Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

waiv t1_ja5zm64 wrote

Reply to comment by magellan315 in Israelis, Palestinians pledge to curb violence at Jordan meeting by Hiversitize

It's silly trying to portray Israel as a poor victim when they have dished as much as they have received, the 1956 and 1967 wars were started by Israel, plenty of incursions against Gaza and the West Bank before 1967, including blowing up whole towns and attacking the Jordanian army when the Jordanian King was on peace talks with Israel.

−8

magellan315 t1_ja7zn3v wrote

The 1967 War was due to the fact that multiple Arab countries were massing soldiers, air planes, and tanks near the Israeli border in battle formations, should they have waited to be attacked first? The peace talks through the U.N. failed and allowed the Arabs to stall for time.

Then of course there is the 1973, 6 day war, where the Arabs attacked on the most sacred day of the Jewish religion.

4

waiv t1_ja8ifux wrote

Well, according to the American and Israeli intelligence back then Nasser wasn't going to take offensive action against Israel. There were no UN peace talks, there were going to be peace talks in Washington but the IDF attacked one day before the Egyptian envoy arrived.

2

magellan315 t1_ja8n9n6 wrote

Nasser mobilized the Egyptian military, ordered U.N. Peacekeepers out of the Egypt, and closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli ships. The closing of the Straits of Tiran was declared by President Lyndon Johnson to be "If a single act of folly was more responsible for this explosion than any other, it was the arbitrary and dangerous announced decision that the Straits of Tiran would be closed."

2

waiv t1_ja8v4se wrote

Yeah, same peacekeepers who offered to be relocated on the Israel side of the border but were refused, if the Israeli government was really worried about Nasser attacking, why didn't they allow them to take new positions?

Meh, they were worse causus belli before and cooler heads prevailed, for instance the IDF invaded Jordan, destroyed a jordanian town and attacked their army in 1966 and that didn't led to war.

It's not like the blockade of a port that was barely used back then required an urgent action without resorting to diplomacy.

Anyway, seems silly to blame the Arab countries for all the wars when clearly Israel started at least half of them.

−3

magellan315 t1_ja8wh29 wrote

U.N. Peacekeepers are lightly armed and would have done nothing to stop the Egyptian military which was already massing on the border. In 1956 Egypt blocked the Straits of Tiran to Israeli ships. Egypt hadn't learned its lesson the last time.

Jordan had been a base of operations for the PLO who was engaging in terrorist attacks. The Israeli's sent a message to both parties about what would not be tolerated.

2

waiv t1_ja8yc67 wrote

If by message you meant "war crime" and act of war, sure.

In the end Israel went Pearl Harbour against Egypt and then lied claiming they were attacked first, and since that didn't stick they started the narrative of "preemptive war".

1

magellan315 t1_ja91eq8 wrote

The Arabs were led by their noses by the Russians who claimed Israel massing their military to attack the Arabs. The Arabs failed to do due diligence and double check. Unlike Pearl Harbor America was not preparing for war against Japan. The Arabs were in battle formations because they were going to attack. Should the Israeli's have waited for an impending attack.

0

waiv t1_jacbfon wrote

So Egypt moved to the border not because they intended to attack Israel but because they thought Israel was going to attack Syria? Thanks for explaining, even less reasons to justify the Israeli attack.

Were they even in "battle formations"? They had been stationed there for three weeks doing nothing when Israel attacked treacherously.

1

magellan315 t1_jacv60w wrote

Egypt failed to verify the information they had and yes the Arab troops were in battle formation. Are you saying Israel should have waited to be attacked by three large armies?

1