OoE Reply
Colonel,
"...The answer in both 1967 and 1973 is a resounding yes..."
Sorry, Colonel. Guess I'm just myopic but I sense, as you put it, you are not seeing the forest for the trees. Israel wasn't prepared to forego a pre-emptive strike in 1967 despite America imploring them to restrain from such. Israel, too, had no undue cause for concern of Soviet intervention after the Egyptians had been defeated as they'd attained all they were prepared to seize.
That didn't include Damascus so they knew there'd be no Soviet intervention.
Finally, sir, it was an empty threat. You refuse to acknowledge the Soviet inability to follow-through with prudent pre-positioning, adroit right-of-way access for follow-on forces, or valid operational planning measures. Israel clearly knew what the Soviets had done to avail themselves of their threat. While always a cause for concern it in no way restrained Israeli operational and strategic imperatives.
Those are my conclusions regarding 1967 from the links offered by you.
1973? Please help me to understand your view there. I'd likely not concur that the Soviet Union pressured America into restraining Israel from utterly destroying the Egyptian 3rd Army. In point of fact, America did so with Kissinger seeing it as an opportunity to gain leverage over the Egyptians at the expense of the Soviet Union. Syria? Don't know. I do know that Israel advanced on Damascus but never attempted to besiege the city. I do know that the Soviets never compelled a full Israeli disengagement from Syria until a treaty effecting such was signed in May 1974.
Colonel, I can't imagine the Israelis ever willingly eager to fight the Soviets. I can't imagine, however, they not being prepared to do what they must against whomever stood or now stands in their way. Given where they've been to where they are now and the threats still remaining at their throat, Israel remain a people with little to lose when it comes to defending their interests.
Colonel,
"...The answer in both 1967 and 1973 is a resounding yes..."
Sorry, Colonel. Guess I'm just myopic but I sense, as you put it, you are not seeing the forest for the trees. Israel wasn't prepared to forego a pre-emptive strike in 1967 despite America imploring them to restrain from such. Israel, too, had no undue cause for concern of Soviet intervention after the Egyptians had been defeated as they'd attained all they were prepared to seize.
That didn't include Damascus so they knew there'd be no Soviet intervention.
Finally, sir, it was an empty threat. You refuse to acknowledge the Soviet inability to follow-through with prudent pre-positioning, adroit right-of-way access for follow-on forces, or valid operational planning measures. Israel clearly knew what the Soviets had done to avail themselves of their threat. While always a cause for concern it in no way restrained Israeli operational and strategic imperatives.
Those are my conclusions regarding 1967 from the links offered by you.
1973? Please help me to understand your view there. I'd likely not concur that the Soviet Union pressured America into restraining Israel from utterly destroying the Egyptian 3rd Army. In point of fact, America did so with Kissinger seeing it as an opportunity to gain leverage over the Egyptians at the expense of the Soviet Union. Syria? Don't know. I do know that Israel advanced on Damascus but never attempted to besiege the city. I do know that the Soviets never compelled a full Israeli disengagement from Syria until a treaty effecting such was signed in May 1974.
Colonel, I can't imagine the Israelis ever willingly eager to fight the Soviets. I can't imagine, however, they not being prepared to do what they must against whomever stood or now stands in their way. Given where they've been to where they are now and the threats still remaining at their throat, Israel remain a people with little to lose when it comes to defending their interests.
Comment