Why did the Arab coalition do so badly in the Six-Day War? They brought like twice the forces the Israelis did, and it wasn't really outdated equipment either, and yet they got absolutely spanked with the Arabs taking like 100 times the casualties. You can't even really make the Ukraine argument of "well the US was backing them" because no we weren't, Johnson was very wary about supplying Israel for the conflict because he was afraid they'd go into overkill in their counterattack if the Arab attack was blunted.
Despite the fact that both sides had modern weapons, the result was the equivalent of when the Brits went up against tribals.
>100 times the casualties
My bad I checked, it was like 20 times the casualties. Which is still insane.
read "why arabs loose wars"
And compared to storries from vets feom iraq and afghanistan I collected over the years, the book is very kind and generous.
Long story short: islam and inbreeding don't go well with skills required on modern battlefield
Islam has conquered literally conquered all parts where Islam is the main religion.
So Islam conquered Islam? I can't believe that was the solution all along. Someone go tell George Bush. Quick!
And when was that anon? When was the last time Muslims conquered anything?
Nta but I was going to say "the Ottoman conquests" but then I remembered Turks aren't Arabs, they're an entirely different ethnic group. Hell that means Arabs can't even claim the great Saladin as he was a Kurd, and Kurds aren't Arabs either.
>When was the last time Muslims conquered anything?
Right now. Western Europe
80% of Muslims aren't Arabs THOUGH
What about the term "modern battlefield" do you not understand
Please be patient, in his country the culture hasn't changed since the 1100s so "modern" is a foreign concept to him.
We're talking about modern warfare. Mongolians conquered half the world hundreds of years ago, but their tactics don't work today.
The tl;dr of "Why Arabs Lose Wars" is there's a real command problem in a lot of Arabic nations where soldiers disobey orders from their higher-ups, usually for 1 of 2 reasons
>the guy above me is from a tribe my tribe hated and I'll be damned if I take orders from him
>Hmmm that's not a bad idea...but I think MY idea is even better and when it succeed, I'll be the one everyone praises!
Those tactics weren't as much of a detriment in the 11th century.
That's half of it, the other half is where the higher ups don't train this boys so they don't become a threat. Like taking away the operator manuals in those tanks.
I think it's less Islam specifically and more Arab tribal politics (which predates Islam) having a lot of influence in middle east nation states that were kinda arbitrarily drawn up after WW1. Hence you get a lot of shit were folks would use institutions as a means to pursue tribal obligations/interests/feuds, rather than what the institution is purportedly meant to do. So you get shit like some fuckwit inbreed cousin getting put in charge of a tank brigade because he's fearless leaders nephew, and someone vaguely competent is haram because three generations ago someone in his family fucked someones goat.
The Israelis did better less because they were garden gnomes (though the religious homogeneity helped), and more because they predominantly came from European countries with functional nation states where it was commonly accepted that institutions should function for the benefit of a nation state. That helps a lot in making a military that isn't organizationally fucked up, and has guys in it actually proficient in the making people dead business at the sharp end.
Nepotism and strong senses of personal pride. Cant admit your own choices or orders from above are dumb, better just suicide charge into a entrenched garden gnome position
Israel would have likely won in any case, being a competent military vs arab shitholes.
But my understanding is the decisive factor was the Israelic first strike basically totally annihilating the arab air forces. They also trained their crews to fly roughly double the amount of sorties per day the arabs could. So a combindation of those two things easily achieved them aerial superiority, at which point it was basically over.
Read "Armies Of Sand"
>TLDR
Dictatorship
Conscript soldiers
Culture of ass kissing instead of performance
>Dictatorship
The Iraqi army under Saddam performed far better than under their democracy.
Serious tactical failures. Like absolutely insane levels of tactical failure on multiple points that were simply so damaging that an there was no recovering. Read the Wikipedia page for Christ's sake. It's like a Monty python sketch.
>our tanks can't traverse turrets high enough to engage the enemy AT on the ridge we're advancing on so we just get to drive toward them while they shoot at us
>DRIVE FASTER
There's also
>we've got a fuck load of bogeys on radar, pretty sure the garden gnomes are about to assfuck us
>shut down all the AA, we've got brass flying in and there's so many traitors in our midst that our own guys may shoot them down
It goes on and on. It's cartoonist levels of stupid.
30 points of IQ difference.
Simple as.
Because they're Arabs and Arabs are shit at war.
>do great at first
>perfect time to attack
>actually well planned
>get cocky after initial steamroll and turn the blitzkrieg into a leisurely stroll
>start petty infighting that slows you down further
>Israel has time to setup defences
>Arabs proceed to lose compounded by previous and continuing leadership infighting
Pretty sure you are thinking of the Yom Kippur War, the Six Day War started with an Israeli pre-emptive strike.
>Why did the Arab coalition do so badly in the Six-Day War?
>Arab coalition
you answered your own question bud
kenneth pollack is a corrupt garden gnome but i would say his overall criticisms of the poor performance of Arab militaries and why they use their gear so badly is worth listening to.
Seriously, it's comical how much Arabs are now the least martial race on earth now to the point where Sub-Saharan africans in Toyota pickups with M2 .50s mounted on the flatbed soundly kick their ass.
oops accidentally posted in a thread
but you know what its on topic anyway
It's easy: Israel had western training and equipment, Arabs had Soviet training and equipment.
It all boils down to Soviets being subhumans even when they sent their own soldiers to fight Israel they performed extremely poorly.
Before Yom Kippur war Israeli intelligence was warned multiple times that Egypt is preparing to cross the Suez Channel and almost every time they responded with
>lol arabs are too stupid to pull this off
https://www.dekelegypt.co.il/100515
they had good reason to think that. Most of the people in this video might unironically make better commanders than Arab generals.
Arab armies are designed to keep the leader in power. That means they can't be too powerful, and that they train to murder civilians.
they were planning an immoral evil invasion of israel which demoralized the troops. people naturally get demoralized when forced to fight on behalf of evil where's israel's morale was good because they were defending their land from evil
10/10
he's right thoughie
>Why did the Arab coalition do so badly in the Six-Day War?
>fighting against God's chosen people
>expecting to win
What a stupid question
>Do a surprise attack on Egypt with aircraft
>Destroy all enemy aircraft
>Get instant air supremacy
It's that simple.
Because Israel is mostly white and Arab countries are incompetent shit skins?
>Shitsrael
>white
unironically it was due to gnomish tricks
same reason the Natzees were able to hold out for so long. They both had internal lines of movment while the Arabs and earlier the allies, had the external lines of movment. This means its easier for the guys on the inside to send troops from one front to another and harder for the guys on the outside.
Thus, you can mass on one front to defeat a threat and then redeploy quickly to another front. Napoleons favored party trick.
A very good post.
Russian Equipment
Poor training
Poor tactics