What can the PLA learn from the IDF?

darth sidious

Banned Idiot
Lavi said:
The main universal lessons from the Arab-Israeli Wars I believe is that a generally higher education level all the way down the chain from generals to privates, and especially amongst NCO's, can very well be the deciding factor. Israel's high pace meant that they took the initative and their enemies were forced to react upon Israeli manouvers instead of making their own moves (first half of the Yom Kippur War being an exception).

When you add mission tactics to this you get what not only made Israel beat their bigger and sometimes better equipped enemies, but also what made Germany win the battle for Tannenberg and their Luddendorf offensive succesfull, not to mention the huge German victories in the early parts of WWII. The fact is that Germany throughout the Second World War managed to "do more with less" when compared to the Allies who, especially the Soviets, were more strictly directed from the top.

It is one of the great ironies of history that the country that best have carried the doctrines of Germany forward is Israel.


more with less is not enough for chinas enemys

they Gernams to destroy a large protion of the red army in 1941/42 but was eventualy overwhelmed if all of israel enemy attack at once with 1/2 the ability of the Russians then the out come would be quite different
 

Red not Dead

Junior Member
VIP Professional
darth sidious said:
IDF like army=elephant
Soveit style army= ants

elephant may kill some ants ,But eventualy it WILL be eaten :D

China is like the soviet union in many ways

1 releative poor cant afford a large IDF like army
2 high population ( copared with potenial enemies)
3 large land mass to defend
4 less advabced then rivial tech wise

such a situation demands a large army at a reasonably low cost
weapons produced will be more paratical and relible at the expanse of perfomance

a T-99 will lose aginst the abrams at a one to one encounter, But will most certinaly win in a Kursk style battle ( fire power and armour releative the same but T-99 will be in far greater numbers). A AK may not be as accurate as a M-4 but it wil shoot regardless of enviroment. Lack of high perfomance aircraft will be overcomed with massive numbers of cheap Sams etc.

lack of quality will be overcomed with Quanity

IDF has been victrious in the past because all of its enemy have roughly the same size military much are armed and trained in soviet lines. This combined with forgein supprot better weapons and training allowed iseral to surive.
Lack of unity amoung arabs in also a grerat asset enabling iseral to take o and defeat her enemy one by one.

this will noit be the case if the enemy has greater numbers? better motivation/training in the iran-Iraq war Iran manage to hold off a enemy with superior weapon with numbers alone.


Well there were never huge engagemnts in kursk...The most massive encouter was the 69 armorde corpse against the SS 87th panzerbrig. 325 tanks against 126 panzers and the panzies got raped not by number but by suicidal manoeuvers from the soviets. All those numbers were mostly achieved by scatered forces on a huge battlefield.

We don't know what the T-99 is capable of!!! What if the chinese simply out flank and break the US front...What if Chinese Grunts with ATGM's and HATW create pockets that block the US armored formations while being hard to knock by CAS assets. That's wht happened in kursk. The german force faced a well prepared multilayer stylish defence with great AT assets.

The Iran Iraq war was not about superior assets...remember Crappy Warpact tanks were blown up by same Warpact RPG's and ATGM's.

Israel survived in the first war because they had the support of both camps. They had comm block weaponery (czech arms shipments arrived in 1947) as well as Western one. In 1948 the arabs had only german, french and british made tanks and were trained by german staff. they lost because they had not the force to face a better equipped army with all the vets coming back both from the western armies and the Soviet one. Then their troops were decades behind in terms of motivation and fighting skills. In 1957 they took on egypt alongside the British and the french and in 1967 they attacked first and pinned down all arab assets while capitalizing on arab mutual distrust and dissent. But what happened in 1973? They went apeshit rushing for the nukes and hadn't it been for the Syrian operationnal "break", Israel could have been history by now. It's is not as easy as you think. Soviet doctrine and assets served pretty well to others (may i remind you the Indian-pak wars or the NVA vs ARVN fighting). Not to mention the South Afs got a bit itched by the cuban expeditionnary "volunteer" force.
 

Lavi

Junior Member
1973 was not exactly such a disaster as you want it to look like, yes, the IDF made some huge mistakes, but when finally getting into the fight they managed to fight back and against all odds beat both the Egyptians and the Syrians (and the units of other nations involved, like the Iraqis and the Jordanians).

The crossing of the Suez channel is a very good example on what a determined unit can do against a numerically superior enemy, and the battle for the Golan Heights is still used as a school book example.

Personally I don't think a good commander will fight a ants vs. elephant battle, caring about the well-being of your men is one of the parts that make a good leader. It also gives the men trust in their authorities knowing that they wont be sent on unnecessary missions, but rather that when the boss calls, it's something important that is worth fighting for. That is what gives a good spirit! Wasting human lives will eventually not be a good way to fight a war.
 

Red not Dead

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Lavi said:
1973 was not exactly such a disaster as you want it to look like, yes, the IDF made some huge mistakes, but when finally getting into the fight they managed to fight back and against all odds beat both the Egyptians and the Syrians (and the units of other nations involved, like the Iraqis and the Jordanians).

The crossing of the Suez channel is a very good example on what a determined unit can do against a numerically superior enemy, and the battle for the Golan Heights is still used as a school book example.

Personally I don't think a good commander will fight a ants vs. elephant battle, caring about the well-being of your men is one of the parts that make a good leader. It also gives the men trust in their authorities knowing that they wont be sent on unnecessary missions, but rather that when the boss calls, it's something important that is worth fighting for. That is what gives a good spirit! Wasting human lives will eventually not be a good way to fight a war.

Actually the israelis still claim they were up to the task...you knwo you weren't. Good for you uncle Sam got those supplies and ammunition to you not to mention their AA umbrella (arab) fell short otherwise you could have payed a huge price. But you won and that's what matters.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
Red not Dead said:
Actually the israelis still claim they were up to the task...you knwo you weren't. Good for you uncle Sam got those supplies and ammunition to you not to mention their AA umbrella (arab) fell short otherwise you could have payed a huge price. But you won and that's what matters.

The ironic thing is, in the end the only party that benefitted was Uncle Sam. Egypt's military was destroyed, Israel lost its conquered/occupied sinai territory, Syria got its butt kicked in Golan, the Arab league had to expel Egypt, and Moscow watched Egypt switch sides from Russia to US. =/
 

Red not Dead

Junior Member
VIP Professional
adeptitus said:
The ironic thing is, in the end the only party that benefitted was Uncle Sam. Egypt's military was destroyed, Israel lost its conquered/occupied sinai territory, Syria got its butt kicked in Golan, the Arab league had to expel Egypt, and Moscow watched Egypt switch sides from Russia to US. =/


Very true.
 

Maork

New Member
Israel resumes arms sales to China

(
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)

Israeli arms developers are once again marketing their wares in China despite the 2004 crisis that developed with the US over a sensitive arms deal, Defense Ministry Director-General Ya'acov Toren revealed on Wednesday.

"The military industries have returned to working on defense exports with China and other countries," Toren told reporters in his first press conference since taking office in September 2005.

"Defense exports were never an unsupervised business, and we require all of the industries who want to sell to submit the plans which we then review and approve according to the set criteria."

A severe crisis developed between Israel and the US in December 2004 after the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) received unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) from China for what Israel said were standard repairs. The Pentagon claimed Israel was deceitful and that the UAVs were sent to IAI for upgrading.

In August 2005, the crisis was resolved after Israel and the US signed an understanding that effectively granted the US a veto over Israeli arms sales to selected countries that Washington felt compromised its national security.

One of the unwritten conditions was also the dismissal of long-time ministry director-general Amos Yaron.

"I didn't investigate the affair to see what happened and how we got developed a situation of a lack of trust between us and America," Toren said. "There were arguments and misunderstandings and personal differences, but I believed it wasn't significant."

"What is important," Toren added, "is that we have renewed the strategic dialogue with the US and most things are back to the way they used to be."

According to new procedures, military industries interested in exporting arms to China are required to first receive the Defense Ministry's approval for the marketing stage and the negotiations even before the sale itself.

"We don't approve everything," Toren said. In an effort to improve the supervision over defense deals, Toren has recently decided to establish a new exports division alongside the MOD's Foreign Defense Assistance and Defense Export Organization (SIBAT).

Toren added that he also planned to establish a strategic planning body for the defense establishment and the IDF and to enhance relations with foreign countries. "We don't have a strong enough presence abroad," he said.

While contracts valued at more than $3 billion were signed by Israeli military industries this past year, Toren said he would like to see an increase and that he was considering sending a defense attach to Japan - a post vacant for the past two years.

Defense deals, Toren said, was also a type of diplomacy that often preceded public relations between two countries. "When an Indian plane filled with Israeli systems takes to the sky, then [Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon can go visit India," he said referring to Sharon's visit in September 2003.

During the talk, Toren revealed that the Rafael and Elta had performed a successful exercise on Tuesday with the revolutionary Trophy armored vehicle defense system. The new system intercepts and destroys missiles with a shotgun-like blast just before they hit the armored vehicle. US officials and representatives from other countries were present at the exercise.

=========================================

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Gangle

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Israel is the king of a Fast Victory, cause it cannot sustaine a war for long without it really hurting the economy.

If china invades Taiwon they want to do it in quick victory before they can get to their battle stations. Best group to do this will prob be the smaller portion of modernized Units.

China prob can learn alot from Israel
 

FreeAsia2000

Junior Member
Gangle said:
Israel is the king of a Fast Victory, cause it cannot sustaine a war for long without it really hurting the economy.

If china invades Taiwon they want to do it in quick victory before they can get to their battle stations. Best group to do this will prob be the smaller portion of modernized Units.

China prob can learn alot from Israel

?!

Does anybody understand ANYTHING he said apart from what a great military
he thinks Israel has ?

Dude I seriously suggest you read Red_Not_Dead's posts on the middle eastern wars instead of watching Fox news
 

darth sidious

Banned Idiot
israel surived the first three wars because of the weakness of her enmey not it own power

later own sperior equipment and forgein support allowed it to surive

besides they have uncle sam and NUkes to protect them
 
Top