13-Jul-14 World View -- Will Israel win the next war ?

[John]

13-Jul-14 World View -- Will Israel win the next war between Arabs and Jews?


Israeli special forces appear to be fighting in Gaza

** 13-Jul-14 World View -- Will Israel win the next war between Arabs and Jews?
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e140713



Contents:
Israeli special forces appear to be fighting in Gaza
Will Israel win the next war between Arabs and Jews?
Biblical prophecy and the future of Israel
History and population and the future of Israel


Keys:
Generational Dynamics, Gaza, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Quds Brigades,
Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL,
Esau, Ishmael, Isaiah 17, Damascus, Turkey, Anatolia,
Ottoman Empire, Byzantine Empire, War with the Holy League,
Nakba, Palestine

[T Muir]

I see you skirted around the fact Israel possesses nuclear weapons, when trying to defend your thesis on why Israel is inevitably bound to be defeated by 100M combined Arabs. By your logic, China will inevitably defeat the US due to sheer population numbers and generational hatred. Or better yet, a combined China, Pakistan and the Arab world would annihilate the United States. You really cannot discount superior military technology and tactics, air superiority, and nuclear weapons from the equation. In modern warfare, it's basically game-over for the country that doesn't have air superiority. And you completely discount international intervention or allied collaboration, if a combined Arab world attacked Israel, as if these things happen in a test tube vacuum.
A 100M people country also does not field a 100M man army. Your presumption is just absurd. The US's ability to manufacture endless ships, tanks and warplanes lead to the defeat of the Axis, not sheer human numbers. We only had 12M military personnel at the height of WWII. Will the Arab world go Rosy the Riveter and build the greatest manufacturing engine the world has ever known? Absurd. Alas, the idea of an Arab world coming together in unity like the Allies in WWII is simply preposterous.

If Israel feared its existence was in jeopardy, they would likely go nuclear on the many capitals of their enemies, and well as fielded forces. We don't fight with shields and swords in phalanxes anymore. There is little to no chance of Israeli defeat at the hands of a combined Arab attack for this reason alone.

[Guest]

In modern warfare, it's basically game-over for the country that doesn't have air superiority.

You obviously have no idea what you talking about.

How many aircraft (jet fighters, helicopters, or even bi-planes) do the Taliban have? How long has the West been fighting there? 13 years! Determination is more important than air power.

America built 96,000 airplanes in 1944. How many did they build last year? Technology has been extremely expensive and not even robots can crank out high tech like the old days. Wars against lightly armed Muslims has costs trillions and bankrupted the West. So much for air power and superior technology.


I don't doubt Israel would go nuclear if they were losing, but so what? Israel would be burned off the map too. Most of the world's Muslim population (over a billion) live in Asia-not the ME. And the there are more Arabs in France than Jews Israel. By all means, nuke away.

[Guest]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

Ron Rosenbaum writes in his 2012 book How the End Begins: The Road to a Nuclear World War III that, in his opinion, in the "aftermath of a second Holocaust", Israel could "bring down the pillars of the world (attack Moscow and European capitals for instance)" as well as the "holy places of Islam." He writes that "abandonment of proportionality is the essence" of the Samson Option.

[JULLIEN1]

there are more Arabs in France than Jews Israel

Wrong: there are "only" between three and four million people of North African descent in France whereas there are 6.1 millions of Jews in Israel according to the Israel bureau of statistics. Don't believe the exaggerations told by the racist right.

To the one who wrote :

The one thing wrong with Generational Dynamics theory is it does not account for religion.

It's just written "We don't use religious interpretations". Religion is a different thing.

I am 100% backer of Generational Dynamics except when it comes to Israel who is Yahweh's chosen people, even though they don't act like it. He would not let the region be trampled on by Esau's and Ishmael's descendants.

Well, He did: between 70 A.D and 1947 A.D. God is recorded in the Bible as telling to Abraham his descendants will be more numerous than the stars in the sky. He is NOT recorded as telling they'll be more numerous in Palestine than the stars in the sky.

[John]

From a web site reader:

To Mr Xenakis,

You wrote:
"My speculation is that a sense grew across the Muslim world that these repeated Muslim defeats could be turned to victories in only one way: by outbreeding the Jews and Christians. I don't know if anyone issued a fatwa or if some Muslim politician made an appeal. But in the six decades since World War II, when Western politicians were encouraging couples to have no more than two children, to prevent a population explosion, the Muslim world was encouraging couples to have as many children as possible, in order to defeat the West.
That's my speculation for why the birth rate in the Sunni Muslim countries has been twice the birth rate in Western countries."

Your speculation is almost true except it's a Palestinian-only reaction. The consensus was expressed by Yasser Arafat as "The wombs of Arab women are our best weapon". I think you'll be interested in that article written by a demographer:
http://demographymatters.blogspot.fr/20 ... raeli.html

By the way, it happens French decision-makers have had a similar reaction. One of the reasons for our big welfare state is we think obvious the state should encourage natality, give money to mothers and get a healthy population. De Gaulle in 1945 declared he wanted a France of one hundred million inhabitants by the year 2000. We are only 66 million but it's still held as a success because the population increased instead of decreasing as in the 1930's.

[Guest]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

Ron Rosenbaum writes in his 2012 book How the End Begins: The Road to a Nuclear World War III that, in his opinion, in the "aftermath of a second Holocaust", Israel could "bring down the pillars of the world (attack Moscow and European capitals for instance)" as well as the "holy places of Islam." He writes that "abandonment of proportionality is the essence" of the Samson Option.

I'd rather be dead than be a victim of nuclear blackmail. As John has pointed out, a nuclear war would not destroy the world, just parts of it. What's next, India demanding free oil and gold or it will unleash a nuclear war?

I think it is in everyone's interest to work for a just peace. I don't think people will, so we are probably going to end up in a nuclear war as John has predicted.

[Guest]

When I lived in France back in 1999, I read that there were six million Muslims (mostly Arab). Are you taking illegals into account? How about the birthrate? America was supposed to have 20 million illegals back in the 90s, and that number has supposedly remained unchanged. Perhaps the right in France is, well, right?

[vincecate]

There were two categories of objections: Biblical prophecy, and history. I'll address both of them below.

There was a 3rd category of objection. There is a lot more to war than just having more civilians, or even soldiers. The technology, the training, the defensive systems (Iron Dome, bomb shelters) etc really make it so that man-for-man the Israelis will do more killing and less dying. Drones with anti-tank missiles and the Iron Dome that should stop incoming tanks and airplanes making it really hard for the Arabs to hurt Israel. You can see this in the numbers for the current fighting. Last I read, Israel had not lost a man yet. So we can't calculate a Arab deaths/Israeli deaths ratio in this fight so far, since we would get a divide by zero error. But the ratio is probably more than 20 Arabs killed for every Israeli killed, higher than the ratio of total nearby Arabs to Israelis.

All of this does not even look at the Nucear option. Here is some info on the 1973 war:

"That night Meir authorized the assembly of thirteen 20-kiloton-of-TNT (84 TJ) tactical atomic weapons for Jericho missiles at Sdot Micha Airbase, and F-4 aircraft at Tel Nof Airbase, for use against Syrian and Egyptian targets.[274] They would be used if absolutely necessary to prevent total defeat, but the preparation was done in an easily detectable way, likely as a signal to the United States.[276] Kissinger learned of the nuclear alert on the morning of October 9. That day, President Nixon ordered the commencement of Operation Nickel Grass, an American airlift to replace all of Israel's material losses."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War

In the 41 years since then Israel has made more and larger bombs.

Also, Egypt does not like Hamas and won't even look the other way so they can bring stuff in by tunnel. They are not close to joining in their fight.

[Guest]

The army generals in Cairo might not like HAMAS, but the Arab street just might differ.