October 1973 Ramadan War

[GoMig-21]

Basically

Oh no, look who's here! The thread is gonna be one huge battle now lol.

Eygpt couldn't gain anything on war .so surrendered at a negotiation table stabbing the syrians and Palestinians for ever ending the dream their rebellion flag represented

1) couldn't gain anything
2) surrendered at a negation table
3) stabbing the syrians and Palestinians for ever
4) ending the dream their rebellion flag represented

Oh boy, a lot to unpack here. Let's take a look at each one of these crazy fallacies lol.

1) Egypt gained a major part of the Sinai territory. Granted the square mileage of the actual territory in Sinai wasn't huge, but one must factor in the obstacles that needed to be crossed and either destroyed or occupied and those were the massive undertaking of crossing the Suez Canal with a force of 5 divisions comprising of tanks, armored vehicles, mechanized units, special force and roughly 95,000 troops. This was achieved in a record time of 6 hours.

Once the canal was crossed, the entire Barlev line which was 100 kilometers long and stretched from the furthest point north in Port Said which is the entrance to the Suez Canal from the Mediterranean Sea all the way south to the entrance of the Red Sea. That is a massive stretch. The Barlev line was a huge sand barrier wall the zionists erected days after their criminal adventure of 1967 on the east side of the canal to prevent (or make it very difficult) for the Egyptian army to get over. It was a gigantic sand wall with 16 outposts spread out throughout the entire 100-kilometer stretch.

Look at this thing.

Notice the cutout sections? I'll get to that in a minute.

These are all 16 zionist outpost locations. The correct term should be fortifications because that's what they were. All the crap they did had Nazi elements written all over them because that's exactly what they were/are. They were Nazis who stole Palestinian lands and moved there and brought all their Nazi war-fighting skills and tactics and methods with them. The Barlev line and its fortifications are the perfect example of that, akin to the Migneaux line which was built by the French to keep the Nazis out of France and the Nazis learnt from that. This could very well have been assisted in the designing of it by the French when they planned to jointly attack Egypt and occupy the Sinai with Britain, France and the zionist in 1956.



Small example of the outposts, complete with trenches from one underground bunker to the other complete with meeting rooms, sleeping rooms, kitchens bathrooms you name it.



The initial crossing made by Egyptian infantrymen in rubber dinghies with paddles and then hiking the massive & steep barrier carrying RPGs, flame-throwers, AKs and all sorts of other equipment to seize the outposts first. This was initiated after a full hour and a half of hundreds of artillery fire from the west bank onto the fortifications.




Once these men were over the barrier and took control of all the outposts, the genius of this war plan took place. Prior to the war when the initial plannning phase was being decided, Shazly and Co. experimented with all sorts of methods on how to break through that barrier to allow the floating bridges to cross the armored divisions over the canal and through the barrier. They tried dynamite, explosives, dropping bombs from fighter jets but none those methods were efficient enough. Then a young army engineer came up with a brilliant idea to use gas-powered generators to pump water out of the canal through high-pressure fire hoses and simply erode the sand. And that's what they did. Worked like a charm in record time without any of the cost and dangers of bombs & explosives.

Once the openings were washed out, the pontoon bridges were quickly assembled and splashed and assembled with the assistance of PT boats and connected both sides for all the armored & infantry units to cross. Total of 20 bridges across the entire canal stretch.

During high tides, the current was brutal that it bowed the bridges in their center span. They had to run PT boats for ours to control the current from snapping the bridges.

Once the outpost were taken over, this is the ONLY surrendering that took place, and it wasn't any Egyptians looool Handing over the zionist flag and saluting the victorious party.

That flag has a nice home now at the Cairo war museum.

The war started on the 6th of October and by the 8th, the Egyptian 2nd & 3rd armies has taken over the canal, the entire Barlev line, 15 out of 16 fortification posts and a 30 kilometer stretch into the Sinai that ran all 100 miles from north to south.

2) Obviously there was no surrender whatsoever. Nice try though. The "negotiating table" was for a cease-fire agreement set up by the United Nations. The zionist were being stupid at the ceasefire negotiations that Egypt threatened to continue the war, actually. But the zionist knew they had no chance and that their position was untenable and just as fragile as the 3rd Army's if not worse. Ended up tucking their tails between their legs and withdrew like the defeated army that they were.

They lost all the land they occupied in their fake encirclement stunt PLUS all the gained territory by the Egyptian army which remained in Egyptian hands. If that isn't a solid Egyptian victory, I couldn't fathom what would be.

If anything, it was more of a zionist surrender because what happened in the end? The zionist retreated under a huge Egyptian armored and missile force just stationed a few kilometers away and they not only withdrew in a surrender but lost all the land that was gained by Egypt during the war. That's quite different from the way you're trying to falsely portray it, bro. It's all evident in these maps right here.

3) stabbing the Syrians and Palestinians for ever

How did we stab the Syrians in the back? Explain that to me, pls. What an awful thing to say, man. We died and bled on the field and held our end of the bargain while they completely blew their chance. They made tremendous gains across the Golan all the way to the River Jordan and then got beat badly by a tiny zionist force that pushed them all the way back. How were we supposed to do anything for them? As a matter of fact, that was one of Sadat's biggest mistakes was sending the two units from each army to their deaths just to relieve the pressure off the Syrians. Shazly warned him that it was futile and not to do it. But Sadat was stubborn and we lost a lot of tanks but especially great men who sacrifice themselves just to take pressure off of the Syrians who were failing badly on the Golan. That's a terrible accusation.

4) ending the dream their rebellion flag represented

Nothing lasts forever. Things change, people move on and life goes on, ma man.

Ironically Eygpt didn't change their flag
Though briefly Arabs did kick out Eygpt out of OIC

You're thinking of the United Arab Republic of Egypt flag. That was changed after Nasser died.

This is the same Egyptian flag as today that was raised in Sinai in 1973, homie.

The Arab countries kicked Egypt out after the Peace Accords, not after this war. That was another 4 years later. But hey, they've since changed their minds and we're back in the fold just like the bros we've always been and look at what has happened with those who've decided to move on vs those who haven't? I think it's clear as day that Egypt made the right decision.

 

[The SC]

Two very very simple questions that need a yes sir no answer


Did Eygpt took over all the lost land in 1967 from Israel or how much%?

Did Eygpt deviated away from rest of the Arab world in ending the war and post war agenda & getting kicked out of OIC and Arab League ?


Any sane person will answer no and yes

All the answers and much more are in this thread.. either read or live..
and stop trolling..

 

[GoMig-21]

All the answers and much more are in this thread.. either tread or live..
and stop trolling..

It was so late when I made that post it's full of grammatical errors I went to edit it and the edit function is gone. The new format on the new forum isn't as good as the old one TBH, don't you think so? The edit option used to be available for as long as the thread was alive.

I forgot to load the disengagement maps showing the massive loss of zionist territory after the ceasefire agreement and by 1975 when they were pushed as far back as the passes to allow for the peace-keeping forces to have their area of control and the Egyptian army to maintain the territory it gained and reopen the Suez Canal. I'll try loading them up some other time.

There is difference between fantasy and reality..I thought after 40,000 gazans or more specifically Arabs slaughter few 100 feet from Eygpt would have made that clear but apparently it hasnt

Shifting goal posts again? lol

 

[Waz]

I remember watching a documentary showing normal Egyptian men taking up arms (the army was too far off) to defend a city or town on the Egyptian side when the Israeli columns were taking land to barter for, when they crossed the canal. They had heavy losses inflicted on them and never tried to take the city/town again.
Just amazing valor.

 

[GoMig-21]

Two very very simple questions that need a yes sir no answer


Did Eygpt took over all the lost land in 1967 from Israel or how much%?

Did Eygpt deviated away from rest of the Arab world in ending the war and post war agenda & getting kicked out of OIC and Arab League ?


Any sane person will answer no and yes

Egypt didn't take over ALL the lost land from 1967 yes that's true. So is that what needed to happen for you to acknowledge that it was an Egyptian victory? So gaining full control of the canal and 30 kilometers of territory into the Sinai is not considered a victory to you because the ENTIRE Sinai territory wasn't recovered? That's your perception of what a victory would've been in this war?

What if I told you that wasn't the goal of the war? And that the goal was limited to exactly what was achieved, would you then admit that it was in fact an Egyptian victory?

That seems to be what quite a few people think; the objective of this war launched by Egypt was to recover the entire Sinai Peninsula, but it wasn't. Because we didn't have the power to do that, especially when you consider that this was 5 years after the humiliating defeat of 1967. We were crippled and realized that and the main factor was that our air force had been mostly destroyed on the ground and then fought a 3 year war of attrition with the zionist where we discovered they were much better trained pilots with better tactics and better equipment. We had made an honest self-evaluation of the defeat in 67 and made the determination that the offensive plan for 1973 would have to be limited to our strength and capabilities.

That being understood, the objective was simply to cross the canal, take control of the 16 outposts along the entire stretch of the canal and penetrate deep enough into Sinai within the protection of the SAM umbrella shield's range which was approximately 30 kilometers deep from the canal. And that's exactly what was happened.

The idea was also to inflict as much of a human toll on them that they would realize that 1967 was a fluke, and that their aura of invincibility was shattered in the wake of their success and false sense of pride and whatever BS they enjoyed.

And that was achieved. They were smacked in the face to the point where that one-eyed bandit moshe dayan was crying thinking it was the ultimate destruction of the 3rd temple or something like that. This was the guy who was so full of himself, basking in his own stink & glory of 67 to the point where after that war he was actually laughing and ragging at the Egyptian army and saying things like "I'll fight the Egyptian army any time and be victorious" or some crap like that. He was saying the complete opposite after this war which is amazing how karma comes around and bites you in the ass.

There's a book that was all zionist propaganda with pictures of nothing about the war as a totality of events, but rather only their penetration to the west into Egypt proper (typical) and it had a bunch of colored pictures and one of them was a sequence of him and a bunch of his jackboot thug criminal goons walking around the beautiful Egyptian green farmlands and small villages smiling and doing his glory-basking for the cameras and suddenly an Egyptian Mi-17 flies right over them and the brave Egyptian soldiers in the helicopter hand-dropped a large bomb in attempt to kill him and his posse but they missed by about 100 meters or so. Not something anyone can do on the cuff like that and unfortunately the zionist had a TOW-mounted armored vehicle nearby and quickly shot the Mi-17 down and it crashed in a huge ball of fire. Credit to those brave men who sacrificed their lives attempting such a daring & difficult mission. But the series of pictures were so telling where one minute he was smiling for the cameras and the next he looked like he had the fear of God in him with a coronary failure and a triple heart attack with a taste of stroke and a full-fledged panic attack while crying on the ground at the same time, him and his goons l-o-l-o-l! I hope to get a hold of that book and pics someday. Just a small example of the results & attitude changes this war created.

Back to the maps.



The orange is very misleading as to the territory captured by the Egyptian 2nd & 3rd armies. The outline I drew is much closer to reality which matches the km scale for the map size at the bottom left where I also drew the width of approximately 25-30 kilometers. That was the predetermined SAM umbrella range. The straight line I drew from the southern tip in Sharm El Sheikh all the way up north into the Mediterranean is the line where the passes are (a series of mountains in the Sinai where there are only a few openings to pass through from east to west & vice versa, hence the "passes"). Roughly near Bir Gifgafa shown in the center of the line. That's how far back the zionist were forced to retreat in their defeat.

Here's the Egyptian map which matches the gained territory lines I drew in that above map.



The orange/brown is Egyptian army gained territory, the green is International Peace Keeping Forces buffer zone and beyond that is how far back the zionist had to retreat.

Even this one from Wikipedia (which is totally zionist controlled as we all know) shows the same actual final disengagement lines that my & the Egyptian/Arabic maps show.



All the diagonally blue-lined area (supposed to be wider and closer to 25km like I've shown) is the territory gained by the Egyptian 2nd & 3rd armies remaining as Egyptian gained territory. How much clearer can a military victory be? I challenge anyone (especially you @ziaulislam to prove otherwise since you said this:

ziaulislam said:
Eygpt couldn't gain anything on war .so surrendered at a negotiation table

You also asked what percentage of the land Egypt got back from this war, well there it is in those maps.

The better question is how much illegally occupied territory did Israel lose? And the answer is a significant portion of the Sinai, practically 1/3 if you include the peace-keeping forces buffer zone.

Amazing, isn't it? The deception of the western control on the twisting and tweaking of the historical facts to suit their narrative. So obvious how those lines are not even close to the real lines just to incrementally add to the overall deception and degradation of the Egyptian army's success in this war.

So when they say "the war was a military victory for Israel but a political victory for Egypt" you can laugh as you now know how absurd that is. And how effective their propaganda and manipulation machines are, working 24/7/365 as we clearly see it today in the news and online.

 

[The SC]

I simply pointed out that Eygpt never got any land back (ime the Sinai)..it only got Sinai back on negaotiation table in 1982(8 years later) deviating(or stabbing if u like drama) from rest of the Arab world including its allies in war, resulting in Eygpt being kicked out of Arab League and OIC and giving isrealis a legitimatacy that they use till date to slaughter Arabs

Tell me what's is wrong here? It's just history..I have no shame saying Pakistanis killed Bengalis and surrendered to India..it history
Are you creating a parallel history in which Eygpt didnot negaotiated a withdraw in 1980 and expelling from Arab League didn't happen in 1979 till 1989 when non Arab countries pushed for Eygpt to be back in oic ??

Parallel history that Pakistanis sometimes wish to make with respect to India??

And for pointing out written documented undeniable history I get soft warning points ..for what did I call names or abused eygptians?? No
I simply pointed out that eygptians did what was good for them ..a Egyptian nationalist movement started and Arab nationalist movement died...it's as simple as that

You are not familiar with the subject.. it is obvious.. if you were you'll know that the Egyptian army took the Eastern part of the Canal from IDF and destroyed the Barliv line.. and hold on to about 30 km from the canal on the east side till the end of the war.. then they negotiated the rest..

Don't blabber anymore fallacies here..

 

[The SC]

Brave work by civilians but military failure of 1960-1970s wasn't Soviet weapons but lack of leadership and lack of training of Arab military

Just as we see today lack of leadership and lack of military training..they have best Americans weapons now but results are pretty much the same

Arab nationalism died, the revolt flag became meaningless and nationalism emiratis, Saudi, eygptians, nationalism lives

Bengali pilots shot down several Israeli plans in same aircraft that eygptians and Jordanian thought to be peace(piece ) of junk.. clearly he wasn't a magician

This thread is about the 1973 Ramadan war not the 67 war..

You are still saying false info about training and leadership..

Maybe you need another warning..

 

[Foinikas]

I think the main problem was that Arabs,once more,had different goals from each other while pretending to be on the same page when planning the war.

 

[Mehmed Bey]

May Allah forgive him and strengthen him and may he rest in blessed peace InshaAllah.

If you don't mid me asking, where did he serve?
You're right it was a different time than nowadays. I was living in Cyprus (Nicosia) when the war broke out and I'll never forget both my mother & Father watching the brief TV news and then tuning to the radio for hours.

It was a time mired in regional war as we barely got out of there before the Turkish invasion. We left a day before the start of that war.

Have you seen this? Today in Egypt.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1785067850232717584

Dear brother, I apologise for the late answer.
My late father was a doctor in the Bosnian war and was killed, while on duty. I served on the front lines though..
Yes it was totally different time. Remember who was in Riyad then? King Feisal Rahimullahi . If you collect the whole government of Saudi now , they wouldn't be fit to clean his shoes.
As of this Bosnian women? Forget her , a traitor.

 

[SaadH]

Exactly.. couldn't retake entirely or even half of Sinai despite a surprise attack on hanaka and 10x numerical advantage with latest modern weapons from France and Soviet Union

Strategically and practically a failed war which led to losing in negotiation table.

Pretty sure Israelis would have left Sinai without this war with the terms Eygpt agreed to

That arbitrary line in the Sinai peninsula constituting not even 20% of the area was the extent of Egyptian air defence missiles. They couldn't go beyond that line, lest IDAF destroy their ground forces...

 

[SaadH]

On the night of 25 September, Hussein secretly flew to Tel Aviv to warn Meir of an impending Syrian attack. "Are they going to war without the Egyptians, asked Mrs. Meir. The king said he didn't think so. 'I think they [Egypt] would cooperate.'"

Hussein was the grand son of the Sherif of Mecca, the OG traitor...and the father of that half mutt zionist poodle the current fake King of Jordan...as we say in our local vernacular "Ghaddar ibne Ghaddar ibne Ghaddar".

 

[GoMig-21]

I don't disagree to any of this. I am clearly stating the obvious..Arabs didn't take back Sinai in war but at negotiation table accepting Israel legitimacy

That was not what you said, sir. This is what you said:

ziaulislam said:
Eygpt couldn't gain anything on war .so surrendered at a negotiation table stabbing the syrians and Palestinians for ever ending the dream their rebellion flag represented

So you claimed Egypt couldn't gain anything on war and surrendered at negotiation table. And since this thread is about the October 6th Ramadan war, it's only safe to say that you're talking about this war, yes? So I showed you how much Egypt gained as far as territory by the end culminating in the zionist withdrawal.

You also said Egypt "surrendered" at the negotiation table and again, since this is about the October 6th Ramadan War, it's safe to say you were talking about the 101-kilometer meeting in the tent that was set up by the UN. Egypt never surrendered. It did agree to a few preconditions but that was so the 3rd Army could be supplied and for the zionist to at least go back to the October 22nd position before they violated the ceasefire. Then they ended up asking for way more than they had the power to and that's when they were threatened by continuing the war from Egypt's perspective. They had no choice but to tuck tail and withdraw losing all the land I showed you.


Now if you're talking about the not gaining the entire Sinai by war and only getting the rest of it back by the peace treaty, that's true but we explained that this war wasn't about retaking the entire Sinai. It was limited in scope and that scope was achieved.

Am I wrong here? You just posted it yourself look at the maps yourself
This was despite numerical advantage the Arabs enjoyed
More Arabs died, more aircraft destroyed without achieving the objectives of freeing Sinai (or alqudus/Jordanian objective or golan heights Syrian objective)

We might've had numerical advantage in certain armor and manpower only at the start, but we had nothing compared to the enemy in terms of air force which limited what the ground forces could accomplish.

So the numerical argument is not accurate, not to mention the quality of the weaponry. The MiG-21MF was the most advanced fighter in the EAF at the time and there was no comparison to the zionist's F-4 Phantom II or even the Mirage 5 Nesher.

Shazly in his book said the Soviets were 10 years behind the US in aviation. They had nothing to match the F-4 Phantom that they could give us. The Phantom -- and these are his words verbatim -- "The United States had developed the best penetrative fighter in the world, the Phantom with its array of electronics & missiles. The Soviet Union, by contrast, had concentrated on defensive fighters and anti-aircraft missiles. We had nothing to match the Phantom because the Soviets had nothing."

Egypt had the MiG-21, MiG-19 in very small numbers and MiG-17 to go up against the F-4 Phantom, Mirage 5 & 3 and A4 Skyhawk. Not to mention better trained & experienced pilots.
So there's a bit of a tossup as far as a blanket statement like "had numerical superiority." Things are never that simple. Black & white in times of war. So many factors to consider you really have to study all of them before forming an opinion.

More Arabs died, more aircraft destroyed without achieving the objectives of freeing Sinai (or alqudus/Jordanian objective or golan heights Syrian objective)

When I have some time, I'll list exact details of both sides' numbers on human loss and equipment loss. Nothing is ever as it seems on the surface, and in war, those numbers vary exponentially from one side to the other.

As far as KIA, the impact is always figured in relation to population. Egypt & the Arabs could absorb large battlefield death tolls, the zionist could not. And if we take their lowest claimed number of KIA, it was calculated as if the US has lost 250,000 troops in vietnam instead of 53k. And this was in the span of a 3-week long war in this case, not 10+/- years the Vietnam war lasted. Put that into perspective and you can clearly see what I mean by studying the intricacies of wars to really determine enough to form a proper opinion.

Eygptians bailed out quickly like in 1967 resulting in collapse of the front

We already admitted 1967 was a humiliating defeat. No one here, least of all me have any problem admitting that was one of the worst defeats in the history of modern warfare. We're living with it and dealing with it but it has nothing to do with this topic except for certain statistical comparisons.

why are you bringing it up now? Trying to rub more salt into your comments?

I am not an Arab, ask PLO or Palestinians whay they think

And who sacrificed tens of thousands of men for the Palestinians going way back before 1948? Most of them who understand this conflict from its roots until now realize the sacrifice Egyptian have give for the Palestinian cause.

I tell you what, Palestinians or you or whomever complaining about this or saying Egypt isn't or hasn't done enough for them is a very sensitive subject because any insinuation of that is so disrespectful and dishonoring in Arab & Muslim culture. Usual met with vicious reaction. Nothing is worse than someone saying you haven't done much or betrayed the cause or comments of that sort when one has sacrificed men by the tens of thousands. It's very touchy, bro.

Not sure why a honest discussion is not possible these days ...

No problem having an honest discussion. Isn't that what we're doing? How much more honesty do you want, maaan? The tank is empty lol.

I have great respect for soldiers who fought and died but I fear their deaths were not honored by the current or previous eygptians leaders

Fair enough, but not in this war.

Yes the Arabs did took back the size canal which could not have been oeprationalized with the Jews sitting at arterillery range anyway

That's right! You're coming around!

 

[GoMig-21]

On the night of 25 September, Hussein secretly flew to Tel Aviv to warn Meir of an impending Syrian attack. "Are they going to war without the Egyptians, asked Mrs. Meir. The king said he didn't think so. 'I think they [Egypt] would cooperate.'"

Hussein was the grand son of the Sherif of Mecca, the OG traitor...and the father of that half mutt zionist poodle the current fake King of Jordan...as we say in our local vernacular "Ghaddar ibne Ghaddar ibne Ghaddar".

Now that's a traitor. He called the zionist 2 weeks prior to the war (since Sadat tried recruiting the king & Jordan also for the triad of Syria, Egypt & Jrdan) as symbolic counterattack to 1967) to tell them Jordan will not be participating in this upcoming war, effectively blowing the cover and betraying the cause. He could've easily waited until the war broke out and then made the call to tell them to let them know that Jordan wasn't involved since he was petrified of a zionist reprisal. His excuse was that he didn't want a preemptive attack by the Jews or for them to launch a counterattack thinking Jordan was also participating. That's no excuse to betray us.

 

[The SC]

I think the main problem was that Arabs,once more,had different goals from each other while pretending to be on the same page when planning the war.

True to a certain point for the objective of the war.. some wanted to go all in to Jerusalem..Egypt wisely said we can fight Israel but we can't fight the US..Who has threatened to send troops..

 

[The SC]

Egypt redeemed some of its honour in 1973 but it had to submit itself to Zionist domination in order to get the Sinai back.

As an example the Zionist entity controls the Rafah crossing and not Egypt.

Wrong..the Rafah crossing is a border crossing controlled by Egypt on its side and Israel on the other side.. get you facts right..and stop trolling and flaming..