Yet Soviet Pilots did the exact same feat of forcing Israel to bow down and simmer.
In July 1970, Israeli pilots ambushed Soviet piloted MIGs, shooting down 5.
Then proceeded to lose a whole wing. Also read the actual ambush story, nothing to do with "lack of range". Once again, what you say and what is real seem to be two different universes.
Plenty? Let's say that this is a complete fallacy that relies on the pre-emptive action taken by Israel. Being smarter and bold, doesn't make your weapons "better".
The preemptive attack of '67 affected arab air forces not tanks. But based on the performance of surviving arab jets in air combat, the Churchill brothers doubt it would've made much difference had there been no initial destruction of arab jets on the ground.
Uhm so the Israelis didn't invade, they didn't initiate a ground attack, nor did they exploited the cold start...I get it, Pz3 is better t-34 because you know the German Invasion was absolutely flawless...for 3 months. I'm going to need a bigger facepalm.
In both confrontations, having the Israelis creep up or shoot them as turkeys in the Golan or in the Sinai, is a testament to the lack of tactical culture, not strategic. So you might actually want to read the difference between those.
Arab strategic mistakes, such as focusing on red ridge or attacking on Oct. 14, contributed greatly to defeat.
Oh no you didn't, Golan occupation happened once the Syrians accepted the cease-fire by 9th of June. Part of the Syrian forces were blindsided by the cease-fire order, the other part was simply already in retreat. Golan Occupation took part during 6-day war, maybe you should start switching from one story to the other.
By mid-day the 9th of June Israeli air-force has reduced the fighting capability of the Syrian armed forces to less than 30%, not as much in material losses, than in logistical drought with basically no motorized component. This meant that the small available forces of the Syrian tank companies were pretty much mobile pillboxes. And that the Syrians would be forced to fight their hearts out. With one small asterisk. Basically NO Supplies. Unlike in 1973 where the syrians WOULD engage in delaying tactics, here they stood their ground, bloodied the Israelis but they would be done by sheer logistical shortages. And indeed, guess what? From Al Zaura onwards the Syrians couldn't defend themselves, because ... they were running on borrowed time. They totally forgot
The most important issue however happened when the Golani Brigade led itself to the slaughter house and the Syrians didn't exploit it. Instead of hitting the M3's they insisted on the Jumbo shermans which while more dangerous were also lame ducks in the Golan terrain, but allowing the Israelis to dismount (tactical mistake) they made their task harder and allowed infiltration.
We can have this discussion day in, day out and the end would be the same. Arab armies were hollow ones, and that hasn't changed, but that didn't meant they were idiots.