Talk:Six-Day War#rfc 0E56426

> The Egyptian forces consisted of seven divisions: four armoured, two infantry, and one mechanized infantry.

This does not agree with ["Order of battle for the Six-Day War" article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle_for_the_Six-Day_War#Egyptian_Army) and [map used by the section](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/1967_Six_Day_War_-_conquest_of_Sinai_5-6_June.jpg).

OOB article suggests that it's backwards (four infantry, two armored, one mechanized):

• 2nd Infantry Division – Maj. Gen. Sadi Naguib
• 3rd Infantry Division – Maj. Gen. Osman Nasser
• 7th Infantry Division – Maj. Gen. Abd el Aziz Soliman
• 20th PLA Division Gaza – Maj. Gen. Mohammed Abd el Moneim Hasni
• Infantry Brigade (Ind) – Brig. Mohammed Abd el Moneim Khalil
• 6th Mechanized Division – Maj. Gen. Abd el Kader Hassan (on map as infantry division, but that's probably fine)
• Task Force Shazli – Maj. Gen. Saad el-Shazly (on map as armored division)
• 4th Armoured Division – Maj. Gen. Sidki el Ghoul
• 1st Armoured Brigade – Brig. Hussein Abd el Nataf
• 125th Armoured Brigade – Brig. Ahmed El-Naby

In the casualties table it is written that 400 Israeli tanks were DESTROYED. This number seems to be too high, and seems to refer to DAMAGED tanks. Most of the damaged tanks were repaired sooner or later. In addition, some 200 Arab tanks were taken by IDF and perhaps it is needed a different entry in this table.

Reference 81 links to a broken Archive.org link. The material is still partially available on Archive, but the corrected URL should be "https://archive.org/details/caseforpalestine0000quig/mode/2up". The full reference (fixing both links) would be the following source:

{{Cite book |last=Quigley |first=John |url=https://archive.org/details/caseforpalestine0000quig/mode/2up |title=The Case for Palestine: An International Law Perspective |publisher=Duke University Press |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-8223-3539-9 |location=London |page=[https://archive.org/details/caseforpalestine0000quig/page/162/mode/2up 163] |url-access=limited}}

Curlsstars (talk) 21:03, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Not an error, just a stylistic choice that makes the map a little less intuitive. The map at the top starts with Israel in dark blue, then different shades of green, then turquoise—it is a little hard to visualize the gradual attack with such colors. I think the flow of the war could be more easily understood at a glance if, e.g. day 1 was a moderate blue, day 2 a light blue, day 3 a blue-green, day 4 a darker green, day 5 a lighter green, day 6 a lime green. This would create a chronological gradient that would make the map significantly easier to comprehend. 108.147.175.124 (talk) 00:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, or just use categorical colors and make the figure legend bigger. Terrible figure hinestly. 82.147.226.185 (talk) 08:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Seems like there is no mention in this article of the fact that Israel had been planning expansionism into West Bank and Gaza ever since the 1948 war? This was detailed notably by Ilan Pappe, who noted that these ambitions and plans had been fulfilled in 1967 war, which goes against the traditional Zionist narrative of having found themselves in a war they "did not start". Makeandtoss (talk) 18:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

:Ilan Pappe is an extremely opinionated source unfortunately, we cannot present his views as straight facts if not significantly substantiated by other sources. In reality there was a deep debate within Israeli authorities whether the West Bank should be captured or not. ABHammad (talk) 08:41, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

::"We cannot present his views as straight facts if not significantly substantiated by other sources." This is not true at all, Pappé is a respected scholar and a reliable source, especially for facts. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:01, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

::Pappé is a significant voice, and per WP:NPOV, we must include all significant views. If he is truly in isolation, it can go in attributed; if he is not then it is even more due and necessary. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:13, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

:::Agreed, also, anyway, he is not the only RS to have written about this. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

:See https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2021-06-03/ty-article/.highlight/israel-said-67-land-conquests-werent-planned-declassified-documents-say-otherwise/0000017f-e738-df5f-a17f-fffe3ac80000 - IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

::Also now having read more of Pappe's works, there are many good points to be highlighted here: Israel's military superiority due to US weapons was a factor in winning the war, northern Israeli incitement and provocations that aimed to illicit a Syrian response in order to occupy the Golan Heights, Israeli plans to occupy the WB from Jordan in 1957, 58 and 60. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Do we have a separate WP article on that? Makeandtoss (talk) 14:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

:1967 Palestinian exodus. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

::Thanks. Interestingly very little information there that did not even show up on a google search; also few WP links to it. Pappe has also written about the expulsions of that period which he also charachterized as ethnic cleansing. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:18, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Pappe disputes the preemptive narrative, and I am sure other scholars do too, so why is this stated in WP voice? Makeandtoss (talk) 07:52, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Every single picture in the article except the first one seems to revolve around Israel. Makeandtoss (talk) 07:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

:Good point. Which pictures do you propose to add? Jeppiz (talk) 09:17, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

::I will have to look. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:21, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

:::The destroyed Jordan River bridge with Palestinian refugees crossing it is of course an iconic picture of the war. Possible options: [https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/group-of-syrian-soldiers-captured-by-the-israeli-army-in-news-photo/152216479?adppopup=true ] [https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/july-1967-after-the-six-day-war-israel-tripled-its-surface-news-photo/154904543?adppopup=true ] [https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/refugees-fleeing-across-the-river-jordan-over-the-war-news-photo/1245770396?adppopup=true ] [https://www.gettyimages.ae/detail/news-photo/an-israeli-soldier-marches-a-soldier-from-jordan-through-news-photo/514700468?adppopup=true ] Makeandtoss (talk) 10:01, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

This phrasing which you reverted reflects RS: “ Syria. It captured the Gaza Strip and the Sinai desert from Egypt; the Golan Heights from Syria; and the West Bank and East Jerusalem, from Jordan.” [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39960461 ] Makeandtoss (talk) 13:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

:{{ping|SPECIFICO}} Makeandtoss (talk) 13:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

::I agree and restored the edit accordingly. Jeppiz (talk) 13:36, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

:::I left a friendly note on your talk page about BRD.

::Makeandtoss, thank you for engaging on the talk page. I do not believe it reflects the WEIGHT of mainstream narratives as to the abandonment of Gaza and the West Bank by Egypt and Jordan and I am concerned that the revision I reverted would mislead our uninformed readers as to the context and mainstream understanding of the history of the current occupation and the prior abandonment of the Palestinian people. We need to keep in mind that our readers do not come to these articles, particularly lead-skimmers, with an awareness of surrounding facts and narratives. While I know that some analysts believe that the war was precipitated by Israel as a pretext for the conquest of the occupied Palestinian lands, that is not currently the mainstream consensus view. SPECIFICO talk 14:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

:::I think your talk page message to Jeppiz was unnecessary. BRD relates to when one’s own edits are reverted, not that of others. The previous version is awkward and I’ve provided the supporting RS for the new one. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

::::Personal remarks should go on my user talk. However you appear to have confused BRD with the "enforced BRD" CT restriction on some pages. Please review BRD. Tag-team edit warring is being discussed now at WP:AE, and it's apparently quite a concern recently. Hence my note. SPECIFICO talk 02:22, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

:::::{{ping|SPECIFICO}} There is no confusion. WP:BRD states: "Discuss your bold edit with the person who reverted you." It does not state discuss another user's bold edit with another user who had reverted them. Furthermore, your accusation towards {{ping|Jeppiz}} that they are engaged in tag-team edit warring because they disagreed with your edit and reverted you once is an unacceptable and baseless assumption of bad faith. Again, as communicated to you below, please do better. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

:::::@SPECIFICO: Tagteaming is a serious aspersion and shouldn't be made idly on talk pages. Either it's serious and you should raise it on a reporting page, or you shouldn't raise it at all. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

::::::As I said above, this all belongs on user talk, not here. And friendly reminders are routine in CT, not aspersions. SPECIFICO talk 14:34, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

:::SPECIFICO, your talk page note was not particularly helpful as you erroneously claimed I had engaged in discussion despite explaining my revert. Please do better in the future. Your reading of Makeandtoss's version is equally erroneous. Nowhere does it claim a "pretext". It simply states the neutral and sourced fact that Israel occupied these territories. Jeppiz (talk) 22:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

::::Sourced facts aren't necessarily NPOV. See WP:ONUS. The prior version I reinstated is a more neutral summary for editors unaware of the context and relations with Jordan and Egypt. Disagreements need to be discussed on talk. SPECIFICO talk 02:22, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

The various shades of green are confusing, unnecessary and the legend is barely readable. Do we have an alternative map showing only two colors; pre- and post-1967? Makeandtoss (talk) 10:58, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected|answered=yes}}

The following word in bold in last paragraph of lead should be removed, since it is superfluous and gramatically incorrect:

...and the Sinai Peninsula as and the Gaza Strip from Egypt.

Thank you very much!--Steven Homan (talk) 00:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

:Done. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest that you change a line in the paragraph about the uss liberty from

'After an investigation, the U.S. accepted the explanation that the incident was friendly fire and the issue was closed by the exchange of diplomatic notes in 1987.' to

'After an investigation, the U.S. accepted the explanation that the incident was accidental and the issue was closed by the exchange of diplomatic notes in 1987.'

as 'friendly fire' implies that the US was directly on Israel's side during the war when in reality they kept a position of strict neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Napoleon583 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

:Done. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

This article was started all the way back in 2002 in American English. Per MOS:RETAIN it should stay that way. John (talk) 00:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

:I've restored US English and added a tag. John (talk) 07:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

"The Israeli decision was to be conveyed to the Arab nations by the United States. The U.S. was informed of the decision, but not that it was to transmit it. There is no evidence of receipt from Egypt or Syria, and some historians claim that they may never have received the offer."

Incorrect. Israel told the US not to tell anybody about the offer nor did they do so themselves. As another Wikipedia article puts it:

"On 19 June 1967, shortly after the Six-Day War, the Israeli government voted to return the Sinai to Egypt and the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for a permanent peace settlement and a demilitarization of the returned territories. This decision was not made public at the time, nor was it conveyed to any Arab state. " - Land for peace#Peace treaties

The current description here should be changed to that.

Mcdruid (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

: That's correct. The Raz source from the other article is good. Zero^talk 12:58, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Why isn't it added even if they didn't send any troops 80.107.72.31 (talk) 23:43, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

- FYI, I haven't seen any good sources corroborating this statement, so I think we're gonna pass on this one; we can't just simply make unsourced statements now, can we? TootsieRollsAddict (talk to me pls I am lonely) 15:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

"Background" section: One source is not enough, wording leaves user puzzled. Suggest adding more explicit & nuanced Egyptian source: Elbahtimy, Hassan (June 5, 2017). [https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/did-the-soviet-union-deliberately-instigate-the-1967-war-the-middle-east "Did the Soviet Union Deliberately Instigate the 1967 War in the Middle East?"], The Wilson Center. It suggests unintentionally wrong intelligence and general Soviet reluctance in supporting Egyptian war intentions. It's also available online, unlike the only ref so far, a book.

More is of course needed. Didn't the USSR have useful satellite assets in 1967, did they depend on human assets or various intercepts, which can more easily be inaccurate? We're talking of some 10,000 soldiers and hundreds of tanks, which weren't actually where the Soviets said they were! ("An Israeli infantry brigade typically has about 1,000 to 2,000 soldiers, while an armoured tank brigade has about 100 tanks." See [https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/israel-says-calling-up-two-reserve-brigades-for-north/articleshow/113672483.cms here].)

:"On May 13, 1967, the Soviet Union provided information that Israel was amassing around 11 brigades to attack Syria through at least three channels. It was first communicated to Anwar Sadat, speaker of the Egyptian parliament, during his short stop in Moscow following an official visit to North Korea. It was directly communicated twice more in Cairo, through Egyptian intelligence and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As this information accumulated on Nasser’s desk, by May 13, Egypt was considering how it could come to Syria’s rescue."

Brevity is the least of many required qualities of an encyclopedic text. Arminden (talk) 11:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

{{edit extended-protected|Six-Day War|answered=yes}}

Elios Peredhel (talk) 09:18, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

In the penultimate sentence of "Casualties and losses", it states, "Jordanian losses accounted to 21, including 17 military aircraft, 1 helicopter and 3 passenger aicraft." Please change the word "aicraft" to "aircraft", correcting the typo. Elios Peredhel (talk) 09:18, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}}, thanks, Huldra (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected|answered=yes}}

Description of suggested change:

add a link to Operation Focus in the lead (diff is just a suggestion of many possible implementations, i just thought it was weird it wasn't linked when there seemed to be a great opportunity to do so)

Diff:

{{TextDiff|1=Israel launched a series of airstrikes against Egyptian airfields and other facilities|2=Israel launched a series of airstrikes against Egyptian airfields and other facilities}} Bloonpauper (talk) 02:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

:Done. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 03:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected|answered=yes}}

{{Edit extended-protected|answered=yes}}

Description of suggested change:

Please add "Operation Shimshon" (מבצע שמשון Mivtza Shimshon) a nuclear contingency named after Samson from the Bible.

The only mention of anything nuclear that I could find on the current page was, "One Israeli plane, which was damaged and unable to break radio silence, was shot down by Israeli Hawk missiles after it strayed over the Negev Nuclear Research Center.[91]"

Operation Shimshon could be added near there, between that section and the next, or it could be a section of "Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula", or a section of "weapons".

Diff:

{{TextDiff

|1=

Among the Egyptian planes lost were all 30 Tu-16 bombers, 27 out of 40 Il-28 bombers, 12 Su-7 fighter-bombers, over 90 MiG-21s, 20 MiG-19s, 25 MiG-17 fighters, and around 32 transport planes and helicopters. In addition, Egyptian radars and SAM missiles were also attacked and destroyed. The Israelis lost 19 planes, including two destroyed in air-to-air combat and 13 downed by anti-aircraft artillery.[90] One Israeli plane, which was damaged and unable to break radio silence, was shot down by Israeli Hawk missiles after it strayed over the Negev Nuclear Research Center.[91] Another was destroyed by an exploding Egyptian bomber.[92]

The attack guaranteed Israeli air supremacy for the rest of the war. Attacks on other Arab air forces by Israel took place later in the day as hostilities broke out on other fronts.

The large numbers of Arab aircraft claimed destroyed by Israel on that day were at first regarded as "greatly exaggerated" by the Western press, but the fact that the Egyptian Air Force, along with other Arab air forces attacked by Israel, made practically no appearance for the remaining days of the conflict proved that the numbers were most likely authentic. Throughout the war, Israeli aircraft continued strafing Arab airfield runways to prevent their return to usability. Meanwhile, Egyptian state-run radio had reported an Egyptian victory, falsely claiming that 70 Israeli planes had been downed on the first day of fighting.[93]

The Egyptian forces consisted of seven divisions: four armored, two infantry, and one mechanized infantry. Overall, Egypt had around 100,000 troops and 900–950 tanks in the Sinai, backed by 1,100 APCs and 1,000 artillery pieces.[10] This arrangement was thought to be based on the Soviet doctrine, where mobile armor units at strategic depth provide a dynamic defense while infantry units engage in defensive battles.

|2=

Among the Egyptian planes lost were all 30 Tu-16 bombers, 27 out of 40 Il-28 bombers, 12 Su-7 fighter-bombers, over 90 MiG-21s, 20 MiG-19s, 25 MiG-17 fighters, and around 32 transport planes and helicopters. In addition, Egyptian radars and SAM missiles were also attacked and destroyed. The Israelis lost 19 planes, including two destroyed in air-to-air combat and 13 downed by anti-aircraft artillery.[90] One Israeli plane, which was damaged and unable to break radio silence, was shot down by Israeli Hawk missiles after it strayed over the Negev Nuclear Research Center.[91] Another was destroyed by an exploding Egyptian bomber.[92]

The attack guaranteed Israeli air supremacy for the rest of the war. Attacks on other Arab air forces by Israel took place later in the day as hostilities broke out on other fronts.

The large numbers of Arab aircraft claimed destroyed by Israel on that day were at first regarded as "greatly exaggerated" by the Western press, but the fact that the Egyptian Air Force, along with other Arab air forces attacked by Israel, made practically no appearance for the remaining days of the conflict proved that the numbers were most likely authentic. Throughout the war, Israeli aircraft continued strafing Arab airfield runways to prevent their return to usability. Meanwhile, Egyptian state-run radio had reported an Egyptian victory, falsely claiming that 70 Israeli planes had been downed on the first day of fighting.[93]

The Israelis had a plan to resort to using nuclear weapons if they were at risk of losing the war. They called the plan "Operation Shimshon" (מבצע שמשון Mivtza Shimshon), the Hebrew name for Samson from the Bible. The Samson plan was to conduct a first test on the battlefield in Egypt. The rushed deployment plan was also partly inspired by a worry that Egypt would try to thwart Israeli attempts to develop fully functional weapons by attacking Israel's nuclear research facility. The deployment plan included detonating a nuclear weapon on the top of Mount Sanai as an intimidating show of force. Israelis improvised multiple never-before-tested devices to deploy in the Sinai. General [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%A6%D7%97%D7%A7_%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%A7%D7%91 Yitzhak (Yitza) Yaakov] was worried that if the plan was used then he and his troops in Egypt would be killed. The plan was not used because Israel managed to avoid losing using only conventional weapons.

The Egyptian forces consisted of seven divisions: four armored, two infantry, and one mechanized infantry. Overall, Egypt had around 100,000 troops and 900–950 tanks in the Sinai, backed by 1,100 APCs and 1,000 artillery pieces.[10] This arrangement was thought to be based on the Soviet doctrine, where mobile armor units at strategic depth provide a dynamic defense while infantry units engage in defensive battles.

}}

English sources using the name "Operation Shimshon"

• https://www.politico.eu/article/israels-secret-plan-to-nuke-the-egyptian-desert/
• https://www.businessinsider.com/ap-us-think-tank-israel-had-plan-to-use-atomic-bomb-in-1967-2017-6
• https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/israel-had-plan-to-use-atomic-bomb-in-1967-1.61143
• https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-nuclear-bomb-six-day-war-sinai-egypt-use-weapon-syria-jordan-iraq-a7774921.html

English sources using the name "Operation Samson"

• https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4971814,00.html
• https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4971018,00.html
• https://warontherocks.com/2017/06/the-six-day-war-and-the-nuclear-coup-that-never-was/

Hebrew sources using the name מבצע שמשון

• https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4971483,00.html
• https://www.kikar.co.il/israel-news/skxtpr "Already on the eve of the Six-Day War in June 1967, when Israel feared for its fate, it quickly assembled an improvised nuclear device and threatened to activate it, according to researcher Dr. Avner Cohen. (Haaretz, "Dayan's Dilemma", 6.4.2017) This was the first hint of "Operation Samson"[1] - a scenario in which Israel activates its nuclear weapons as a last resort, in the sense of 'let my soul die with the Philistines'." That footnote explains the name Samson, "[1] 'Samson's Choice' is a code name for the event that Israel decides to use an atomic bomb. The analogy of the authors of the name is, of course, after Samson, the hero-judge (and Messiah of his generation) who pulled down the pillars of the temple of the god Dagon in Gaza, and on the day of his death killed more than in his entire life, as he wrote: 'My soul shall die with the Philistines'."

I am not sure which, Haaretz article kikar.co.il is talking about, they shortened the title and the date "6.4.2017" is ambiguous. These two are both the right year and topic (two article published on the same day).

• Hebrew 4 June 2017 https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/2017-06-04/ty-article/.premium/0000017f-db9b-d3ff-a7ff-fbbbd6c80001?lts=1749998240751 "Nuclear researcher Dr. Avner Cohen, who is responsible for revealing the documents, told Haaretz that his goal is to present the "nuclear narrative" of the Six-Day War to the general public, in an attempt to better explain the reasons for the outbreak of the war."

• Hebrew 4 June 2017 https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/2017-06-04/ty-article/.premium/0000017f-db87-df62-a9ff-dfd77e5f0000 quote from that: "Retired Brigadier General [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%A6%D7%97%D7%A7_%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%A7%D7%91 Yitzhak (Yitza) Yaakov] described in interviews the secret contingency plan, which he called “Operation Doomsday.” The plan was supposed to be put into action in the event that Israel felt it was about to lose the 1967 war ... the program's code name was "Samson." Israel's nuclear deterrent program was called "Samson's Choice," after the biblical Samson who killed his Philistine enemies and himself in the process. Yaakov said he feared that if Israel, as a last resort, carried out the secret plan on Egyptian territory, the nuclear explosion would kill him and his commando team." Note: The names used were שמשון (Samson) and מבצע יום הדין (Operation Doomsday or Judgement day, Hebrew wiki [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9D_%D7%94%D7%93%D7%99%D7%9F יום הדין] links to Judgement Day in English, General Yitzhak Yaakov has a page in Hebrew: [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%A6%D7%97%D7%A7_%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%A7%D7%91 יצחק יעקב] but not English

• English version of the Haaretz article, and this article seems to not be paywalled. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2017-06-04/ty-article/israeli-ex-general-nuking-sinai-in-1967-wouldve-hurt-israel/0000017f-f846-ddde-abff-fc672eff0000

English Wilson Center document by Avner Cohen: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-1967-six-day-war

• quote: "Ya’tza Testimony and the “Shimshon” Contingency Plan: … While I knew that during the 1967 crisis Israel crossed the nuclear threshold— Israel had improvised two or three explosive nuclear devices—I did not know any concrete details about the who, when, and why involved in that crash effort. Did the initiative come from the political top or from the developers and managers in the field? What was the strategic purpose of this rushed assembly? … In 1999 I obtained an extraordinary first-hand testimony that addressed many of these questions. That summer, I met former Brigadier General Yitzhak Ya’akov (nicknamed Ya’tza), who in 1967, as the IDF colonel in charge of weapons development, was the chief liaison between the IDF and all the civilian defense industries, including the nuclear project. In May 1967, Ya’tza took it upon himself – with his commanders’ blessing -- to add an operational-military dimension to the fast-created, new situation on the ground. He drew a preliminary contingency plan – codenamed “Shimshon” (“Samson”) – proposing how such an improvised device could be exploded for demonstrative purposes. To be clear, the operation would have been purely demonstrative, yet the crash effort to make such a contingency plan possible is indicative of the enormous anxiety in Israel in those days."

2405:6E00:633:F37:A58A:9427:ADF5:31DC (talk) 23:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

2405:6E00:633:F37:E0B7:A19C:16C2:98D3 (talk) 08:22, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::What do you mean by "reliable source"? I had ten references, eleven now. 2405:6E00:633:F37:A58A:9427:ADF5:31DC (talk) 20:59, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

::Good result but for the wrong reason. The request is clear as to what he wants to add and the sources. However, this is a major change to an article and may be controversial. Our rules on edit requests require that you discuss it with others before posting an edit request. So it's properly

::File:X mark.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Tlx|Edit extended-protected}} template. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 17:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

The article talks about an area they call "the West Bank" which does not exist and never has.

This area consists of two soveriegn nations called Judea and Samaria which are names they acquired 2,000 years before the Six Day War. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:1C20:A80:7DC1:AB99:351C:8A20 (talk) 23:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

:We use the name that is generally used in the WP:reliable sources. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 11:44, 25 June 2025 (UTC)