I would say the Syrians. Same reasons as Conley's plus the fact that they never chilled own.

They attack on diffrent fronts....but togather.

Let's take a look at the conflicts involving these nations one at a time.

1. Israel's War of Independence (1948-9) = Israel was invaded by 6 Arab armies; Egypt, Syria, Transjordan (later Jordan), Lebanon, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. As well as local Arab forces.
2. The Sanai War (1956 = The conquest of Egypt's Sinai Peninsula by Israel.
3. The Six-Day War (1967) = Israel crushed Egypt, Jordan and Syria.
4. The Yom Kippur (Ramadan) War (1973) = Egypt and Syria attacked Israel and failed.
5. The Israeli Invasion of Lebanon (1982-1984) = Israel defeated a large Syrian army in Lebanon rather handily.
Source: http://www.historyguy.com/arab_israeli_wars.html

Arab Losses:
1. Egypt – 2,000; Syria – 1,000; Trans(Jordan) – 1,000
2. Egypt – 3,000
3. Egypt – 10,000; Syria – 1,000; Jordan – 5,000
4. Egypt – 5,000; Syria – 8,000; Jordan – 1,000
Source: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/His...asualties.html

Sherman, I don’t really see any real clear choice there!

Here's the stats that our friend D-Top posted so chech your opinions

Well, Dtop, you need to look at it in terms of achivments, not losses(which the arabs take little notice of).

1948- Jordan is only arab nation to keep a part of the mandat(west bank).
1956-Egypt got kicked around.
1967- All of them get kicked around...
1973- Egypt crosses the canal, forcing its way into sinay, almost braking the IDFs southern command. Syria reaches the edge of the Golan, almost pooring down into Israel itself. Then we turn the tide, and kick them around. However, Egypt achives its goal when the peace treaty with Israel is sighned a few years later, giving
egypt Sinay.
1982-Well, we kicked the Syrians around. Should never have staid in lebannon, stupid move.

OK Sherman so which country would you say fared best against you guys?

Well, the Jordanians have traditionaly had the best trained forces of those three?

The Arab Legion in 1948 and the only ones on the oposition to use mobile warfare on a large scale in 1967, the Egyptians and Syrians mostly buried their tanks as bunkers.

The Jordanian army today is pretty well equipped too IIRC.

Well, thats true in a way, I guss. The Jordanians are the best trained, largely due to their relations with the British Army. But relly, since 1967 the Jordanians are scared to death of Israel....You have to understand how small the Jordanian army is in comparison with the IDF....Plus the Jordanians see the Syrians as hostile(Israel acctually prevented the Syrian from invading Jordan in 1970). In 1967 the Jordanians tryed to use their tanks on offensive, but they did not stand a chance, because of IAFs air-supiriority.

I think overall, the Egyptians are the most succsesfull, mainly because of 1973.

Slight deviation off the main topic...
correct me if i'm wrong but the pakis claim that they loaned fighter aircraft and pilots to the arabs during the wars that these guys creamed the IsAF's butt!!
now look i know it sounds mighty exaggerated but even so..whats your take on this piece of "info"?

First they were British trained, not Soviet as with the Syrians and Egyptians.

Second they were Western equiped. Centurion MBTs and other Western equipment, not Soviet junk.

Third they were the least aggressive and ambitious. They're desire to push the Jews into the sea seems to have been significantly less than that of the Egyptians and Syrians. Why, I couldn't say.

Fourth when beaten they retreated in good order and were not routed pell mell the way the Syrians and Egyptians were.

But that's just my opinion.

furioustote