Jump to content

Talk:List of wars involving Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Add this

[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict Keep up to date. The Middle East is a hot topic right now. Keep the facts accurate enough for people. Otherwise the page could be terminated if its not active. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PleaseConsider (talk • contribs) 14:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Data of casualties of both sides of wars

[edit]

It is incredibly POV not to include the deaths of the other side. --217.162.219.59 (talk) 14:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? B-Machine (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. It's definitively biased information if only showing casualties of one side. This is not just Israeli history, it's Palestinian and Lebanese and Middle East history.

The casualty figures need to be added for all parties engaged in each conflict - along with the stated reasons/justification for the start of each conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.237.10.109 (talk) 09:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Pillar of Cloud

[edit]

Referring to Hamas millitary leader Jabari as a 'terrorist' is misleading to say the least. Probably the term is close to meaningless and should never be used lightly on Wikipedia. Source Sinbadbuddha (talk) 23:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you have WP on your side; I don't know. But not referring to Hamas as a terrorist organization is misleading. [1] Here are three entries I noticed just now:
Nablus school bus bombing April 29, 2001 Nablus, West Bank None Hamas claimed responsibility.
HaSharon Mall suicide bombing May 18, 2001 HaSharon shopping mall, Netanya 5 Hamas claimed responsibility.
Hadera Mall bombing May 25, 2001 Hadera None Hamas claimed responsibility.William Jockusch (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Hezbollah attacks made between 2000-2006 should not be mentioned here

[edit]

The "2000–2006 Shebaa Farms conflict" which refers to all the Hezbollah hostile activities (rocket and mortar attacks) carried out along the Israeli-Lebanese border between 2000-2006 should definitely be removed from this article - these well-planned attacks had only minimal IDF responses (immediate aircraft and artillery attacks directed only at the launching areas). Israel has been experiencing non-stop hostile activities ever since it was established by many terrorist/guerrilla organizations – we cannot and should not list the terrorist/guerrilla attacks against Israeli targets in this list – they could perhaps be listed a different article which would focus on that instead though. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 03:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. However, writing an article about all terrorist and guerrilla attacks suffered by Israel since 1948 would be a tremendous effort for any kind of user. Perhaps this table is replacing the hypothetical article you talked about, at least for the moment.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 04:15, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, following your reasoning and knowing that Israeli forces didn't respond to Iraqi missile attacks during the Gulf War... why you didn't eliminate this conflict from the article's table?--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 04:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
During the Gulf War the Iraqis hoped that by attacking Israel, Israel would be drawn into the war and many Arab nations would withdraw from the coalition, as they would be reluctant to fight alongside Israel. Israel, at the request of the United States, did not join the war although it was attacked by 39 Scud missiles aimed at the central cities. Even though the IDF forces were not involved in fighting for strategic reasons, it was definitely war time in Israel (all the millions of Israeli civilians were handed out gas masks by the Israeli government, in case any of the missiles targeting the population contained chemical agents, and Israeli civiliann were forced to wear these masks and seek shelter whenever an alarm signaling an approaching Scud missile was sounded). Does anyone else beside AndresHerutJaim think that the Gulf war should be removed from this article? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 05:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


There were no ceasefire/armistice or peace agreements with Iraq for the Gulf War. Israeli forces did not engage with Iraqi forces. Could include a sub-section of 'Attacks on Israel' (i.e., within the actual extent of Israel's Sovereignty) talknic|talknic]] (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Reliable sources needed for Losses sections in the tables

[edit]

Please help me gather reliable sources for the data presented in those sections in the tables. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 05:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Military operations

[edit]

In other words, you are repeating what is already written in another article.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed the IDF has been involved in many armed conflicts. In my opinion we should refreain from adding ALL IDF operations to this article and only add the most prominent ones through consensus. If you think otherwise, please state so. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 07:17, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With what criteria would you decide what is a "prominent operation" and what it is not. For example, I think this conflict is more important for this page than this one.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 07:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A consensus needs to be reached through a discussion which would include (hopefully) many wikipedians about the final selection of armed conflicts included in this article (see section below). TheCuriousGnome (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Defensive Shield

[edit]

Operation Defensive Shield????? my friend... now do you want to translate this box to this article? What are you doing?--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was supposed that this article would be an extension of this box. Just a summary of the main Arab-Israeli engagements.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that your are new here. Please explain in detail why we should not include certain military operations. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 07:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because this article should be about major engagements, not about operations included on a big conflict (for example, Operation Defensive Shield, which is already included in the Second Intifada page) or limited and circumstantial operations (such as Entebbe). For those things, we have another site. Any way, if we include ALL operations or battles carried out by Israeli forces, without distinction, we should also include minor IDF operations or low conflicts such as this one.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 07:19, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A consensus needs to be reached through a discussion which would include (hopefully) many wikipedians about the final selection of armed conflicts included in this article (see section below). TheCuriousGnome (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are the most prominent armed conflicts (excluding the wars) to be included?

[edit]

We need to reach a consensus on this matter. We need to select only the most prominent ones to be included here since we could not and should not list all military operations ever made by the IDF here and/or list all the terrorist/guerrilla attacks against Israeli targets in which the IDF's reaction was minimal (immediate Israeli aircraft and artillery attacks directed at the launching sites immediately after the attacks).

The current selection which I have created is mostly composed of "Armed conflicts involving the IDF not defined as wars" which I consider the most prominent ones:

Please give reasons for or against the current armed conflicts included and/or for your suggestions.

As I said, we need to reach a consensus on this matter through a discussion which would include (hopefully) many wikipedians about the final selection of armed conflicts included in this article. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Second Intifada is the whole period of Israeli-Palestinian violence since 2000, so it is redundant to include Israeli sub-operations of this period such as Defensive Shield, Rainbow, Day of Penitence, Bringing Home the Goods, Summer Rains and Hot Winter. All the casualties and military actions of the 2000-2008 period of Israeli-Palestinian violence are an integral part of the al-Aqsa Intifada. Besides, we forgot to include Operation Determined Path, which is an important part of the Israeli arrest operations in the West Bank and some kind of extension of Defensive Shield. On the other hand, why we shouldn't include operations against maritime arms traffic, like Noah's Ark (2002) and Four Species (2009).--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 04:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The same criteria should be applied for these operations which have to be included in the article's list:
They are part of the bigger Operation Wrath of God, but they were also important sub-operations, just like Defensive Shield or Summer Rains during the Second Intifada.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 04:33, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


More events to include (if Defensive Shield is not included in the Second Intifada):
--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 05:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I agree it might be better to get around never ending discussions such as this by simply reffering the viewers to Military operations conducted by the Israel Defense Forces. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 02:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's been changed. I hope you agree that the current version works best. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 02:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

where does the Nakba fit into this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardGKnight (talk • contribs) 09:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mess

[edit]

This article's a mess. It should look more like the Norwegian version. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 21:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

[edit]

List of wars involving Israel is in line with other articles in the category. Given that this is an part of the world with ongoing instability, and that in Wikipedia ArbCom sanctions apply, surely we should follow the usual style to avoid controversy. Views? Itsmejudith (talk) 15:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza War

[edit]

The Gaza War should definitely be added to the list. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 14:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Why is so difficult to understand? The violent confrontations which appear in this list have been defined BY ISRAEL as wars. Does Israel define Operation Cast Lead as a war?? NO! So it shouldn't be in this list.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:06, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have broken the 1RR rule and will be reported for such.Owain the 1st (talk) 06:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for self reverting your mistake.Owain the 1st (talk) 06:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. I've reverted myself. But I ask you to think with common sense: there is a reason why Retribution operations, War over Water, Operation Litani, South Lebanon conflict, First Intifada, Second Intifada and other conflicts involving Israel, are not included in this category. And it's because this section of the article is only for armed engagements defined BY ISRAEL as wars... not by you, not by me, not by the media, not by the Arabs... ONLY BY ISRAEL (I tell you again: read the title, please). There is another article for all violent conflicts involving IDF.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why should the article be limited to wars designated such by Israel? ← George talk 06:20, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Because there is already another article for all the violent conflicts involving Israel.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The title says Wars involving Israel, does not say anything about wars that just Israel thinks are wars.Not seeing any good argument for taking the Gaza war out of that list at all.Owain the 1st (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should change the title to Wars that Israel thinks are wars that it was involved in but the rest of the entire world thinks they have been involved in more wars..or something along those lines.Owain the 1st (talk) 06:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The title says The violent confrontations which appear in this list have been defined by Israel as wars. After a long debate, many users reached the conclusion this would be the best.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The title does not say what you say it does and your conclusion of the debate is also in correct as it says that operation cast lead..Gaza war should be included.The title of this article is Wars involving Israel and they were involved in the Gaza war.btw a deabte between you and one other guy does not provide a consensus.Owain the 1st (talk) 06:39, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tell you what... why don't you revert your non-consensus edition and discuss it first? (this debate started long time before you came). Why do you think this article should be a copy of this one?--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have no need to revert anything at all, thanks.I suggest you actually get a consensus before breaking the 1RR rule here again. I would have this article deleted being as it seems to just repeat what is posted in other articles on wikipedia.Owain the 1st (talk) 06:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted???? This article just shows the conflicts which are considered wars by Israel. Why should be deleted?--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 06:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any other articles on this site about other states that have the same type of article?I doubt it.Owain the 1st (talk) 07:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is an article which lists the wars the United States has been involved in. It includes conflicts that the United States does not officially refer to as wars (as they lack declarations of war), but that reliable sources commonly refer to as wars. This article should follow the same standard. ← George talk 08:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down guys. Andres, in response to my question about why this should only list conflicts Israel considers wars, you pointed to an article titled Military operations conducted by the Israel Defense Forces. A military operation is different than a war, and that doesn't explain why this list should only be limited to conflicts which Israel considers wars. Similar lists on Wikipedia for other countries do not make this distinction, and include conflicts that are generally referred to as wars even if the combatants in those wars do not call them such (which isn't uncommon). Rather than arguing that the list should only include wars as defined by Israel because of a sentence in the article, it's much simpler to just change that sentence. In general, the bar for inclusion in this list should be conflicts that are referred to as wars by reliable sources. ← George talk 08:06, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed.Owain the 1st (talk) 08:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Andres needs to stop reverting against consensus here.  – OhioStandard (talk) 09:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree if a merge is done. I have been watching this and kind of confused as to why the list is limited to what Israel says. If there is a second list dealing with operations then simply merge this over there. While you are at it, add some cute formatting and get it up to FL. Sounds fun.Cptnono (talk) 01:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that other article is a bit odd. No other country has an article listing all its military operations, probably because they're too large a topic for a single article. Instead, military operations are usually divided up by the war they were a part of, such as Military operations of the 2006 Lebanon War. That sort of division makes more sense I think, even just to keep the lists manageable. ← George talk 03:15, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Put it in separate tables (common on higher quality lists) per major conflict.
  • Conflict 1
    • Battle 1a
    • Battle 1b
  • Conflict 2
    • Battle 2a
    • Battle 2b
It would be an massive pain to coordinate but better in the long run it would save time over bickering what is and is not a "war" while also presenting like information in one list instead of two. Having two separate lists is not useful which makes the question of if something is a war or not completely mute.Cptnono (talk) 04:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree at all. If your problem is the lack of articles involving other countries' military operations... make them! but don't eliminate any information regarding IDF operations (limited or extensive).--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli wars

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move. It is already moved. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Israeli wars → List of wars involving Israel — A war has two or more sides, so each war involving Israel is also a war involving another country. Move is therefore needed for NPOV purposes. And it is in line with other articles. And proposed here already with no objection. And the article is a list so that should be reflected in the title. --Itsmejudith (talk) 18:22, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel strongly about the "list of" either. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:48, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What CWenger said Wars involving Israel yes; "List of ..." preferably no. Johnbod (talk) 15:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a bit of a mishmash right now. To be honest, I don't see that anything other than the initial list is really necessary, and I'd support pruning the article to simply that and moving to a list title. However, if it is the intention of watching editors to really make this an overview of military conflict involving Israel then that wouldn't be appropriate in the long run. In either case, I don't think a plural title like "wars involving Israel" helps, as it still sounds like it should be a list. I'd recommend a discussion of where this article is going before deciding on a final location. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Smart30 (talk) 06:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move, preferably to Wars involving Israel. This is more than a list. The current title is acceptable but Wars involving Israel does have the benefit of being more clearly NPOV. I note that this in effect completes a circle of moves [2]. Andrewa (talk) 02:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cubans in the Yom Kippur War?

[edit]

An editor has put the Cuban flag in the Yom Kippur War section here.Is there any evidence from reputable sources that they were actually involved in that war?Owain the 1st (talk) 10:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba sent approximately 1,500 troops to support the Arab contingents, including tank and helicopter crews, who reportedly engaged in combat operations against the IDF.[1]--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 12:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but one guys book is not going to do it for me especially as I can not read it and I do not know who he is and where he got his sources.So have you got anything else apart from one guys book?If it happened then it should not be too hard to find many accounts of it, right?The only reference to it on this whole site is that guys book, nothing else.So please prove it or lose it.Owain the 1st (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A book is an accepted and legitimate reference in wikipedia. You can verify this in Yom Kippur War's article. If you didn't read the book, I don't care at all, it's your problem, not mine (search more references by yourself). But you won't vandalize this article any more.--AndresHerutJaim (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing in the yom kippur war article except that guys book.I have looked him up and it seems that he has been criticized by other authors for making lots of false claims in his books.As for vandalizing this article, it is you who have been doing that and have been warned about it as well and have had your edits reverted again and again.As for searching more references, I have, seems people who have written books about the war left out the supposed Cubans, sort of tells me because they were not there.Owain the 1st (talk) 03:33, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a few books that dispute what that book says.The Cuban military under Castro By Jaime Suchlicki, It says that it is unclear if they were in the war.This book says that they sent troops in November 1973 and that is after the war had ended.United States relations with South Africa: a critical overview from the By Y. G.-M. Lulat Being as it is clearly disputed I suggest it be taken out.Owain the 1st (talk) 03:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perez's book is scholarly so it can be used. Suchlicki too, but it is an edited collection and we must cite the author of the individual piece. I can't see any reference to this question in either Suchlicki or Lulat (Google Books, search inside book for "Yom Kippur", for "Israel"), so could page numbers be supplied please. If scholars disagree, it is straightforward what to do, we write "A says X while B says Y". Itsmejudith (talk) 08:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe or maybe not no proof 2001:E68:544E:E2B4:1565:155C:9B60:C22F (talk) 11:37, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Perez, Cuba: Between Reform and Revolution, p. 377–379

Shortening

[edit]

I believe this table contains too much information squeezed into a too small place. What about shortening it to something like this? --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 22:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Conflict Years Combatant 1 Combatant 2 Results
War of Independence 1948 - 1949  Israel Egypt Egypt
 Syria
Jordan Transjordan
 Lebanon
 Iraq
 Saudi Arabia
State of Palestine Holy War Army
Yemen Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen
Arab League Arab Liberation Army
Muslim Brotherhood
Sinai War 1956  Israel
United Kingdom United Kingdom
France France 		 Egypt
  • Israeli-Anglo-French coalition military victory
  • Israeli occupation of Sinai (until 1957)
  • Egyptian political victory
  • United Nations cease-fire
  • UNEF deployment in Sinai
  • Straits of Tiran re-opened to Israeli shipping
Six Day War 1967  Israel  Egypt
 Syria
 Jordan
 Iraq
War of Attrition 1967 - 1970  Israel  Egypt
Soviet Union USSR
State of Palestine PLO
 Jordan
 Syria
  • Both sides claimed victory
  • Continued Israeli occupation of Sinai
Yom Kippur War 1973  Israel  Egypt
 Syria
 Iraq
First Lebanon War 1982  Israel

File:South Lebanon Army Patch.png SLA
LF

Phalange
 State of Palestine PLO

 Syria
LNRF
Amal
SSNP
  • Israeli military victory
  • PLO expulsion (1982)
  • Destruction of Syrian SAM batteries in the Bekaa
  • Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon (1982–1985)
  • Israeli Security Zone and the SLA (1985–2000)
  • South Lebanon conflict (1982–2000)
  • Hezbollah presence in southern Lebanon (1980s–2006) and southern Beirut (1980s–present)
Second Lebanon War 2006  Israel Hezbollah
Amal
SSNP
LCP
PFLP-GC

There are error on the flags in Six Day War. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.152.254.34 (talk) 20:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]


Arab-Israeli War, changing name to War of Independence?

[edit]

User:AndresHerutJaim has changed the name of the 1948 Arab-Israel War to War of Independence two times in a 24hr period and has broken the 1R rule in doing so.I asked him to self revert it and he has but has put in the comment box "for now".The war is known as the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, that is what the article on the wikipedia is called so I see no need to change it.Although it may be known by the other name possible in Israel it is not known by that name around the world.I do not see the reason for changing it to something that it is not called in the actual wikipedia article.The editor has told me to bring this to talk before changing it back but has failed himself to bring it here before changing it in the first place.Thoughts? Owain the 1st (talk) 01:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just so, Owain. This is a problem throughout the I/P area. A great many articles link to redirects in order to display and use the Israeli-preferred name. That's poor practice; the most common name, or at least a neutral, descriptive name should be used, and the redirects avoided. Calling a war or conflict "Operation this or that", or by the name given to it by only one side, as opposed to the internationally-known one, is a problem re NPOV. It usually arises re most wars and conflicts that Wikipedia includes articles about, not just those in the I/P area, and it always needs to be corrected.  – OhioStandard (talk) 07:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. We need to keep a global perspective. Itsmejudith (talk) 14:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed the names in the article to what they are known as in the world and not just Israel.They now also reflect what they are known as on wikipedia.I see no reason for them to just have the Israeli name for a war and ignore what the rest of the world knows it by as that is not a NPOV.How did it ever get like this anyway?Owain the 1st (talk) 07:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of the Amal Movement.svg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Flag of the Amal Movement.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:South Lebanon Army Patch.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:South Lebanon Army Patch.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Organization of article and order of presentation

[edit]

We just finished going through this once: I've just restored the article version as edited by AndresHerutJaim at 03:31, 20 June 2011 UTC. The overall structure, organization, and order of presentation in that version was the result of a long process of compromises that began almost three months ago. The restructuring that Greyshark09 introduced yesterday threw that out entirely, restored the precedence of Israeli-specific names, and restricted the term "war" to just the Israeli-approved usage rather than the common international usage we'd agreed (see previous talk page section) to abide by previously. My restoration effectively reverts Greyshark09's restructuring. We can go through the tedium of a formal RfC, I suppose, but given that this was just settled, I think demanding that now would be poor practice.  – OhioStandard (talk) 23:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't noticed you have discussed the issue before, no prob. My apologies.Greyshark09 (talk) 13:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Greyshark, and for your gracious reply, as well, especially since I find when I look back now on what I wrote I see I probably sounded rather huffy. Sorry for that; I didn't intend to. Best,  – OhioStandard (talk) 08:54, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The War Over Water

[edit]

Just one remark - War over Water is not a "War", it is called "the war over the water", a dispute over water resources - there were technically no casualties in those several operations.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Greyshark; I'd noticed the ambiguity in the name, too. I understood it wasn't an aerial battle that took place literally over water, that is, although the ambiguity seems to me to remain even with a preceding "the". Not sure re naming since I see the article doesn't carry a preceding "the" either. But that will be moot, of course, if we end up deleting the entry.
Can you explain further re the "technically" part of "technically no casualties", though? I'm being lazy, because pressed for time just now; will do my own "homework" to learn more about the conflict when I can, of course. But if only small-arms fire was exchanged - no missiles, air strikes, tanks, no significant infrastructure damage, & etc, and especially if no one or only a few people were hurt, then it would indeed seem silly to include this. Hope you don't mind that I broke this out into a new section, btw... Or if Greyshark doesn't see this - or even if he does, too - anyone else who can help clarify would be welcome to opine, of course. Thanks,  – OhioStandard (talk) 08:54, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit like Cod wars between Britain and Iceland, which are in List of wars involving Great Britain. Can we keep it in, while indicating that there are some differences between it and the major armed conflicts? Itsmejudith (talk) 14:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it, since somebody changed the original name "The War over Water" in Fabruary without consensus to "War over Water", and that is how it became a war. "The War over Water" is the book title (!!!) of Cooley, John, K. (Spring, 1984). A book title became an "armed conflict" (somebody added template), and then turned into an invented "war". I would have renamed it back, but one of the editors of that page is edit-warring not to, so i left it that way. Check this source: [3]. And here is Bolivian War Over Water: [4]. Find similarities?Greyshark09 (talk) 16:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here is another "Water War", which someone can add a military conflict infobox to, and then add to war list: [5]. And for conclusion another "Fight over Dead Sea Scrolls" [6] and "War over Natural Gas" [7]. I assume WP:SYNTH (synthesis) regarding The "War over Water" - making it adequate to a real scale war, WP:OR for the person who added it to this list, and simple WP:UNDUE for resourse conflict in relation to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Greyshark09 (talk) 19:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of war

[edit]

Since this is titled the "list of wars" (not "list of conflicts" or battles), then all events listed here should qualify the definition of war (sometimes wars are part of a bigger conflict or war - like WW, but usually not) or at least be defined as a "war" by WP:RS [8]:

"War" is an armed conflict with at least 1,000 military battle deaths, where at least one of the parties is the government of a state.

The events which do not qualify the definition or are subconflicts or even single battles, and are not named "war" per WP:COMMONNAME:

  • Retribution Operations
  • 1978 South Lebanon conflict (part of Lebanon Civil War, but is it being named "war" by itself, like the 1982 Lebanon War?)
  • South Lebanon conflict 1982-2000
  • First Intifada (an uprising, not war per definition)
  • Second Intifada (same as above)

Well, any sources to call those wars would be appreciated.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this could be dealt with by formatting as a table, and labelling entries as "war" or "other conflict"? I would prefer that to systematic deletion. Let's also have a look at some other articles in the series and see what they do. Cod wars, as I said, is quite a close parallel, no casualties. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pls put your attention - we don't source from wikipedia. Is there an external list of wars, where you find the Cod Wars or The War over the Water? Don't see it here [9], [10].Greyshark09 (talk) 18:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I appreciate we don't source from Wikipedia; it's just a precedent. We can agree how much attention to give to it. WikiProject Military History is among the best and I expect they will give good guidance that can be applied across a range of articles. I'm just trying to find a compromise so that we don't mislead by labelling things as wars that aren't really, but we don't delete material that could be useful. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The usual procedure is request reliable source in case of doubtful information. Since this is a list of wars, i simply ask a WP:RS to call those events a war. Not everything violent and with casualties is a war per definition, cited by me.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Let's try and get some more views. As I said, I don't want to mislead any readers into thinking that something was a big armed conflict when it wasn't. But I still think this could potentially be dealt with by labelling within the article. Do you want me to post at WP:Milhist? Itsmejudith (talk) 20:21, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again - we are speaking in this thread about 5 conflicts, which are not defined as wars per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RS (Retribution operations, 1978 South Lebanon conflict, South Lebanon conflict 1982-2000, First Intifada, Second Intifada). Lets wait for more views and you are welcome to post it on military project. I'm not on a hurry on this.Greyshark09 (talk) 21:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Greyshark, you've misinterpreted the source you cited. The Nobel page you quoted from wasn't trying to provide a general definition for the meaning of the word "war", it was just providing the criterion they chose as a convenient definition for the purpose of constructing that particular map. Here's the full quote, with emphasis added:
The map includes more than 200 wars from 1899-2001. Each flame represents one war. "War" according to our definition is an armed conflict with at least 1,000 military battle deaths, where at least one of the parties is the government of a state. The casualty figure provided on the map refers to military losses, unless otherwise stated. This means that many smaller wars are not included, in most cases because of this casualty threshold.
When they say "according to our definition" they're clearly talking about "our definition for this purpose". Think about it: Is it reasonable to use the same arbitrary number of deaths for Liechtenstein as for China before Liechtenstein can be said to have been at war? And 1000 military losses would mean around 10,000 civilian losses ( see Civilian casualty ratio ) in most modern wars; note that the Nobel page says, "Civilian deaths are generally not included even if they are battle-connected." So 11,000 killed, and probably at least three times that many people wounded. The typical Chinese would probably never meet anyone directly affected, it would be something he'd hear about in the media. The typical citizen of Liechtenstein would have been wounded at least once, and would have several close relatives and neighbors who were killed.
Here's the Oxford English Dictionary's primary definition of the noun, "war":
Hostile contention by means of armed forces, carried on between nations, states, or rulers, or between parties in the same nation or state; the employment of armed forces against a foreign power, or against an opposing party in the state.
Under this definition from the most widely accepted authority on the English language, any time politically-motivated groups bring armed force to compel or resist another such group, it's appropriate to describe the result as "war". The entry for "war" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy looks quite helpful, as well, but I can't say I'm wholly satisfied with it, or with the OED either.  – OhioStandard (talk) 01:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is an underlying problem, and it is this. When the article was renamed (see above) it was not 100% clear whether it was a list of wars article, or simply a wars article. Greyshark's initial post in this thread says it is list of, but actually it currently isn't. I think we need either to develop it as an article about Wars involving Israel, or as a list. If a list, then the criterion for inclusion is notability (and I think then all the existing items are notable). If an article about, then we have a duty to explain all about the topic (and again I think all the present material can be worked in). Itsmejudith (talk) 07:01, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Judith you are 100% correct, i thought this page is "list of wars involving Israel" (it looks so from the first impression, and all other similar pages are named "list of wars involving <country>" (like List of wars involving Finland, List of wars involving the US). I don't find any page named "Wars involving <country>", but a list. It occurs to me this page should accordingly be renamed to "List of wars involving Israel". In its current form this page is just a section of "Arab-Israeli conflict" article.Greyshark09 (talk) 16:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you look above, I proposed moving the article to "List of wars" from its previous title "Israeli wars". Some people preferred this title and I didn't really mind. As a general principle, I don't like seeing too many articles retelling the whole Arab-Israeli conflict, because it multiplies the effort needed to ensure NPOV. So I wouldn't be opposed to this becoming a simple list. I still think that there would be room for the less important conflicts so long as it was clear that, for example, there were no casualties. Keep info in so long as it is notable. Itsmejudith (talk) 21:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A simple list is intrinsically desirable, but we'd have to agree on how to present that, and there are some areas of contention that would have to be overcome. Salient among them are:
  1. Some editors object to calling anything a "war" that Israel doesn't call a war. I'd suggest we can solve this by including a narrow column to check off which of the armed conflicts we present are identified as wars by Israel.
  2. We'd also need to come up with a well-defined criteria for deciding what to include. This might prove less contentious if we were to bypass that controversy by naming our list as something like "List of wars and armed conflicts involving Israel" and then create a redirect from "List of wars involving Israel". Doing so might also help mitigate the conflict over point #1, above.
  3. Naming may also be contentious. We currently have hundreds of articles, for example, that use a redirect or other means to refer to our articles named 1948 Arab–Israeli War and Gaza War as the "War of Independence" and "Operation Cast Lead", respectively. It's my view that just the verbatim name of the corresponding article should be presented in the leftmost column of any list, and I'd prefer to keep that as the only one presented. If people just can't live with that, we can discuss whether to include columns for nationalistic names, as well, i.e. for both the Arab and the Israeli preferred names. If we do include such columns, then the question becomes whether to include just the English translation of those names, or to present their spelling in Arabic and Hebrew, too. Doing so would of course force us to leave out other information that would be useful, those additional columns would make our page much "wider".
Comments welcome, of course, but please reply below, rather than interleaving them above.  – OhioStandard (talk) 04:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my attitude i see the point to make a logical move first and then solve the disrapancies and relatively minor issues. Anyhow regarding your raised points - correct me if i'm wrong but Gaza War is the only "war" not ackowledged as war by IDF, and that is not such a big issue. I would not agree to make it "list of wars and other conflicts involving Israel" (or "list of wars, military conflicts and civilian conflicts involving Israel" if someone wants to completely bring the name out of proportions), since like "Wars involving Israel" there are no similar articles named "list of wars and other conflicts involving <country>", so it should not be an exception.Greyshark09 (talk) 15:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your proposal of renaming right away, and this makes we wonder what has happened to make the result of the proposal to dissolve? the outcome was "move", so why haven't you guys moved it?Greyshark09 (talk) 15:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand this last point. What is a proposal to dissolve? Re the name, I am happy with either Wars involving Israel, if it is going to be an explanatory article, or List of wars involving Israel, if it is going to be a list. If it is a list, then notability is the criterion for inclusion. I don't think "wars and other conflicts" will work; it's out of line with other articles but that is not the main point, it's just unwieldy. I proposed the previous move out of consistency with other articles, but we only need broad consistency, it doesn't have to be 100%. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Greyshark:With respect, I think it would be a much better idea to first settle these issues before moving the article or rearranging its format. No one is completely happy with the article in its current form, but at least it is somewhat stable right now. Can we please try to benefit from the relative calm we currently have here to try to settle these points first, so as to avoid the likelihood of a protracted fight arising over the article in some new format?
@All: I accept that a long "wars or conflicts" name is probably too cumbersome, but what about "List of armed conflicts involving Israel" with a column to check off which are not identified as "wars" by that country, and with some agreed-upon minimum standard of inclusion? We'd obviously not want to include one-off commando operations by either side, e.g. the Entebbe raid, but I think most entirely uninvolved (i.e. non I/P) editors would say the Intifadas should be included, for example. I doubt it would seem reasonable to most uninvolved editors to exclude armed conflicts that resulted in thousands of deaths and that had such disruptive consequences more generally.
If other countries don't have a similar "List of armed conflicts" article, I think that's probably because there's not as much of a need for one. Armed conflicts involving other countries have tended to more discrete, less "spread out" and ongoing for so long a time. And there's certainly value to having a single article that lists all armed conflicts that rise to some agreed-upon minimum standard of salience, regardless of whether the word "war" appears in the preferred name of any party to the conflict. Finally, this solution would allow us to avoid interminable battles over the very contentious question of what should be termed a "war" in what seems to me to be the fairest possible way. I'm not claiming this would be a perfect solution, but it's as fair a solution to this very contentious problem that I think we're likely to see.  – OhioStandard (talk) 01:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you search for all engagements - you should go to Violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Timeline of Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Military operations conducted by the Israel Defense Forces and other similar pages. Don't try to make a list of wars into another list of incidents - this is WP:UNDUE and a synthesis. I also notice this page is categorized as "list of wars", and has an appopriate table for such (which made me confused). So guys - either we rename it to "list of wars" and make an appropriate make out or this page merges into the Arab-Israeli conflict and Military operations conducted by the IDF articles. So, i leave it to you - i have much work on other Middle Eastern conflicts.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since this discussion went dead, i would like to add that a definition of war according to Webster is:

War is a state of opened and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations.

Thus if the conflict was not declared a war by any side and involved only certain organization, rather a nation or a state - it cannot be called war, thus the "War list" including "retribution operations" is a synthesis and either removed or moved into "conflicts involving IDF".Greyshark09 (talk) 11:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wars involving Israel → List of wars involving Israel – To match the other "List of wars" articles. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:03, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

First Lebanon War

[edit]

User:Averysoda is insisting that 1) the 1982-85 Lebanon War was a "military victory" and "strategic failure" (which can only make sense if one choose to ignore all events after 1982), and 2) that the 1985-2000 South Lebanon conflict was "separate". I appeal to him to describe how they are separate in any way - they are divided into two different articles for the sake of clarity, but are in no way separate in practical terms (one being merely a continuation of the other). I fail to see the logic behind either of those claims, and invite him to explain them here. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The First Lebanon War was a different (although related) conflict from the South Lebanon Conflict between Hezbollah and IDF in the Security Zone. In fact, Israel only considers the first one as an "official war", and most sources agree with that distinction, that's why there are two separated articles in Wikipedia instead of one. The 1982 war was a clear Israeli military victory because the objective of expelling the PLO from Lebanon was achieved (as well as defeating the Syrian forces). One may say that the final strategic objective of achieving a lasting peace between Lebanon and Israel was not reached, since the PLO was replaced by Hezbollah and the conflict continued as a guerrilla low-level insurgency, but we can't ignore the fact that in the 1982 war Israel managed to drive out the PLO from the Arab country in a resounding military victory.--Averysoda (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The fighting became less intense after the Israeli withdrawal to the Security Zone in June 1985, but never stopped. The war continued in varying intensity until May 2000, and I fail to see how the two are somehow separated.
Furthermore, the "military victory" only describes the immediate outcome of the 1982 invasion, and does not take the following 3 years of guerilla war into account. Israel partially expelled the PLO, but failed to oust Syria, failed in its wider effort to make peace with Lebanon, and withdrew having only partially achieved one of its aims. The war is not remembered as any sort of "success" in Israel, this is mainly a view of Wikipedians. It was a failure, and a costly one. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 00:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The First Lebanon War took place in 1982, as Israel intervened on behalf of the Free Lebanon State (and its allied militias) during the Lebanese Civil War and out of interest to defeat and expel the PLO out of south Lebanon as the final phase of Palestinian insurgency in South Lebanon (1960s-1982). Some consider the 1982-85 phase of increased Israeli military presence as aftermath of the 1982 war, but this is somewhat controversial. In any case in 1985, with the Israeli withdrawal to Security Belt and alliance with Antoine Lahed's South Lebanon Army (former military force of Free Lebanon State) on one hand and emergence of Hezbollah (with the support of Iranian Revolutionary forces) on the other - a new and different phase of the conflict began, lasting from 1985 to 2000, entirely spinning off the Lebanese Civil War.GreyShark (dibra) 09:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Greyshark09: Although Hezbollah didn't officially exist before 1985, the conflict between Israel and Lebanese shiites started long before the withdrawal to the Security Belt. Furthermore, Israel's alliance with the Maronites collapsed long before the 1985 withdrawal. The 1985-2000 phase was indeed different than the 1982-1985 phase, but that doesn't mean they were two different wars. The split leaves the impression that these phases were separate conflicts, which is inaccurate. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 11:26, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT - The belligerents weren't all that different. The only main differences were the marginalization (but not removal) of the PLO as a belligerent, and the collapse of the Israel-Maronite alliance. Apart from that, the belligerents were more or less static throughout most of the war. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 11:29, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There were two different conflicts: one against the PLO in 1982 which was an Israeli military victory (since the PLO departed from Lebanon and Syrian forces were defeated), and a different one from 1985 mainly against Hezbollah, which eventually resulted in Israel retreating from southern Lebanon. One may argue that the conflict with Hezbollah was a continuation or a consequence of the 1982 invasion, but there's a reason why there are two completely different articles in Wikipedia, merging them here would be original research and quite confusing. It's like merging in this article the first Indochina war with the Vietnam war that came after. The 1982-85 Lebanon war and the South Lebanon Conflict (1985-2000) had different enemies, different objectives, different outcomes and even different geographical locations since the 1982 war against Palestinian militants wasn't limited to the southern part of Lebanon.--Yschilov (talk) 06:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I responded to these exact arguments in my previous post. Apart from the PLO, Israel has basically the same enemies from 1982 to 2000, as well as the same main ally. If we are to talk about objectives, they changed within the 1982-85 phase of the war as well. The guerilla campaign against the IDF continued throughout the whole conflict, and a line drawn in June 1985 is purely artificial.
For the record, since you mentioned Vietnam; the First Indochina War ended with the Geneva Conference, and only in 1959 were North and South Vietnam openly at war. Not comparable at all. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 14:54, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not true. The enemy in 1982 was the PLO and the Syrians, not Hezbollah. Arafat and his organization departed from Lebanon while the Syrians were defeated in the battlefield. PLO was the target of "Operation Peace for Galilee", that's a well-known fact. Israel withdrew to the southern tip in 1985 and then Hezbollah started a guerrilla campaign against IDF positions and their Christian allies. Those are two different (although consecutive) conflicts, that's why they have two different articles in Wikipedia with a lot of sources to back it up. What you are doing by trying to merge the two into a single war and ignoring the PLO is nothing more than original research.--Yschilov (talk) 00:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The PLO only partially withdrew, and remained a player in the war until they were expelled by the Syrians in the War of the Camps. The conflict with the Shiite groups that later emerged as Hezbollah started already in 1982, and clashes with the Syrians continued throughout the whole conflict (not to mention Syria's support for Hezbollah). Although 1985 may have marked a point of de-escalation as far as Israel was concerned, the withdrawal from most of Lebanon did not mark the end of the war between Israel and Hezbollah. Presenting it as two separate wars is misleading. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 00:52, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More than 14,000 PLO militants evacuated Lebanon in August and September of 1982. I may agree or disagree with your analysis, but the fact is that Wikipedia has two separate articles for the 1982 war and the 1985-2000 South Lebanon conflict. It's very simple. If you want to merge the two, first you have to discuss it in the proper articles. Merging them here in this table is original research, therefore not acceptable. It's also interesting that the official Israeli name for this war, the First Lebanon War, doesn't apply to the low intensity conflict between IDF and Hezbollah from 1985 until 2000.--Yschilov (talk) 01:42, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why would I want to merge the articles? Plenty of military conflicts are split up into several articles. All I'm saying is that they should be in the same row on this list, as splitting them implies they were separate, which is inaccurate. Israel occupied parts of Lebanon from 1982 to 2000, and fought various combatants over this throughout this whole period. 18 years, one conflict. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 02:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's original research. There are two different conflicts with two different articles and different outcomes: one between 1982 and 1985 in the entire Lebanon (reaching Beirut), mainly against the PLO; and a different conflict since 1985 in the southern part of that country mainly against Hezbollah, in the so-called Security Zone.--Yschilov (talk) 05:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly do not understand what original research means. So far, all I've been doing has been providing information that can be found within the articles themselves. Original research would be if I tried to draw some unsupported conclusion from that. You make a point of the fact that we have two articles, but neither of those articles state that this conflict was actually two separate conflicts. Besides, what's more misleading - to place both in the same row, or to separate them to imply they were, indeed, separate?
As a word of friendly advice, do note that this article is subject to 1RR. I rarely if ever report other users, but I'd hate to see this discussion interrupted because somebody else reported you. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 05:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Listen, if they were the same conflict, it would be in a single article or they would be part of a larger article, the same way 1947–48 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and 1948 Arab–Israeli War are part of the wider 1948 Palestine war. As the articles in Wikipedia explain (supported by multiple reliable sources), the conflict with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon was a consequence of the Israeli presence there, after the war against the PLO. Of course they are related, but they are not the same conflict. And don't worry about 1RR, I'm familiarized with that rule and I haven't broken it so far.--Yschilov (talk) 05:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Such an article would basically be a repetition of the two that already exist. Besides, I don't see what your argument is. "It can't be, because there's no Wikipedia article".
What you don't understand is that the conflict with Hezbollah predates the 1985 withdrawal (which, by the way, happened in stages, starting already in 1983). The PLO was the "main" target only in 1982, and removing the PLO from Lebanon was actually a minor goal compared to Israel's other ambitions in Lebanon. Hezbollah emerged already in 1982, and from there on, its insurgency continued until May 2000. You insist on narrowing this down to two separate wars against the PLO and Hezbollah, which in reality was far from the case. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 05:57, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, because the south Lebanon conflict started only after Israel withdrew from most of Lebanon, leaving only a residual force in the security zone. As long as both conflicts are in separated articles, I don't see any justification to merge them as a single one in the table. That's original research.--Yschilov (talk) 07:23, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's basically like saying the 1985-1999 conflict ended when the SLA withdrew from Jezzine, starting a new 1999-2000 conflict. Just because the center of the conflict is moved from one place to another does not mean the conflict itself is over. The Hezbollah-Amal-Jammoul insurgency against the IDF went on more or less uninterruptedly from 1982 to 2000. That's not original research, that's a fact. The fact that we have two articles is no argument at all. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 15:53, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Listen, it's very simple. We have two different articles for two different conflicts (although related). They are not the same. If you want to merge them into a single conflict, first you have to gain consensus for merging the articles (open a discussion here or here). In the meantime, the table must show those two articles separated.--Yschilov (talk) 01:31, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to merge the articles. Please respond to what I'm actually saying rather than repeat this non-point. You do not have to lecture me on how Wikipedia works either. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 02:25, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you are not planning to merge the two articles, then leave this table alone. Merging the two here is nothing more than original research. Those articles are separated for a reason. It's not the same conflict.--Yschilov (talk) 05:21, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think the only solution here is to involve a third party, as you're either ignoring or not reading my posts. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 06:11, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you don't get it, maybe a neutral third party would be a good option. Perhaps someone who is not involved in ARBPIA so he can see the case from a different (unbiased) perspective.--Yschilov (talk) 21:08, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I will not waste more energy on this pointless discussion before I invite a third party. But why did you remove Hezbollah as a combatant of the 1982-85 phase, and Jammoul and Amal from the 1985-2000 phase? That, my friend, is original research. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 17:05, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In hindsight, I'm not actually strongly opposed to the current layout. Even though I think this is nitpicking, if it concludes an argument, then by all means, I'm fine with leaving it like it is for the sake of house peace. Are you fine with the adjustments that I made? --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the current version, after my last adjustment. However, I think the collapse of Israeli-Maronite alliance should be in the Security Zone conflict since that happened when Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000. Nevertheless, the 1982 Lebanon war article includes that in the results so I'm not going to object.--Yschilov (talk) 09:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Israeli-Maronite alliance collapsed when Bashir Gemayel was killed and was replaced by his more pro-Syrian brother, who was reluctant to give Israel what it wanted. I also object to the "consolidation of the Free Lebanon State for two reasons; this "state" ceased to exist in 1984, and the SLA had been in control of much of South Lebanon before 1982. For the sake of the layout, I also prefer not to squeeze too much information into the tables. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 17:12, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1948 war

[edit]

Perhaps its better to change result from "victory" to "overall victory", there were few battles Israel lost or didn't win ex:Battles of Latrun (1948). Makeandtoss (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If the 1948 war wasn't an Israeli victory, I wonder what your definition is. Of course it lost some battles, like the victorious party in any war. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 13:17, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok... But what about 'invasion of Israel' thats completely false. It was Mandatory Palestine. Borders of Israel (aka Green line) was formed as a result of the war... Makeandtoss (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Israel was declared independent more or less the moment the Mandate was dissolved. Mandatory Palestine was dissolved right before the Arab League invaded. The lack of clear borders does not make pre-1949 Israel non-existent. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 14:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Theres a difference between being declared independent and being independent. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:22, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In what way was Israel not independent? Who was it dependent on? I fail to see the logic behind your argument. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 15:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Now if ISIS declares independence, would we say that the world invaded the Islamic state!? Makeandtoss (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That comparison is not worth commenting. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not resembling terrorism to Israel. on the night of the termination of mandate it was no state. It had nothing.. I bet there was a dicussion on this issue on 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the article says Arab forces invaded Palestine.Makeandtoss (talk) 18:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying you weren't comparing Israel to ISIS. It's true that Israel did not have clear borders when it declared its independence, but it certainly held land - aside from Jewish-populated areas, Yishuv forces captured Galilee (which was allotted to the Arab state in the UN partition plan) well ahead of the Arab League invasion. That being said, I see the main article says "former Mandatory Palestine", and that's a formulation I actually think is better than the one we currently have here. If you don't mind, we can agree to disagree on our little debate and settle for this option. Are you fine with that? --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 20:41, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful! We weren't miles apart after all. Cheers! --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 21:18, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of wars involving Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:38, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Table: The table of wars should include enemy casualties

[edit]

It's not only showing Israeli casualties, which is not full information. Data of Palestinian casualties in Operation Cast Lead and the other wars should definitively be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.191.131.119 (talk) 00:38, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of wars involving Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:44, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 February 2020

[edit]

For the 2006 Lebanon War you should include the Amal Movement since it was written as a belligrent in the First Lebanon War but it was actually a belligrent in both wars. 218.186.135.10 (talk) 01:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The following source has been used by other articles to cite the 17 death of the Amal Movement in the Second Lebanon War, which makes it the second most active belligerent of the Hezbollah-led faction and therefore it should be mentioned as such, as it was in the previous conflicts.[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20060928081123/http://www.dailystar.com.lb/July_War06.asp

References

  1. ^ "Timeline of the July War 2006". The Daily Star. AFP. 28 September 2006. Archived from the original on 28 September 2006.

Add Amal as a Belligerent to the Second Lebanon War

[edit]

The following source has been used by other articles to cite the 17 death of the Amal Movement in the Second Lebanon War, which makes it the second most active belligerent of the Hezbollah-led faction and therefore it should be mentioned as such, as it was in the previous conflicts.[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20060928081123/http://www.dailystar.com.lb/July_War06.asp

References

  1. ^ "Timeline of the July War 2006". The Daily Star. AFP. 28 September 2006. Archived from the original on 28 September 2006.

2nd Lebanese war

[edit]

.The information is different in the Hebrew Wikipedia. It says, "The war did not yield a clear victory for either side" and I think it's not biased, because a ceasefire was signed and UNIFIL forces were deployed on the border between Israel and Lebanon thus, I believe it should be changed here too.

2019–2021 Persian Gulf crisis

[edit]

2019–2021 Persian Gulf crisis Doremon764 (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Phrasing Ambiguity

[edit]

In the phrase "Palestinian attacks and counter Military operations carried out by the Israel Defense Forces during the 1950s and 1960s" (the "Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency" section), does "Palestinian attacks" refer to attacks by Palestine or attacks on Palestine? To me, the meaning of the sentence is ambiguous (since the "and" could be referring to two separate attacks that were both carried out by Israel, or it could be referring to an attack by Palestine and Israeli counterattacks). My assumption is that the intended meaning is the latter, but I would like to clarify if possible. IDontHaveAnAccountYet (talk) 05:56, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Civilian casualties

[edit]

There in fact was one civilian casualty on the israeli side during the Yom Kippur war in 1973 2A0D:6FC2:40A2:6C00:E823:44E8:7293:4BE1 (talk) 19:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yom kippur war

[edit]

yom kippur war didn't end with a significant territorial change?? Are you kidding me?? Who's editing Wikipedia nowadays? A Fourth grade student?? Spike 255555 (talk) 19:24, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 October 2023

[edit]

Correct the typo – current conflict is not called "Swords of Iran" but "Swords of Iron". ToKroCZ (talk) 14:07, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: changed it to read what the article is currently titled, October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict. Swords of Iron is only the name of the current Israeli counteroffensive, does not make sense to name the whole conflict after the Israeli operation Cannolis (talk) 14:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Israel–Hamas war into the introduction

[edit]

The opening paragraph reads that there have been "two major Palestinian Arab uprisings known as the First Intifada and the Second Intifada (see Israeli–Palestinian conflict), and a broad series of other armed engagements rooted in the Arab–Israeli conflict." Should the recent war be included in this mention of Palestinian uprisings? In any case, it might already seem notable enough to be mentioned and linked in the introduction. 84.169.235.246 (talk) 10:47, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Table source and presentation

[edit]

The table is useful but its presentation is confused. Does it present a list of conflicts based on the Israeli perspective or not? On the one hand the introduction to the table says only conflicts in bold are considered as wars by Israel (as opposed, presumably, to mere skirmishes or disorder). On the other hand the results column list victories, clearly only victories for the Israeli side.

My suggestions: - Re-word the introductory sentence to the table as follows: "The following table lists conflicts involving Israel. Conflicts officially considered as wars by the Israeli Ministry of Defense (as opposed to mere skirmishes or civil disorder) are marked in bold." - Give a better reference ... note 3 is to another Wikipedia entry on Israeli military decorations so I am not sure what is meant to be learned from there. - In the results column "Victory" should be changed to "Israeli victory". The latter is unambiguous and there should be no presumption for what readers understand by the former. Hajjamda (talk) 11:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 November 2023

[edit]

Changes to "List of wars involving Israel" article:  Done(1) In "Palestinian Insurgency in S. Lebanon" paragraph: (a) Change "PLO relocate to..." to "The PLO relocated to..." (b) Change "and stage attacks on the Galilee and as a base for..." to "and staged attacks on Galilee and used South Lebanon as a base for..."  Done(2) Change the "1982 Lebanon War" paragraph from an indented paragraph - beginning with "**" - to a non-indented paragraph beginning with a single "*" like the other paragraphs. Goman1 (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 December 2023

[edit]

put Inconclusive or Stalemate for october war (1973). 2603:6010:1C00:325:EF8:449:6BD9:CFC9 (talk) 04:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

there are a lot of sources to support the fact that the war did indeed end in a stalemate
  • source: Al Jazeera's article on the October Arab-Israeli War of 1973 states that "the counterattack majorly turned the tide of the war in favor of the Israelis, and the fighting came to a stalemate"
link: https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2018/10/8/the-october-arab-israeli-war-of-1973-what-happened
  • source: The National Security Archive, a research institute and library located at The George Washington University, refers to "Airlifts, Battlefield Stalemates, and Oil Threats" in a document related to the October War and U.S. Policy
link: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB98/index.htm
  • source: The Jewish Virtual Library, a comprehensive online resource about Jewish history, politics and culture, mentions that "the war ended in a military stalemate"
  • source: The Encyclopaedia Britannica states that "the war ended in a military stalemate, with Israel managing to push the invading forces back but suffering heavy losses"
  • source: The History Channel's website notes that "the war ended in a stalemate, with both sides claiming victory"
  • source: The BBC's overview of the Yom Kippur War mentions that "the war ended in a stalemate, with both sides suffering heavy losses"
  • source:The Chronikler article titled "How Egypt clutched political victory from the jaws of military stalemate" emphasizes that the 1973 Arab-Israeli war is widely regarded as a military victory in Egypt, despite ending in a stalemate and near defeat. The article discusses the significance of the war and its impact on Egypt's ruling junta and the return of occupied Egyptian territory
link: https://chronikler.com/2023/10/05/how-egypt-clutched-political-victory-from-the-jaws-of-military-stalemate/
2603:6010:1C00:325:18D4:D9D5:9810:EA6F (talk) 04:47, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the proper venue for discussing the Yom Kippur War. Discussing this on talk:Yom Kippur War and get wp:consensus to change the "Result: Israeli victory" entry. If successful, change it here.
Israel maintained their possessions in that an gained more. Egypt nor Syria regained any of their territory; they 'lost'. Maybe the fighting turned to a stalemate, but Israel thwarted the attackers. That, to me, is a victory, not a stalemate. Adakiko (talk) 20:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The war ended with wgypt controlling the majority pf the eastern suez bank and foilinh the israeli encirclement of the third army. Ive brought it up in the talk page a while there ago. Though israel defeated syria, they also ceded territory The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 13:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Iron Swords Belligerents

[edit]

Due to recent events, Iran should be added as one of the combatants against Israel in Operation Iron Swords. IrisArgo (talk) 02:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The beef between Iran and Israel started long before this war. Just because some incidents happened during this war doesn't necessarily mean that the incidents are part of the war. Zerotalk 03:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was not talking about the general hostility between them. I was talking about the fact that Iran launched over 300 drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles at Israel. IrisArgo (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your part is done. You can't participate in discussions. You are limited to making edit requests. You have made your request. Editors with extendedconfirmed privileges will decide what to do about it. Sean.hoyland (talk) 14:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iran-Israel 2024 conflict

[edit]

The 2024 Iran–Israel conflict needs to be added to the page. Mlutter1 (talk) 09:29, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 September 2024

[edit]

The page refers to the attack of the Hammas terrorist group on Israel as Palestinian invation. It does not speak on the murder and rape, and critisizing the Israeli response as a problem. Fix this antisemitic thing. 37.60.47.151 (talk) 18:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: Please provide specific suggestions including references for each fact you would like added. Nightenbelle (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing information

[edit]

I've noticed there is missing information in many of the wars, it would be nice to have the casus beli and an initial introduction on how the conflicted started, the first shots, etc. This is mainly because theese wars are portraid just as "this happened" without the context in how. For example, in the intifadas mentioning the beggining of hostilities with the palestianian demonstrations and subsequent riots, or the biggining of the six-day war with the israeli incursion. The Froog (talk) 09:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Small year change

[edit]

Hello all,

Is there consensus to change "2024 Israel-Hezbollah War" in the first section to "2023 Israel-Hezbollah War" given that the link points to Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present)?

Would change myself, but this may not be the best place for WP:BOLDism.

Thanks so much!

JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 01:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait nevermind I was incorrect.
JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 20:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_wars_involving_Israel&oldid=1255221629"