 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999
time: 00:17
|
|
Nazi army as in what? the Wehrmacht? the Shutzstafflen?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
The military deliberately set out to destroy the buffalo herds, in addition to the civilian slaughter of buffalo. |
no. the buffalos got in the way of the trains and messed with settlers... that's why the military and others deliberately set out to destroy the herds.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
You mean the part where ben-Gurion provoked every Arab state within a thousand miles of Israel to attack it at birth?
*I know, we'll get them to attack us with overwhelming odds and then we'll conquer them!* Uhhh, sir, they have overwhelming odds. *Don't bother me with details, Smithers!* |
Well, first off, at no point were the Israelis ever outnumbered militarily in '48, so the odds weere never overwhelming. At the closest point, at the point when the Arab states invaded Palestine, the Israelis had 3,000 more troops. By the end of the war, the Israelis outnumbers the Arabs by almost double. The only force that Isreal considered a problem was the Arab League, which they neutralized before the war by reaching an accomodation with Jordan (which is why Jordan ended up with the only other significant chunk of Palestine). Next, following the initial cease fire, every new extention of hostilities in '48 was initiated by the Israelis, including the conquest of a chunk of the Sinai the UN forced them to return. They also seized of chunk of Galilee that hadn't been involved in the fighting from the Lebanese (a Christian state, btw).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:17
|
|
Well, aside from the absurd assertion that a state that had just been created outnumbered Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, et al., in military forces...
Who attacked whom?
Last edited by notyoueither on 09-12-2004 at 13:05
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Well, aside from the absurd assertion that a state that had just been created outnumbered Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, et al., in military forces... |
You are assuming those states sent their entire militaries to invade Palestine. This was not the case. The Arab states sent only about 20,000 troops to invade, while Israel already had 23,000 from years of fighting with Great Britain.
quote:
Whom attacked whom? |
Depends on which state. Lebanon never attacked Israel. They simply occupied the portion of Galilee that was to be given to Palestine. Syria attacked Israel near the Sea of Galilee. They claimed that portion of Palestine based on French maps and an unresolved Anglo-French dispute. The Israelis managed to destroy one Syrian tank and the Syrian force turned around. In the West Bank area, Israel attacked Iraqi and Jordanian positions, but were unable to dislodge them.
Egypt sent two colomns into Israel, and they seem to be the one state that made a serious attack on Israel, but seriously underestimating them, as they sent only 5,000 soldiers to attack through Gaza towards Ashdod. The second column, interestingly enough, was not sent to attack the Israelis, but rather to counter the Jordanians, whom the Egyptians (rightfully) suspected were trying to annex Arab Palestine. They were not involed in any hostilities agains the Israelis until October, and the second cease-fire was broken by Israel.
In Jerusalem, the Israelis and the Arab Legaue had been fighting since 1947, with both sides trying to take the whole thing, and both failing.
Prior to the Israeli declaration of Independence, Israeli froces had been moving beyond theyr designated borders and seizing Arab territory. So to answer your question of who attacked whom, the best answer is all sides attacked Palestine and got involved in a fight over the scraps.
This isn't to say the Jews weren't in danger. Settlements in outlying areas, if they didn't flee, were destroyed and slaughtered. On the other hand, the Israelis in an ironic echo of the threat to "throw the Jews into the sea" actually did throw the Arabs into the sea in one city, and sent the Arab dwellers in another town on a death march across the desert. It was a very nasty and brutal war, and both sides have legitmate greiveances. And there will be no peace until both sides can get of them.
Last edited by chegitz guevara on 09-12-2004 at 13:16
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
Well, aside from the absurd assertion that a state that had just been created outnumbered Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, et al., in military forces... |
You are assuming those states sent their entire militaries to invade Palestine. This was not the case. The Arab states sent only about 20,000 troops to invade, while Israel already had 23,000 from years of fighting with Great Britain.
quote:
Whom attacked whom? |
Depends on which state. Lebanon never attacked Israel. They simply occupied the portion of Galilee that was to be given to Palestine. Syria attacked Israel near the Sea of Galilee. They claimed that portion of Palestine based on French maps and an unresolved Anglo-French dispute. The Israelis managed to destroy one Syrian tank and the Syrian force turned around. In the West Bank area, Israel attacked Iraqi and Jordanian positions, but were unable to dislodge them.
Egypt sent two colomns into Israel, and they seem to be the one state that made a serious attack on Israel, but seriously underestimating them, as they sent only 5,000 soldiers to attack through Gaza towards Ashdod. The second column, interestingly enough, was not sent to attack the Israelis, but rather to counter the Jordanians, whom the Egyptians (rightfully) suspected were trying to annex Arab Palestine. They were not involed in any hostilities agains the Israelis until October, and the second cease-fire was broken by Israel.
In Jerusalem, the Israelis and the Arab Legaue had been fighting since 1947, with both sides trying to take the whole thing, and both failing.
Prior to the Israeli declaration of Independence, Israeli froces had been moving beyond theyr designated borders and seizing Arab territory. So to answer your question of who attacked whom, the best answer is all sides attacked Palestine and got involved in a fight over the scraps.
This isn't to say the Jews weren't in danger. Settlements in outlying areas, if they didn't flee, were destroyed and slaughtered. On the other hand, the Israelis in an ironic echo of the threat to "throw the Jews into the sea" actually did throw the Arabs into the sea in one city, and sent the Arab dwellers in another town on a death march across the desert. It was a very nasty and brutal war, and both sides have legitmate greiveances. And there will be no peace until both sides can get of them. |
Bullshit.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Oerdin
Che: The Israelis never directly engaged the British in classical military combat. They used terrorist attacks and a few hit and run attacks and those were strictly the actions of a tiny minority. |
I'm aware of that. Remember, 23,000 is a tiny minority of 650,000 people.
quote:
The Arabs never moved their entire forces into Israel proper because they were attempting to flank the Israelis but their forces in Israel got flanked first. They were always just across the border and they fully planned to use them. The Jews just didn't give them a chance to use them. |
Uhm, no.
The Israelis didn't outflank anyone. They were better armed (which really says something about the Arabs--except for the Arab Legion), and had much higher moral, and more actual combat experience. The Israelis were generally better able to bring more forces to bear in a given area, since the Arab states did not coordinate their attacks, since they weren't seriously engaged in a war against Israel (which they underestimated) and were instead participating in a land grab, as everyone knew that Palestine didn't have a viable state.
The Arabs never made a serious attempt to destroy Israel, even in 1973, when it was actually possible (had Jordan joined in). Egypt knew it was limited to ten miles from the canal zone, the range of its anti-air missiles, which means they weren't going too far. If it hadn't been for the pounding Syria was taking, Egypt wouldn't have moved out from under that cover.
In '48, the Arabs held the majority of their forces back, for a variety of reasons. One, they were newly indpendent and not terribly secure from their own populations, they didn't have the logisitics to handle that many troops, they didn't have the supplies to equip that many troops, most of their troops weren't even trained, they terribly understimated the abilties of the Israelis, and they didn't want to get involved in a real war with each other over the division of Palestine. Had they been seriously trying to destroy Israel, then they would have massively bulked up their forces during the casefires, which they never did (though they did increase them, they did not do so as quickly as the Israelis did). Finally, if the Arabs had massive forces sitting across the border waiting to be used, Why did the Israelis so easily trounce the Egyptians in the Sinai in Dec. '48?
Israel was every bit as much of a predetory state as its neighbors. It was just better at it.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-12-2004 22:18
I had actually always assumed it was a major paper, but now I don't remember.
at your superior 1337 debating sk1llz, notyoueither.
|