the whole world rotate around them.
BUT there are still a few good men in service and we really should not comment on things that we really did not have a clear picture of.
Heng u really should not have to drag the decease in your arrgument to prove your point, have u thought of how his family and friends will feel when they read ur post.
Please respect the deceased.
moderator please lock or delete this post please -
Originally posted by freddy the K:my dear, "u obviously haven't paid much attention to the bigwigs talking have u?" I'm one of the few BIGWIGs who give talks to JCs on a regular basis and i speak from experience. How many talks have u attended in NJC? 1,2,3 or 4? do u even know who is the military head u posed the qn to? no? well, i guess anyone can say "oh, I spoke to a big shot and he couldn't give me an ans". So what is it that "they were saying they could do this and that"?
Some big-wigged clown you are to blurt out operational code words in your posts. Don't know what sort of big shot you are in SAF. But to flame someone in your first post of this thread just shows how much of an officer you are (if you are one). You are acting like you are a nobody in the SAF looking for attention.Originally posted by freddy the K:look, heng, i dun have all nite to wait for you to post a rebuttal. i'm all shacked out from OFE and need to catch some zzzzs -
actually wrong again. im going to agree with u that we come from diff angles and will never see eye to eye(except this once) and leave it at that. cheers.Originally posted by freddy the K:well, IAF has a good point here. the topic is abt the YK war, not some obscure NE talk that Heng attended 4-5 years ago or Hu's death.
Heng and lazerlordz, tell you both what, i'll take it that we come from different angles and will never see eye to eye. if we cannot agree on any of the earlier postings, at least let's agree to disagree. go ahead, take your last shots. it is your given right anyway, altho i suspect it'll be more of the "where did frauddy go now? did i make him cry already?" variant...
IAF and Mod: my apologies for the hijack and degeneration. -
well, finally, some common agreement. hey, despite our vehement differences, i truely wish u the best of times in UK.Originally posted by HENG@:actually wrong again. im going to agree with u that we come from diff angles and will never see eye to eye(except this once) and leave it at that. cheers.
cheers to u too, ole chap!
-
aw Pabs, pls. i merely mentioned OFE. For all u know, i may have meant Oscar Foxtrot Echo. besides, u dun read the papers much do you? it's been mentioned already...Originally posted by Pablo:Some big-wigged clown you are to blurt out operational code words in your posts. Don't know what sort of big shot you are in SAF. But to flame someone in your first post of this thread just shows how much of an officer you are (if you are one). You are acting like you are a nobody in the SAF looking for attention.
"Don't know what sort of big shot you are in SAF."
yup, that's rite, u dun know much do you? wait, perhaps u are one of those whom Lazerlordz was referring to? you know, those who "are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves."
"But to flame someone in your first post of this thread"
pls show me how i flamed Heng in my first post. or r u simply biased? Selective reading and interpretion, perhaps? for your benefit, let me refresh your memory:
"oh learned esteemed Heng, can u pls show in what way the SAF has under-estimated the enemy? Is there an enemy to begin wif? also, do show in what way our leaders talk today that make it sound like we have a military that can overrun the whole of malaysia and indonesia in 48 hours. And what makes u think we want to over-run the WHOLE of malaysia and indonesia in 48 hours?
(quoted from heng): "perhaps we can hold out against malaysia OR indonesia for 48 hours n pray for someone to come to our aid(fat chance of holding out if malaysia ANd indonesia decides to join forces)"
just becos u served 2.5 yrs of NSF as a clerk doesn't mean u know what the SAF is capable of, so dun go around tokking like u do."
Gee, i addressed him as learned and esteemed.... what more do you want? Anyway, I made my peace wif Heng and i mean it. If u cant accept it, well, as heng said: ""so sue me. U've got a problem with it, bark away. I don't care. "
cheers! -
to get back on track, does anyone agree that one of israel's greatest failure in the YK War was the quality of its intel?
The Comd of the Armed Corps, Gen Avraham Adan gives an insightful account into israeli thinking at that time:
"My colleagues and i were certainly surprised. The underlying assessmentof Israeli Intelligence was that the armed forces of the Arab nations were still unprepared for war; hence the probability of war seemed very low."
Quoted from The Arab-Israeli Conflict by Kirstan E. Schilze -
What if the Arab won the war! The Israeli was pushed into the sea. The state of Israel is being annex.Originally posted by KumSioJui:not really true .. I read somewhere initially the americans wanted the israeli's to bleed especially after all their victories against arab nations and some of the USA arab allies & friends were starting to give the americans the cold shoulder.
The rumour was it was only sometime during the successive days of the war when the israeli's were really bleeding and close to the meaning of "being pushed into the sea" that the us satalite picked up 2 erect lauchers somewhere in israel that really paniced the americans who immediately provided that airlift to avoid armageddon.
The yanks are really one kind.
What will happen to the Jewish?
Will the US just sit back and watch. If the Jewish are being slaughter (Ethnic Cleansing)? Will the whole world / United Nation tolerate ethnic cleansing'?
Why no one has succeed in killing every Jews in this world? Not even Hilter's Nazi or Arabs?
Does anyone here know any race/ethnic group that are extinct in this world? Is there any website or source delicated to it? -
I think we should call it a stalemate here.But just note that I happen to mourn the loss of three family members in three years.So there.Do what you will, and say what you wish.My right to post is the same as yours, but for the sake of keeping it back to the topic, I shall not fire anymore salvos over.I have said my piece and you may continue at your own pleasure.Originally posted by freddy the K:right, i can now see why some of the more original established and reputable members chose to migrate to another forum. let me see, if i leave, heng will sing "aww i dun normally taunt, but where did frauddy go now? did i make him cry already". If i stay, others will still not accept logical reasoning and facts, rather they will state that "Some people are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves". hmmmm....
let's see how this has gone? dear tankee asked if anyone have any links to the YK war? Heng said "the one lesson sg can learn is to never underestimate your enemy. the way our leaders talk today, they make it sound like we have a military that can overrun the whole of malaysia and indonesia in 48 hours when in reality perhaps we can hold out against malaysia OR indonesia for 48 hours n pray for someone to come to our aid(fat chance of holding out if malaysia ANd indonesia decides to join forces)" w/o citing any sources or substantiating his arguments. he later explained that he was referring to Israel's enemies not singapore's. er... ok...
he then contradicts himself by saying he does not normally taunt but still does anyway...
sarcasm? well, let's see what dear ole heng posted: "here's a nice tip. go see what "sarcasm" means here: www.dictionary.com"
unable to answer coherently, he then claims he did and calls pple names.... he then get's upset becos he used his name in his nick and pple see that. he also challenges others to reveal themselves.... hmm....
from out of nowhere, he then drags Hu's death in here and proceed to be another know-it-all championing his personal agenda. he claims to know who were responsible and refuses to name anyone, but repeatedly challenges others to mention names. he instead alleges that every single one who testified in public court were merely saying what SAF wanted them to say.
he also alleges that MINDEF did not release his cause of death within 72 hours. hmmm.... how do u think Hu's parent would have felt? instead, heng claims credit for making the first announcement....
"arrogance and loss of composure in you"? - well, i apologise if it came out that way, but perhaps u missed the very same elements from heng?
Lazerlordz, "your arrogant, down-the-line shoveling of your self-professed opinions down the mouth of another fellow human really takes the cake." doesn't that sound so familiar? oh wait... it's coming out of your own mouth right back at you...
"A real man does not need to nitpick the arguments of others to win his case.From the beginning to the end, all I've seen is a tape recorder looping over and over again. " - dear, i only point out the fallacies of the argument, but u seem to have a bone to pick wif a personality you cannot agree wif. yup, all i've seen so far is heng's recorder too...
"Unless you've had a friend die like Heng did, please don't assume you have the moral nor the social high ground to shoot missiles at others.Rage of a familiar hath its privilege.You dont.Simple enough."
unless u've done and seen the things i did, pls dun assume u have the moral nor the social high ground to lecture others. i have the privilege of mourning a fellow family member who passed on, u dun. simple enuff for u?
"who's the one flooding MN with sarcasm six feet deep and three feet wide?"
perhaps u meant to ask heng abt sarcasm... who will then refer u to a dictionary?
"Heng@, no point arguing with this fellow.Some people are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves.And how often have we seen this sort of behaviour flying around like a demented vampire?Lots.Countless even.I've been denudated with such crap all my life."
well, at least we agree on some point. yes some pple are not born to discuss things objectively, they are born to attack the person behind the ideas, and not the ideas themselves. this just abt describes heng's and your postings here so far. and yes, i do sympathise u for having been denudated with such crap all your life.
Out. -
Originally posted by want to know:
if the arab forces had won the war, in all likelihood, the state of Israel could very well be transformed into the state of Palestine. But that's an unlikely possibility considering the state of political affairs during that era.
What if the Arab won the war! The Israeli was pushed into the sea. The state of Israel is being annex.
[b]What will happen to the Jewish?
Will the US just sit back and watch. If the Jewish are being slaughter (Ethnic Cleansing)? Will the whole world / United Nation tolerate ethnic cleansing'?
Why no one has succeed in killing every Jews in this world? Not even Hilter's Nazi or Arabs?
Does anyone here know any race/ethnic group that are extinct in this world? Is there any website or source delicated to it?[/b]
Why has no one succeed in killing every single Jew in this world? biblically, some have reply that they are God's chosen pple. Realistically? i can offer no answer. As for any extinct race/ethnic grp, i dun think this is the forum for it rite? -
laz, just as i made my peace with heng, if we cant have a civilised discussion, that at least we agree to disagree.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I think we should call it a stalemate here.But just note that I happen to mourn the loss of three family members in three years.So there.Do what you will, and say what you wish.My right to post is the same as yours, but for the sake of keeping it back to the topic, I shall not fire anymore salvos over.I have said my piece and you may continue at your own pleasure.
Out.
"Do what you will, and say what you wish.My right to post is the same as yours"
last point for consideration, Laz: if u say that we have the same right, then why try to deny me my right wif your very 1st post in this thread?
anyway, i guess that's water under the bridge. we shall all continue at our own pleasure.
Cheerios and thanks for your insights, ole chap! -
The First Zionist Congress met in Basle, Switzerland, to discuss the ideas set out in Theodor Herzl's 1896 book Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State). Herzl, a Jewish journalist and writer living in Vienna, wanted Jews to have their own state - primarily as a response to European anti-Semitism.
The Congress issued the Basle Programme to establish a "home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured by public law" and set up the World Zionist Organisation to work for that end.
A few Zionist immigrants had already started arriving in the area before 1897. By 1903 there were some 25,000 of them, mostly from Eastern Europe. They lived alongside about half a million Arab residents in what was then part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. A second wave of about 40,000 immigrants arrived in the region between 1904 and 1914.
At the time of World War I the area was ruled by the Turkish Ottoman empire. Turkish control ended when Arab forces backed by Britain drove out the Ottomans.
Britain occupied the region at the end of the war in 1918 and was assigned as the mandatory power by the League of Nations on 25 April 1920.
During this period of change, three key pledges were made.
In 1916 the British Commissioner in Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon, had promised the Arab leadership post-war independence for former Ottoman Arab provinces.
However, at the same time, the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement between war victors, Britain and France, divided the region under their joint control.
Then in 1917, the British Foreign Minister Arthur Balfour committed Britain to work towards "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people", in a letter to leading Zionist Lord Rothschild. It became known as the Balfour Declaration.
The Zionist project of the 1920s and 1930s saw hundreds of thousands of Jews emigrating to British Mandate Palestine, provoking unrest in the Arab community.
In 1922, a British census showed the Jewish population had risen to about 11% of Palestine's 750,000 inhabitants. More than 300,000 immigrants arrived in the next 15 years.
Zionist-Arab antagonism boiled over into violent clashes in August 1929 when 133 Jews were killed by Palestinians and 110 Palestinians died at the hands of the British police.
Arab discontent again exploded into widespread civil disobedience during a general strike in 1936. By this time, the militant Zionist group Irgun Zvai Leumi was orchestrating attacks on Palestinian and British targets with the aim of "liberating" Palestine and Transjordan (modern-day Jordan) by force.
In July 1937, Britain, in a Royal Commission headed by former Secretary of State for India, Lord Peel, recommended partitioning the land into a Jewish state (about a third of British Mandate Palestine, including Galilee and the coastal plain) and an Arab one.
Palestinian and Arab representatives rejected this and demanded an end to immigration and the safeguarding of a single unified state with protection of minority rights. Violent opposition continued until 1938 when it was crushed with reinforcements from the UK.
Britain, which had ruled Palestine since 1920, handed over responsibility for solving the Zionist-Arab problem to the UN in 1947.
The territory was plagued with chronic unrest pitting native Arabs against Jewish immigrants (who now made up about a third the population, owning about 6% of the land). The situation had become more critical with the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Jews fleeing the Nazi persecution in Europe. Some six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust during World War II.
The UN set up a special committee which recommended splitting the territory into separate Jewish and Palestinian states. Palestinian representatives, known as the Arab Higher Committee, rejected the proposal; their counterparts in the Jewish Agency accepted it.
The partition plan gave 56.47% of Palestine to the Jewish state and 43.53% to the Arab state, with an international enclave around Jerusalem. On 29 November 1947, 33 countries of the UN General Assembly voted for partition, 13 voted against and 10 abstained. The plan, which was rejected by the Palestinians, was never implemented.
Britain announced its intention to terminate its Palestine mandate on 15 May 1948 but hostilities broke out before the date arrived.
The death of British soldiers in the conflict made the continuing presence in Palestine deeply unpopular in Britain. In addition, the British resented American pressure to allow in more Jewish refugees - a sign of growing US suport for Zionism.
Both Arab and Jewish sides prepared for the coming confrontation by mobilising forces. The first "clearing" operations were conducted against Palestinian villages by Jewish forces in December.
The State of Israel, the first Jewish state for nearly 2,000 years, was proclaimed at 1600 on 14 May 1948 in Tel Aviv. The declaration came into effect the following day as the last British troops withdrew. Palestinians remember 15 May as "al-Nakba", or the Catastrophe.
The year had begun with Jewish and Arab armies each staging attacks on territory held by the other side. Jewish forces, backed by the Irgun and Lehi militant groups made more progress, seizing areas alloted to the Jewish state but also conquering substantial territories allocated for the Palestinian one.
Irgun and Lehi massacred scores of inhabitants of the village of Deir Yassin near Jerusalem on 9 April. Word of the massacre spread terror among Palestinians and hundreds of thousands fled to Lebanon, Egypt and the area now known as the West Bank.
The Jewish armies were victorious in the Negev, Galilee, West Jerusalem and much of the coastal plain.
The day after the state of Israel was declared five Arab armies from Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq immediately invaded Israel but were repulsed, and the Israeli army crushed pockets of resistance. Armistices established Israel's borders on the frontier of most of the earlier British Mandate Palestine.
Egypt kept the Gaza Strip while Jordan annexed the area around East Jerusalem and the land now known as the West Bank. These territories made up about 25% of the total area of British Mandate Palestine.
Since 1948 there had been fierce competition between neighbouring states to lead an Arab response to the creation of Israel. That left the Palestinians as passive onlookers.
In January 1964, Arab governments - wanting to create a Palestinian organisation that would remain essentially under their control - voted to create a body called the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).
But the Palestinians wanted a genuinely independent body, and that was the goal of Yasser Arafat who took over the chairmanship of the PLO in 1969. His Fatah organisation (founded in secret five years earlier) was gaining notoriety with its armed operations against Israel.
Fatah fighters inflicted heavy casualties on Israeli troops at Karameh in Jordan in 1968.
Mounting tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbours culminated in six days of hostilities starting on 5 June 1967 and ending on 11 June - six days which changed the face of the Middle East conflict.
Israel seized Gaza and the Sinai from Egypt in the south and the Golan Heights from Syria in the north. It also pushed Jordanian forces out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Egypt's powerful air force was put out of action on the first day of fighting when Israeli jets bombed it on the ground in a pre-emptive strike.
The territorial gains doubled the area of land controlled by Israel. The victory heralded a new age of confidence and optimism for Israel and its supporters.
The UN issued Security Council Resolution 242, stressing "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" and calling for "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict".
According ot the UN, the conflict displaced another 500,000 Palestinians who fled to Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.
Unable to regain the territory they had lost in 1967 by diplomatic means, Egypt and Syria launched major offensives against Israel on the Jewish festival of the Day of Atonement or Yom Kippur. The clashes are also known as the Ramadan war.
Initially, Egypt and Syria made advances in Sinai and the Golan Heights. These were reversed after three weeks of fighting. Israel eventually made gains beyond the 1967 ceasefire lines.
Israeli forces pushed on into Syria beyond the Golan Heights, though they later gave up some of these gains. In Egypt, Israeli forces regained territory and advanced to the western side of the Suez Canal.
The United States, the Soviet Union and the United Nations all made diplomatic interventions to bring about ceasefire agreements between the combatants.
Egypt and Syria jointly lost an estimated 8,500 soldiers in the fighting, while Israel lost about 6,000.
The war left Israel more dependent on the US for military, diplomatic and economic support. Soon after the war, Saudi Arabia led a petroleum embargo against states that supported Israel. The embargo, which caused a steep rises in petrol prices and fuel shortages across the world, lasted until March 1974. In October 1973 the UN Security Council passed resolution 338 which called for the combatants "to cease all firing and terminate all military activity immediately... [and start] negotiations between the parties concerned under appropriate auspices aimed at establishing a just and durable peace in the Middle East". -
According to the book "The Yom Kippur War : The Epic Encounter That Transformed the Middle East" by abraham rabinovich (i think he's a freelance correspondent for straits times too) the aim of the war was actually not to annihilate israel but to avenge the humiliation of arab defeat during the six-day war.
The overall strategy was limited - simply seize back the land that was lost during the previous war - same for the syrians who lost the golan heights. While they did achieved complete surprise - the arab armies failed to maintain momentum and hence did not follow thru' their success. There was evident lack of planning as to what to do after they got their foot into the door.. and that's just a part of the big picture look.
Another impt reason why the israelis were able to turn the tide around in the favor was that they had a superb culture of military effectiveness at all levels. In contrast the arab armies suffered from lack of cohesion and lack of initiative. The following insight best sums it up:
"Leadership may be the greatest weakness of Arab training systems. [A] sergeant first class in the U.S. Army has as much authority as a colonel in an Arab army. . . "
The quote was taken from the following:
www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/AD_Issues/amdipl_17/articles/deatkine_arabs1.html -
actually i think it shows how a preemptive strike is useful for a country surrounded by enemies all around
-
Overreliance on Technology in Warfare:
The Yom Kippur War as a Case Study
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/04summer/bolia.htm
This is one good article from US Army College. I've extracted the conclusion of this article:
One of the imprints of the Yom Kippur War on military history has been the lessons it has provided regarding the danger of relying on technology as a replacement for doctrine, tactics, and training. This has been demonstrated in this article by examining the overreliance on signals intelligence—which is only as good as the information it intercepts, and ultimately its interpretation— that led to the Israelis being surprised by the attack on 6 October 1973; and by looking at Israel’s failure to develop a combined-arms doctrine, relying instead on armor and the Israeli Air Force to the exclusion of adequate infantry and artillery, in the face of Arab armies and air forces that had developed such doctrine.
The article also has pointed out that while the Israelis were able to overcome their deficiencies, they did so only by means that were completely independent of technology: the quality of their leaders, the quality of their troops, and their national spirit. This should not be taken to mean that advancements in technology have no place in warfare. Rather, the interpretation should be that technology must not be allowed to surpass the development of doctrine and tactics to guide its usage, nor hailed to the exclusion of the human element.
While MINDEF is pursuing 3G SAF, they must be mindful not to repeat other people's mistake. -
Acutally it was the Egypt failure to take hold of the initiative, some tanks units which already reach the outskirt of Isreal town were told to hold and wait for further instruction ( russian tactics). These allow the IDF to regroup and rush reserve forward which turn the tide of the war. With the Egypt army push to a hold, isreal quickly counter attack into egypt and thus trapped the Egpyt army with supplies cut off.Originally posted by tankee1981:I am intrested in the history of Yom Kippur War and what makes the seriously outnumbered,less well equipped IDF who is almost totally taken by surprise to overcome the initial Soviet wave like tactics and subsequently win the war. I think this is something which Singapore in particular SAF can learn from. Anyone have any links to the story of this war?Thanks -
kind of a smart move huh..
-
For a more in-depth analysis of IDF's successes and failures during the YK War, you can also refer to Israel's War- A History Since 1947 by Ahron Bregman (Ch 3 and 4). There were both political and military factors, but undeniably, the later failure of the Arab forces to capitalise on their initial successes during the opening days of the war accounted for a significant part of the Arabs' losses.
btw, many historians see the Israeli-Arab Wars as a proxy of the Cold War during that time. -
Actually there is much to learn from both side of the Yom Kippur war, like the egypt combat engineers was inventive to use water pumps to breach the sand wall of the canal with speed that result in crossing of the canal with speed that totally caught the isreal by surprise. Next the Egypt have invest heavily with Sams and anti-tank missiles which create heavily casaulties for Isreal tanks and planes as they are not prepare for them.Originally posted by storywolf:Acutally it was the Egypt failure to take hold of the initiative, some tanks units which already reach the outskirt of Isreal town were told to hold and wait for further instruction ( russian tactics). These allow the IDF to regroup and rush reserve forward which turn the tide of the war. With the Egypt army push to a hold, isreal quickly counter attack into egypt and thus trapped the Egpyt army with supplies cut off.
For the Isreal side, they have the forsight, one general actually just did a run through with commanders on the golan height defence just week before, that why the syrian was check. Isreal was quick to adapt new technology, they quickly got the US to send them countermeasures for their planes and for tanks they quickly do combine arms to make sure the Armour are support by infantries to protect them from portable anti-tanks missiles.
Isreal once check the advance of the syrain army , quickly was able to diver it forces to halt the egypt army. Then came the crazy egypt advance which see their tanks in huge numbers do crazy advance ( russian tactics ) against isreal tanks which have dug in, under the pounding of the artiliaries, the egyptian infantry was taken out and now their tanks fall mercy to the highly markmanship of the Isreal tanks. This saw the biggest armour clashes since world war 2. Which concept of - number superior vs better tanks is proven.
A bold move was to move bridging equippment, to enable the crossing of the canal. Once in place isreal tanks and M113s are able to cross. Sharon the currently Prime minister is the Hero who oversee the this counter thrust across to egypt shore. He was a Marvick, instead of waiting and secure the banks as instructed, he send his tanks and M113s to attack airfields and others. With such good results, that they soon are ask to take out the AA sites, which open up the way for Isreal airforce planes. After that Isreal did a hook behind the whole 3rd egypt army and totally trapped and are force to call for peace. -
Isreali Defence Force is capable, I belief due largely to the fact that many races are after the Jews.And aftere many years of fighting for their lives,for their own survival,they are more determined then others to live and thus adopt a very very pro-active way in their military capabilities.As such,the way they fight is different,its fighting for their lives to the very end.Thus,they do not seem to have lost any war.Unlike the world's super-power,the US which lost terribly in Vietnam.
Just my 2cents worth -
I am wondering (aloud) if the facination with IDF, conventional warfare and fighting set pieces on open terrian is relevant beyond seminal concerns like character, ability to adapt and survival defence.
Since 1973, we have seen vicious enthnic conflicts, 9-11 strikes, and even narco-drug wars, none of which can any basis or relevance be tied back to the 6 day war.
The landscape (physically, technology and players) has changed beyond recgonition. Even this thread reflect the new realities, had it appeared in 1973 it would be a technical blow by blow analysis instead of the exchange of moral or psychological analysis seen in the latter posts... interesting