Why Arabs Lose Wars

[Marek Tucan]

IIRC from 1973, IDF rated the Jordanians as toughest enemy, followed by Iraqis - though it may be because both armies hit IDF at the height of Golan counterattack, so spent, tired and weakened.

 

Usual comment re. Egyptians seemed to be that while fairly compúetent on individual level and on defensive, they lacked initiattive and situational awareness for mobile warfare.Which is probably in a similar vein to Iraqi army, officers too involved in politics which can preclude or actively discourage the competent ones from reaching top posts.

[Archie Pellagio]

 

 

There is a massive gulf between "the average Arab IQ being 80" which is total and utter horse shit and you know it, and somehow that requiring an Arab master-general to disprove it.

 

 

Anyhow, every gene pool produces exceptional individuals(both high and low side) don't you find it rather odd that you can't name any exceptionally competent (or even reasonably competent) Iraqi military leaders? We have exceptional brutes, like the Hussein family, but no significant military competence.

 

IMO, I would suspect this is significant evidence that high average competence across the force is much more important to military success than great leadership in these days of technical military forces. S/F.....Ken M

 

 

Name me one exceptionally competent (or even reasonably competent) Iraqi Australian military leader from the last fifteen years of continuous, simultaneous deployments.

 

Do you see the problem with this metric?

You can rinse and repeat with all manner of nations (Canada, Britain etc I'm sure) nations than I'm sure have produced decent leaders, you just don't know about them.

[Delta tank 6]

 

 

There is a massive gulf between "the average Arab IQ being 80" which is total and utter horse shit and you know it, and somehow that requiring an Arab master-general to disprove it.

 

 

I can neither confirm nor deny the validity of the mid 80's number, and neither can you. I can however, provide the subjective observation that Iraqis generally and collectively are/were pretty damned dumb. Which leads me to believe that those numbers are possible and reasonable. More people have gotten themselves in deep shit from thinking they know something wrong than from not knowing. In fact, possibly the #1 problem with America these days is all the people who think they know something who are 180 degrees wrong.

 

Anyhow, every gene pool produces exceptional individuals(both high and low side) don't you find it rather odd that you can't name any exceptionally competent (or even reasonably competent) Iraqi military leaders? We have exceptional brutes, like the Hussein family, but no significant military competence.

 

IMO, I would suspect this is significant evidence that high average competence across the force is much more important to military success than great leadership in these days of technical military forces. S/F.....Ken M

 

Is it not customary in some Iraq tribes to marry their first cousins in order further reinforce the tribes bonds? You can marry your first cousin once in a while inside a family and suffer no genetic problems, but you can not do it every generation. Now, I read that somewhere, is it true?

 

Mike

[Cyber_Ghost]

Arabs soldier and especially the Egyptians have been good fighters at the personal level, and when competently led could hold on to defensive positions well enough. In a lot of cases, only when threatened by encirclement the units broke and routed, but when that happened it happened on a large scale and was just throwing everything and running away.
I guess it has a lot to do with the training and day to day operations of the army, so when cut off from leadership their units don't act independently, that's the reason they aren't that good when attacking - The level of independence needed for the tactical level commanders isn't there so when they can break through, there is no one to give the order.

As for Hizballah and Hamas, some of their units are extermely well trained tactically and can match all the IDF regular units one on one, their problem is that war isn't a fair fight.

[Ken Estes]

When does a 'one on one' match occur in wartime?

[crazyinsane105]

Is it possible that Arabs lose wars because they chose to wage wars versus superior enemies?

 

Superior enemies? The Arabs outnumbered the Israelis in terms of manpower and equipment back in '73 and even had the element of surprise. They still failed to beat the Israeli military back. On the other hand, Hezbullah is significantly weaker than the IDF yet it managed to route them time and again during the Lebanon occupation and the 2006 war.

[EchoFiveMike]

Hezbullah "routing" IDF units? Why haven't we heard of this before?

 

The only time anyone calls the durkas successful it's usually defined by some PR metric, which is strictly a function of the Marxist media and their never-ending subversion campaign against goodness and normalcy.

 

"We destroyed an evil Joo Merkava! God is great!"

"That's nice shithead, now do it 1500 more times and you'll be getting somewhere."

S/F....Ken M

Edited August 12, 2014 by EchoFiveMike

[Simon Tan]

The kool aid is intense in Chitown.

[swerve]

When does a 'one on one' match occur in wartime?

I think that's the point he's making with "their problem is that war isn't a fair fight".

[Ivanhoe]

Everything I've heard from every US personnel who had to train Arabs absolutely correlates with that assessment, regardless of the actual quality of the writing or pre-disposition of the author.

 

That said, pan-islamism seems to be a much more effective model for arabs than pan-arabism ever was. No one doubts the effectiveness of Hezbollah. Definitely a unique case though in the Arab world; generally their war record speaks for itself.

 

Think about Nasser's version of a pan-Arab state straddling the ME. Who was he going to knock off? Turkey, Iran, Israel? No easy way to rack up quick, easy victories.

[baboon6]

 

There is a massive gulf between "the average Arab IQ being 80" which is total and utter horse shit and you know it, and somehow that requiring an Arab master-general to disprove it.

 

. I can however, provide the subjective observation that Iraqis generally and collectively are/were pretty damned dumb. Which leads me to believe that those numbers are possible and reasonable.

Oh you make me laugh sometimes. Keep up the good work.

[Colin]

The assault of the canal in 73 was likely one of the greatest feats of military action by an Islamic state in the 20th century. As I understand it, the Soviet mission was pulled back or isolated prior to the attack to prevent leaks/ international issues.

[RETAC21]

Arabs soldier and especially the Egyptians have been good fighters at the personal level, and when competently led could hold on to defensive positions well enough. In a lot of cases, only when threatened by encirclement the units broke and routed, but when that happened it happened on a large scale and was just throwing everything and running away.

I guess it has a lot to do with the training and day to day operations of the army, so when cut off from leadership their units don't act independently, that's the reason they aren't that good when attacking - The level of independence needed for the tactical level commanders isn't there so when they can break through, there is no one to give the order.

 

 

 

You can say that of any army and any period. Russians in 41, French in 40 etc,etc. What hinders getting good training is that good units may end up changing the regime, something the ruler at the time may not be too keen to do.

 

 

As for Hizballah and Hamas, some of their units are extermely well trained tactically and can match all the IDF regular units one on one, their problem is that war isn't a fair fight.

 

Different kind of fight, fought on another level. This is COIN warfare, it won't threaten the existence of Israel like tanks overrunning the Golan, but the war is fought on planes different from the strictly military and the win by not loosing. PR is more important than actual military prowess and meaningless victories (we blew up a tank!) are exploited to win adepts among the undecided.

 

See Mao for more:

 

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-6/mswv6_28.htm#ch4

[Colin]

The problem for Hamas is they are not swimming in a sea, they are flopping around in a puddle. Hamas wins a PR victory with people that have the attention span of 3 year old at a huge costs to themselves. When Gaza was the only thing happening it made big news, but compare it to previous protests and you will see the turnout is smaller. even the useful idiots are getting worn out. How many more times can Hamas afford such "victories"?

[Noble713]

Is it possible that Arabs lose wars because they chose to wage wars versus superior enemies?

That wouldn't explain the failure of Iraqi mechanized offensives early in its war against a disorganized Iran.

[RETAC21]

The problem for Hamas is they are not swimming in a sea, they are flopping around in a puddle. Hamas wins a PR victory with people that have the attention span of 3 year old at a huge costs to themselves. When Gaza was the only thing happening it made big news, but compare it to previous protests and you will see the turnout is smaller. even the useful idiots are getting worn out. How many more times can Hamas afford such "victories"?

 

You got that wrong, Gaza has a population of 1.82 million, the current "genocide" has reduced that number by less than 2.000. Hamas has lost 900 by the IDF count, the pool is huge compared to the kills, and most of those 900 would be foot soldiers. The next generation will step up and it will go around once more.

 

You are letting your bias blind you, the amount of bad press being harvested by Israel in this round is huge and plays into Hamas hands - overall it's no different than Cast Lead (1.4k vs 2k killed), but the radical left is way more organised and BDS is getting a traction that previously it didn't have, being proposed by all kind of loonies. The next step is becoming a popular cause like Apartheid became in the 80s, then sanctions, then...

 

Just by not occupying the ground and denying the terrorist access to the locals, Israel ends up loosing - Imagine Northern Ireland without the British Army in the late 70s/early 80s, where they get to kill collborators at will and manage the PR in the US to portray the Brits as genocidal, etc.

 

This is COIN 101, one would have figured that after Iraq this was clear to everyone.

[Colin]

China is an ocean , Gaza is clearly a puddle and 1.82million is basically a medium sized city. 900 kills and years of work down the drain. Hamas needs to win at the bargaining table to justify this, but Israel can just give up a small bit in the way of sanctions. Hamas also will have to tighten it's grip on the population and the media, who were finally starting to go off script. Hamas has also been very bad at choosing friends on the outside and may face real problems equipping those new recruits.

[RETAC21]

No, you are still thinking of Hamas as an state but it is not, Northern Ireland was also a puddle but it took 30 years to pacify, Lebanon, much of the same, the end result was having Hizballah taking over S. Lebanon. Negotiations are not relevant because if they fail, Hamas will still be in existance and if they get anything out of them it will be trumpeted as a great success. Go back to the liberation of Shalit to see what I mean.

 

As for the tunnels or the rockets, they are red herrings, neither enabling Hamas to meaningfully attacking Israel like suicide bombers did in the 90s. As for equipment, Egypt has shown to be mostly unable to stop the flow, mainly because they are frying bigger fishes closer to home, and then, just how many weapons has lost Hamas? In reality not many, so their grip on the population isnt going to change.

 

This war isn ot going to be won militarily short of really taking genocidal measures, which would kill Israel, or occupying and patrollin Gaza which is going to kill many Israelis. IMO there's no easy way out.

[AETiglathPZ]

Hezbullah "routing" IDF units? Why haven't we heard of this before?

 

The only time anyone calls the durkas successful it's usually defined by some PR metric, which is strictly a function of the Marxist media and their never-ending subversion campaign against goodness and normalcy.

 

"We destroyed an evil Joo Merkava! God is great!"

"That's nice shithead, now do it 1500 more times and you'll be getting somewhere."

S/F....Ken M

To be fair, you would have to include every Classic Jonny Quest villain ethnicity in the mix. Didn't the Serbs declare victory when they shot down one..ONE F-117. Kind of a far cry when German were taking out dozens of B-17s in one battle.

[AETiglathPZ]

The kool aid is intense in Chitown.

Hey, I.......o' wait.

[RETAC21]

I've posted this before, but it offers unique insight into the Iraqui Army and why it failed: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=146268

[Rod]

The problem that Israel faces today versus say in the 60s is that modern media, anti-Israel sentiment and a tilt towards the left by the Western media and pundits has made getting the job done much harder. Back then if rockets hit an Israeli city, you sent the 101st Paratroopers to the source of the launch area and take out any fighters there, and if 50 civilians died in cross-fire you might get a small 6 lines mention on Page 18 of the New York Times. Nowadays, a rubber-bullet hits a Palestinian protester throwing a molotov cocktail and you get first page coverage in media, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, showing said militant being carried injured by friends under caption of unarmed Palestinian wounded by Israeli soldiers.

 

The same thing affected the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistant to a certain extent but the threshold of civilian casualties on the other side is much higher before the media start criticizing the U.S. military and the Administration begin promising restraint and requiring a legal adviser to opine before someone shoots.

[RETAC21]

That is nonsense, if it was that easy how comes the problem didnt end in 1970? The media is part of the battlefied, but failure arises from the lack of a coherent strategy. See Afghanistan, the Soviets didnt care about Western talking heads and werent coy about using firepower - how did that worked out?

[EchoFiveMike]

The Sov problem was the classic failure in COIN, allowing a safe refuge for the enemy to regroup and rearm. If the Afghans didn't have US support and Pakistan refuges, the Sovs would have exterminated them. S/F.....Ken M

[RETAC21]

No, definitely not. The Soviet tried that against the unsupported UPA and failed, so they changed their tune to infiltration and espionage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Insurgent_Army#End_of_UPA_resistance

 

Which would have been more difficult vs the Afghans.