Post by Tomatolake on Oct 4, 2019 19:26:01 GMT -5
Oh God here we go a thread on Israel!!!!!!
My knowledge of the Yom Kippur war is very limited, I had always thought that despite some initial success the Arab countries were defeated once Israel mobilized it's military.
I have recently come across a few "special" people online who claim that Egypt defeated Israel.
I am now going to quote the wikki
By the end of the war, the Israelis had advanced to positions some 101 kilometres from Egypt's capital, Cairo, and occupied 1,600 square kilometres west of the Suez Canal.[242] They had also cut the Cairo-Suez road and encircled the bulk of Egypt's Third Army. The Israelis had also taken many prisoners after Egyptian soldiers, including many officers, began surrendering in masses towards the end of the war.[243] The Egyptians held a narrow strip on the east bank of the canal, occupying some 1,200 square kilometres of the Sinai.[243] One source estimated that the Egyptians had 70,000 men, 720 tanks and 994 artillery pieces on the east bank of the canal.[244] However, 30,000 to 45,000 of them were now encircled by the Israelis
Seems a pretty clear Israeli military victory however.
Despite Israel's tactical successes west of the canal, the Egyptian military was reformed and organized. Consequently, according to Gamasy, the Israeli military position became "weak" for different reasons, "One, Israel now had a large force (about six or seven brigades) in a very limited area of land, surrounded from all sides either by natural or man-made barriers, or by the Egyptian forces. This put it in a weak position. Moreover, there were the difficulties in supplying this force, in evacuating it, in the lengthy communication lines, and in the daily attrition in men and equipment. Two, to protect these troops, the Israeli command had to allocate other forces (four or five brigades) to defend the entrances to the breach at the Deversoir. Three, to immobilize the Egyptian bridgeheads in Sinai the Israeli command had to allocate ten brigades to face the Second and Third army bridgeheads. In addition, it became necessary to keep the strategic reserves at their maximum state of alert. Thus, Israel was obliged to keep its armed force-and consequently the country-mobilized for a long period, at least until the war came to an end, because the ceasefire did not signal the end of the war. There is no doubt that this in total conflict with its military theories."[247] For those reasons and according to Dayan, "It was therefore thought that Israel would withdraw from the west bank, since she was most sensitive on the subject of soldier's lives." The Egyptian forces didn't pull to the west and held onto their positions east of the canal controlling both shores of the Suez Canal. None of the Canal's main cities were occupied by Israel; however, the city of Suez was surrounded.
So maybe the Israeli's weren't in such a strong position after all.
But then again who is this Gamasy character they are quoting.
El-Gamasy was well known for being the Chief of Operations for all Ground Forces participating in the 1973 October War. (Yom Kippur war)
Oh dear so the statement claiming that the Israeli's were in serious trouble comes from the leader of the Egyptian army, a man who is never going to say "Yeah, we were beaten badly."
And that folks is how the propaganda machine works.
