Israeli preparation for war with Syria was less extensive than the Egyptian preparations, because the border was smaller (Approximately 80 miles vs. 40 miles) in comparison to the Egyptian-Israeli border. (See Figure 2. Israel - Syria Border). Israel built fortified Jewish settlements in the Golan. Anticipating Syriawould attack with armor, Israel made obstacles, tank traps, and minefields. Reinforced bunkers and tank placements were created. The battlefield plan was laid out with interlocking fields of fire to halt any Syrian advance. Israel had made peace with Jordan so there was no perceived need to fortify the Israel-Jordan border.
Egyptian troop and installation preparations during the War of Attrition were in direct contrast to Israel’s Bar-Lev Line. Egypt did not anticipate a large scale attack across the Suez Canal so there was no need for the equivalent of a Bar-Lev Line on the west side of the Suez Canal. They did have mobile forces of armor, artillery, and infantry that harassed the Israelis with probes and artillery barrages. Egypt also practiced surge and retreat of troops along the Suez Canal. These surges were purposefully done to lull Israel into complacency and safety. Disinformation was practiced and journalists often found Arab documents detailing the shortcomings in Arab unity and military readiness. Egypt’s president Anwar Sadat contributed as well. Several times he had threatened military action against Israel and the deadlines passed with no repercussions. All the while, Sadat and his counterpart in Syria, President Hafez al Asad, were committed to military action. Egypt took action to address two specific Israeli advantages from the Six Day War, Israeli air superiority and Israeli tank operations. Egypt ...
... middle of paper ...
...y the tactical advantage from 6-8 October and would attack the Golan Heights on three fronts, a northern from, a middle front, and a southern front. One division allocated for each front and a Ranger Battalion to take an Israeli command and control outpost in the high north. An intense barrage of Syrian artillery prepared the assault. Unfortunately for the Syrians, the terrain of the Golan Heights provided limited avenues of approach so Israel had well planned defensive positions. 37 Three divisions proceeded to advance in their corridor encountering stiff resistance from the undermanned, but well prepared defensive Israeli positions. Syrian armor had difficulty negotiating preplaced minefields, tank traps, and obstacles and it was “target practice”38 for the Israeli defenders and the Syrians suffered heavy losses. Syria still had strength in numbers on its side.
The overall execution of this amphibious assault has developed into the modern day air assault. The method of choosing the terrain on which to fight the battle is not new but doing so by rapidly massing on the flanks or rear of the enemy through maneuver was started by this battle. As MacArthur demonstrated, an air assault becomes the most effective method for disrupting and surrounding the enemy and denying terrain. Also, by choosing a tactically advantageous location a much smaller force can subdue an enemy of greater numbers.
In this paper, I will provide a Battle Analysis and outline the events leading up to and surrounding the Battle of 73 Eastings (refers to a north-south grid line). In addition, I will describe how the United States Army’s (USA) 2nd Armored Calvary Regiment (ACR) defeated forces from the Iraqi Republican Guard (IRG) using speed, technology and superior combat power. Although some consider the Battle of 73 Eastings extremely successful, some consider it a failure due to the large amount of Iraqi forces that retreated towards Bagdad. Lastly, I will analyze how each side used their intelligence assets and what they could have used to change the outcome.
At the beginning of the Suez Canal crisis many individuals felt hostility towards each other and the main concern was the ownership of the Suez Canal and to who exactly would gain the authority to run it on their own accord. In 1954 Gamal Abdul Nasser came to power in Egypt, he was once formally known as an Egyptian army officer, before becoming a politician. After the attack of the Israelis in Gaza, Egypt to protect Israel from hostility the Egyptians had been putting forward against them; many Egyptians felt hatred for the Egyptian king, this led to a democratic system being built and that was how Nasser came to power in a democratic society in which he was able to play on the hearts of Arab Nationalism. When the cold war began to surface Britain asked Egypt to join an anti-soviet alliance with them in times of need, for Egyptian Suez Canal was in the authority of Britain making Egypt an ally of the United Kingdom. Nasser refused saying t...
“So much in life depends on our attitude, the way we choose to see things and respond to others makes all the difference.” -Thomas S. Monson. People need to have more respect for one another and a positive attitude against racial discrimination. In “The Wednesday Wars,” by Gary D. Schmidt, there is a Vietnamese girl named Mai Thi attending Camillo Junior High. Mai Thi is a refugee from Vietnam and escaped the torment and grueling graphic images of the war happening there. Mrs. Bigio’s (the school cook) husband was killed by the Viet Cong while fighting bravely in the war. When Mrs. Bigio received the news, she was stricken with all different emotions: grief, sorrow, depression, hatred, and vengeance. One day at
Egypt began as a collection of feudal settlements in 3200 BC along the Nile Delta that continued to grow by military expansion and over centuries became an empire controlling most of the ancient Middle East, north to Syria- Palestine and south to Nubia. (Ancient Egypt, 2011) (Morkot, 2003, p. xxxvii)The threat of invasion was never a concern for Egypt as they had benefited from its geographical location, protected by the desert to the east and west and by the Mediterranean Sea in the north. In addition, the Egyptians enjoyed military superiority over their enemies and thus believed they did not require weapons more advanced than their enemies. This situation did not incentivize the Egyptians to participate in the international arms trade of their day, “Diplomacy , rather tha...
...d took control of the Gaza Strip once again. Anwar el-Sadat then became president after Gamal Abdel Nasser died in 1970. In an effort to take control of the Sinai Peninsula, Anwar el-Sadat attacked the Israelis. After a cease-fire, the United Nation’s troops then returned to keep things peaceful. Israel then later withdrew and was only allowed to use it for non-military purposes. In 1978 a peace treaty was established between Egypt and Israel which influenced more peace in the Middle East. Although a formal treaty was signed in 1979. In 1981 Sadat was assassinated and Mohamed Hosni Mubarak followed him in presidency. The Sinai Peninsula was then returned to Egypt in 1982 after the Israeli troops withdrew from the region. Mubarak embraced Sadat’s policies and managed to climb to the top and be once again making Egypt known as one of the leaders of the Arab world.
The Middle East has since time immemorial been on the global scope because of its explosive disposition. The Arab Israeli conflict has not been an exception as it has stood out to be one of the major endless conflicts not only in the region but also in the world. Its impact continues to be felt all over the world while a satisfying solution still remains intangible. A lot has also been said and written on the conflict, both factual and fallacious with some allegations being obviously evocative. All these allegations offer an array of disparate views on the conflict. This essay presents an overview of some of the major literature on the controversial conflict by offering precise and clear insights into the cause, nature, evolution and future of the Israel Arab conflict.
The causes of the Yom Kippur war one can date it back all the way to
In conclusion, the true victor of the war is Egypt since it achieved its goals militarily – the twelve kilometers of land in the Eastern bank of the Suez Canal – and somehow achieved its goals politically and economically. Sadat proved to himself, to Egypt, and to the whole world that he is, in fact, an excellent military leader that possesses a strategic mind. Using his strategic tactics and careful planning, Sadat was able to achieve what he wanted. In addition, his offers to make peace with Israel that put an end to the war, granted him a Nobel peace prize. Israel, however, agreed to the peace treaty Egypt offered making it appear to be afraid of Egypt’s power. History is an essential part in the process of learning, as without it, one would never know the hidden mysteries of a country.
Since the inception of an Israeli nation-state in 1948, violence and conflict has played a major role in Israel’s brief history. In the Sixty-One year’s Israel has been a recognized nation-state, they have fought in 6 interstate wars, 2 civil wars, and over 144 dyadic militarized interstate disputes (MIDs) with some display of military force against other states (Maoz 5). Israel has been involved in constant conflict throughout the past half century. Israel’s tension against other states within the Middle East has spurred vast economic, social, and political unity that has fostered a sense of nationalism and unity in Israel not seen in most other states. Over the next several pages I will try and dissect the reasons for why the nation state of Israel has been emerged in constant conflict and how this conflict has helped foster national unity and identity among the people of Israel.
"Plutot mourir que faillir"("Rather dying than failing")and “UBIQUE! QUO FAS ET GLORIA DUCUNT" “Everywhere! Where Right and Glory Lead.” The Seven Years war, or the French and Indian war to Americans, was arguably the first true world. The Seven years war was a worldwide war fought in Europe, North America, and India between. It was France, Austria, Russia, Saxony, Sweden, and (after 1762) Spain on the one side and Prussia, Great Britain, and Hanover on the other (the Americans where there only for the North American theater).This conflict was the result of the ongoing hostilities and the struggle of supremacy between France and Great Britain. In 1754, in North America, George Washington was defeated at Fort Necessity in western Pennsylvania. From that moment on, both France and Great Britain dispatched troops, although not in equal numbers. For France, the war in Europe was the top priority, so the country sent just a few troops. It also considered it was more important to protect its colonies in the West Indies, since sugar cane was more lucrative than the fur trade in New France (Canada). Great Britain on the other hand was determined to destroy France's colonial empire, and it sent more than 20,000 soldiers to America. It must also be noted that American colonists were unable to defend themselves against their Canadian counterparts, who, with the help the Native Americans excelled in the art of the guerilla warfare. For New England, it was imperative to obliterate New France and its Native allies, which were preventing the States from acquiring and occupying new land (New England had a very large population and sought new land to occupy and farm.) France waste no time in the war and attacked the British held island of Minorca. This island ended up in the hands of the French. Although France did well in the war until 1757, the tide proceeded to turn, in favor of the British troops, after William Pitt became Sec. of state for war. The British won several victories right including the battle on the Plains of Abraham in 1759, when James Wolfe defeated the army of Montcalm. Things were far from over, however, because the final result depended on whether France was victorious or defeated. In the end, France was defeated on all fronts (West Indies, the subcontinent of India, Europe and America). The Treaty of Paris, signed by Great Britain, France, and Spain on February 10, 1763, ended the Seven Years' War and its American counterpart, the French and Indian War (1754-1763).
The Holocaust was the almost complete destruction of Jews and others by the Nazis during World War II, which lasted between1939 and 1945. We can learn much from this event and ways to prevent similar events from happening again. However, it can be compared to today’s Arab Israeli Conflict, which is the cause of a dispute over the land of Palestine.
In 1095, Jerusalem was a flourishing city that was the main powerhouse for three religions; all three religions wanted complete control over the holy land. These three religions were Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, and all three religions were known to use Jerusalem as a place of religious reasons. But in turn, the best part about Jerusalem was the political power it held. Pope Urban’s demand for power and Jewish Israel’s desire to control Palestinians are the factors in the political conflict over the holy land.
The Arab-Israeli conflict is perhaps the most complex political issue of our time. Many have resorted to simply blaming one side or the other. If people took the time to understand the history and correct the misconceptions a potential path forward for the Palestinians comes in place. The main reason as to why the conflict continues is because both Palestinians and Israelis have been fighting over land for the past 66 years.
One of the first recognizable problems that the Arab forces had when entering the war in 1948 was the insignificant amount of soldiers the army contained. At the beginning stages of the war, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Syria, did not send their full armies into Palestine. The combination of all five countries led to about 25,000 soldiers who were poorly trained, unorganized, and did not have a supply system that could function properly. By May of 1948, it is estimated that Egypt sent a total of 10,000 soldiers, Jordan 8,000 soldiers, Iraq 4,000-6,000 soldiers, Syria 1,500-2,500 soldiers, and Lebanon fewer than 1,000 soldiers to fight in the war.# The Arab army lacked the ne...