The Israeli's have managed to hold territory by force. The difference is that worldwide support was in favor of them instead of the Palestinians.

I would say that you cannot hold a region by force alone unless you commit to multiple generations of occupation AND manage to maintain when superpowers oppose it.

> The Israeli's have managed to hold territory by force. The difference is that worldwide support was in favor of them instead of the Palestinians.

what? My impression is that "worldwide support" was in favor of the Palestinians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembl...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembl...

I don’t think they have the economic resources to sustain a prolonged engagement or occupation.

Isn't their capacity to maintain an ongoing assault about available meat sacks, ammunition, food and oil - none of which they lack - rather than money?

> food

There have been mentions that they're already short on food for their soldiers. Wonder if that's an actual thing, and if so, then how badly short they are?

Especially with that old phrase "an army marches on it's stomach" coming to mind. :)

The lack of food among the Russian invading forces (if real) is due to them outrunning their logistics, not a general food shortage in Russia. Russia’s army is not designed to operate more than about 50-100km from their rail network.