Israeli Army addition

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-23 22:10

I meant it might already be occupied by the time America starts fighting the war.

Figisaacnewton · Post by **Figisaacnewton** » 2006-03-23 22:54

Pence wrote:I dont understand why everyone is jumping on Israel, its a small country that is part of the MEC anyway.

Russia, Argentinia, Middle Africa and East Europe offer much more.

Finnaly. That explains your wierd angle at all of these storylines you keep disliking. Righty...

Anyways... Israel = Sworn enemy of MEC, probably the only reason the MEC exist. Not random part of MEC. If anything were to set off a BF2 like war, it would be some middleeastern country shooting at Israel, or Israel bombing Iran or something like that, and then the middle east would band into a MEC and start an official jihad.

Israel has one of the best militaries in the world, and would definetely NOT be overrun right at the beggingin of the war, unless Iran fucking nuked it into dust or somethign.

Russia is too bankrupt to fight a real war.
Argentina.... comon it looks pretty and has its problems... but not that much...
Middle africa was done by the original POE, and may actually make sense, as presumably Eygpt and maybe even like Libya and Sudan would join the MEC

East Europe is a no because russia is a no, and POE2 is doing it. the only thing in east europe i see workign is turkey.

Uncle Blues · Post by **Uncle Blues** » 2006-03-23 23:45

Maybe Polish Army?

[T]Terranova7 · Post by **[T]Terranova7** » 2006-03-24 01:23

Israel actually makes sense since they are one of the few democracies existing in the middle-east. Iraq could also become a target of the MEC if the current war/occupation of Iraq exists in the BF2/PR timeline. Not to mention Russia seems outplayed to me, and probably others. There are many games and mods that use the country of Russia. However I would personally love to see Israel and other smaller countries in a mod. We don't really need Middle Africa, since East Asia, the Middle-East and the Pacific combined pretty much offer all of the environments the PR team needs for mapping.

Also why the hell would you mention Argentina. Its not even on the same continent that the war is taking place on. East Europe has some nice grasslands and a bit snow every now and then; thats all. I really don't think we should be asking for a WW3 mod here.

Post by **Katarn** » 2006-03-24 05:21

Terranova wrote:Also why the hell would you mention Argentina. Its not even on the same continent that the war is taking place on.

Neither is the US or Canada

Infantrigel · Post by **Infantrigel** » 2006-03-24 09:41

'[R-DEV wrote:Katarn']Neither is the US or Canada

Good point!

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-24 14:15

Figisaacnewton wrote: Russia is too bankrupt to fight a real war.
Argentina.... comon it looks pretty and has its problems... but not that much...
Middle africa was done by the original POE, and may actually make sense, as presumably Eygpt and maybe even like Libya and Sudan would join the MEC

And Somalia and the more eastern country's.

I said Russia because if the Middle Eastern Coalition can form into the giant, profetional war machine that it is then why a country the size of Russia cant is beond me (Russia has alot of oil too).

Argentinia could be the same story and they have a reason; The Falklands.

Israel has one of the best militaries in the world, and would definetely NOT be overrun right at the beggingin of the war, unless Iran fucking nuked it into dust or somethign.

You are forgeting that the MEC is a profetional force and could easily wipe out the pethetic Isreali army if you compare it to theres. Turky could also have fallen to the MEC (most likely)

Besides arnt we are looking for a new enemy? The fact that Isreal is attacked and occupied by the MEC is irelivent because otherwise they would just be another allie.

Peter-SAS · Post by **Peter-SAS** » 2006-03-24 15:30

Pence wrote:
You are forgeting that the MEC is a profetional force and could easily wipe out the pethetic Isreali army if you compare it to theres.

Didn't that already happen. Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc ganged up on Israel, and the Israelis sent them packing with their tails between their legs.

Israel does not have a pathetic army. And they have nukes too

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-24 18:43

Peter-SAS wrote:

Didn't that already happen. Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc ganged up on Israel, and the Israelis sent them packing with their tails between their legs.

Israel does not have a pathetic army. And they have nukes too

We are talking about the MEC, past conflicts between middle eastern country's are irelivent.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-03-24 18:58

israel have fought them several times, and with the exception of the tank disaster that got a number of their old MBTs blasted some time ago, they won each fight soundly.

so yeah, maybe this so called MEC of the future is a professional army, but considering that currently israel is THE professional one compared to it's potential foe (which makes up for the MEC) i don't see their army going backward. If the MEC becomes professional the israel is almost certain to:

a. surpass it in quality and tactical deployment strategy.
b. blast the living hell out of them before they r organized.

What makes u think that israel is going to sit tight while these clearly hostile countries build the MEC against them? It's obvious that in order to maintain clear advantage against their foe, israel will bolster it's military strength to ensure they remain superior to the nearby MEC threat.

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-24 19:15

Zepheris Casull wrote:israel have fought them several times, and with the exception of the tank disaster that got a number of their old MBTs blasted some time ago, they won each fight soundly.

so yeah, maybe this so called MEC of the future is a professional army, but considering that currently israel is THE professional one compared to it's potential foe (which makes up for the MEC) i don't see their army going backward. If the MEC becomes professional the israel is almost certain to:

a. surpass it in quality and tactical deployment strategy.
b. blast the living hell out of them before they r organized.

What makes u think that israel is going to sit tight while these clearly hostile countries build the MEC against them? It's obvious that in order to maintain clear advantage against their foe, israel will bolster it's military strength to ensure they remain superior to the nearby MEC threat.

What makes you think that a small country can contend with the hole of the MEC. I dont get it, So what if Isreal has a decent force now because the MEC are just as good if not better and they have more people.

And yes Isreal would just sit back and wait because thats what America must have done and if it did try and do somethink it would have a hard time ocuping the mass of MEC teritory let alone trying to take it in the frist place.

Isreal is also going to be an allie but we already have the British comeing, why dont we find an enemy?

[T]Terranova7 · Post by **[T]Terranova7** » 2006-03-24 19:48

'[R-DEV wrote:Katarn']Neither is the US or Canada

I think Pence means fighting on their land. So unless Argentina plans on mobilizing its armed forces and going to the middle-east, or for whatever reason we end up fighting in New York City; it does not make sense.

On another note who said Israel would go after the MEC. All Israel has to do is simply defend itself, no offensives against the MEC or anything like that. Also China and the MEC combined are pretty much large enough itself. CHina holds the world's largest population and military personal. Assuming that the MEC is just a bunch of arabic countries united, they virtually hold an unlimited amount of resources in the middle-east. A good example would be WW2, you know how many countries had to fight against Germany alone?

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-24 20:11

Terranova wrote:A good example would be WW2, you know how many countries had to fight against Germany alone?

Germany, Austria and Hungary, Finland, Mexico, Italy, Checlsovakia, Japan and a Large number of Americans, British, Polish, French, Russian, Greek, Norwegian and Turkish deserters.

Against The British Empire, French resistance and a load of Polish, Dutch, Belgium and French escapie's, Russia and America - Hardly fair to say the allies were larger. Yea ok Britian had the largest Empire and America was becomeing a superpower but still.

German tanks and equipment was the best. (Panther, Panzer 4, MP44)
British fighters were the best. (Spitfire, Mustang, Typhoon)
American bombers were the best (B-25, B17, B-29)

lonelyjew · Post by **lonelyjew** » 2006-03-24 20:35

Gemany and Japan were the only real threats to us. Yes, Italy, Romania, and Checlsovakia did some, but honestly they didn't do that much. The allies were also basically the US, England, and Russia. The other countries that we were allied with, Australia, China, and the partisans and rebels of various nations taken over by the Axis like Italy and the other small Axis nations did little to turn the tide of the war.

Now, looking at the most important countries of both sides, the allies had vastly superior numbers and recources. What kept the Axis from getting utterly destroyed was surprise, superior tactics, and in the case of Germany much better technology. Germanies superior tactics really shined in the fall of France who were supposed to have the worlds best army. It took the allies a long time to catch up both in tactics, and equipment.

Now, Germany can be compared to Israel, a nation that is small compared to it's enemies, but has far superior officers, soldiers, equipment, and a generaly better ability to fight. The MEC's streangth would be in it's recources, but hardly it's equipment and tactics. Yes, they will have good weapons compared to what they have now, but nothing compared to modern armies like the U.S. and England. I doubt that they would be able to even get Russian T-90 tanks. Unless they were willing to create their own MBT's and jets they would not be getting top of the line weaponry from any nation.

Also, keep in mind that the U.S. would not allow Israel to fall so easily. As soon as we thought it would be needed, our forces would be put in Israel to help back the already strong Israely army. If we saw a war comming this would be even more important because we would need an outpost like Israel to attack surrounding MEC nations.

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-24 21:59

Australia was part of the British Empire.

The MEC's streangth would be in it's recources, but hardly it's equipment and tactics.

Why not? If we are fighting such retarded and ill equiped enemys then we should have already won.

Isreal is not going to contend and thats it! Theres no way they could stop a MEC advance regardless of equpiment. If the MEC have poor equipment and tactics, what provoked them to buy the Havok and T-90 and millions of Eryx and possably Billions of AK-101's witch are better than the M16 and i am not even mentioning the aircraft.

Another decent enemy please...

Top_Cat_AxJnAt · Post by **Top_Cat_AxJnAt** » 2006-03-24 22:17

IMagine an AK101 with a thermal scope = an uber weapon. I would love it if the grenade launcher could be replaced with one. It would be sooooooooooo coool.
sorry about the oftopic.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-03-25 00:04

Pence: the reason why i believe israel will still be one step aheaf of the MEC is because that is exactly what the israel stance is. Israel ensures that they always have superiority in some aspect to at least a combined 2 potential threat of them. What this means is that they make sure that even if 2 of their potential enemy join forces and israel receives no support from their ally, they will still be able to subdue the enemy comfortably. This ensures that none of their enemy dare to launch an assault on them, and this is exactly what happened in the six day war on 1967 in which israel destroyed the bulk of the Egypt, Jordan, and Syria's air force and a good portion of their land forces (Egypt in particular was hit hard).

Another reason is this, unlike other hostile nations surrounding them, israel cannot afford to have excessive loss in any war. Realizing that they make sure that their IDF is superior than any of the surrounding countries forces because the only way they can make sure that casualty remains minimum would be to have superior hardware and training (and hence a more professional force) since numerically they are at a disadvantage against the combined arab forces (which is the bulk of the MEC).

So, if MEC is formed and if they are as professional as they seem, then IDF would be facing a very formidable foe. In that regard, they have 2 options, either bolster their IDF strength (both hardware and personnel) or launch a pre emptive strike like in the six day war.

The scenario in six day war was that literally all of the arab nations surrounding the israel more or less decided to erase israel's existence from the map. Egypt, Syria, and Jordan are just the one that got hit by the pre emptive strike, Iraq and many other arab nations openly stated that they too backed the alliance so Israel, realizing that they will face overwhelming number in the event of a full alliance, decided to launch a pre emptive strike and neutralize Egypt, Syria, and Jordan before they all can mount a united offensive against the israel. The same scenario is likely to occur if MEC have numerical superiority and are hostile to the israel (both of which are very likely), in that event israel would likely launch a pre emptive strike as well to make sure they remain at advantage against the MEC.

And thus this sets up a perfect scenario of an MEC vs IDF war, MEC have numerical advantage, but are less organized because the IDF are likely to hit them while the MEC are still in the infancy and not yet fully organized (which is likely, because forming a coalition force of many nations is never easy, in particular because unlike the coalition force in dessert storm, none of the arab nations are particularly strong by themself).

Also note that israel have a lot of modern hardwares and i dare say some of them are better than the US equipment. That and their IDF have literally fought all the wars from the day they were founded till now and have won practically all of their major conflict, thus they have experience and personnel quality on their side as well.

six7 · Post by **six7** » 2006-03-25 01:53

Pence wrote:
If the MEC have poor equipment and tactics, what provoked them to buy the Havok and T-90 and millions of Eryx and possably Billions of AK-101's witch are better than the M16 and i am not even mentioning the aircraft.

The US is currently in the process of replacing the M16.

The Su-34 and the MIG 29 are both extremely good aircraft but US fighters also have many advantages. The F 14 can shoot down a plane from 90 miles away. The F22 and X35 both are more maneuverable than the russian made counterparts and they appear smaller than a seagull on a radar screen. First strike capability and maneuverability are 2 of the most important things in dogfights. Also, US and british pilots are hands down the best in the world.

The Republican guard in the gulf war was equiped with a division of T 90 tanks. When the T 90 went up against the M1A1, it had the advantages of being on the defensive, knowing the battlefield, and superior numbers. The T 90s were decimated while the US didn't lose a single Abrams.

[T]Terranova7 · Post by **[T]Terranova7** » 2006-03-25 03:19

What? What are you talking about? The only tanks that I know of the republican guard using were some old T-72s. The T-90 is Russia's latest tank in production. In fact the T-90 is only in service with Russia and India, thats all for the moment.

Also whether or not the AK-101 is better than the M16A2 rifle is really a matter of opinion. The AK-101 for the most part is just an AK74 in an export model. Fires 5.56mm rounds just like the M16A2, only thing is the M16A2 can only be fired in single and burst modes. I'm also certain that the M16A2 has a rate of fire at about 800 rounds per minute. The AK-101 does 600 rounds per minute. However I think the AK seris of guns are normally much more reliable than the M16 rifles; less jamming and what not.

Back on topic. If any nation for the most part began a military buildup, the others would too. Israel has one of the finest armies in the world. And if their sworn enemies of sorts were building up a military they would no doubt begin a military buildup of their own. I'm confident They could hold off against the MEC onslaught. Since their country is small, it should be alot more easier to defend their borders.

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-03-25 05:01

Terranova wrote:What? What are you talking about? The only tanks that I know of the republican guard using were some old T-72s. The T-90 is Russia's latest tank in production. In fact the T-90 is only in service with Russia and India, thats all for the moment.

The MEC use the T-90.

The F 14 can shoot down a plane from 90 miles away

Source?

Also whether or not the AK-101 is better than the M16A2 rifle is really a matter of opinion.

There have been rifle tests, the L85 alwase comes out on top and then the AK-101 followed by the M16 (family) and then the FAMAS G3 is the worst, try Wiki for that.

The US is currently in the process of replacing the M16.

Eh? I dont see a replacement in PR yet so this is irelivent. Plus the new weapon is practicly an M16 cross G36 anyway - Hardly leaping passed the M16.

The T 90s were decimated while the US didn't lose a single Abrams.

Terranova says otherwise...

At Zepheris Casull; the six day war is not a way of decideing who is more powerfull, renember that the MEC are Profetional, heavily equiped and most of all 100's of times larger than Isreal a little logic suggests that Isreal would not last a month if the MEC swarmed over the boarder.

I cant beleave you base it on the 'Six day war' when that was a load of stupid old Russian hardware against a decent force. The MEC HAVE the decent hardware now and obviously plenty of it, not to mention the troops too, Isreal's only hope is to run all the way into Europe.