Go Back   Alternate History Discussion Board > Discussion > Alternate History Discussion: After 1900

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 25th, 2012, 12:37 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Fighting in Sinai

The village of Abu Uwayulah in the central Sinai served as the road centre for the entire Sinai, and thus was a key Israeli target. To the east of Abu Uwayulah were several ridges that formed a natural defensive zone known to the Israelis as the "Hedgehog". Holding the "Hedgehog" were 3,000 Egyptians of the 17th and 18th battalions of the 3rd Infantry Division commanded by Colonel Sami Yassa. Yassa's men held a series of well fortified trenches. The "Hedgehog" could only be assaulted from the east flank of Umm Qataf ridge and the west flank of Ruafa ridge.

On 30 October, a probing attack by Israeli armour under Major Izhak Ben-Ari turned into an assault on the Umm Qataf ridge that ended in failure. During the fighting at Umm Qataf, Colonel Yassa was badly wounded and replaced by Colonel Saadedden Mutawally. To the south, another unit of the Israeli 7th Armored Brigade discovered the al-Dayyiqa gap in the Jebel Halal ridge of the "Hedgehog". The Israeli forces stormed and took the al-Dayyiqa gap. Colonel Mutawally failed to appreciate the extent of the danger to his forces posed by the IDF breakthrough at al-Dayyiqa. Led by Colonel Avraham Adan an IDF force entered the al-Dayyiqa and at dawn on 31 October attacked Abu Uwayulah. After an hour's fighting, Abu Uwayulah fell to the IDF. At the same time, another IDF battalion attacked the Ruafa ridge. Concurrently, another attack was launched on the eastern edge of the "Hedgehog" by the IDF 10th Infantry Brigade (composed mostly of reservists) that ended in failure. By noon, the Israeli Air Force had carried out a series of punishing airstrikes on the Egyptian positions, sometimes accidentally hitting IDF ground forces. Such was the tendency of the IAF to stage "friendly fire" incidents the IAF was arguably as much as danger to the Israeli troops as to the enemy.
After taking Abu Uwayulah, Adan committed all of his forces against the Ruafa ridge of the "Hedgehog". Adan began a three-pronged attack with one armored force striking northeastern edge of Ruafa, a mixed infantry/armored force attacking the north edge and a feint attack from a neighbouring knoll. During the evening attack on 31 October, a chaotic battle raged on Ruafa ridge with much hand-to-hand fighting. Through every IDF tank involved was destroyed, after a night's fighting, Ruafa had fallen to the IDF. Another IDF assault that night, this time by the 10th Infantry Brigade on Umm Qataf was less succcessful with much of the attacking force getting lost in the darkness, resulting in a series of confused attacks that ended in failure. Dayan, who had grown impatient with the failure to storm the "Hedgehog", sacked the 10th Brigade's commander Colonel Shmuel Golinda and replaced him with Colonel Israel Tal.

The city of Rafah was strategically important to Israel because control of that city would sever the Gaza Strip from the Sinai and provide a way to the main centres of the northern Sinai, al-Arish and al-Qantarah. Holding the forts outside of Rafah were a mixture of Egyptian and Palestinian forces in the 5th Infantry Brigade commanded by Brigadier General Jaafar al-Abd. In Rafah itself the 87th Palestinian Infantry Brigade was stationed. Assigned to capture Rafah were 1st Infantry Brigade led by Colonel Benjamin Givli and 27th Armored Brigade commanded by Colonel Haim Bar-Lev of the IDF. To the south of Rafah were a series of mine-filled sand dunes and to the north were a series of fortifed hills.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old January 25th, 2012, 01:50 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Anglo-French intervention

To support the invasion, large air forces had been deployed to Cyprus and Malta by Britain and France and many aircraft carriers were deployed. The two airbases on Cyprus were so congested that a third field which was in dubious condition had to be brought into use for French aircraft. Even RAF Luqa on Malta was extremely crowded with RAF Bomber Command aircraft. The British deployed the aircraft carriers HMS Eagle, Albion and Bulwark and France had the battleship Jean Bart and aircraft carriers Arromanches and La Fayette on station. In addition, HMS Ocean and Theseus acted as jumping-off points for Britain's helicopter-borne assault (the world's first).



British carrier HMS Eagle

In the morning of 30 October Britain and France sent ultimatums to Egypt and Israel. They initiated Operation Musketeer on 31 October, with a bombing campaign. Nasser responded by sinking all 40 ships present in the canal closing it to all shipping – shipping would not move again until mid-1957. Despite the risk of an invasion in the Canal Zone, Field Marshal Abdel Hakim Amer ordered Egyptian troops in the Sinai to stay put, as Amer confidently assured Nasser that the Egyptians could defeat the Israelis in the Sinai and then defeat the Anglo-French forces once they came ashore in the Canal Zone. Amer also advised Nasser to send more troops into the Sinai to inflict his promised defeat on Israel, even through there the risk of them being cut off if the Canal Zone was seized by Anglo-French forces was enormous. Not until late on October 31, did Nasser disregard Amer's rosy assessement and ordered his forces to disengage in the Sinai and to retreat back to the Canal Zone to face the expected Anglo-French invasion. Eden and Mollet ordered Phase I to begin 13 hours after the Anglo-French ultimatum. British bombers based in Cyprus and Malta took off to Cairo with the aim of destroying Cairo airport, only to be personally ordered back by Eden when he learned that American civilians were being evacuated at Cairo airport. Fearful of the backlash that might result if American civilians were killed in a British bombing attack, Eden sent the Valiant bombers back to Malta while the Canberras were ordered to hit Almaza airbase outside of Cairo. British night bombing proved ineffective. Starting on the morning of 1 November, carrier-based de Havilland Sea Venoms, Chance-Vought Corsairs and Hawker Sea Hawks began a series of daytime strikes on Egypt. By the night of 1 November the Egyptian Air Force had lost 200 planes. With the destruction of Egypt's air force, Keightley ordered the beginning of Phase II. As part of Phase II, a wide-ranging interdiction campaign began. On 3 November F4U-7 Corsairs from the 14.F and 15.F Aéronavale taking off from the French carriers Arromanches and La Fayette, attacked the aerodrome at Cairo.



French carrier Arromanches ( ex-British Colossus )
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old January 25th, 2012, 07:35 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Paratroopers and Marines

The very aggressive French General Beaufre suggested at once that Anglo-French forces seize the Canal Zone with airborne landings instead of waiting the planned ten days for Revise II to be worked through, and that the risk of sending in paratroops without the prospect of sea-borne landings for several days be taken. By 3 November, Beaufre finally convinced Keightley and Stockwell of the merits of his approach, and gained the approval for Operation Telescope as Beaufre had code-named the airborne assault on the Canal Zone.

On late 5 November, an advance element of the 3rd Battalion of the British Parachute Regiment dropped on El Gamil Airfield, a narrow strip of land led by Brigadier M.A.H. Butler. The "Red Devils" could not return Egyptian fire while landing, but once the paratroops landed, they used their Sten guns, three-inch mortars and anti-tank weapons with great effect. Having taken the airfield with a dozen casualites, the remainder of the battalion flew in by helicopter. The Battalion then secured the area around the airfield. During the ensuring street fighting, the Egyptian forces engaged in methodical tactics, fighting on the defense while inflicting maximum casualties and retreating only when overwhelming force was brought to bear. In particular, the SU100s proved to be a formiable weapon in urban combat. The British forces moved up towards Port Said with air support before digging in at 13:00 to hold until the beach assault. With close support from carrier-based Wyverns, the British paratroops took Port Said's sewage works and the cemetery while becoming engaged in a pitched battle for the Coast Guard barracks.

At the same time, Lieutenant Colonel Pierre Chateau-Jobert landed with a force of the 2e RPC at Raswa. Raswa imposed the problem of a small drop zone surrounded by water, but General Jacques Massu of the 10th Parachute Division assured Beaufre that this was not an insolvable problem for his men.[148] 500 heavily armed paratroopers of the French 2nd Colonial Parachute Regiment (2ème RPC), hastily redeployed from combat in Algeria, jumped over the al-Raswa bridges from Noratlas Nord 2501 transports of the Escadrille de Transport (ET) 1/61 and ET 3/61, together with some combat engineers of the Guards Independent Parachute Company. Despite the loss of two soldiers, the western bridge was swiftly secured by the paras, and F4U Corsairs of the Aéronavale 14.F and 15.F flew a series of close-air-support missions, destroying several SU-100 tank destroyers. F-84Fs also hit two large oil storage tanks in Port Said, which went up in flames and covered most of the city in a thick cloud of smoke for the next several days. Egyptian resistance varied, with some positions fighting back until destroyed, while others were abandoned with little resistance. The French paratroops stormed and took Port Said's waterworks that morning, an important objective to control in a city in the desert. Chateau-Jobert followed up this success by beginning an attack on Port Fuad. Derek Varble, the American military historian, later wrote "Air support and fierce French assaults transformed the fighting at Port Fuad into a rout". During the fighting in the Canal Zone, the French paratroops often practiced their "no-prisoners'" code and executed Egyptian POWs.


Sea Venom on deck of HMS Eagle

The Egyptian commander at Port Said, General Salahedin Moguy then proposed a truce. His offer was taken up, and in the ensuring meeting with General Butler, Chateau-Jobert and General Massu, was offered the terms of surrendering the city and marching his men to the Gamil airfield to taken off to POW camps in Cyprus. Moguy had no interest in surrendering and only made the truce offer to buy time for his men to dig in. Strongly supported by British Admiral Manley Laurence Power, Beaufre urged that the sea-borne landings be accelerated and that Allied forces land the very next day. In this, Beaufre was opposed by Stockwell and Knightley who wished to stick with the original plan. Stockwell was always in favour of rigidly following already agreed to plans, and was most reluctant to see any changes, whereas Beaufre was all for changing plans to match with changed circumstances. The differences between Stockwell and Beaufre were summarized by the American historian Derek Varble as: "Stockwell favored existing plans; their methodical construction and underlying staff work reduced risks. Beaufre, by contrast an opportunist, saw plans merely a means to an end, without much inherent value. For him, altered circumstances or assumptions provided adequate justfication to jettison part or all of the original plan".


At first light on 6 November, Commandos of Nos 42 Commando and 40 Commando Royal Marines stormed the beaches, using landing craft of World War II vintage (Landing Craft Assault and Landing Vehicle Tracked). The battlegroup standing offshore opened fire, giving covering fire for the landings and causing considerable damage to the Egyptian batteries and gun emplacements. The town of Port Said sustained great damage and was seen to be alight. The men of 42 Commando as much as possible chose to by-pass Egyptian positions and focused on trying to break through inland. The Royal Marines of 40 Commando had the advantage of being supported by Centurion tanks as they landed on Sierra Red beach. Upon entering downtown Port Said, the Marines became engaged in fierce urban combat as the Egyptians used the Casino Palace Hotel and other strongpoints as fortresses.


Nasser proclaimed the Suez War to be a "people's war". As such, Egyptian troops were ordered to don civilian clothes while guns were freely handed out to Egyptian civilians. From Nasser's point of view, a "people's war" presented the British and French with an insolvable dilemma. If the Allies reacted aggressively to the "people's war", then that would result in the deaths of innocent civilians and thus bring world sympathy to his cause while weakening morale on the home front in Britain and France. If the Allies reacted cautiously to the "people's war", than that would result in Allied forces becoming bogged down by sniper attacks, who had the advantage of attacking "...with near impunity by hiding among crowds of apparent non-combatants". These tactics worked especially well against the British. British leaders, especially Eden and the First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Louis Montbatten were afraid of being labelled "murderers and baby killers", and sincerely attempted to limit Egyptian civilian deaths. Eden frequently interfered with Phrase I and II bombing, striking off various targets that he felt were likely to cause excessive civilian deaths, and restricted the gun sizes that could be used at the Port Said landings, again to minimize civilian deaths. The American historian Derek Varble commented that the paradox between Eden's concern for Egyptian civilians and the object of Revise Phrase II bombing, which was intended to terrorize the Egyptian people was never resolved. Despite Eden's best efforts, British bombing still killed hundreds of Egyptian civilians during Revise II, through these deaths were due more to imprecise aiming rather then a deliberate policy of "area bombing" a la like that employed against Germany in World War II. At Port Said, the heavy fighting in the streets and the resulting fires destroyed much of the city, killing thousands of civilians.


In the afternoon, 522 additional French paras of the 1er REP (Régiment Étranger Parachutiste, 1st Foreign Parachute Regiment) were dropped near Port Fouad. These were also constantly supported by the Corsairs of the French Aéronavale, which flew very intensive operations: for example, although the French carrier La Fayette developed catapult problems, no less than 40 combat sorties were completed. The French were aided by AMX-13 light tanks. While clearing Port Fuad, the Ier Regiment Etranger Parachutiste killed 100 Egyptians without losing a man in return. In total, 10 French soldiers were killed and 30 injured during the landing and the subsequent battles.


British commandos of No. 45 Commando assaulted by helicopter, meeting stiff resistance, with shore batteries striking several helicopters, while friendly fire from British carrier-borne aircraft caused casualties to 45 Commando and HQ. The helicopter borne assault of 45 Commando was the first time helicopters were used by UK Forces to lift men directly into a combat zone. Lieutenant Colonel N.H. Tailyour, who was leading 45 Commando was landed by mistake in a stadium still under Egyptian control resulting in a very hasty retreat. Street fighting and house clearing, with strong opposition from well-entrenched Egyptian sniper positions, caused further casualties.[168] Especially fierce fighting took place at the Port Said's Customs House and Navy House. The Egyptians destroyed Port Said's Inner Harbour, which forced the British to improvise and use the Fishing Harbour to land their forces. The 2nd Bn of the Parachute Regiment landed by ship in the harbour. Centurion tanks of the British 6th Royal Tank Regiment were landed and by 12:00 they had reached the French paratroops. While the British were landing at Port Said, the men of the 2 RPC at Raswa fought off Egyptian counter-attacks featuring SU100 self-propelled guns.


Soldiers of 2 RPC in Port Said

After establishing themselves in a position in downtown Port Said, 42 Commando headed down the Shari Muhammat Ali, the main north-south road to link up with the French forces at the Raswa bridge and the Inner Basin lock. While doing so, the Marines also took Port Said's gasworks. Meanwhile, 40 Commando supported by the Royal Tank Regiment remained engaged in clearing the downtown of Egyptian snipers. Colonel Tailyour arranged for more reinforcements to be brought in via helicopter.


Hearing rumours that Moguy wished to surrender, both Stockwell and Beaufre left their command ship HMS Tyne for Port Said. Upon landing, they learned the rumours were not true. Instead of returning to the Tyne, both Stockwell and Beaufre spent the day in Port Said, and were thus cut off from the news. The Centurions of the Royal Tank Regiment supported by the paratroops of 2 RPC began a slow advance down to al-Qantarah on the night of 6 November. Egyptian sniper attacks and the need to clear every building led to the 3rd Para to be slowed in their attempts to link up with the Royal Marines.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old January 26th, 2012, 12:43 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
View from Washington

President Eisenhower wasn't quite amused when he heard that Israel has attacked Egypt. He knew, of course, that Egypt has done some very bad things ( like nationalising Suez Canal and banned Israeli shipping trough Canal and Straits of Tiran ) and satisfactory diplomatic solution for that problems was required, but he was against the war, especially because this seemed as open agression by Israel on Egypt.

The trouble was that these days there was revolution in Hungary. And it seemed that Hungarians are pretty sucessful, they had forced Soviet forces out of Budapest, decided that they leving out of Warsaw Pact and pronounced neutrality. It seemed that Soviet Forces are withdrawing from Hungary. And in Washington many were thinking that this is maybe first crack in Soviet control of Eastern Europe. USA had no intention to give real help to Hungarian revolutionaries, but US politicians and media were full of praise for them. And they did not want that anything could cast a shadow on events in Hungary, because Soviet Union there was in loose-loose situation. If they leave Hungary to go, there goes Warsaw Pact and their control of Eastern Europe. If they intervene there and put down the revolution, well, the whole world will see that they are enemy of freedom and democracy and Soviet moral position in the world will be significantly compromised.


Flag of Hungary, without communist coat of arms

Then came informations from CIA that UK and France are preparring military action against Egypt and that they had allready concentrated their forces in Cyprus and in Malta. So, after consultation with his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and leaders of House and Senate majority, he decided that United Nations could be the right place to solve this problem. So he, with some other countries, members of Security Council, decided to call a emergency session of Council that will condemn Israeli attack and order to Israel to stop their forces and retreat to their territory.

But, when Security Council met, Britain and France decided to support Israel and vetoed resolution that was against Israel. That was pretty big surprise. First time USA and Soviet Union were on the same side, while UK and France were on opposide side. Something strange was happening...


United Nations Security Council
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old January 26th, 2012, 06:10 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Condemnation

News that Britain and France had issued ultimatum to Egypt and Israel to back down from Suez Canal area wasn't quite big surprise for United States. CIA allready had informations about preparations in UK and France for military action against Egypt. But, their actual attack on Egypt was really bad news for president Eisenhower. Especcially their timing for this operation was bad. It coincided with revolution in Hungary and Americans were furious that UK and France began attack without their permission. Wich they would not give at least untill all this mess with Hungary isn't calmed down, this way or another.

So, president Eisenhower gave following statement after news of Anglo-French attack:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Egypt.ogv.jpg

In short he said that USA condemns the invasion, that USA were not consulted about the invasion and that USA want that United Nations solve this dispute. USA know that calling the Security Council would be pointless because of British and french right of veto, so they decided, together with some other countries to call, first time in history, Assembley General of UN in a emergency session, where UK and France could not block the descision.

He also ordered his Ambassadors in London, Paris and Tel Aviv Winthrop W. Aldrich, C. Douglas Dillon and Edward B. Lawson to put as strongest possible pressure on governments in London, Paris and Tel Aviv to stop the invasion.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old January 26th, 2012, 06:46 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
No comments?

Not even to point on spelling and grammar mistakes?
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old January 26th, 2012, 06:50 PM
Some Bloke Some Bloke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1000 or more
apart from MacMillan popping his clogs has anything changed so far?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old January 26th, 2012, 07:01 PM
The Oncoming Storm The Oncoming Storm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fighting the system from within
Posts: 1000 or more
Good so far, I take it there is going to be a significant POD soon?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old January 26th, 2012, 07:11 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Oncoming Storm View Post
Good so far, I take it there is going to be a significant POD soon?
Very soon, death of Macmillan is the POD, he ( as CoE ) will not be there to say to Eden that Americans will/could destroy the pound.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".

Last edited by abc123; January 26th, 2012 at 07:12 PM.. Reason: .
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old January 26th, 2012, 07:21 PM
Some Bloke Some Bloke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1000 or more
ahh, it's becoming clear now (why oh why did they not make an emoticon with a long twirly moustache?)
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old January 26th, 2012, 08:24 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Bloke View Post
ahh, it's becoming clear now (why oh why did they not make an emoticon with a long twirly moustache?)
LOL

__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old January 26th, 2012, 10:35 PM
The Oncoming Storm The Oncoming Storm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fighting the system from within
Posts: 1000 or more
BTW it's a shame that there seems to be no film of that Sea Venom landing wheels up on Eagle as it must have been pretty spectacular if scary for the pilots.

Apparently they had that plane repaired and flying combat missions again before the end of that day!
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old January 26th, 2012, 11:41 PM
lukedalton lukedalton is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Italy
Posts: 1000 or more
Till now is a good no real good description of the conflict, but for what i know not much is changed so i want to wait the development before say anything.
Pleas continue
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old January 27th, 2012, 12:03 AM
Evermourn Evermourn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 152
For people like myself who aren't familiar with the details of the conflict, it would be helpful if when there is a change from OTL events you put in a comment in a different color or in italics (explaining what happened OTL). Otherwise we don't have much idea when the ATL kicks in. Looking forwards to the USA/USSR vs FR/UK/Israel war I suspect it will be over by Christmas.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old January 27th, 2012, 12:59 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Oncoming Storm View Post
BTW it's a shame that there seems to be no film of that Sea Venom landing wheels up on Eagle as it must have been pretty spectacular if scary for the pilots.

Apparently they had that plane repaired and flying combat missions again before the end of that day!
Well, not carrier landing, but pretty cool video of Buccaneers and Gibraltar:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0-xn...eature=related
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old January 27th, 2012, 02:24 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
East River

While Israel refused to withdraw its troops from Sinai, Eisenhower declared, "We must not allow Europe to go flat on its back for the want of oil." He sought UN-backed efforts to impose economic sanctions on Israel until it fully withdrew from Egyptian territory. Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson and minority leader William Knowland objected to American pressure on Israel. Johnson told the Secretary of State John Foster Dulles that he wanted him to oppose "with all its skill" any attempt to apply sanctions on Israel.

Dulles rebuffed Johnson's request, and informed Eisenhower of the objections made by the Senate. Eisenhower was "insistent on applying economic sanctions" to the extent of cutting off private American assistance to Israel which was estimated to be over $100 million a year. Ultimately, the Democratic party-controlled Senate would not cooperate with Eisenhower's position on Israel. Eisenhower finally told Congress he would take the issue to the American people, saying, "America has either one voice or none, and that voice is the voice of the President - whether everybody agrees with him or not." The President spoke to the nation by radio and television where he outlined Israel's refusal to withdraw, explaining his belief that the UN had "no choice but to exert pressure upon Israel.

Considering the grave situation created by the actions against Egypt, and with lack of unanimity among the permanent members preventing it from exercising its primary responsibility to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council passed Resolution 119; it decided to call an emergency special session of the General Assembley for the first time, as provided in the 1950 "Uniting for Peace" resolution, in order to make appropriate recommendations to end the fighting.

The emergency special session was convened 1 November; the same day Nasser requested diplomatic assistance from the U.S., without requesting the same from the Soviet Union. In the early hours of 2 November, the General Assembly adopted the United States' proposal for Resolution 997 (ES-I); the vote was 64 in favor and 5 opposed (Australia, New Zealand, Britain, France, and Israel) with 6 abstentions. It called for an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of all forces behind the armistice lines, an arms embargo, and the reopening of the Suez Canal, which was now blocked. The Secretary-General was requested to observe and report promptly on compliance to both the Security Council and General Assembly, for further action as deemed appropriate in accordance with the UN Charter.

__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old January 27th, 2012, 04:07 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Downing Street

On November 2nd, Ambassador of United States to the Court of St. James was ushered into office of Prime Minister Anthony Eden. There was Eden and his Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd waiting for him.

After greeting with Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary, Ambassador said:

Your Excelencies, my Government has ordered to me to say that President and Government of United States are condemning attack of Israel, United Kingdom and France on Egypt in most serious terms. It is opinion of my Government that such attack is first of all a serious breach of international law and UN Chapter, and secondly very badly timed move, in the middle of events in Hungary. Such move destroys our credibility when we condemn Soviet actions in Hungary and when we demand free development of Hungary.
Therefore, my Government asks that Isreal, United Kingdom and France emmediatly stop with their attacks on Egypt and withdraw their forces from Egyptian soil, as stipulated in resolution of General Assembley and cooperate in efforts of General Assembley in finding a peacefull solution for this problem. I must also say that in this time my coleagues in Paris and Tel Aviv are conveying the same message to corresponding governments.

PM Eden: Ambassador, I must say that HM Government is very surprised by such reaction of our most trusted ally. Frankly, we are dissapointed that your Government doesn't realises that United Kingdom and France are motivated by two things alone: first, to protect security of Suez Canal and secondly, to protect sacrosantity of international treaties.
By doeing this, United Kingdom and France are doeing the thing that USA should have to done long time ago, together with us.
Does United States Government indeed want to put tinpot socialist dictator before their most trusted allies?
We reject protests and condemnations of United States Governent, because we are of opinion that we just are following treaties that this Government has signed with Egypt only 2 years ago. Pacta sunt servanda. Treaties are very clear and need to be respected. If we allow Nasser pass with this, what is next?
You know that he had forbidden passing of Israeli ships trough Canal and Straits of Tiran? What do you need more? That he closes the entire Canal for evrebody except Soviets and their sattelites?

Ambassador: I'm very sorry that Your Excellency did not accept view of my Government. I will pass your remarks to my Government, but I do not think that president Eisenhower will be pleased by your responce.

PM Eden: You do that, Mr. Ambassador. And say to president Eisenhower that he needs to think hard is Egypt more important to his country than Britain and France. Have a nice day.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old January 27th, 2012, 05:58 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
View from Kremlin

Soviet Union was rather buissy these days with all the mess in Hungary, but oportunity like this to get bit of goodwill in international community could not be waisted. So TASS was very active in attacking Britain, France and Israel as imperialists that wan't to enslave poor Arabs.
Soviets naturally had no niether way or intention to do soemthing to really help Egypt, but that had not prevented them in bluffing. Soviet Premier Bulganin even threatned that Soviets will blast Britain and France with their nuclear missiles if they do not retreat from Egypt.

Eden was aware that Soviets are bluffing, because he had good knowledge about right status of soviet nuclear arsenel. They allmost had no missiles at all, and evenif they had, Britain was nuclear power too, so there was no need to be worried about that. Also expeditionary capabilities of Soviet Armed Forces were very limited, so no involment of Soviet Union was likely, not to mention that they had more than enough their own problems at the time.

Things in Paris were not so calm, so to reassure them, Eden sent following note to French Prime Minister Mollet: "Her Majesty's Government will consider any nuclear weapons attack by Soviet Union on France as attack of Soviet Union on United Kingdom and will respond accordingly."
The same message was sent to both Soviet and American Ambassador in London.


RAFs Vickers Valiant
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old January 27th, 2012, 08:31 PM
abc123 abc123 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Economical pressure

While Royal Marines and Paras were advancing towards al-Qantarah, in Downing Street 10 there was meeting of Cabinet. Prime Minister Eden opened the session:

PM: Gentlemen, I have called you here because of serious news that I and Secretary Lloyd have get in last 24 hours. You all are aware of opinion and demands of our most trusted "allies" and relatives from across the Atlantic. But now hera are not only demands, now are coming threats from them. But I will now let Lloyd to brief you.

FS Lloyd: Thank you Prime Minister. Gentlemen, as you know, Americans have asked us on the first day of our operation that we stop wiht operations. We refused and have presented them our arguments. But they have continued with pressure against us and our allies. You all know about that infamous resolution of General Assembley against us. Some UN-members like Portugal and Iceland even proposed that us and French should be excluded from NATO.

One member of Cabinet: Fools! Who would defend them then if not us and the French?!

Other members agreed with that intrusion.

FS Lloyd: I agree, but let's continue. All of this mess in Suez have caused significant economical losses for our economy. When our Treasury approached IMF about short-term loan, they were refused, by orders from White House apparently.
And then, last night there came latest threat, Americans told us that if we don't retreat that they will start to sell-off Sterling Bond holdings. But our Chancellor of Exchequer can tell us more about that.

CoE Thorneycroft: That's right gentlemen. As you know, these bonds are bought by US Treasury as part of Marshall plan to revive European economy and as partial payment of Britain's enormous World War II debt to the US Government, American corporations, and individuals. Also, it seems that Americans have ordered to Saudi Arabia that she stop selling their oil to us and French.

PM: So, Peter, what's assesment of your department of influence on our economy if Americans do what they said?

CoE: Well, it is impossible to know exact consequences, but experts from my department insure me that, first of all, they think that Americans are bluffing, and secondly, if they really do that, that our economy can hold it out. It would be better if they don't do that, but we could survive that. It could have some pressures on course of pound, but not something that we can't solve.
Also, they had proposed to me that if Americans would seem as that they really want to do that, that it would be good thing to threaten them that in that case we will not be in possibility to pay our WW2 dept to them.

PM: Do you think that something like that would work?

CoE: It is possible, of course, they allways were thinking of that as a bluff, to answer on their bluff, but if they can do that to us, I presume that we have to respond with something, and that's pretty much strongest ammunition we have.

PM: It seems reasonable to me, gentlemen, what do you think?

Lord Privy Seal Rab Butler: I agree. We can't allow that they blackmail us into submission. We are, after all, independent country and world power. If we allow them that, we would be their colony. Also, it seems that it's too late to back down now? It is better to finish the job.

PM: I would like that Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee Sir William Dickson to inform us about the course of operations.

Sir William Dickson: Prime Minister, gentlemen, our forces have taken out Port Said as as we can see on this map are heading south for al-Quantara. Tempo of our advance is little slower than expected because our forces became entangled in street fighting in Port Suez, because Egyptian soldiers are dressed as civillians and they use nipers to shoot on our soldiers, so cleaning of area was nescessary.
Egyptian Air Force is, for all intents and purposes, destroyed. Their remains have retreated in airbases in south of Egypt from where they can't threaten our forces. We estimate that over 200 their planes is destroyed, alltrough our bombardments did not had all the effects we desired. Some important targets, like Radio Cairo are not destroyed.
Israelis had, on their part, suceeded to take all of Sinai and their forces had stopped 10 miles from Canal. General Dayan assured me that their forces are ready to join our forces if nescesarry.


PM: So Air Marshal, what is your estimate when could our forces take entire Canal Zone?

Dickson: Well, if we can judge by current progress, in about 5 or 6 days. If it were those bloody snipers in Port Said, we would allready be in Ismailia by now.

PM: Air Marshal, I want that you take Canal Zone as soonest as possible. 6 days is too much. I want that your forces leave snipers and go take Ismailia and Port Suez. There's also danger of Egyptian counter-attack from the west and also you do see in what political problems we are.

Dickson: Yes Mr. Prime Minister. I will send the orders to commanders of operation to do so. But we don't think that Egyptian counter-attack is too likely or dangerous. Their army is in pretty bad shape and with bad officers. Also, we have air supremacy, so if they attack us with heavy forces, we could easily destroy them from the air.

PM: Never mind. I want canal Zone taken as soonest as possible, even if you have to be little reckless. I wan't to have the best bargaining position as possible.

Dickson: I agree absolutly Prime Minister. We will do as you ordered.

Home Secretary Lloyd George: Prime Minister, if I may, I would like to warn members of this Cabinet on protests that are in rampage in London. Big number of protesters was assembled on Trafalgar Square. Police estimates are about 30 000 people. Some left-wing Labour MPs as Bevan and others wee leading them towards Downing Street.

PM: Do you think that I don't know that Home Secretary? Do you think that I haven't heard them shouting: "Eden must go!"? But we are here, gentlemen to do hard things even when majority of population doesn't thinks so. Do I have to remind you that when Chamberlain returned from Munich, dozens of thousands were standing before Buckingham Palace and were approving that? And what we got not even a year ater that? War, that lasted for 6 years.
If we were strong then we maybe could avoid that war. Nasser is Hitler of our days, gentlemen. We must take him down, othervise our influence in Middle East is over.
And do I have to remind you what's in stake there? 80% of our and European oil comes from there. Americans are far less dependent of that oil, they have their own. But we must stay firm and do our job.

Lloyd George: That leads us to another question, what would be consequences of that Saudi embargo on oil for us and the French?

Chancellor of Exchequer: It could have effect on price of oil but in general, our companies as Royal Dutch-Shell and Anglo Iranean are capable to cover our needs from existing wells in Iran, Kuvait and other Gulf shaikdoms. They are firmly under our military and political control, so I don't see any problems there. For the French, they could have some problems, more then us. I have informed that they had found some oil reserves in Algeria but that would require some time to be trought to production, even with greatest speed. But if we increase our production in Gulf countries I was informed that we could meet most of their needs too. First few weeks could be bumpy, especially because longer sailing time for tankers but after that, I expect that situation will be allright.

PM: Thank you Peter. So gentlemen, do we agree that our military forces continue with operation and even speed it up, so that we can have controle of Canal as soonest as possible? Also, do we agree that we reject American threat and if they insist that we threat them with our refusal to pay debts from WW2? After all, if they do not care for our agreement with Egypt, why should we care about our agreement with them?
Please, gentlemen, vote.

After voting 14 vots were for and 4 were abstained.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".

Last edited by abc123; January 28th, 2012 at 02:12 PM.. Reason: .
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old January 27th, 2012, 08:44 PM
The Oncoming Storm The Oncoming Storm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fighting the system from within
Posts: 1000 or more
Bluff and Counter-Bluff. Whatever way this ends up I don't think anyone will be talking about a special relationship for a while.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.