Due Diligence relaying the truth

As I have frequently stated I so dislike those po-Israel people who in their rush to write they do not do "Due Diligence" and verify the truth of what they say or PUBLISH! 

Many of those I chastised for their mistakes think of me as an cantankerous old coot.

As a truthful historian one must relay truth, as a JOURNALIST, one must maintain journalist integrity-by doing "Due Diligence" which regretfully is a thing of the past.

By relaying incorrect or false information it merely plays into the arsenal of mendaciousl lies of the backers of the "Landless refugee decendants of the eunuchs of the Great Nachba".

In the latest email from David Lange -Israellycool he posted an article by Lloyd Masel:

"Why Nixon Helped Israel in 1973: A Promise To His Mother".

This incorrect and un documented assertion that President Nixon  aided Israel in 1973 primarily because of a promise to his mother is not supported by historical evidence. (Bovine Excrement)

Richard Nixon's personal sentiments and background are often discussed in relation to his presidency but here is ABSOLUTELY NO historical evidence to support this statement!

Historians and analyses of the Yom Kippur War and Nixon's foreign policy point , instead point out several key geopolitical and strategic motivations for the massive U.S. airlift of military supplies (known as Operation Nickel Grass) to Israel:

Cold War Proxy Conflict: 

The most significant factor was the Cold War. The Soviet Union was heavily arming and supporting Egypt and Syria. A decisive Arab victory, especially with Soviet backing, would have greatly enhanced Soviet influence in the Middle East and been a major strategic blow to the U.S. and its position against communism. Nixon and Kissinger saw the conflict as a proxy war between the superpowers.

Preventing Israel's Defeat (and Potential Nuclear Escalation): 

Israel suffered significant initial losses. There were credible fears that if the tide of the war didn't turn, Israel might face a catastrophic defeat, potentially even leading to a desperate use of its undeclared nuclear capabilities. Nixon was determined to prevent Israel's collapse.

Leverage for Peace Talks: 

Nixon and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger believed that an Israeli victory, or at least a strong negotiating position, would be necessary to bring about meaningful peace talks between Israel and the Arab states. They aimed to establish a new diplomatic order in the Middle East that would be favorable to U.S. interests.

Maintaining U.S. Credibility:

 As an ally, the U.S. had a vested interest in demonstrating its commitment to Israel. Abandoning Israel in its hour of need would have severely damaged U.S. credibility with allies worldwide.

Avoiding Another Geopolitical Disaster: 

The Nixon administration was still heavily dealing with the aftermath of Vietnam. They wanted to avoid another prolonged and costly military quagmire, but also to prevent a situation that could escalate directly into a U.S.-Soviet confrontation.

While Nixon's personal views on Jews and Israel have been complex and at times contradictory (with some evidence of anti-Semitic remarks in private), his decision-making during the Yom Kippur War was overwhelmingly driven by strategic national interests within the context of the Cold War. There is no widely accepted historical account that attributes his decision to a promise made to his mother.FACT!!

Lloyd Masel also stated in the article  "Prime Minister Golda Meir was in a state of shock." is not correct.

When I had made aliyah in 1974 I was fortunate to meet and speak with Golda and as I once contributed to Wikkipedia I wrote:

"In the days leading up to the Yom Kippur War, Israeli intelligence could not conclusively determine that an attack was imminent. However, on 5 October 1973, Meir received information that Syrian forces were massing on the Golan Heights. She was alarmed by the reports, and believed that the situation was similar to what preceded the Six-Day War. However, her advisers counseled her not to worry, saying they would have adequate notice before any war broke out. This made sense at the time; after the Six Day War, most in the Israeli intelligence community considered the Arabs unprepared to launch another attack.

Consequently, although the Knesset passed a resolution granting her power to demand a full-scale call-up of the military (instead of the typical cabinet decision), Meir did not mobilize Israel's forces early. Soon, though, the threat of war became very clear. Six hours before the outbreak of hostilities, Meir met with Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan and General David Elazar. While Dayan continued to argue that war was unlikely and favored calling up the air force and only two divisions, Elazar advocated full-scale army mobilization and the launch of a full-scale preemptive strike on Syrian forces. "

On October 6, Meir approved full-scale mobilizing but rejected a preemptive strike, citing concerns that Israel might be perceived as initiating hostilities, which would hurt Israel's access to crucial foreign aid and military support, in particular from the United States, in the resulting conflict. 

Take special not of this:

She made it a priority to inform Washington of her decision. U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger later confirmed Meir's assessment by stating that if Israel had launched a preemptive strike, Israel would not have received the backing of the United States." 

Lloyd Masel also blithely states: 

"Israel, with less than 200 tanks facing an enemy with 1400 tanks was totally ill-equipped to counter an onslaught of this magnitude."

As a historian and IDF veteran I wish to correct the article with the true facts!!!

In October 1973, at the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had a diverse tank inventory, primarily consisting of modernized Western-made tanks.

The main types of tanks in the IDF's possession were:

Centurion tanks (Sho't): 

These British-made main battle tanks were heavily modified by Israel, receiving a new powerpack (Continental AVDS-1790-2A diesel engine and Allison CD850-6 transmission) and a 105mm L7 gun. These upgraded versions were known as "Sho't Kal" (Alef, Bet, Gimel, Dalet sub-variants). The Sho't Meteor, an earlier upgrade with the original Rolls-Royce Meteor engine but also armed with the 105mm gun, also saw some combat. By the start of the war, 293 Centurion tanks were operational.

M48 Patton (Magach-3): 

These American-made tanks were upgraded by Israel, primarily by replacing their original 90mm gun with the 105mm L7 gun and receiving other improvements such as new engines and transmissions. These were known as "Magach-3."

M60/M60A1 Patton (Magach-6): 

Newer American-made tanks that were also in Israeli service, sometimes referred to as "Magach-6."

In terms of numbers, documented sources indicate that Israel had approximately 540 of the modified M48A3 (Magach-3) and M60A1 (Magach-6) tanks at the beginning of the war. 

For Centurions, 293 were operational. 

While older Sherman variants (M-50 and M-51, sometimes referred to as "Super Shermans") had largely been replaced in regular units, they were still used by reserve units on both the Sinai and Golan Heights fronts during the Yom Kippur War. TRUE DOCUMENTED FACTS!