Alodia said:
The 25th dynasty was very well connected and involved in near-eastern affairs during the period. They managed to form alliances with the kings of pheonicia and syria, they were also supporters of the Assyrian rebellions throughout their kingdom.
I never denied they were capable of stirring up trouble for Assyria. But they not build the kind of very useful international connections that the 26th Dynasty did. They did not engage in large-scale foreign trade, they had few if any connections with the Greeks, Lydians, or Phrygians, for example. The fact that they were able to meddle in the affairs of Phoenicia, Syria, and Palestine does not mean they were "well connected" internationally.
Alodia said:
The Kushites were also able to extend their rule over the levant at the end of Sennacherib rule.
Not according to anything I've ever encountered in many years of reading. They may have briefly forayed into Palestine, but as Assyria was embroiled in a civil war between competing successors to the throne at the time, this is hardly a indicator of the prowess of the Kushites.
Alodia said:
This is the reason I compared their struggle against the Assyrians with that of Ramses II(against the Hittites). Their situations were very similar , since they both possed inferior weapons to those of their enemies.
Actually, the Egyptian army of Ramses II was quite the equal of the Hittite army of the time. The Hittites did have some iron weapons, but they were only used by very high-ranking noblemen as the techniques of mass-produced ironwork had not yet been invented and iron was VERY expensive. The Kushites, however, were not remotely equal to the Assyrians. They were about 400 years behind the times technologically. It was only with the 26th Dynasty that Egypt finally caught up to the rest of the near East in that respect.
Alodia said:
It's true that the Kushites would have never been able to defeat them indefinitely but(a major defeat like that in their first encounter) followed by a peace treaty could have bought them enough time to organize and modernize their forces(equip them with iron weapons).
The problem with that scenario is that the Kushite Kings did not have the money to modernize. The 26th Dynasty was able to do that by modernizing the Egyptian tax system and by engaging in large-scale overseas trade, which the Kushites did not do.
Alodia said:
This would be hard to believe since it was the Egyptians themselves who invited the Kushites to rule over them(both before and after(an attempt) the assyrian invasions).
Considering that the Kushites had to invade and displace several rival native Egyptian dynasties before assuming power in Egypt, it is hard to see how they were "invited" to rule over Egypt. It is true that some Egyptian nobility rallied to the standard of Taharka when he attempted to retake Egypt from Assyria, but many others stood by the Assyrians against him.
Alodia said:
The reason I didn't choose the 26th dynasty was because their prosperity was very much based on what was done in the 25th.
Untrue. The prosperity of the 26th Dynasty was because of improved governmental system which Necho I and Psamtik I instituted after being held hostage in Assyria (where they observed the Assyrian government in action and learned from it), as well as the international trade and military contacts which they forged. The Kushites had NOTHING to do with it.