![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Battle of Karameh article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Battle of Karameh has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 21, 2016. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that during the
Battle of Karameh, the
Israeli Army aborted a plan to retrieve two of its tanks (pictured) that were left behind in
Jordan? | |||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on March 21, 2018, March 21, 2021, and March 21, 2024. |
I had added to the original article on this subject: "Some scholars have expressed a third view, describing the events as "a conflict with limited military importance" which has since been blown up and exaggerated by both sides. W. Andrew Terrill (Winter 2001). ""The Political Mythology of the Battle of Karameh"". The Middle East Journal. Volume 55, Number 1. {{
cite journal}}
: |volume=
has extra text (
help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |journal=
(
help)
I think this is a viewpoint as meritorious as saying that the Israelis or Palestinians "won" anything here. After all, it has been forty years since the battle, and nothing for which it was fought has been resolved, or shows any sign of immanent resolution. bd2412 T 23:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm starting a discussion here, which has partially been going on between Nudve and myself on talk, because what I'll raise now is not just between the two of us. I'm talking about improving the article potentially to GA status, which shouldn't be too difficult. However, many things are still missing, which exists in the sources already provided in the article! I suggest the following improvement (will make some of them myself as time allows):
-- Ynhockey ( Talk) 14:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has a full section devoted to (and entitled) "Israeli command structure", but there's nothing about the Palestinians' or even the Jordanian army's. This seems one-sided; similar treatment should be afforded each side, and if it can't, there should be an explanation. If, for example, rigorous scholarly efforts have been unable to establish which Palestinian combatants were where and in what capacity, or the Jordanian army has never announced who the members of its local command hierarchy were, the article should say so. In the alternative, maybe naming all the lieutenants is unnecessary. -- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 18:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
The commander during the battle was not King Hussein but Mashhoor Haditha, I changed that. --Michael1408 06:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Aljazeera TV network's documentary.--Michael1408 19:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael1408 ( talk • contribs)
You are right, i am trying to find a citable source --Michael1408 19:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael1408 ( talk • contribs)
the arabic article has a lot of different information backed by several cites including an interview with Mashhour haditha, the comander of the jordanian army. and the number of losses on each side is different acording to the citations.. and they are mostly from official military cites. the article in my opinion should be re-evaluated and many things should be added to it to insure that it is impartial —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.144.193 ( talk) 08:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Why would Jordan let Israel invade without even an attempt to resist? I don't care so much about "assumed" vs. "hoped", but the army of a sovereign state doesn't "stay out of the fighting" when its territory is invaded. Not allowing the word "invade"/"invasion" seems rather WP:POV. Erik Warmelink ( talk) 07:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the casualty numbers, sources stated are primarily Israeli, whereas Arab and foreign sources are not taken into account. The numbers issued by Jordanian officials differ widely from the ones posted. To add to that, Jordan had no planes during the battle as they had completely lost their air force during the 1967 war, so it is absurd that "2 planes" are stated to have been lost by Jordan under casualties. Furthermore the result of the battle was not Israeli military victory. According to many sources; the Battle of Karameh is celebrated each year as the first Arab victory over Israel's then "unbeatable" army; it is a source of pride for Jordanians and Palestinians, and thus if Israel also claims victory, the result must be both sides declared victory as I edited.
I think the speech by Haim Bar-Lev, the high-ranking Israeli military official, that was published by Haaretz newspaper on 31/3/1968, should be taken well into account, especially the following quotes:
“ | "The Karameh operation was unique in nature and Israelis were not used to this kind of operation. In other words, all other military operations were decorated with victory for our forces; the Israelis were used to seeing their army gain victory in every operation, but Karameh was different because of the large number of casualties among our forces and other consequences of the battle like Jordanian forces taking a number of our tanks and vehicles, all of which were a major surprise to the Israeli community."
The high-ranking Israeli official, Haim Bar-Lev was also quoted by United Press International, saying that Israel lost three times the number of vehicles that were once lost during the June 67 war. |
” |
Please consider re-evaluation of the sources provided in the article, and thank you. :-) Ymousa ( talk) 08:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Also regarding the quote by Bar Lev, it is present in English in The Hashemite Arab Army1908-1979: an appreciation and analysis of military operations by Sayed Ali El-Edroos p278. Ymousa ( talk) 13:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I see no problem with the inclusion of inflated casualty figures so long as we can provide sources and properly explain their dubiousness. bd2412 T 19:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Ymousa, I have no doubt that the claims were made, and you provide a fine source, but "Middle East Record 1968" is just that - a record. Published in 1973, it merely reports what was said about the subject. The numbers, which even contradict themselves, are outlandish. Claims abound, but there is a huge difference between claims made in the heat of battle or shortly afterwards and durable historical fact. 40 years after the event, the Israeli Ministry of Defence maintains a site containing a web page for each and every IDF fatality over the years. There are 29 people listed for March 21 1968, where's everyone else gone? Then there's the multitude of WP:RS. 250 Israeli casualties is a tenfold expansion on practically each and every modern work to discuss the subject, one written in the last 25 years. It's pure WP:FRINGE and should be treated as such.
As someone who otherwise tries hard to stay far & away from any article involving Palestine & Israel, I'd like to point out the following about the numbers of casualties in this battle. First, the Middle East Record 1968 cited above by Poliocrites cites sources which are usually considered reliable -- the BBC, New York Times, & King Hussein of Jordan. Dismissing them as unreliable without further examination only leads to further conflict. Second, the official public records of any military will, despite its best good faith intents, minimize its losses; no one wants to admit to having more soldier killed or wounded than need be. Thus the IDF, despite its care & skill in record-keeping, must be treated as a biased source. (And so is the Jordanian army, the Palestinian, & the US military.) Thirdly, the varying reports of casualties on both sides may have arisen over initial reports having been repeated, without subsequent corrections. That would explain where the BBC, the NYT, & King Hussein came up with the number of 200 total IDF casualties. Actually finding & reading the original news reports would help in explaining that figure. Fourthly, there is a lot of misinformation floating out there about all sorts of incidents with emotional connotations -- such as this battle. People who only know part of the story will come to this article, see one set of figures & assume that the article is in error & attempt to change it. Therefore, we need to not only include all points of view on the matter, but explain where these numbers came from. Those acting in good faith will see why one statistic has been favored over another, & not bother with repeating another edit war; as for the rest, the only solution for them no matter what we do is to ban them. But it's better to work with everyone editting in good faith. -- llywrch ( talk) 21:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree with user llywrch IDF, despite its care in record-keeping, must be treated as a biased source, just as the Jordanian army, and the Palestinian PLO force. I would recommend at least mentioning in the article that some estimates point to higher IDF causalities, as the official IDF ones. Representing several points of view (I think sources were identified above) is the better way to go, rather than using IDF consistent estimates and not pointing to estimates from the other side. Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.189.41 ( talk) 23:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible to start a new section devoted to reactions from various countries, specifically Jordan? The Battle of Karameh is a source of pride to Jordanians, and it is not seen as an Israeli victory but a Jordanian one in the kingdom. Numerous Jordanian sources and newspapers report the celebrations that occur on a yearly basis, and I'll be more than happy to provide some. I think this should be included in the article. Building up on the previous debate regarding bias of the article, I would also still love to see Arab casualty sources being used in the article. As was previously said, we need to not only include all points of view on the matter, but explain where these numbers came from. Much appreciation. Ymousa ( talk) 12:38, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Changed result to reflect that both sides claim victory. Who won is entirely based on what you believe the actual objectives were, Israel claiming their objective was simply a raid and retalliation after which they fell back, Jordan claiming it was a full attack on Jordanian soil and was repulsed and Palestinians claiming that it was an attempt to eradicate the PLO and destroy the camp at Karamah, and in both of these it largely failed. So, each side claims victory and there are sources to back all sides up. I strongly urge no one on any side to take this out of neutrality and for all to just leave this result as it is, adding perhaps a further section on how each side claims victory or sees the battle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.76.216.244 ( talk) 22:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
i found 2 sources this book [1] and this is a celebration patronized by king Abdullah II on Al Karama Battle anniversary [2]
Given to the events of this war, I think a "both-sides claim victory" would be appropriete. Israel did complete its mission of destroying the Karemah camp, yet the Jordanian military and PLOs feel that they chased and drove the Israelis out. Or at least something like that, because if Jordanians are celebrating this day, surely that would count as a victory. PacificWarrior101 ( talk) 06:41, 28 March 2013 (UTC)PacificWarrior101
Agree with pacific suggestion for the infobox. If all Arabs consider it as a victory then that's notable enough to be included in the article. Since there wasn't a third party documentation from inside the event itself, then we have to primarily depend on both sides claims, and non of them should have a priority on the other -- aad_Dira ( talk) 04:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC).
So, should I understand this silence as "no oppose"? -- aad_Dira ( talk) 06:03, 5 May 2013 (UTC).
Well, if still no oppose I gonna change the infobox to "both-sides claim victory" -- aad_Dira ( talk) 15:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC).
Where on earth are you getting the idea that this is a poor source? Its co-published by Wiley, a respected academic publisher, and Israel Universities Press. You cant simply say no this isnt a reliable source, especially when it prima facie meets all the requirements. nableezy - 14:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I know that the references vary greatly but I got several notable third party references that support another point of view. Here are the sources; two New York Times articles right after the battle claim that Israeli forces were repelled. here, here. Also there are several Israeli sources supporting this, including here, here, here, here, here, here. Other sources; here, here, here, here, here, here. Along with, of course, the countless Arab sources.
The infobox could be 'Both sides claim victory ,Karameh camp destroyed ,Failure to capture Arafat ,Israeli raid repelled'
@ Irondome: @ Nableezy: @ IranitGreenberg: @ Ymousa: @ Poliocretes:, care to share your opinion?-- Makeandtoss ( talk) 13:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
(copied over from my Talk page)
Both 6 Israeli armored vehicles and 40 Jordanians dead are mentioned in the source. Here's the exact location. Makeandtoss ( talk) 23:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Chaim Herzog and Kenneth Pollack estimate 28 dead and 69 wounded.-- Makeandtoss ( talk) 00:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
The statement that 2 Jordanian jets were shot down is reliably sourced to "Zeev Maoz page 246". Maoz, in turn, gives two impeccable historical references for this (Morris, 2001 and Michelson, 1984). You can't "debunk" such well sourced material relying on one Wikipedia editor's original research which claims that Jordan's air force had no jets at that point in time (which is obviously ignorant of the fact that Jordan's F-104s were in Turkey during the war and thus not destroyed, but that is a side point - original research is original research), and another editor's personal research, which refutes the former's original research but says he hasn't seen the IAF claim such victories. Now, it would be one thing if the reliable source making the claim was some marginal publication, but in this case the very same source is being used multiple times in the same infobox (!!!) , for figures of Israeli half truck losses etc.. You can't pick and choose which figure to accept and which figures to reject, from the same source, based on WP:OR, or more likely WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Bad Dryer ( talk) 17:14, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Ummm, I don't find anyone reporting what Maoz's first source "Morris 2001, p369" says: "One fighter-bomber was shot down and a mirage had to crash-land." Actually the way Morris presents it seems to suggest that the aircraft were Israeli. Who flew mirages then?
Here is the whole paragraph: "Altogether the IDF lost 33 dead and 161 wounded at Karameh: 27 Israeli tanks were hit, four of them left behind. One fighter-bomber was shot down and a mirage had to crash-land. The PLO lost 156 dead and 141 captured. The Arab legion lost 84 dead and 250 wounded." You can see that the two aircraft are listed as Israeli losses.
Zero
talk
02:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Israeli had mirages then for sure. As far as I can see, Jordan had none until 1981. This confirms Morris' plain text: he is referring to Israeli planes, not Jordanian planes. Zero talk 02:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Continuing to look at at Morris' book, the source he gives for the paragraph is the Hebrew article that Poliocretes mentioned above. Maoz's "Michaelson 1984" is the same as the source Morris gives: "Mem" (Michaelson), Benny. (Heb.) 'Operation Topfet', a battle on the East Bank of the Jordan—March 1968, Ma'arachot 292-93 (1984). Morris refers to pages 29 and 32. Zero talk 02:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Indeed, the Hebrew source (middle column of p29) says that one Israeli aircraft was shot down (what is ״אוראגן״?) and one Mirage III crash-landed. We need a Hebrew reader to check more carefully that this source does not mention Jordanian aircraft shot down. Assuming it doesn't, I withdraw my support for citing Moaz with WP:IAR as basis. Both of Maoz's sources state something different from what he reports and it is beyond reasonable doubt that he just made a mistake. Zero talk 03:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I am totally confused by this, to quote: "An Israeli aircraft was supposed to drop leaflets addressed to Fatah, after the paratroopers had surrounded the town; however, due to difficult weather conditions, the helicopters flying the paratroopers arrived twenty minutes too late". I can understand that if the leaflet drop was to occur after the town was surrounded, but the paratroops were "too late", that would mean that the pamphlets were dropped first. But in what sense does this mean that the troops were "late"? The element of surprise had already gone. So too late for what? Royalcourtier ( talk) 22:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
A newspaper article from the day after the raid is hardly sufficient to support this claim. While the New York Times is definitely reliable, scholarly sources are needed if this is to stay in the infobox. -- Mikrobølgeovn ( talk) 13:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Mikrobølgeovn: [8] Makeandtoss ( talk) 21:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Check out this source [10]. Makeandtoss ( talk) 14:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Mikrobølgeovn:. So? Two days are quite enough for the press to know what exactly happened and what did not . Makeandtoss ( talk) 19:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Mikrobølgeovn: And that way, we literally leave out the entire view point of the Palestinians and Jordanians! Makeandtoss ( talk) 22:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
I pinged you here about six months ago asking for your opinion.. In any case, there are lots of sources to support this point of view including; here, here. Also there are several Israeli sources supporting this, including here, here, here, here, here, here. Other sources; here, here, here, here, here, [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] here. Along with, of course, the countless Arab sources. Lets assume we put in that Israel had a tactical victory, what victory did the Arabs achieve? As far as I have researched, there were no sources thoroughly discussing the type of victories so this will become original research. The Israelis left tens of vehicles behind, 3 dead soldiers and various types of weapons and ammunition. That really doesn't look like a coordinated withdrawal to me. Makeandtoss ( talk) 17:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: FunkMonk ( talk · contribs) 19:32, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Actually M&T, I was just copy-editing. The English at numerous points in the article is not idiomatic, and occasionally ungrammatical.
I can no longer edit the page for 24 hours, and finish my top to bottom ce. So I can't fix it. Nishidani ( talk) 09:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
After the Six-Day War in 1967, the PLO and Fatah started to step up their guerrilla attacks against Israel from Jordanian soil, using the border town of Karameh as their headquarters. [2] The battle started with an Israeli invasion that was intended to destroy Palestinian groups' camps at Karameh and capture Yasser Arafat in reprisal for the attacks by the PLO.(Cath Senker (2004). The Arab-Israeli Conflict. Black Rabbit Books. p. 45-47.) However, plans for the two operations were prepared in 1967, one year before the attacks began.("Debacle in the desert")It is also believed that Israel wanted to punish Jordan for its support to the PLO.
Though the Israeli invasion, whose purpose was to destroy the Palestinian militant camps at Karameh and capture Yasser Arafat, was primarily motivated as a reprisal for these new attacks, the two operations had been prepared a year earlier.("Debacle in the desert" )
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Karameh. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Karameh. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
All pictures currently in article are about Jordanian soldiers or maps, so I added a famous picture of the event depicting Israeli soldiers, which was deleted a few years ago from Wikimedia Commons. There's nothing wrong with that. However, I made a mistake. Apparently, Israeli copyright would've run out in 1.1.2019. Probably it will be deleted from commons anyway. I would appreciate very much if someone could uploade it with a proper licence later on.-- יניב הורון ( talk) 13:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Article reads
That's a false conclusion. Just because operations are planned ahead in no way contradicts nor precludes that later incidents may serve as their trigger. It *was* carried out in retaliation of the bus incident, if that hadn't occurred it would simply have been triggered by another. -- 217.225.245.163 ( talk) 16:53, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is either a very silly mistake or open vandalism. Why making up facts? The text and sources clearly say those tanks were damaged, not destroyed (both Jordanian and Israeli). Someone please revert.--
Aroma Stylish (
talk)
22:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jordan and Palestine won the battle not Israel. Misinformation leads to wrong history SamerTall ( talk) 19:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Battle of Karameh article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Battle of Karameh has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 21, 2016. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that during the
Battle of Karameh, the
Israeli Army aborted a plan to retrieve two of its tanks (pictured) that were left behind in
Jordan? | |||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on March 21, 2018, March 21, 2021, and March 21, 2024. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I had added to the original article on this subject: "Some scholars have expressed a third view, describing the events as "a conflict with limited military importance" which has since been blown up and exaggerated by both sides. W. Andrew Terrill (Winter 2001). ""The Political Mythology of the Battle of Karameh"". The Middle East Journal. Volume 55, Number 1. {{
cite journal}}
: |volume=
has extra text (
help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |journal=
(
help)
I think this is a viewpoint as meritorious as saying that the Israelis or Palestinians "won" anything here. After all, it has been forty years since the battle, and nothing for which it was fought has been resolved, or shows any sign of immanent resolution. bd2412 T 23:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm starting a discussion here, which has partially been going on between Nudve and myself on talk, because what I'll raise now is not just between the two of us. I'm talking about improving the article potentially to GA status, which shouldn't be too difficult. However, many things are still missing, which exists in the sources already provided in the article! I suggest the following improvement (will make some of them myself as time allows):
-- Ynhockey ( Talk) 14:07, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has a full section devoted to (and entitled) "Israeli command structure", but there's nothing about the Palestinians' or even the Jordanian army's. This seems one-sided; similar treatment should be afforded each side, and if it can't, there should be an explanation. If, for example, rigorous scholarly efforts have been unable to establish which Palestinian combatants were where and in what capacity, or the Jordanian army has never announced who the members of its local command hierarchy were, the article should say so. In the alternative, maybe naming all the lieutenants is unnecessary. -- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 18:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
The commander during the battle was not King Hussein but Mashhoor Haditha, I changed that. --Michael1408 06:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Aljazeera TV network's documentary.--Michael1408 19:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael1408 ( talk • contribs)
You are right, i am trying to find a citable source --Michael1408 19:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael1408 ( talk • contribs)
the arabic article has a lot of different information backed by several cites including an interview with Mashhour haditha, the comander of the jordanian army. and the number of losses on each side is different acording to the citations.. and they are mostly from official military cites. the article in my opinion should be re-evaluated and many things should be added to it to insure that it is impartial —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.144.193 ( talk) 08:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Why would Jordan let Israel invade without even an attempt to resist? I don't care so much about "assumed" vs. "hoped", but the army of a sovereign state doesn't "stay out of the fighting" when its territory is invaded. Not allowing the word "invade"/"invasion" seems rather WP:POV. Erik Warmelink ( talk) 07:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the casualty numbers, sources stated are primarily Israeli, whereas Arab and foreign sources are not taken into account. The numbers issued by Jordanian officials differ widely from the ones posted. To add to that, Jordan had no planes during the battle as they had completely lost their air force during the 1967 war, so it is absurd that "2 planes" are stated to have been lost by Jordan under casualties. Furthermore the result of the battle was not Israeli military victory. According to many sources; the Battle of Karameh is celebrated each year as the first Arab victory over Israel's then "unbeatable" army; it is a source of pride for Jordanians and Palestinians, and thus if Israel also claims victory, the result must be both sides declared victory as I edited.
I think the speech by Haim Bar-Lev, the high-ranking Israeli military official, that was published by Haaretz newspaper on 31/3/1968, should be taken well into account, especially the following quotes:
“ | "The Karameh operation was unique in nature and Israelis were not used to this kind of operation. In other words, all other military operations were decorated with victory for our forces; the Israelis were used to seeing their army gain victory in every operation, but Karameh was different because of the large number of casualties among our forces and other consequences of the battle like Jordanian forces taking a number of our tanks and vehicles, all of which were a major surprise to the Israeli community."
The high-ranking Israeli official, Haim Bar-Lev was also quoted by United Press International, saying that Israel lost three times the number of vehicles that were once lost during the June 67 war. |
” |
Please consider re-evaluation of the sources provided in the article, and thank you. :-) Ymousa ( talk) 08:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Also regarding the quote by Bar Lev, it is present in English in The Hashemite Arab Army1908-1979: an appreciation and analysis of military operations by Sayed Ali El-Edroos p278. Ymousa ( talk) 13:42, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I see no problem with the inclusion of inflated casualty figures so long as we can provide sources and properly explain their dubiousness. bd2412 T 19:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Ymousa, I have no doubt that the claims were made, and you provide a fine source, but "Middle East Record 1968" is just that - a record. Published in 1973, it merely reports what was said about the subject. The numbers, which even contradict themselves, are outlandish. Claims abound, but there is a huge difference between claims made in the heat of battle or shortly afterwards and durable historical fact. 40 years after the event, the Israeli Ministry of Defence maintains a site containing a web page for each and every IDF fatality over the years. There are 29 people listed for March 21 1968, where's everyone else gone? Then there's the multitude of WP:RS. 250 Israeli casualties is a tenfold expansion on practically each and every modern work to discuss the subject, one written in the last 25 years. It's pure WP:FRINGE and should be treated as such.
As someone who otherwise tries hard to stay far & away from any article involving Palestine & Israel, I'd like to point out the following about the numbers of casualties in this battle. First, the Middle East Record 1968 cited above by Poliocrites cites sources which are usually considered reliable -- the BBC, New York Times, & King Hussein of Jordan. Dismissing them as unreliable without further examination only leads to further conflict. Second, the official public records of any military will, despite its best good faith intents, minimize its losses; no one wants to admit to having more soldier killed or wounded than need be. Thus the IDF, despite its care & skill in record-keeping, must be treated as a biased source. (And so is the Jordanian army, the Palestinian, & the US military.) Thirdly, the varying reports of casualties on both sides may have arisen over initial reports having been repeated, without subsequent corrections. That would explain where the BBC, the NYT, & King Hussein came up with the number of 200 total IDF casualties. Actually finding & reading the original news reports would help in explaining that figure. Fourthly, there is a lot of misinformation floating out there about all sorts of incidents with emotional connotations -- such as this battle. People who only know part of the story will come to this article, see one set of figures & assume that the article is in error & attempt to change it. Therefore, we need to not only include all points of view on the matter, but explain where these numbers came from. Those acting in good faith will see why one statistic has been favored over another, & not bother with repeating another edit war; as for the rest, the only solution for them no matter what we do is to ban them. But it's better to work with everyone editting in good faith. -- llywrch ( talk) 21:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree with user llywrch IDF, despite its care in record-keeping, must be treated as a biased source, just as the Jordanian army, and the Palestinian PLO force. I would recommend at least mentioning in the article that some estimates point to higher IDF causalities, as the official IDF ones. Representing several points of view (I think sources were identified above) is the better way to go, rather than using IDF consistent estimates and not pointing to estimates from the other side. Any thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.189.41 ( talk) 23:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible to start a new section devoted to reactions from various countries, specifically Jordan? The Battle of Karameh is a source of pride to Jordanians, and it is not seen as an Israeli victory but a Jordanian one in the kingdom. Numerous Jordanian sources and newspapers report the celebrations that occur on a yearly basis, and I'll be more than happy to provide some. I think this should be included in the article. Building up on the previous debate regarding bias of the article, I would also still love to see Arab casualty sources being used in the article. As was previously said, we need to not only include all points of view on the matter, but explain where these numbers came from. Much appreciation. Ymousa ( talk) 12:38, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Changed result to reflect that both sides claim victory. Who won is entirely based on what you believe the actual objectives were, Israel claiming their objective was simply a raid and retalliation after which they fell back, Jordan claiming it was a full attack on Jordanian soil and was repulsed and Palestinians claiming that it was an attempt to eradicate the PLO and destroy the camp at Karamah, and in both of these it largely failed. So, each side claims victory and there are sources to back all sides up. I strongly urge no one on any side to take this out of neutrality and for all to just leave this result as it is, adding perhaps a further section on how each side claims victory or sees the battle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.76.216.244 ( talk) 22:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
i found 2 sources this book [1] and this is a celebration patronized by king Abdullah II on Al Karama Battle anniversary [2]
Given to the events of this war, I think a "both-sides claim victory" would be appropriete. Israel did complete its mission of destroying the Karemah camp, yet the Jordanian military and PLOs feel that they chased and drove the Israelis out. Or at least something like that, because if Jordanians are celebrating this day, surely that would count as a victory. PacificWarrior101 ( talk) 06:41, 28 March 2013 (UTC)PacificWarrior101
Agree with pacific suggestion for the infobox. If all Arabs consider it as a victory then that's notable enough to be included in the article. Since there wasn't a third party documentation from inside the event itself, then we have to primarily depend on both sides claims, and non of them should have a priority on the other -- aad_Dira ( talk) 04:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC).
So, should I understand this silence as "no oppose"? -- aad_Dira ( talk) 06:03, 5 May 2013 (UTC).
Well, if still no oppose I gonna change the infobox to "both-sides claim victory" -- aad_Dira ( talk) 15:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC).
Where on earth are you getting the idea that this is a poor source? Its co-published by Wiley, a respected academic publisher, and Israel Universities Press. You cant simply say no this isnt a reliable source, especially when it prima facie meets all the requirements. nableezy - 14:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I know that the references vary greatly but I got several notable third party references that support another point of view. Here are the sources; two New York Times articles right after the battle claim that Israeli forces were repelled. here, here. Also there are several Israeli sources supporting this, including here, here, here, here, here, here. Other sources; here, here, here, here, here, here. Along with, of course, the countless Arab sources.
The infobox could be 'Both sides claim victory ,Karameh camp destroyed ,Failure to capture Arafat ,Israeli raid repelled'
@ Irondome: @ Nableezy: @ IranitGreenberg: @ Ymousa: @ Poliocretes:, care to share your opinion?-- Makeandtoss ( talk) 13:25, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
(copied over from my Talk page)
Both 6 Israeli armored vehicles and 40 Jordanians dead are mentioned in the source. Here's the exact location. Makeandtoss ( talk) 23:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Chaim Herzog and Kenneth Pollack estimate 28 dead and 69 wounded.-- Makeandtoss ( talk) 00:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
The statement that 2 Jordanian jets were shot down is reliably sourced to "Zeev Maoz page 246". Maoz, in turn, gives two impeccable historical references for this (Morris, 2001 and Michelson, 1984). You can't "debunk" such well sourced material relying on one Wikipedia editor's original research which claims that Jordan's air force had no jets at that point in time (which is obviously ignorant of the fact that Jordan's F-104s were in Turkey during the war and thus not destroyed, but that is a side point - original research is original research), and another editor's personal research, which refutes the former's original research but says he hasn't seen the IAF claim such victories. Now, it would be one thing if the reliable source making the claim was some marginal publication, but in this case the very same source is being used multiple times in the same infobox (!!!) , for figures of Israeli half truck losses etc.. You can't pick and choose which figure to accept and which figures to reject, from the same source, based on WP:OR, or more likely WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Bad Dryer ( talk) 17:14, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Ummm, I don't find anyone reporting what Maoz's first source "Morris 2001, p369" says: "One fighter-bomber was shot down and a mirage had to crash-land." Actually the way Morris presents it seems to suggest that the aircraft were Israeli. Who flew mirages then?
Here is the whole paragraph: "Altogether the IDF lost 33 dead and 161 wounded at Karameh: 27 Israeli tanks were hit, four of them left behind. One fighter-bomber was shot down and a mirage had to crash-land. The PLO lost 156 dead and 141 captured. The Arab legion lost 84 dead and 250 wounded." You can see that the two aircraft are listed as Israeli losses.
Zero
talk
02:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Israeli had mirages then for sure. As far as I can see, Jordan had none until 1981. This confirms Morris' plain text: he is referring to Israeli planes, not Jordanian planes. Zero talk 02:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Continuing to look at at Morris' book, the source he gives for the paragraph is the Hebrew article that Poliocretes mentioned above. Maoz's "Michaelson 1984" is the same as the source Morris gives: "Mem" (Michaelson), Benny. (Heb.) 'Operation Topfet', a battle on the East Bank of the Jordan—March 1968, Ma'arachot 292-93 (1984). Morris refers to pages 29 and 32. Zero talk 02:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Indeed, the Hebrew source (middle column of p29) says that one Israeli aircraft was shot down (what is ״אוראגן״?) and one Mirage III crash-landed. We need a Hebrew reader to check more carefully that this source does not mention Jordanian aircraft shot down. Assuming it doesn't, I withdraw my support for citing Moaz with WP:IAR as basis. Both of Maoz's sources state something different from what he reports and it is beyond reasonable doubt that he just made a mistake. Zero talk 03:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I am totally confused by this, to quote: "An Israeli aircraft was supposed to drop leaflets addressed to Fatah, after the paratroopers had surrounded the town; however, due to difficult weather conditions, the helicopters flying the paratroopers arrived twenty minutes too late". I can understand that if the leaflet drop was to occur after the town was surrounded, but the paratroops were "too late", that would mean that the pamphlets were dropped first. But in what sense does this mean that the troops were "late"? The element of surprise had already gone. So too late for what? Royalcourtier ( talk) 22:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
A newspaper article from the day after the raid is hardly sufficient to support this claim. While the New York Times is definitely reliable, scholarly sources are needed if this is to stay in the infobox. -- Mikrobølgeovn ( talk) 13:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Mikrobølgeovn: [8] Makeandtoss ( talk) 21:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Check out this source [10]. Makeandtoss ( talk) 14:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Mikrobølgeovn:. So? Two days are quite enough for the press to know what exactly happened and what did not . Makeandtoss ( talk) 19:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Mikrobølgeovn: And that way, we literally leave out the entire view point of the Palestinians and Jordanians! Makeandtoss ( talk) 22:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
I pinged you here about six months ago asking for your opinion.. In any case, there are lots of sources to support this point of view including; here, here. Also there are several Israeli sources supporting this, including here, here, here, here, here, here. Other sources; here, here, here, here, here, [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] here. Along with, of course, the countless Arab sources. Lets assume we put in that Israel had a tactical victory, what victory did the Arabs achieve? As far as I have researched, there were no sources thoroughly discussing the type of victories so this will become original research. The Israelis left tens of vehicles behind, 3 dead soldiers and various types of weapons and ammunition. That really doesn't look like a coordinated withdrawal to me. Makeandtoss ( talk) 17:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: FunkMonk ( talk · contribs) 19:32, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Actually M&T, I was just copy-editing. The English at numerous points in the article is not idiomatic, and occasionally ungrammatical.
I can no longer edit the page for 24 hours, and finish my top to bottom ce. So I can't fix it. Nishidani ( talk) 09:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
After the Six-Day War in 1967, the PLO and Fatah started to step up their guerrilla attacks against Israel from Jordanian soil, using the border town of Karameh as their headquarters. [2] The battle started with an Israeli invasion that was intended to destroy Palestinian groups' camps at Karameh and capture Yasser Arafat in reprisal for the attacks by the PLO.(Cath Senker (2004). The Arab-Israeli Conflict. Black Rabbit Books. p. 45-47.) However, plans for the two operations were prepared in 1967, one year before the attacks began.("Debacle in the desert")It is also believed that Israel wanted to punish Jordan for its support to the PLO.
Though the Israeli invasion, whose purpose was to destroy the Palestinian militant camps at Karameh and capture Yasser Arafat, was primarily motivated as a reprisal for these new attacks, the two operations had been prepared a year earlier.("Debacle in the desert" )
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Karameh. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Battle of Karameh. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
All pictures currently in article are about Jordanian soldiers or maps, so I added a famous picture of the event depicting Israeli soldiers, which was deleted a few years ago from Wikimedia Commons. There's nothing wrong with that. However, I made a mistake. Apparently, Israeli copyright would've run out in 1.1.2019. Probably it will be deleted from commons anyway. I would appreciate very much if someone could uploade it with a proper licence later on.-- יניב הורון ( talk) 13:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Article reads
That's a false conclusion. Just because operations are planned ahead in no way contradicts nor precludes that later incidents may serve as their trigger. It *was* carried out in retaliation of the bus incident, if that hadn't occurred it would simply have been triggered by another. -- 217.225.245.163 ( talk) 16:53, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is either a very silly mistake or open vandalism. Why making up facts? The text and sources clearly say those tanks were damaged, not destroyed (both Jordanian and Israeli). Someone please revert.--
Aroma Stylish (
talk)
22:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Jordan and Palestine won the battle not Israel. Misinformation leads to wrong history SamerTall ( talk) 19:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)