It was A devastating Arabian victory as for the first days of the war egypt and Syria crushed most of the idf

Israel itself admitted the loss of 800 tanks and over 200 aircraft which is a price a country at the size of Israel cannot afford to pay at a long term

And in a letter from president sadat to president hafez asad that for the first days of the war they proved israel's weak position But as for the rest of the war Egypt was fighting against America with it's best weapons and Egypt and Syria cannot simply fight America

And then America gave Israel a military aid of 2.2bilion dollars at the time(operation nickel grass) which is alot as comparing costs of now it's not less than 10billion dollars of military aid

While all of what was said here is correct, it leaves out the details/perspective that in the three to six months before the war, the USSR provided lots of military aid to Egypt and Syria. Military aircraft, patrol boats (plus anti-ship missiles), tanks, anti-tank wire guided missiles, SAMs, artillery, etc. Money and facilities to train the armies. Being on the offensive, several special tactics were designed and developed to help defeat the Israelis. Such as the water hoses to remove the sand berms at the east edge of the Suez Canal which allowed the Egyptian Army to penetrate the Bar-Lev line quickly and pour into the Sinai Desert at a far faster time frame than anticipated by the Israeli Army. The USSR had several satellites in position to observe what was going on during the conflict. The USA did not have any satellites in position to cover the conflict but, they effectively used the SR-71 on daily flights from Langley AFB, Va, USA to the Sinai Penninsula and back each day to keep the US Government updated with what was truly going on in the battle.
One real problem was that the definition of success was different for Egypt than it was for Syria! For Syria, to break through the defenses on the Golan Heights was the minimum needed to claim any sort of victory for the Syrian army. A complete break-through did not happen. For Egypt, to take and be able to hold territory on the east side of the Sinai Desert was the minimum required to claim any sort victory.
Egypt, had fixed SAM sights while Syria had mobile SAM sites and this was important. For Syria was able to move its SAM sites to protect its armor columns, as they moved. Egypt, was not able to move its SAM sites to protect its armor forces and, once they ventured beyond the range that could be protected by the SAMs positioned on Egypt's side of the Suez Canal, the Egyptian Army suffered.
Syria pleaded with and got Egypt to attack beyond the coverage of the SAM sites, with armor columns. The Egyptian armor was slaughtered by the Israeli AF once the armored columns were no longer protected by the Egyptian SAM sites.
The Israeli Army found a couple of weak spots in the Egyptian line along the canal. They penetrated these two weak spots and established forces on the west side of the Suez Canal. The Israeli armored forces on the west side of the canal was told to destroy the SAM sites. "IF"... Egyptian armor was encountered, Israeli armor was not to engage them but, to keep on the move and, to call Israeli fighter-bombers to attack the Egyptian armor. Once large holes were caused in the Egyptian Army defenses, the IAF used its fighter-bombers were used to attack targets deep in Egypt to force the Egyptian military into a different military philosophy.
On the Golan Heights, mobile SAM sites got the glory for shooting so many Israeli fighter-bombers. Some good video of SAM-6 success'. In reality, the SAMs (SAM-6s in particular) caused the IAF fighter-bombers to do a "Split-S" to evade the SAMs, where they were chewed up by the Syrian ZSU-23-4 anti-aircraft guns. In a three day battle, IAF fighter-bombers attack Syrian SAM sites and ZSU-23 anti-aircraft guns, destroying a large number of them. The IAF lost a large number of fighter-bombers during this three day battle. After the battle, the IAF sent F-4 Phantoms through the holes in the air defenses to attack military sites around Damascus! The Syrian Army withdrew the the mobile SAMs to protect their capitial, leaving the armor on the Golan Heights unprotected.... with the expected results of Syrian armor being destroyed.
For Syria, the conflict was a loss... no debate about it. Despite the casualties, Israel considered the war a victory for them because they forced the Syrian fores back and they held large amounts of land on the west side of of the Suez Canal and, they forced Syria back on the Golan Heights. For Egypt, it was a moral victory, they held land on the east side of the Suez Canal. The first time the Egyptian Army had an honorable outcome with their performance in the conflict. It was also the 'first time' the Egyptian Air Force was still competing for aerial parity in the aerial battle at the end of the conflict!!
This moral victory enabled Egypt to bargain with honor in negotiating a peace agreement.

If all i have said is correct then we won when we fought Israel lost against America not a surprise actually or are we supposed to beat Israel then fight America doesn't lt look like a war with America to u then it is supposed to be Egypt and Syria plus some aid from allies V.S. Israel and america and I'm talking about our war with isrAel not america

Originally Posted by O.W.E.G.

If all i have said is correct then we won when we fought Israel lost against America not a surprise actually or are we supposed to beat Israel then fight America doesn't lt look like a war with America to u then it is supposed to be Egypt and Syria plus some aid from allies V.S. Israel and america and I'm talking about our war with isrAel not america

The Arab forces had a whole lot of aid from the Soviet Union, at least equal to what the USA provided Israel. The big difference most of America's aid came to Israel during the conflict while the Soviet Union's was in the many months before the war.
The difference in weapons quality had little to do with the outcome of the conflict. The MiG-17s, 19s &, 21s when flown by pilots of equal ability/competence were competitive to the fighters Israel had. The F-4 Phantom, Mirage 3 and, the MiG-21 were all the latest fighters from the countries that produced them. The MiG-21 showed it was very capable against the F-4 over Viet Nam. The British Centurion tank was a little better than the T-62 (in some respects) but, the T-62 had night vision capability... the Centurion did not.

Israel's big advantage was its military intelligence and leadership of its officers. The Israeli officers and troops were better trained than the Arab nation counter-parts. Yes, the Egyptian Army was far better trained than any previous conflict against Israel but, the Israelis were still better over-all.
I only see one scenario in which American troops would fight for Israel... that is if the Soviet Union provided the Arab nations with Soviet Troops. President Nixon put America's strategic forces on DEFCON 2 (Defence Condition two, the highest war readiness level short of combat), when the Soviets said they were going to send their paratroopers to be some sort of peace keeper force without America doing the same. The Soviet Union was not willing to risk WW-3 over the Middle East. I don't think the Soviet leadership (like the Cuban Missile crisis) thought this through thoroughly. What would happen if the Soviets sent their paratroopers to the Middle East and Israeli fighters shot down the transport planes over Syria???????

Look Avon I have a book from an Egyptian source who was close to sadat himself and what was said in is that they refused to give us more aircraft and that's why we relied on SAMs
And what intelligence the fact that they didn't know were going to war until the morning of the sixth of October

Originally Posted by O.W.E.G.

I have a book from an Egyptian source who was close to sadat himself and what was said in is that they refused to give us more aircraft and that's why we relied on SAMs

There are interviews with Israeli Army officers (on You Tube) who discuss the things the Syrian and Egyptian Armies were doing in an effort to throw off the Israeli perceptions of an eminent attack. In the days proceeding the war troops would move forward in the mornings and go away at night. What the Israelis did not realize was, the number of troops that remained hidden continued to grow and remain at forward positions. These maneuvers were practiced and towards the beginning of the conflict, troops were moved up to front line or assault positions on both the Golan Height and the west side of the Suez Canal, when the Israelis discovered the number of troops in forward positions it was too late to effectively respond.
The Soviets felt they had provided enough weapons, especially when one combines the weapons of Egypt and Syria. Between Egypt and Syria they had 4,600 armored vehicles (SEE NOTE), 1,090 aircraft and, 185 SAM sights. Versus the Israelis having 1,700 armored vehicles, 488 aircraft and, 10 SAM sights. Improved training should have also help improve the chances of victory? At least that is the way the Soviets saw it.
NOTE;
The Soviet T-62s had a primitive night vision capability!

Both the USA and USSR were both very surprised at the loss rate of major weapons in the Yum Kippur War. It caused them both to re-evaluate their forces along the inter-German border.

Originally Posted by O.W.E.G.

And what intelligence the fact that they didn't know were going to war until the morning of the sixth of October

If you are referring to the Israelis, yes. It was no accident that Egypt and Syria both started the attack at the same time and, that all forces completely prepared. Without prior planning this would not be possible, and it takes more than a half day to prepare an air force for combat. The only total forces I know of that were (at that time) prepared to go to war with out any prior notice were the strategic nuclear forces and the SSBNs of all countries during the Cold War!

U stated Wat Israel started with and a loss of 200 aircraft wen they only had 488 that looks like if nickel grass was not to occur Israel would not have been there today

Originally Posted by O.W.E.G.

U stated Wat Israel started with and a loss of 200 aircraft wen they only had 488 that looks like if nickel grass was not to occur Israel would not have been there today

Yes you are correct but also, "IF"... the USSR had not provided an arms build-up the likelyhood of the Arab nations to start the War of Yom Kippur most like would not have started? Or, at least not at that time. Operation "Grass Nickel" also provided the IAF with later model F-4 Phantoms than the Israelis previously had. Lighter than the earlier F-4s with more powerful engines.
Aviation Week Magazine did special issues on the Israeli and Egyptian militaries a couple months after the Yom Kippur War and one comment made by an Egyptian fighter pilot was, that with the newer F-4 Phantom 2s the tactics of IAF pilots was different than previously in the conflict and the performance of the newer F-4s was also hotter.

Avon the soviets gave us t-34 mostly which was used as an anti tank gun and was useless on th battle feild
And the israelis on the israelis crossed to the east bank to capture suez city force the third army to surrender take Ismailia city advance on Cairo Geuss Wat they failed in all

Avon I noticed Ure saying the soviets supplied but we paid every dime in those weapons from our money while nickel grass was aid for free