Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News The israeli state from the nile to the euphrates

  1. Mar 10, 2010 #1

    drizzle

    User Avatar
    Gold Member



    http://www.thenewamericanempire.com/tremblay=1068.htm" [Broken]

    greater-israel-map5.jpg


    :raising an eyebrow:

    Hope this doesn't belong to conspiracy theories :biggrin:... And anti virus softwares won't detect an attac from this site :biggrin:

    Seriously, what do you think of this?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 10, 2010 #2
    Is my response going to get deleted again?

    If Israel wants to expand (which they wont) they wont face much of a fight. The only army worthwhile in the area is the Egyptian army, so taking the Sinai will be a bit of a problem. Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are all afraid of Israel.

    Besides, a world without Hamas and Hezbollah is a better place.
     
  4. Mar 10, 2010 #3
    What I believe he is coming at:

    Response:
    If I remember correctly, Sadam H. was partly responsible for making claims of WMD for other purposes. Other causes were poor intelligence. I don't think there is enough evidence for that this was for oil and Israel.
     
  5. Mar 10, 2010 #4
    I'd have to disagree about Israel nnot facing much of a fight. While they probably won't want to expand, if they had decided to I think the resistence would be massive. The Islamic nations are not something to be taken lightly. I have no doubt in my mind that if Israeli decided to expand they would band together and fight. I have a feeling that attacks would occur all over the world especially in America... it'd be brutal.
     
  6. Mar 10, 2010 #5
    The Muslims have banded together for every war Israel has fought. Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, and Jordan are still in the stone age militarily wise compared to the IAF and IDF.

    No doubt in my mind the Muslim nations would be destroyed in a very short war.
     
  7. Mar 10, 2010 #6
    It is not simple as that.

    1) Majority of the world don't support these kind of actions
    2) America/Israel itself will be extinguished if it continues its stupidity, the aggressor is equally harmed as the victims
     
  8. Mar 10, 2010 #7
    The majority of the world does not support terrorism, but these countries do. (besides Egypt)
     
  9. Mar 10, 2010 #8
    Nah they really haven't... and the general Islamic attitude towards both America and Israel is getting worse and worse. This won't be like American invasion of Iraq, or Afghanistan. The majority of the world will not support it.
     
  10. Mar 10, 2010 #9

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Those lands also seem to have been historically Persian, Greek, Roman and British - do we take it in turns or do we decide based on who Isreal/Iran/Greece/Italy/Uk has most nukes?
     
  11. Mar 10, 2010 #10
    You are going to have to cite sources showing that the majority of Islamic states support terrorism... as well as sources showing that the majority of the rest of the world does not support terrorism at all...
     
  12. Mar 10, 2010 #11
    War of Independence: Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon

    Sinai War: Egypt

    The Six Day War: Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Algeria

    The War of Attrition: Egypt, USSR, PLO

    The Yom Kippur War: Egypt and Syria

    First and Second Lebanon War: Hezbollah, ANO


    You are really going to call for sources stating that there is a free reign for radicals in most of the ME and the Persian Gulf
     
  13. Mar 10, 2010 #12
    What non-sense are you citing these wars to attempt to prove?
     
  14. Mar 10, 2010 #13
    That. You said the Muslim nations did not band together to fight Israel, which I cited the wars that Israel has fought showing that it has been a lopsided war in almost every war.
     
  15. Mar 10, 2010 #14
    Ohhh, well in most of those the Arab nations were actually reluctant to go to war. If Israel decides to expand as in the OP I think it will be met with heavy resistence.

    Take for example the War of Independence. Even though more nations were supporting the Arabs they didnt really field more troops than Israeli's. At the beginning they did, and they cut up Israel for the most part... but just under a years time Israeli forces far outnumbered the Arab forces. I think it'd be different in a modern war in the Middle East... much different. Also you have to look at military strategy being used at the time and equipment available to both sides.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2010
  16. Mar 10, 2010 #15
    I can not take seriously any information source that says "All those things that everyone thinks are the reasons for [insert politically charged event] have nothing to do with it at all. It all has to do with [insert politically charged topic]!"
     
  17. Mar 10, 2010 #16
    As far as the OP goes though I think that any nation that can go to war and wants to go to war should be able to go to war. How does this relate to the OP?

    Well if Israel wants to expand and it wants to conquer surrounding territories then as far as I'm concerned it can go right ahead.
     
  18. Mar 11, 2010 #17
    I disagree that they won't face much of a fight. Mainly Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait all have M1A1 MBTs and M2A2s USA. Also the hand full of T-90s owned by Saudi Arabia would be a large problem. All three of these countries would lose some or all of there land in the purposed expansion. This is just looking at the ground forces. In the air Saudi Arabia is operating F-15s, AH-64s, Euorfighter Typhoons, and both the air and ground attack versions of the Tornados. Egypt is flying the F-16s, Ah-64, and Mirage 2000s Finlay Kuwait has both F/A-18s and AH-64s.

    Granted the rest of the countries would be no problem for the equipment that the IDF/IAF is running. In the cases of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait they would be facing equivalent equipment. This defiantly would not be the same as the six day war where a smaller force that was equipped with state of the art equipment facing a larger force with USSR hand me downs.
     
  19. Mar 11, 2010 #18
    The Opfor can have all sorts of advanced equipment, but it doesn't help to have poor crews. The IDF and IAF is trained a lot harder than any of the Arab nations, and this will show in a head on battle.

    I will change my statement from it being an easily won battle, to a battle that is still heavily in favour of an Israeli victory. The armies of the Arab nations all appear to have the same track record of having lazy commanders, and troops unwilling to fight.

    I can't argue with the facts that both sides have equivalent equipment, but as I said before the willingness to fight will be a large factor.

    On the opposite side of the fence, if Israel were to take on this "plan" the soldiers of the defending nation would not want their land to become Jewish controlled, and will subsequently fight hard.

    The original article was written by a quack though, there is no reason for Israel to invade any other country at the moment because things have been relatively peaceful diplomatically save the Hezbollah and Hamas.
     
  20. Mar 11, 2010 #19

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2017 Award

    First, this map (or one very much like it) first appeared in the notorious forgery "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion". Since this whole thing is based on a forgery, I am locking this thread. There are legitimate reasons to criticize Israel (and probably just about every country) without resorting to forgeries.

    It's entirely possible that one can find someone who supports this wacky map. Holding all Jewry responsible for a few nutjobs is the same as holding all of Islam responsible for the Beslan school massacre.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook