Wi: Successful Yom kipper war, Would Sadat be able to merge with his neighbors

Several problems with this:
1. While Sadat, Hussein, and some other Arab leaders might have been quite willing to live with an Israel inside the pre-6 day war borders, many Arab leaders were not and/or were certainly unwilling to accept any "Israel" publicly. If the Egyptians are truly winning, not just a tactical birdgehead along the canal of limited depth, there will be huge pressure on them to keep going and Syria will certainly pile on (Israel would have to weaken the front there to move forces south), and even Jordan might join in if for no other reason than to decide how much of the West Bank it might keep as a buffer and perhaps a chunk of Jerusalem.
2. The Israelis are not nuke happy, on the other hand if they are truly losing, and the cry across the Arab world is to push the victory to the point of "Jews in the sea" (which IMHO a serious military victory early on would result in), they know exactly what would happen. After the initial spate of killings, rapes, and lootings, the vast majority of the Jewish population of Israel would be expelled with the clothes on their backs and little more. Perhaps those who could trace their residence in "Palestine" to Ottoman times might be allowed to stay, a small percentage at best. This is unacceptable so...
3. The USA will not go to war with the USSR even if the Soviets keep their hands folded while violent ethnic cleansing goes on it what used to be Israel. The USA won't go to war with the USSR even if they airlift supplies to Egypt so the Egyptians can keep their offensive going. The USA won't go to war with the USSR even if Soviet advisors and technicians are openly flying aircraft or operating missile batteries, and "unknown" submarines are blockading the Israeli coast (as long as no US/NATO flag merchants are sunk). Frankly if the USSR was to use a few big nukes and turn Israel in to glowing green glass (trinitite) the USA would not go to war with the USSR - sure relations would nosedive and things would get nasty but war, no.
4. Other than as peacekeepers to supervise the evacuation of Jews, no US troops will be sent in, and you can be 110% sure no NATO troops would be except as blue helmets with unloaded weapons. Frankly if the USSR was to use just a few nukes on Israel and turn the whole place in to radioac
5. No meaningful union of other Arab states with Egypt will occur, except that which is forced by the Egyptian military. None of the other Arab leaders would be willing to play second banana to whomever is running Egypt, as it is a lot of Arabs elsewhere find Egyptians "overbearing" and too big for their britches. Egypt might take part of Sudan, but actual union with Libya or anyone else voluntarily - nope.

Note: The scenario in #2 was the stated policy of the bulk of the Arab countries in 1973, and remains the stated policy of some of them (as well as Hizbollah, Hamas, and the PA) to this day. Now you could argue that this is mere rhetoric for the masses, however history (and not just of the Holocaust) shows that when somebody makes these sorts of threats you need to take them seriously, because usually they do mean it
 
2. The Israelis are not nuke happy, on the other hand if they are truly losing, and the cry across the Arab world is to push the victory to the point of "Jews in the sea" (which IMHO a serious military victory early on would result in), they know exactly what would happen. After the initial spate of killings, rapes, and lootings, the vast majority of the Jewish population of Israel would be expelled with the clothes on their backs and little more. Perhaps those who could trace their residence in "Palestine" to Ottoman times might be allowed to stay, a small percentage at best. This is unacceptable so...

So the Samson option would be on, goodbye Arab Capital cities and a few 'gifts' to the USSR via F4s on one way missions
 
I can see Egypt winning their part of the war; all they really needed to do was sit inside their defensive 'box' and keep Israel from penetrating it... which they could have done if they had not sent a big chunk of their armored forces out of the box to help Syria. Speaking of which, Syria came within a hair of winning on their front...but... their goal was to reconquer the Golan Heights and then move down into Israel proper... if they succeed in this and Israel can't stop them, then the Samson option is very likely. Jordan... played little part in the war. They sent an armored force to the Syrian front to help them out, but otherwise did nothing. So it gets complicated... if Egypt wins their part, they aren't helping out Syria, who will do even worse than OTL. OTOH, if we make a new POD on the Syrian front and have them do better, we could end up with the Samson option. I'm not really seeing an option that gives all of the Arab nations their old pre-1967 borders back, although Egypt could certainly regain theirs (which is what happened in OTL even though they certainly didn't win the war)...
 
Several problems with this:
1. While Sadat, Hussein, and some other Arab leaders might have been quite willing to live with an Israel inside the pre-6 day war borders, many Arab leaders were not and/or were certainly unwilling to accept any "Israel" publicly. If the Egyptians are truly winning, not just a tactical birdgehead along the canal of limited depth, there will be huge pressure on them to keep going and Syria will certainly pile on (Israel would have to weaken the front there to move forces south), and even Jordan might join in if for no other reason than to decide how much of the West Bank it might keep as a buffer and perhaps a chunk of Jerusalem.
2. The Israelis are not nuke happy, on the other hand if they are truly losing, and the cry across the Arab world is to push the victory to the point of "Jews in the sea" (which IMHO a serious military victory early on would result in), they know exactly what would happen. After the initial spate of killings, rapes, and lootings, the vast majority of the Jewish population of Israel would be expelled with the clothes on their backs and little more. Perhaps those who could trace their residence in "Palestine" to Ottoman times might be allowed to stay, a small percentage at best. This is unacceptable so...
3. The USA will not go to war with the USSR even if the Soviets keep their hands folded while violent ethnic cleansing goes on it what used to be Israel. The USA won't go to war with the USSR even if they airlift supplies to Egypt so the Egyptians can keep their offensive going. The USA won't go to war with the USSR even if Soviet advisors and technicians are openly flying aircraft or operating missile batteries, and "unknown" submarines are blockading the Israeli coast (as long as no US/NATO flag merchants are sunk). Frankly if the USSR was to use a few big nukes and turn Israel in to glowing green glass (trinitite) the USA would not go to war with the USSR - sure relations would nosedive and things would get nasty but war, no.
4. Other than as peacekeepers to supervise the evacuation of Jews, no US troops will be sent in, and you can be 110% sure no NATO troops would be except as blue helmets with unloaded weapons. Frankly if the USSR was to use just a few nukes on Israel and turn the whole place in to radioac
5. No meaningful union of other Arab states with Egypt will occur, except that which is forced by the Egyptian military. None of the other Arab leaders would be willing to play second banana to whomever is running Egypt, as it is a lot of Arabs elsewhere find Egyptians "overbearing" and too big for their britches. Egypt might take part of Sudan, but actual union with Libya or anyone else voluntarily - nope.

Note: The scenario in #2 was the stated policy of the bulk of the Arab countries in 1973, and remains the stated policy of some of them (as well as Hizbollah, Hamas, and the PA) to this day. Now you could argue that this is mere rhetoric for the masses, however history (and not just of the Holocaust) shows that when somebody makes these sorts of threats you need to take them seriously, because usually they do mean it
I'm pretty sure if the Jews were at real risk of being driven into the sea then the Samson option would be dusted off.
 
If the Samson option is used, it almost certainly escalates within <1 day to a full US -- USSR exchange.

- The Soviets aren't going to believe that Israel built their own nukes without U.S. help, and will treat their use as a US-sanctioned first-strike.
- Nixon is probably passed out drunk by this point; so when Brezhnev tries to call him and gets told he's unavailable, he's gonna assume Nixon is either shot or in a deep shelter;
and that it's time to launch or lose 'em.
- Later that morning, the shadow of me on my bicycle gets charred into our driveway slab (we lived near Johnson Space Center and several major oil refineries).
 
For the curious, in 1973 the USA had 28,449 warheads to the USSR with 15,915, and the US was at worldwide DEFCON 3, and all SAC was on 15 minute alert
 
If the Samson option is used, it almost certainly escalates within <1 day to a full US -- USSR exchange.

- The Soviets aren't going to believe that Israel built their own nukes without U.S. help, and will treat their use as a US-sanctioned first-strike.

No, the Soviets aren't stupid. They know that Israel developed their nuclear program together with the French, before they realigned to the US.
 
If the Israelis hit the Aswan Dam all of that water will cause a huge flood and wipe out most of Egypt's population and industry, as well as trashing Alexandria and Cairo. Maybe another nuke or three for major military/naval bases but gravity and the Nile will do for Egypt. I doubt the Russians will throw any nukes around, they are not going to risk a nuclear war with the USA if something happens while they are nuking Israel - too much room for mistakes. As someone mentioned, in 1973 Israel can send F4s to parts of Southern Russia (Crimea, Volgograd, maybe even Kiev) on one way missions (some the pilots might be able to bail out outside of Russia if lucky). The USSR is not going to risk having a few cities wiped away by the Israelis in order to "avenge" Arab allies.
 
he USSR is not going to risk having a few cities wiped away by the Israelis in order to "avenge" Arab allies.

One phrase I recall is 'Why bother shooting a corpse' on why the Soviets won't bother with nuking Israeli if the Samson option was in play

Without aerial refueling, F4 could do 2,300 miles with external fuel. Moscow is 1600 miles away
 
Last edited:
No, the Soviets aren't stupid. They know that Israel developed their nuclear program together with the French, before they realigned to the US.

Do we know (from declassified docs etc. after the USSR fell) that they knew that at the time?
Failing that, when did we first know, and could Walker or some other spy have plausibly told them?
 
Do we know (from declassified docs etc. after the USSR fell) that they knew that at the time?
Failing that, when did we first know, and could Walker or some other spy have plausibly told them?

It wasn't that secret that the French assisted them well before Walker turned
 
Several problems with this:
1. While Sadat, Hussein, and some other Arab leaders might have been quite willing to live with an Israel inside the pre-6 day war borders, many Arab leaders were not and/or were certainly unwilling to accept any "Israel" publicly. If the Egyptians are truly winning, not just a tactical birdgehead along the canal of limited depth, there will be huge pressure on them to keep going and Syria will certainly pile on (Israel would have to weaken the front there to move forces south), and even Jordan might join in if for no other reason than to decide how much of the West Bank it might keep as a buffer and perhaps a chunk of Jerusalem.
2. The Israelis are not nuke happy, on the other hand if they are truly losing, and the cry across the Arab world is to push the victory to the point of "Jews in the sea" (which IMHO a serious military victory early on would result in), they know exactly what would happen. After the initial spate of killings, rapes, and lootings, the vast majority of the Jewish population of Israel would be expelled with the clothes on their backs and little more. Perhaps those who could trace their residence in "Palestine" to Ottoman times might be allowed to stay, a small percentage at best. This is unacceptable so...
3. The USA will not go to war with the USSR even if the Soviets keep their hands folded while violent ethnic cleansing goes on it what used to be Israel. The USA won't go to war with the USSR even if they airlift supplies to Egypt so the Egyptians can keep their offensive going. The USA won't go to war with the USSR even if Soviet advisors and technicians are openly flying aircraft or operating missile batteries, and "unknown" submarines are blockading the Israeli coast (as long as no US/NATO flag merchants are sunk). Frankly if the USSR was to use a few big nukes and turn Israel in to glowing green glass (trinitite) the USA would not go to war with the USSR - sure relations would nosedive and things would get nasty but war, no.
4. Other than as peacekeepers to supervise the evacuation of Jews, no US troops will be sent in, and you can be 110% sure no NATO troops would be except as blue helmets with unloaded weapons. Frankly if the USSR was to use just a few nukes on Israel and turn the whole place in to radioac
5. No meaningful union of other Arab states with Egypt will occur, except that which is forced by the Egyptian military. None of the other Arab leaders would be willing to play second banana to whomever is running Egypt, as it is a lot of Arabs elsewhere find Egyptians "overbearing" and too big for their britches. Egypt might take part of Sudan, but actual union with Libya or anyone else voluntarily - nope.

Note: The scenario in #2 was the stated policy of the bulk of the Arab countries in 1973, and remains the stated policy of some of them (as well as Hizbollah, Hamas, and the PA) to this day. Now you could argue that this is mere rhetoric for the masses, however history (and not just of the Holocaust) shows that when somebody makes these sorts of threats you need to take them seriously, because usually they do mean it
You are totally misunderstanding the US commitment to Israel and the Jewish lobby in American politics. Under no conditions does the US just sit back and let Israel get nuked by the Soviets and stand by. You're talking about political suicide for the political party in the US that allows that, literally the party in charge of that decision will never win another election ever. Ever.
 
In the event of successful yom kipper[sic]
Isn't a successful Yom Kippur war by definition the total defeat and annihilation of the Jewish people? In my discussions with Israelis on my trips there for work they tell me that every Israeli knows that in any war the enemy isn't coming for territory or resources, but to wipe out the Jewish population. That's why unless the Arabs, Israelis are mightily motivated and skilled in preparation and training for war, allowing them to win nearly every time.
 
You are totally misunderstanding the US commitment to Israel and the Jewish lobby in American politics. Under no conditions does the US just sit back and let Israel get nuked by the Soviets and stand by. You're talking about political suicide for the political party in the US that allows that, literally the party in charge of that decision will never win another election ever. Ever.

The "Jewish Lobby" simply does not have that kind of influence in the USA. If the USSR was threatening Israel on its own, the USA would make noises about it. ITTL the Israelis have used nukes on the Arabs who are about to overwhelm them conventionally. While the USSR dropping a few (and it would not take many) on Israel the Israelis (even if justified) have opened the door here and the USSR may have formal treaty obligations. The Israelis are not in NATO (and never will be). When the dust settles relations between the USA and the USSR will be incredibly frosty but there won't be a nuclear exchange over this. After a nuclear war with the USSR who might win an election will be so far down on the list of important things (below who gets to lick the dog food can of any leftovers). The USA will not commit nuclear suicide over a country they have no formal treaty with, even of they have an affinity for them. Not even if the country was filled with evangelical Christians instead of Jews.
 
Wouldn't Israel use tactical nuclear weapons first before nuking capitals , I did have the idea of Israel using a tactical nuke with Syria retaliatory gassing some IDF troops or a town and the superpowers forcing a settlement or would that be asb
 
The "Jewish Lobby" simply does not have that kind of influence in the USA. If the USSR was threatening Israel on its own, the USA would make noises about it. ITTL the Israelis have used nukes on the Arabs who are about to overwhelm them conventionally. While the USSR dropping a few (and it would not take many) on Israel the Israelis (even if justified) have opened the door here and the USSR may have formal treaty obligations. The Israelis are not in NATO (and never will be). When the dust settles relations between the USA and the USSR will be incredibly frosty but there won't be a nuclear exchange over this. After a nuclear war with the USSR who might win an election will be so far down on the list of important things (below who gets to lick the dog food can of any leftovers). The USA will not commit nuclear suicide over a country they have no formal treaty with, even of they have an affinity for them. Not even if the country was filled with evangelical Christians instead of Jews.

Likewise, why should the Soviets run the risk of starting nuclear war with the Americans over a bunch of Arabs who poked the tiger with the stick just a bit too far and got mauled. Both sides are going to go "Huh, that sucks." And then they will find some new hotspot to be their front lines for the Cold War. The risk of total destruction of the Homeland is not worth a couple hundred miles of sand in the middle of nowhere.
 
Likewise, why should the Soviets run the risk of starting nuclear war with the Americans over a bunch of Arabs who poked the tiger with the stick just a bit too far and got mauled. Both sides are going to go "Huh, that sucks." And then they will find some new hotspot to be their front lines for the Cold War. The risk of total destruction of the Homeland is not worth a couple hundred miles of sand in the middle of nowhere.

But things were eyeball to eyeball between the USN and Soviets offshore
https://www.pri.org/stories/2012-10-26/little-known-us-soviet-confrontation-during-yom-kippur-war
 
If the Samson option is used, it almost certainly escalates within <1 day to a full US -- USSR exchange.

- The Soviets aren't going to believe that Israel built their own nukes without U.S. help, and will treat their use as a US-sanctioned first-strike.
- Nixon is probably passed out drunk by this point; so when Brezhnev tries to call him and gets told he's unavailable, he's gonna assume Nixon is either shot or in a deep shelter;
and that it's time to launch or lose 'em.
- Later that morning, the shadow of me on my bicycle gets charred into our driveway slab (we lived near Johnson Space Center and several major oil refineries).
I thought South Africa helped Israel with the bomb?
 
Top