Israel Overrated Military.

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

bsl RE:Correcting the correction 4/12/2005 9:53:33 PM

"let's not forget what happened in the 1973 war , the did get their butt kicked" lol. This is how people find themselves being laughed at.

Quote Reply

Celtic RE:RE CORRECTION:Israel Overrated Military. 4/13/2005 1:21:32 PM

It amazes me how you always here about American support for Israel during the arab Israeli wars from people who want so bad to discredit the Israeli victories in these wars. However the facts are the facts arab nations had the best soviet weapons available. Furthermore unlimited funds from countries such as Saudi Arabia. Not To mention overwhelming numbers The truth is simple in the 73 war without superpower intervention Israel would of increased the size of its nation five fold. Egypt landed a couple of good shots then ran like cowards to the teacher to protect them from the onslaught that was about to take place. As far as being overrated im sure all those military publication such as Janes have no idea what there talking about when they rate Israel a top five military in the world.

Quote Reply

french stratege US aid 4/13/2005 2:22:27 PM

Overated vs what?To say that Israelis soldier are better than UK, German or French is a little short.However one of the best force in the world for air land battle power.A capacity similar to Germany plus nukes while a nation of 5 million. This is possible because US aid is about 3 billion$ If you see Israel military budget (with a price simulator), you will understand that their procurement is almost 5 billion $ including spares and their production about 3 Bn $ including R&D, plus 300 m$ oil/kerozen imports. As on 3 Bn$ turnover of their indigenuous industry their is about a Bn$ of R&D then material and other imports account probably for less than half of remaining sum, you will undertsnad that Israel furnish manpower, but suffer of nothing on trade balance as US pay for all currencies needed. On an economic point of view, they do a effort even smaller than Finland (similar population)which import 400m$ a year of weapons and pay it self! They are lucky.And so the country can afford a grotwh similar to a country which would spend nothing on its defense. It is hard to do 3 years of service , but its indigenous manpower. It doesn't hurt really their standard of living. On training it is a little below NATO forces except for aircraft. Their equipment is on top for aircraft but their armored division are less mobile than their NATO counterpart which make sense in defense or for limited offensive in depthness. Their C4ISR is a little below of best NATO nations. Good effort but less than it seems.They can thank US for their pretty generous help.

Quote Reply

Shirrush RE:More to the point 4/13/2005 5:51:48 PM

The IDF is a big, heavy, lumbering and bureaucratic organization that, very much like similar outfits around the world, encourages conformity, promotes mediocrity, and has little room for innovative thinking. It puts, however, a somewhat lighter hierarchical collar around the neck of it's members than other large armies, largely does away with the most part of the archaic and costly military ritual and choreography, and is markedly less corrupt than it's developing countrie's counterparts. The largest part of the army is also made of conscripts, but these serve for an somewhat illegal three-years duration (the Law says 30 months, the IDF says otherwise...), and these soldiers can get roughly as professional and experienced as their counterparts in "all volunteer" armies such as the US or the UK, while costing a fraction of what these western grunts cost as they get paid very little. The military service is compulsory for Israeli citizens, but the army has become pretty selective of late, and most young people anxiously view military service as a right rather than as a duty, since more and more of the young people with "qualitative" problems don't get to serve at all. Functional analphabetism, which is rather common owing to the appalling state of the education system, or the slightest criminal record, are sufficient to get one discharged from the army, and not being able to show a decent military record is a permanent stain on any Israeli's CV, male or female. The army would like to go professional, or, as they say, "all volunteer" as this would spare many hassles with a highly heterogenous conscript population, but that would mean that tiny Israel would have to do with less than 50,000 total military personel, and this is of course not sufficient to ensure the country's defence under the present, or the foreseeable future circumstances. A country that wants to progress does not hoard it's best and brightest among it's armed forces ranks, and Israel is no exception in having it's professional force component composed of young or pretty average individuals. It is unique, however, in being able to make a lot of it's best and brightest readily available to the military in times of strife, as regularly trained reservists. A point that should not be overlooked, however, is that the perception of the army's quality might be at least as important than the actual situation. It is far better to be overrated in the enemy's eyes, as we are now, than to believe we are better than we actually are, as was the case in 1973, an illusion that costed us dearly in human lives. Deterring an enemy and avoiding a war is a lot better than fighting one and winning it, and this is why the IDF must continue cultivating it's image, while keeping focused on real improvements and modernizations. French Stratege, I must admit that this time you seem to know what you are talking about, but you are not being entirely fair in your view that the US aid explains most of the might of the IDF. These annual 2-3 billions are also, after all, a sneak tool of the successive US admistrations that serves the purpose of supporting the American defence industries, and the Israeli military budget, now estimated at around US$ 10 billions, is therefore mostly skimmed off the Israeli economy itself. We're not having it cheap, by a long shot!

Quote Reply

bsl RE:US aid - french strategy 4/13/2005 9:48:41 PM

"They (i.e. Israel) are lucky" No. France is lucky. Israel is good. Israel has never had the luxuries the French take for granted, and they'd have to survive in a world where much of Europe, including France, has followed policies which seem to oscillate between hostile indifference to Israel and outright hostility. Among other mistakes FS has made is to crow about the quality of European militaries versus Israel. The European militaries are shadows of their former selves. To cite Germany, especially, as a pardigm of military prowess, these days, is comical. The British and French militaries are still quite good, quality-wise, but, the truth is that it's highly questionable if they could beat Israel in a straight-up fight with their present forces without going nuclear. Obviously, that's more a reflection of the self-imposed limitations on the European militarie in the present age. But, it's more than enough reason for Europeans to be circumspect when asserting their own superiority. France, after all, is one of the countries whose leaders maintained only a few years ago that sending enough forces to the former Yugoslavia to impose their will on the Serbs was impossible in a time frame less than years. And, to put the oft-cited Euro-canard about Israel's military being entirely dependent on America, I note, pointedly, that the size of American subsidies to Israel have been dwarfed by the size of American subsidies to the NATO militaries over much the same time period. And, France doesn't escape the "lucky" denomination. France was able to afford the pretence of a "world" military through the Cold War years because of the presence of the American, British and German armies guarding their country, as well as the willingness of America to risk the destruction of itself in a fight to stop the Red Army short of the French border. And, finally, the vaunted French military technology isn't at all bad. But, compared to Israel? Why does Israel, which operates under FAR greater political constraints find it so easy to sell military tech on the same scale as France, a country ten times it's size?

Quote Reply

1 2