darkgreensoldier666
Active member
And ???? they still were much more then Israelis !
so the point that they had a little worst tanks then they should doesn't approve nothing.
OCTOBER 1973 WAR (YUM KIPPUR)- AN EGYPTIAN VICTORY
And ???? they still were much more then Israelis !
so the point that they had a little worst tanks then they should doesn't approve nothing.
Panzercracker
Active member
Israel received materiel from US, without it would be gone (use of nuclear weapons would result in a fallout that would equal MAD with Arabs losing their military but Jews losing their civilian population as well) thats one.
Not only did Israel had weapons provided by US during the conflict but it had better tanks and tankers, still without US help Israel was doomed to use nukes which would make everyone's day (including Jews) a whole lot more rainy.
Panzercracker
Active member
Aye but while your victory was impressive it makes it quite a bit less of a thermopylae when you're so much better armed than your enemies.
well, as darkgreen stated a few posts below, we had the quality while they had the quantity (minimum 2:1 ratios in tanks, planes and the rest...) and they had the surprise element 
p.s and its not like the US started teleporting equipment 5 minutes after the war outbreak like in star trek, Israel had to survive a few days to get the replacements which is impressive on its own considering the odds.
p.s and its not like the US started teleporting equipment 5 minutes after the war outbreak like in star trek, Israel had to survive a few days to get the replacements which is impressive on its own considering the odds.
Panzercracker
Active member
You mean US didnt re-outfit you after you lost so much hardware?
darkgreensoldier666
Active member
Ofcourse we were fitted by US ... but not so fast ! I don't even think that US was able to transport some Millitary Aid here durring the war ..
but you talking about this,like US won this WAR !
acttually not only US fitted israel
the most common Israel tanks were Centurion's..
and what will you tell about when one tank stopped a tank column from Sirya (it was centurion tank BTW) => Where do you see US help here??
maybe it was US soldiers dressed like Israeli there ?
Operation Nickle-Grass, the US transit by air of material to Israel had a small effect on the war itself. After the war the US of course helped greatly in re-fitting the IDF. The Arabs themselves recieved similar help from the USSR, naturally.
My point was that Israeli hardware was not better, and usually worse than Arab hardware. Lets check this:
Item-Israel|Arabs=Which is better?
Rifle-FN FAL|AK-47=Arabs have advantage because in the desert the AK is far more reliable.
APC-M113 and M3 Halftrack| BTR-50 and BTR 152= A draw, more or less
Tank- M48/Centurion/Sherman M51| T-62/T-55= Slight advantage to arabs, having Active IR which Israelis did not and the T-62 being vastly superior to the Centurions. Shermans were a seriously old tank by than as well.
Aircraft- Way too many for this chart. Israel defintly leads this with the F4, Mirage and A-4 fighting against Mig-21 and Su-7 mostly. But Russian SA-3 and SA-6 batteries prevented the IAF from assisting the ground forces and caused horrible casualties untill these batteries were physically run down by tanks and infantry.
mmarsh
Active member
Most stories I have read would put the FN-FAL ahead of the AK in notmal cirumstances, but I do agree that in the Desert the AK would have the edge due to its incredible reliability.
As for the Rest, I agree that in terms of Tanks the Arabs were better, but this was offset by the overwhelming air superiority. What was true in WWII still remains true today, a Tank without air cover is just a target. Air defense helps, but it has never been able to thawrt an air attack by itself. I cannot think of a single engagement where armor was able to achieve victory without air support.
And this is why the Arabs lost, the lost the skies therefore they lost the ground war too.
yoyo
New Member
During the 1973 war, there were no Americans or any foreigners who fought for Israel.
The U.S. sent a lot of supplies to Israel,
but the Soviet Union sent much more to both Egypt and Syria
which were supplied by other Arab nations, some of them even sent troops to fight.
While the soviets started to massively supply the Arabs on 11/10/1973,
Henry Kissinger, the U.S. secretary of state decided to delay his supplies for Israel.
When the war started the U.S. agreed to supply Israel.
But Israel would have to transfer the equipment from America by its own.
Sea ways were still blocked by the Arabs and the only aircraft available for long range flights were few passenger airplanes converted into freighters.
The low supply rate had no influence on the battle until 14/10,
when Nixon said "send any thing that can fly".
Only then supplies started to move rapidly by U.S. planes.
In 1973 Israel was outnumbered and outgunned.
However it managed to repulse the Arab offensive.
The U.S. sent a lot of supplies to Israel,
but the Soviet Union sent much more to both Egypt and Syria
which were supplied by other Arab nations, some of them even sent troops to fight.
While the soviets started to massively supply the Arabs on 11/10/1973,
Henry Kissinger, the U.S. secretary of state decided to delay his supplies for Israel.
When the war started the U.S. agreed to supply Israel.
But Israel would have to transfer the equipment from America by its own.
Sea ways were still blocked by the Arabs and the only aircraft available for long range flights were few passenger airplanes converted into freighters.
The low supply rate had no influence on the battle until 14/10,
when Nixon said "send any thing that can fly".
Only then supplies started to move rapidly by U.S. planes.
In 1973 Israel was outnumbered and outgunned.
However it managed to repulse the Arab offensive.
Sayed Zakerya
New Member
Not true. The Egyptian army did not lose his new positions which were liberated through the War on the Canal Eastern shores. These positions extend 180 Kms on the Canal east shore with an average depth of 7 to 10 Kms. Check the following map which shows the armistic lines of 22nd of OCt 1973 which marks the UN ceasefire day. Also, it shows the lines on 24th of OCT which marks the practical end of the War. The two days difference between the two dates were employed by IDF to cut the third army supply lines. As these two days were proved to be after Israel official acceptance of ceasefire on the 22nd of OCT, Israel found masive international opposition to consider the lines of the 24th of Oct as a truth lines. Egypt threatened to ignore the UN ceasefire decision & to resume military action if the third army logistic shippments are checked by IDF. Israel was obliged to open these lines on the 26th of OCT & to start negotiation with Egypt in the attendance of UN officiers to discuss the return to 22nd lines. This negotiation ended with Kilo101 disengagement agreement which marked IDF withdraw to 35 kilometers away from the canal deep inside Sinai. This was completed on the 18th of Jan 1974. This withdrawal liberated 6300 Km2 of Sinai which was under the occupation of IDF since 1967 as shown in the second map. Israel lost lands in this war & did not maintain any political gain. This war marked the first IDF withrawal under fire without the slightest gain.
This is the Egyptian victory.
Sayed Zakerya
New Member
Sorry but that is not quite true. You were wright regaring the Airforce.IAF had far higher quality fighters & bombers in comparison to the EAF. Yet, there was no comparison regarding the tanks as well. IDF was equipped was much higher quality tanks than the Arabs. Here is the comparison
To counter IDF superiority in Airforce, Sam2,3 & 6 anti air missiles batteries were employed forming a complete umbrella over the advancing Egyptian Army. To countert IDF armour superiority, the Egyptian infantry troops were intensivley equipped with anti-tank rockets Strella rockets &
RPG-7. These were the real surprise of 1973 War. Man against tank. The glory 8th of OCT will always mark the worst tanks defeats of IDF. On this day ADAN armoured brigade, MENDLER armoured brigade & SHARON armoured brigade launched IDF main couter attack on the Egyptian army new canal east shore positions but was confronted by the brave infantry troops who destroyed more than 250 Tanks & repulsed the attacking brigades.
The following photo shows the torn IDF tanks by the Egyptian infantry troops.
FALCONsw
Banned
Egypt Commandos
They Wrote"Commando Brigade 122":sniper::tank:
You are right.But its very strange Egypt never had this Tank before.So definitely its not Egyptian Tank.Its an Israeli tank was destroyed by Egyptian commando team.They wrote on the Israeli tank their Unit number.
They Wrote"Commando Brigade 122":sniper::tank:
Last edited:
FALCONsw
Banned
I know.BUT I AM SORRY this tank in the Pic is Israeli one,but after the Egyptian commando team destroyed it,they wrote their name on it.Egypt never had this Tank b4.
THE PHRASE SAY"COMMANDO BRIGADE 122"
BUT WHATEVER,THIS WAR HAD A LOT OF TANKS DESTROYED ON BOTH SIDES
Last edited:
yoyo
New Member
Give me a break.
Egypt threatened to ignore the ceasefire ???
Once the Israelis broke it, the Egyptians broke it too.
There is no evidence that the Egyptians were given order not to oppose the advancing Israelis,
who violated the cease fire by their own.
The Egyptians did manage to defeat the Israelis inside the city of Suez,
but they didn't succeed to defend neither their supply lines, nor their SAM batteries.
Egypt did ignore the cease fire after the Israelis ignored it and Saadat desperately begged the UN to stop the advancing Israelis. Not the opposite.
If Saadat could lift the Israeli siege on his 30,000 3rd army troops by his own, why did Brezhnev threated to send Soviet troops to fight for Egypt if the Israelis wouldn't stop fighting.
Why did Saadat need foreign troops to fight his wars unless he was in a desperate situation?
Israel could easily annihilate the 3rd army after only 3 more days of siege a bombardment and Saadat knew that.
The corrupt Egyptian regime claims that Israel succeeded to encircle the 3rd army because the Egyptians thought the war is over:
The Israelis announced they accept a truce,
The Egyptians left their positions and the Israelis broke the truce and moved forward.
Nonsense.
Israel had gained most of its achievements west of the Suez Canal before the first cease fire of 22/10/1973.
They have cleared the canal area from most of Egyptian SAMs and blocked most of the 3rd army's supply lines.
The ceasefire was firstly violated by some Egyptian troops; the Israelis used it as an excuse and continued the fight.
The Egyptians were still in their positions and could fight back, but instead,
they surrendered by thousands to the Israelis.
On 23/10 the Israelis only blocked the last most southern supply road,
destroyed the remaining missile batteries and brought armored reinforcements.
On 24/10 the encirclement of the 3rd army was complete.
Checkmate.
The corrupt Egyptian regime claims that during the 1973 war, Israeli troops that crossed the Suez Canal and were on its west bank were surrounded by the Egyptians.
And Saadat avoided annihilating them because the U.S. threated to fight for Israel if he does so.
Nonsense.
In any stage of the war, there was no a U.S. threat to intervene for Israel.
If there was such a threat, it could be only if Israel asks the U.S. to force a cease fire and the Egyptians refuse.
Israel didn't ask a cease fire at the end, and even broke the one that was forced on it by America.
Egypt was the one who asked the first cease fire of the 22/10, when Saadat knew his desperate situation.
The Americans wanted a cease fire as well in order to stop the Arab oil embargo on the U.S.
Not for the saving of Israel.
In fact, the soviets were those who threatened to fight on Egypt side,
if the Israelis would have continuing the siege on the surrounded 3rd army.
Egypt threatened to ignore the ceasefire ???
Once the Israelis broke it, the Egyptians broke it too.
There is no evidence that the Egyptians were given order not to oppose the advancing Israelis,
who violated the cease fire by their own.
The Egyptians did manage to defeat the Israelis inside the city of Suez,
but they didn't succeed to defend neither their supply lines, nor their SAM batteries.
Egypt did ignore the cease fire after the Israelis ignored it and Saadat desperately begged the UN to stop the advancing Israelis. Not the opposite.
If Saadat could lift the Israeli siege on his 30,000 3rd army troops by his own, why did Brezhnev threated to send Soviet troops to fight for Egypt if the Israelis wouldn't stop fighting.
Why did Saadat need foreign troops to fight his wars unless he was in a desperate situation?
Israel could easily annihilate the 3rd army after only 3 more days of siege a bombardment and Saadat knew that.
The corrupt Egyptian regime claims that Israel succeeded to encircle the 3rd army because the Egyptians thought the war is over:
The Israelis announced they accept a truce,
The Egyptians left their positions and the Israelis broke the truce and moved forward.
Nonsense.
Israel had gained most of its achievements west of the Suez Canal before the first cease fire of 22/10/1973.
They have cleared the canal area from most of Egyptian SAMs and blocked most of the 3rd army's supply lines.
The ceasefire was firstly violated by some Egyptian troops; the Israelis used it as an excuse and continued the fight.
The Egyptians were still in their positions and could fight back, but instead,
they surrendered by thousands to the Israelis.
On 23/10 the Israelis only blocked the last most southern supply road,
destroyed the remaining missile batteries and brought armored reinforcements.
On 24/10 the encirclement of the 3rd army was complete.
Checkmate.
The corrupt Egyptian regime claims that during the 1973 war, Israeli troops that crossed the Suez Canal and were on its west bank were surrounded by the Egyptians.
And Saadat avoided annihilating them because the U.S. threated to fight for Israel if he does so.
Nonsense.
In any stage of the war, there was no a U.S. threat to intervene for Israel.
If there was such a threat, it could be only if Israel asks the U.S. to force a cease fire and the Egyptians refuse.
Israel didn't ask a cease fire at the end, and even broke the one that was forced on it by America.
Egypt was the one who asked the first cease fire of the 22/10, when Saadat knew his desperate situation.
The Americans wanted a cease fire as well in order to stop the Arab oil embargo on the U.S.
Not for the saving of Israel.
In fact, the soviets were those who threatened to fight on Egypt side,
if the Israelis would have continuing the siege on the surrounded 3rd army.
Forgive me for some grammar mistakes :
No doubt that crossing the Canal and Crashing Bar live line is a great success.
It was surprise for all even the Egyptian.
I want to comment on some points:
1-Israel at Cairo Doors[Its Impossible](Sending your Armors for Cairo is very risky you will face Air attacks and Special forces ambushes.This mean your armor will arrive Cairo Exhausted and will be defeated easily by armor Brigade in Cairo.
2-Sending your forces for Cairo mean that the war will take long time and that mean:
-Arab forces continue to flow to the front-trying to attack Cairo will not be tolerated by other Arab countries and they will be in war directly in war like Iraq and Jordan,This is not to be in favor of Israel-If Jordan and Iraq entered the war they will attack the heart of Israel-Egypt will continue the naval blockade.
"So the cease fire is acceptable for both sides"
Also if there no cease fire both sides will lose a lot of forces even the Israeli forces.
Cease Fire came was good for both sides.Also i doubt that USSR will fight for Egypt,But USA fight for Israel is acceptable.
ِSo Egyptian Forces had achieved its purpose,It is an uncomfortable situation to Israel.
Also Israeli forces achieved its purpose,It is an uncomfortable situation to Egypt.
In this situation cease fire is a must.Its impossible for both sides to continue the battle.Both sides know what will happen if they didn't stop[All Arabs VS USA&Israel]
- Continued fighting would have cut off oil supply for long periods and is not universally accepted.
-All sides have played all the trump cards in this battle.So the situation was very bad for all sides even Israel.
So Egypt achieved a military success and Israel achieved a military success.
No one achieved a total victory.
After the war and the peace treatment Egypt restored the land and Israel Israel got rid of the Egyptian military direct threat.
So If some one come to me and said"Israel won the war,and your army was unable to fight" I will say"So why Israel didn't refuse the final cease fire and went to occupy Cairo and control all Egypt in one operation,haha,I think Israel leaders are not stupid to do this or even refuse the cease fire"
No doubt that crossing the Canal and Crashing Bar live line is a great success.
It was surprise for all even the Egyptian.
I want to comment on some points:
1-Israel at Cairo Doors[Its Impossible](Sending your Armors for Cairo is very risky you will face Air attacks and Special forces ambushes.This mean your armor will arrive Cairo Exhausted and will be defeated easily by armor Brigade in Cairo.
2-Sending your forces for Cairo mean that the war will take long time and that mean:
-Arab forces continue to flow to the front-trying to attack Cairo will not be tolerated by other Arab countries and they will be in war directly in war like Iraq and Jordan,This is not to be in favor of Israel-If Jordan and Iraq entered the war they will attack the heart of Israel-Egypt will continue the naval blockade.
"So the cease fire is acceptable for both sides"
Also if there no cease fire both sides will lose a lot of forces even the Israeli forces.
Cease Fire came was good for both sides.Also i doubt that USSR will fight for Egypt,But USA fight for Israel is acceptable.
ِSo Egyptian Forces had achieved its purpose,It is an uncomfortable situation to Israel.
Also Israeli forces achieved its purpose,It is an uncomfortable situation to Egypt.
In this situation cease fire is a must.Its impossible for both sides to continue the battle.Both sides know what will happen if they didn't stop[All Arabs VS USA&Israel]
- Continued fighting would have cut off oil supply for long periods and is not universally accepted.
-All sides have played all the trump cards in this battle.So the situation was very bad for all sides even Israel.
So Egypt achieved a military success and Israel achieved a military success.
No one achieved a total victory.
After the war and the peace treatment Egypt restored the land and Israel Israel got rid of the Egyptian military direct threat.
So If some one come to me and said"Israel won the war,and your army was unable to fight" I will say"So why Israel didn't refuse the final cease fire and went to occupy Cairo and control all Egypt in one operation,haha,I think Israel leaders are not stupid to do this or even refuse the cease fire"
Last edited: