Why are Arab armed forces so ineffective?

[Yasser76]

Maybe he earned it chasing a super duper best in Pak air force falcon with a rusty old mig21 with no working Comms or serious missiles

Fair play to him

You wanted proof you got it. You calmed gallantry does not work in this era.

 

[harpy1]

You wanted proof you got it. You calmed gallantry does not work in this era.

It does not work in this era full stop
India antiquated equipment is useless
Bravery is useless
Money is what counts
And technology
Without this your screwed

 

[Yasser76]

It does not work in this era full stop
India antiquated equipment is useless
Bravery is useless
Money is what counts
And technology
Without this your screwed

Cool, so you admit he did not deserve a medal?

 

[harpy1]

Cool, so you admit he did not deserve a medal?

Stick to the topic Yasser
It's not about him

 

[Yasser76]

Stick to the topic Yasser
It's not about him

You get called out when you contradict yourself, lose an argument and now want to stick to the topic. I get it....

 

[KingQamaR]

I read that Arab totalitarian rulers tended to staff their military based on loyalty not on leadership. They'd rather have shitty generals who they knew would obey them than skilled generals who may question their orders.

 

[harpy1]

I read that Arab totalitarian rulers tended to staff their military based on loyalty not on leadership. They'd rather have shitty generals who they knew would obey them than skilled generals who may question their orders.

Equipment
Doctrine
Flexible leadership
Training
Experience

Bravery is useful but without above utterly useless

 

[PakFactor]

I read that Arab totalitarian rulers tended to staff their military based on loyalty not on leadership. They'd rather have shitty generals who they knew would obey them than skilled generals who may question their orders.

In addition to having loyal officers, there is also a tribal factor at play where individuals bring up people from their own group. This situation is comparable to Arain community members coming together and voting for another Arain, even if they know he's not the best candidate, due to the belief that family ties are more important than other factors. This issue has impacted not only the Middle East but also South Asia.

Those societies that have done away with tribal and caste systems are the ones that have succeeded the most.

 

[UKBengali]

In addition to having loyal officers, there is also a tribal factor at play where individuals bring up people from their own group. This situation is comparable to Arain community members coming together and voting for another Arain, even if they know he's not the best candidate, due to the belief that family ties are more important than other factors. This issue has impacted not only the Middle East but also South Asia.

Those societies that have done away with tribal and caste systems are the ones that have succeeded the most.

I don't think it applies as much to countries like BD that is a unitary state, and so there is no tribal or ethnic factors that need to come into play when promoting people in the military.

Yes in BD a general must at least not be hostile to ruling Awami League but like CCP there are enough competent people that will be loyal to the ruling party that promotion can generally be done on merit.

 

[KingQamaR]

In addition to having loyal officers, there is also a tribal factor at play where individuals bring up people from their own group. This situation is comparable to Arain community members coming together and voting for another Arain, even if they know he's not the best candidate, due to the belief that family ties are more important than other factors. This issue has impacted not only the Middle East but also South Asia.

Those societies that have done away with tribal and caste systems are the ones that have succeeded the most.

It's interesting that, while the official militaries of Arab countries have historically not done well in conflicts, Arab irregular forces, mujahideen & insurgents, guerrillas and the like tend to have a really good record in terms of efficacy. The differences between the two methods of war are so drastic I wouldn't even know where to begin to try and piece together why this is the case.

 

[UKBengali]

It's interesting that, while the official militaries of Arab countries have historically not done well in conflicts, Arab irregular forces, mujahideen & insurgents, guerrillas and the like tend to have a really good record in terms of efficacy. The differences between the two methods of war are so drastic I wouldn't even know where to begin to try and piece together why this is the case.

As promotion in groups like Hezbollah is done solely on merit and they are actually trained to be effective fighters.

In a military like KSA, promotion to even the officer corp will be done on close links to the royal family and they do not train to be an effective national military but more for show and to suppress internal dissent.

Arabs can be good fighters if the will is there to make them into an effective fighting force.

 

[Wingzero30]

It's interesting that, while the official militaries of Arab countries have historically not done well in conflicts, Arab irregular forces, mujahideen & insurgents, guerrillas and the like tend to have a really good record in terms of efficacy. The differences between the two methods of war are so drastic I wouldn't even know where to begin to try and piece together why this is the case.

Yes I think this is why israel is having such a hard time against Resistance forces.
In previous conventional wars with arab armies, israel took victory rather quickly.