Greater Israel

Status
Not open for further replies.
My guess is they wouldn't take them on board - they'd throw them overboard.

In a war where civilized constraint has gone by the board (which you'd pretty much need to get this kind of map), 'encouraging' the former inhabitants of your new lands to find another home seems... probable. Hopefully, that means shoving them across the border, not extermination camps or the like...
.

According to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Israel , Israel does require foreign grain: could they (given enough oil) ramp up production, or would they have to appropriate farmland in Syria and Jordan to make up the difference?

Of course, if WWIII is bad enough for nuclear winter to kick in, agriculture may not be an option...

(Hm. If Johnny Ringo or Stirling wrote it, the Cannibal Jewish Draka would probably be the good guys.)

Bruce
 
1919-1923
Third Aliya, mainly from Russia
During this time a whole 35,000 ~40,000 Jews emmigrated to Palestine. about 7~8,000 per year.
In my Great Israel TL, I plan to have my Hero try to double or Triple this, with his preventing the British mandated reductions in 1924.
He will settle them in Gaza, Golan heights, West Bank, allowing Israel to gain these, along with Nabatieh [ATL part of Syria, not OTLs Lebanon] in the '48 Independence war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Lebanon_Governorate

He will buy - The Sinai - in the 1930's. 100 Million, with 150 million in Sweeteners to the necessary parties.
However even with a much larger Jewish population and better prepared Military, I don't see much more than this.

However if you Cut OTL Israel +West Bank out of that-- I can see a Greater Syria that did control that territory with a Post GW1 POD.
 
I actually have something close to this in my Chaos TL. The New Roman emperor (imagine Napoleon governing an empire of Greater Italy instead of France, with colonies in North Africa and America) acquires the Sinai to settle the Jews there (Israel proper is out for the moment, because the Messiah hasn't come yet). In a later war, Judea acquires the Negev and Aqaba (as allies of New Rome), and even later, they also take Palestine, Transjordan, Lebanon and Syria, which are all settled by Jews. In the present, Greater Judea is inhabited by 16 million Jews (of 24M world-wide).
 

NomadicSky

Banned
You'd have to go way back in time.

The slave Hagar isn't forced to bear so Ishmael is never born. Sarah still has Isaac though, and hes actually the firstborn.

There.
 
I seriously doubt 30-40 thousand are going to make a difference, also they can't settle in the Golan as that belongs to Syria(France until Syria becomes independent). There is also no chance at all that the Sinai will be sold to anyone, the British will not allow it. Period.
 
I seriously doubt 30-40 thousand are going to make a difference, also they can't settle in the Golan as that belongs to Syria(France until Syria becomes independent). There is also no chance at all that the Sinai will be sold to anyone, the British will not allow it. Period.

Or Israel could just take Sinai from the British or later on from the Egyptians through war and never give back. As for the Golan heights could they not settle in both Palestine and Syria and when Israel bacames independent the parts of Syria heavily settled by the jews could proclaim independence and union with Israel.
 
First, you can't settle the Sinai heavily, you can hardly find a less hospitable locale in the planet.

Second, the Sinai is the back door to the Suez Canal. Israel is not going to be allowed to buy it, seize it militarily or otherwise obtain it. If they try then the scenario becomes a question of what happens to Israel after the British blockade the country or, more likely, inflict a few major military defeats on the nascent state.

As for Golan, still outnumbered by the Palestinian Arabs and extremely so until the refugees from Germany begin arriving, there aren't enough Jewish settlers to waste on a French colony where they'll never be allowed to secede and where the slightest hint of such intention will probably get them expelled by the French. Not to mention 'heavily settled' would mean a tiny slice of Syria with a few thousand Jews at most, in a nation with something like 1.5 million people, so there isn't going to be any legitimate basis for separation.
 
First, you can't settle the Sinai heavily, you can hardly find a less hospitable locale in the planet.

Second, the Sinai is the back door to the Suez Canal. Israel is not going to be allowed to buy it, seize it militarily or otherwise obtain it. If they try then the scenario becomes a question of what happens to Israel after the British blockade the country or, more likely, inflict a few major military defeats on the nascent state.

As for Golan, still outnumbered by the Palestinian Arabs and extremely so until the refugees from Germany begin arriving, there aren't enough Jewish settlers to waste on a French colony where they'll never be allowed to secede and where the slightest hint of such intention will probably get them expelled by the French. Not to mention 'heavily settled' would mean a tiny slice of Syria with a few thousand Jews at most, in a nation with something like 1.5 million people, so there isn't going to be any legitimate basis for separation.
First Israel took Sinai from Egypt during the six day war. It will not be a stretch that Israel will no longer give Sinai back to the egyptians. That will most likely earn the Egypt enmity but Israel could live with that (they could live having all their neighbors hostile towards Israel) and military no combination of arab or muslim (that are willingly going to wage war against Israel) forces are capable to defeat the state of Israel. The Golan or a larger piece of Syria could be seized in one of the many wars with Syria and never give it back.
 
Not to mention the Egyptian efforts, until successful, to retake the Sinai, which are virtually certain to succeed when they have the Soviets behind them and the US explains to Israel that future aid will depend on agreeing to return the Sinai. Of course, the US broke Israel into returning the Sinai in 1956 and I doubt any future presidents will so completely destroy relations with the Arab world by endorsing territorial aggression, said aggression also involving the permanent loss of the Suez Canal.

Nor is it remotely clear that Israel can survive a permanent state of hostilities with all their neighbors. Indeed, Moshe Dayan went so far as to write a paper based on the consequences if Israel expected war every decade with all of the neighbors entitled "The Inevitable Destruction Of Israel".
 

Typo

Banned
The Arab states form some sort of pan-arabic alliance. WWIII come and the Soviets nuke this alliance for some reason, Mecca, Damascus, Baghadad are craters. Israel sits out the exchange and expand into the depopulated area in the aftermath.

For all Time had something like this happen, only no WWIII, and the Soviets nuke themselves into oblivion too
 

MacCaulay

Banned
First, you can't settle the Sinai heavily, you can hardly find a less hospitable locale in the planet.

Second, the Sinai is the back door to the Suez Canal. Israel is not going to be allowed to buy it, seize it militarily or otherwise obtain it. If they try then the scenario becomes a question of what happens to Israel after the British blockade the country or, more likely, inflict a few major military defeats on the nascent state.

As for Golan, still outnumbered by the Palestinian Arabs and extremely so until the refugees from Germany begin arriving, there aren't enough Jewish settlers to waste on a French colony where they'll never be allowed to secede and where the slightest hint of such intention will probably get them expelled by the French. Not to mention 'heavily settled' would mean a tiny slice of Syria with a few thousand Jews at most, in a nation with something like 1.5 million people, so there isn't going to be any legitimate basis for separation.

Both of those places are territory that Israel controlled (quite solidly) after 1967 when it managed to dislodge Arab militaries many times it's size.

I know that the way you're wording your response you're thinking of an earlier POD, but between 1967 and the mid-70s, it would be completely logical to see an Israeli Sinai. The IDF was very much at home there after the Six Day War. It gave Israel something it had never had before: strategic depth.
Before then if there had been an attack then the Israelis would be meeting it on their doorsteps. Controlling the Sinai gave them room to maneuver, train, and soak up an invasion while preparing a counterstroke. This served them well when the Egyptians came in Army Group strength in 1973 during the Yom Kippur War.
Anwar Sadat was the man who got the Sinai back for Egypt, and he did that at the negotiating table. His thanks for that was a bullet from a Muslim radical. It's completely believable that Sadat could've been killed earlier, before the Camp David Accords which got the ball rolling on Israeli return of the Sinai to Egypt. And had he been assassinated before that, the IDF still would've been on the bank of the Suez Canal, entrenched on the successor to the Bar-Lev Line.

What piques my interest is wondering about 1982: Syrian and Israeli forces clashed again in Lebanon, both on the ground and in the air. But their was a distinct lack of will missing from the Syrians, even though they threw so many aircraft into the fray that 2 Israeli Eagle pilots became aces.
The Syrians had no willing partners left to share their hate of Israel with. All they had was the PLO, and the IDF advanced to the outskirts of Beirut in '82 to show what they thought of that. But had a militantly anti-Israeli leader/government been in power in Cairo in 1982, one that calculated the Sinai could be captured while the IDF was tied down in a guerilla conflict in Lebanon, then things could've gotten very hot very fast in the Sinai.
 
Another greater Israel map; from the Euphrates to the Nile!

800px-Greater_Israel_map.jpg
 
If Israel refuses to return the Sinai then the US will act as it did OTL in 1956 and again when Begin hoped to the bitter end to keep part of the Sinai. Once the IDF goes a few months without American equipment there will be a new government in Israel and events will happen as OTL...except that Israel will now have set a pattern of being broken to American requirements.


Israel lost half the east bank of the Suez Canal in the 1973 war and the rest per terms of the cease-fire in 1974.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
If Israel refuses to return the Sinai then the US will act as it did OTL in 1956 and again when Begin hoped to the bitter end to keep part of the Sinai. Once the IDF goes a few months without American equipment there will be a new government in Israel and events will happen as OTL...except that Israel will now have set a pattern of being broken to American requirements.

I've got to admit that your first part makes sense with Sadat in power in Cairo. As for the part I bolded...it was always my understanding that Israel more or less broke agreements when it felt they were expedient anyway.

Israel lost half the east bank of the Suez Canal in the 1973 war and the rest per terms of the cease-fire in 1974.

Well, I did pitch that a POD for an Israeli Sinai would be an earlier assassination of Sadat. If there's no one in Cairo in the mid-to-late 1970s who wants to talk directly to Israel, then the Yom Kippur War has returned things to the status quo and the Israelis and Egyptians are back to staring at each other with no diplomatic recognition.
 
Except things haven't returned to the status quo. Egypt has regained the entire eastern side of the Suez Canal and there is a force of American and other peacekeepers between the Egyptians and the Israelis so Egypt can push many more troops into the Sinai if they wish and, if this is done in response to Israel announcing intentions to annex the Sinai the US isn't going to stop the Egyptians.

Then the US, with either Kissinger(until January 1977) or Brezinski afterwards, asks if Israel wants to refight the attrition war in time of national economic crisis without US support.
 
I might add that if Sadat is removed before the 1973 war then Israel may be in serious trouble.

Given an Egyptian head of state who refuses to counter an army commander whose plan is working well Egypt may not to change the plan and order the army forward from under the SAM umbrella to ease pressure on the Syrians. As a result the Egyptians hold fast until the SAMs can be brought forward, the Israelis take further heavy losses in failed counter-attacks, and the war ends with much of the Sinai back in Egyptian hands and the IDF suffering a clear defeat on the battlefield.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
I might add that if Sadat is removed before the 1973 war then Israel may be in serious trouble.

Given an Egyptian head of state who refuses to counter an army commander whose plan is working well Egypt may not to change the plan and order the army forward from under the SAM umbrella to ease pressure on the Syrians. As a result the Egyptians hold fast until the SAMs can be brought forward, the Israelis take further heavy losses in failed counter-attacks, and the war ends with much of the Sinai back in Egyptian hands and the IDF suffering a clear defeat on the battlefield.

Very true. But if Sadat would've been killed at any time before he was in OTL, I'm pretty sure it would've been in the mid-70s between the end of the war and the Camp David talks. The PBS documentary The 50 Years War even interviews Syrian military and government leaders who were trying to persuade their president to arrest Sadat so he wouldn't go ahead with his planned talks with the Israelis, and the Egyptians' biggest fear was that some crazy was going to come out of the woodwork in Damascus and put a bullet in his head while he was staying overnight.
 
Israel in the Sinai...

About a year ago I jotted down a speculation in which the Jews are bought a homeland in the Sinai, the Egyptians being paid a whacking sum to move the dispossessed nomads to the Egyptian Red Sea coast. This buffer state (for Egypt) then develops desalination and arid land revegetating to a fine art.

After 40 years in the wilderness, Israel then seizes / buys up Palestine bit by bit, but has a federal government structure in Palestine. Main advantage is a defensible homeland with access to oil (Suez canal trade) and more mineral resources.

What do you think?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top