I’m not sure why a thread about the U.S. and Iran at the NPT conference got to discussing a hypothetical Israel-Egypt war.
Marmite here is itching for these countries to go at it, apparently.
I doubt it. It’s true that the Egyptian military is much stronger now than it was last they tangled with the Israelis, but they would have a tough time.
The only relevant advantage for Egypt that I see is in numbers of tanks and infantry, and they have some M1A1 tanks along with the older M60A3.
Both countries fly F-16s, but the Israelis have mostly better ones (2003 F-16I Sufa versus 1991 F-16C/D, for example) with more range, power, advanced avionics, and all the latest missiles.
Yes, yes, but Israel doesn’t need to take and hold Egypt to win; they just need to litter the Sinai/Negev with smoking wrecks. Which they would do.
If pressed hard enough, they can hit Cairo with submarine-launched nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. Israel doesn’t give a fuck about world opinion, see.
Of course, we should note that in the real world it is very, very unlikely that Israel and Egypt will fight another war in the foreseeable future. The two don’t have the warmest of relations, but peace benefits both of them tremendously.
If we stumbled into BizarroWorld and a war did start, I think it’s unlikely the Egyptians would prevail. Even the Yom Kippur War wasn’t, strictly speaking, a military victory for the Egyptians (though it did frighten the Israelis badly enough to make concessions at the negotiating table). The Israelis have an excellent military, and the training to employ it well - the Egyptians would have a very bad day. However, the Israelis wouldn’t have a fun time of it either.
Which is, of course, one of the many excellent reasons why war won’t happen. Neither side has anything to gain that’s remotely worth the cost they’d pay - in men, treasure, and relations with the rest of the world.
It’d never happen, first of all. I know the Middle East is seen as a very dangerous region that could blow up at any time, but most people who actually live there have a much more intimate acquaintance with war and violence than most of us pansy asses in the west and they’re not gonna have a war for shits and giggles, no matter what Marmite Lover wants. There isn’t anything really going on right now that would make the Israelis and Egyptians come to blows, and neither country is eager to fight. Like Mr. Excellent said, peace benefits both countries.
If they did have a war, I don’t know. The Israelis have more money, and a better armed and trained army. The Egyptians have more manpower. The Israelis have nukes that they would not use. Both countries are allied with the US, which would throw a fit and condemn any fighting.
Eh. It’s not really even worth contemplating and I can’t believe I’m even wasting brain power thinking about it.
Hey guys, who would win a fight between a velociraptor and a saber-toothed tiger?
As for not using nukes, I imagine that Israelis expect that if they lose a war against an invading arab army, the result will be genocide. That doesn’t mean they’d use city-busters, but nuking enemy concentrations is possible. You can’t roll your tanks across the border without massing your tanks at the border, and those masses would make tempting targets for tactical nukes. If the alternative is genocide, that is.
If velociraptors were cold-blooded, then it depends on the time of day. Desert snakes, for example, are known for being somewhat torpid in the early morning while they try to sun themselves enough to get up to speed.
However, I recall reading that there are some theories that some dinosaures were actually warm-blooded. In which case, I’d say it’s too close to call, but slight edge towards the mammal. Brains matter.
FWIW, I used to be a dinosaur docent at the Field Museum and we were taught to tell people who asked us about the warm blooded hypothesis that Field paleontologists did not agree, and believed that dinosaurs were, in fact, cold-blooded.
So while I may lack training as a paleontologist myself, my loyalty to the Field Museum forces me to reject your assertion, sirrah! Dinosaurs were cold blooded!
Uh… How exactly was it anything LIKE a victory for Egypt? Israel beat the Egyptians until a stalemate at the Suez Canal (While at the same time fighting in Syria, may I add) and then renewed the offensive, crossing the canal and getting pretty darn close to Cairo. AND it was a two on one war.
Did Israel suffer heavy losses? Yes. But saying it was anything EXCEPT a crushing military defeat for both Egypt and Syria is wrong.
1v1 would NOT happen any time soon. BUT it would be an easy win for Israel.
It was close to a victory in the sense that, even though Egypt was defeated, it fought well enough to convince the Israelis to concede the Sinai at the negotiating table. That was one of Egypt’s major war aims, and they got it largely because they demonstrated that they could inflict heavy losses in combat against the IDF.
I agree, as per my earlier post, that Israeli would probably win a war with Egypt. Better planes, better armor (and armor training) and so on. But I can’t imagine anyone in the IDF would expect an “easy” victory.
I saw the original assertions from the other thread and, frankly, they were the standard anti-Israeli screed and horseshit.
A quick Google search turns up this for rankings of nations based on military strength:
Number 11: Israel
Number 17: Egypt
Of course, such rankings are nearly meaningless, since they take different things into consideration as factors in determining the ranks. Different ranking systems and sites are going to change the ranks because they emphasize different things (size of a military, say, or higher weight to ground forces or air forces or…well, whatever).
For anyone interested, here is Egypt’s OOB (from Wiki). And here is Israel’s OOB (also from Wiki).
From just a quick look at the OOB for both, I’d have to say that Israel has a slight but definite edge in technology, while Egypt has greater numbers. However, technology and size is only part of the equation, and while I don’t know a lot about Egypt’s training, I do know quite a bit about Israels, and I’d say that Israeli training is some of the best in the world. Assuming a defensive war on Israel’s part, I think the Egyptians would have a VERY rough time of it. Assuming an Israeli offensive, then the shoe would be on the other foot, and I’m not sure Israel could do more than secure the border regions against Egypt. Certainly they couldn’t conquer Egypt.
As others have said, there is virtually no chance (except in the fantasy fevered minds of an anti-Israeli fanatic such as the OP of the other thread) of a war between Egypt and Israel, but depending on the circumstances a fictitious conflict I’d have to say that at worst Israel would get a stalemate. There is zero chance that Egypt could roll through Israel and finish it ‘in a day’. That’s fantasy, complete and simple. Even assuming a crushing victory by Egypt on the border, it would take them longer than a day just to drive their army completely unopposed throughout Israel.
Sure…but moving an army, even unopposed, is nothing like taking your car out for a spin. I’m not even sure the Egyptian’s could logistically support a drive of their army from Egypt through Israel. Certainly it would be tough for them to do so…and all of that presupposes that Israel wouldn’t oppose them. If they WERE being opposed…well, I’d say that the chances of Egypt even getting TO the border areas, let alone through them, is vanishingly small.
The Sinai, between the African part of Egypt and the Israeli border, has what are probably the best roads in all of Egypt. Because they were built the Israeli army when it was part of Israel.
On the other hand, this means that the Israelis know the region really well.
Agreed. However, my point was that it takes more to move a large modern mechanized army even a couple hundred miles than to drive a car the same distance. Good roads would help, but I don’t believe Egypt has the logistics assets or system to move a large part of their army into the heart of Israel. I could be wrong about that, but I doubt I am and would be surprised if it turns out that way. Most people don’t realize how difficult it is to move a large mechanized force anywhere because the US makes it look so effortless (though they start to get at least a bit of insight when the bill comes due, and they find out how much it COSTS to move even a single armored division).
Yeah, that would certainly be part of it. Israel’s military is defensive oriented in any case…their tanks are huge, heavily armored and best suited to either short offensives or defensive struggles. Much of the border areas in Israel have probably had defensive planning studies that have been done and updated literally for decades. An Egyptian army attempting an invasion would be sticking their, um, hand into the meat grinder.
By the same token, while I think Israel COULD seize the border regions of Egypt and maybe even drive in a couple hundred miles, it would be VERY costly for them, and in the end what would they really gain that would make it worth their while? No one is going to let them keep the Suez after all.
