Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mavdog
orange, that is an EXTREMELY biased assessment.
the depiction of the israeli army in 1948 as "European-trained soldiers and possessed modern weaponry, including up-to-date fighter and bomber airplanes" is as absurd as it gets. first, the israelis who were european had just been through the nazi extermination campaign, and were NOT "trained soldiers" at all. second, the arab armies were at the least 3x's the size of the israelis. also, the 67 war was not a "pearl harobor type of attack" although I will agree it was pre-emptive. Egypt and Syria, as well as Jordan, had amassed troops at the border preparing to attack israel.
it's odd that the author glosses over the 73 war when the arabs attacked israel on one of the holiest religious days in judaism.
all in all too slanted a write up imo.
|
I agree that it's biased, I admit I only took 3 min. to do a search and copy+paste/format and that it's an imperfect source. However, the basic information contained therein is still accurate and usable. I ask that you don't focus on the depictions of the army, etc. and more on the history (less opinion) and progression of the landgrab. The gist I was trying to convey concerns the escalation of immigration-related violence mentioned by dude following the 1947 U.N. partition.