Why were Arab armed forces so ineffective?

[ziaulislam]

Why are Arab armed forces so ineffective? https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2024/05/05/why-are-arab-armed-forces-so-ineffective

1- never trained by any professional army
2- no pressure for improvement
3- lack of introspection and accountability
4- too much pride?? As per documentation of Pakistani observers in 1970s

 

[The SC]

Arabs have never recovered since they were beaten up by Mongols

I think culture, education and fighting will all face devastation

And who finished the mongols..your ignorance?

 

[The SC]

1- never trained by any professional army
2- no pressure for improvement
3- lack of introspection and accountability
4- too much pride?? As per documentation of Pakistani observers in 1970s

Arabs had professional armies since the time of Prophet Mohamed..

How ignorant can one get..

 

[ziaulislam]

Arabs had professional armies since the time of Prophet Mohamed..

How ignorant can one get..

Sir afghans conquered whole india and had the most disciplined armies

Yet I will say modern afghans were never trained and don't have trained army

Same is true for modern Arabs since they revolted against the Ottomans

Why do you take objective observations so personally????

 

[ziaulislam]

Arabs are Great businessmen..see I am not insulting Arabs just stating the facts here

 

[Fatman17]

The whole article depicts the Western inferior complex mentality since the crusades and how many times they were beaten by the Arabs throughout history..

But things have changed haven't they?

 

[The SC]

But things have changed haven't they?

The Western mentality have not changed.. eventhough everything else has changed..

 

[The SC]

Arabs are Great businessmen..see I am not insulting Arabs just stating the facts here

Yes like the prophet Mohamed.. great businessman but also a warrior when times called for it!

 

[The SC]

Sir afghans conquered whole india and had the most disciplined armies

Yet I will say modern afghans were never trained and don't have trained army

Same is true for modern Arabs since they revolted against the Ottomans

Why do you take objective observations so personally????

Not personally but because of your ignorance.. showing it once more in this post..

The Ottomans were originally the Mamluks organized by Arab armies who they revolted against..

Please do us and yourself a favor and get your facts right before posting just anything that crosses your mind..

 

[majesticpug]

Why are Arab armed forces so ineffective? https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2024/05/05/why-are-arab-armed-forces-so-ineffective

Too wealthy to antagonize the Americans and lose everything.

 

[ziaulislam]

Yes like the prophet Mohamed.. great businessman but also a warrior when times called for it!

You probably need to listen to /read fsomeone outside of the Arab world..too myopic..myopia want bring Arab world..but wait..are we even talking about Arabs or is it now eygptians jordianains Iraqis Saudis..are these even real entities? Is it Arab nationalism or individual nationalism ..if any 1982 was death of Arab nationalism..not sure why do we see Arab nationalism pop out..

Anwar sadat said..Arabs are zero without Eygpt ...but are there any Arabs left any more is the question to ponder.. because all I see are Saudis eygptians emiratis and qataris

You should probably swallow your Arab ego and listen to some non Arabs dais or historians

Start with someone from Pakistan, may be listen to Israr Ahmad..who would have thought he will predict Arab predicament in 1990s to a word

 

[313Ghazi]

Yes, I realize that silly British goofiness. But I bet when the word is used in most, if not all published English literature where it has to be officially edited, it's spelled CORRECTLY as in the way it's spelled in Marriam Websters Dictionary.

Furthermore, you can't use that spelling in a different context.

Example:
"defencive" is totally incorrect.
Defensive is correct.
Defencible is also completely incorrect.
Defensible is correct.

Heck even the bloody French spell it "defense."

Besides, is "armoured" some form of loveable metal military vehicle? Mon amour vehicle.

The language is English, not French, it was invited by the British - the English to be exact.

The article is a behind a pay wall so I haven't read it, but you can't dismiss it for properly using spelling and grammar.

 

[Sharma Ji]

Soo, spelling and grammar wars now ?

nice.

 

[PakFactor]

I wouldn't single out the Arabs. In fact, all Asian nation-states have ineffective armed forces with no modern combat experience beyond fighting enemies who are not well-equipped. This includes countries like Pakistan and India. Even in a conflict between both these countries, neither side has managed to achieve a total victory.

 

[mulj]

arabs are great warriors and soldier material, problem is leadership and political ecosystem that prevents that fact to flourish into the full potential.
sadly their armies mostly serve as regime keepers not as proper combat forces beside that they do not have particular vision and mission.