Nobody denied that initially Egypt was in an advantageous position. An Egyptian spy played for an Israeli double agent in a very good way which allowed Egypt to go for pre-emptive strike. Israel would have been occupied by Egypt if not for American help.
However, by American help or otherwise, tide was turned at the end and Israel recaptured Sinai as well as some territories on the west side of Suez. Prior to the ceasefire, Israel had captured some territories in west side of Suez, Egypt had also captured some territories on the Sinai peninsula. In the end, it could be said that it was status quo anti bellum. (with Sinai belonging to Israel). However, considering the fact that Egypt's man and material loss was several times higher than Israel's and Israel captured the Suez canal, the military victory was for Israel, not Egypt.
At present, I'm afraid the status quo is highly in Israel's favour. Israel's highly advanced nuclear and biological program means it can wipe out all Arab countries if it wishes to, in a matter of hours. Dolphin submarines gives Israel a second-strike capability as well. Had it not been for the fear of the "islamic bomb", Greater Israel would have already been established. The process of taking out Pakistan's nukes is underway, and when it is completed, we will see the dramatic territorial expansion of Israel from Egypt to Iraq, with KSA, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria reduced in size or wiped out.
Compared to Egypt, Israel's air force is vastly superior. The major handicap of Egypt is that it has no BvR capability on its F 16s. These F 16s would be taken out by Israel by BvR and Egyptian F 16s won't even have the ability to lock on outside range.
The recent NATO attack on Libya means Egypt would be attacked from TWO fronts now, from the east by Israel and from the West by NATO (from Libya), in addition to naval blockade in the Mediterranean. Unfortunately, there is very little chance of Egypt surviving when Israel decides to initiate the great war.
Most of the information you provided is wrong and the rest of your prognosis regarding the future is likely to be wrong as well but the future is always uncertain and only Allah (SWT) knows best what the future holds. If you think it's Pakistani nuclear bombs that is holding "Israel" back, you are sadly mistaken, though. One threat from America forced Pakistan to allow Americans and NATO to invade and kill Afghans by the millions, possibly, and cause unspeakable damage which continues to this day. Drone attacks continues, Pakistani air defence is pretty much non-existent so American helicopters can sneak in any time, and they killed 24 or so Pakistani soldiers openly without any repercussion.
At least Iranian gov't and North Korean gov't openly say that Americans are evil and that Americans should leave Afghanistan immediately (read any Iranian gov't newspaper or North Korean gov't newspaper to find out those govt viewpoints). Pakistan is not even strong enough to say that openly, how can you say that "Israel" is holding back because of Pakistan? What is the basis for this highly illogical claim?
In reality, "Israel"s supplier, donor, cash-cow America itself is not strong enough to eliminate the entire Arab world and Middle Eastern militaries alone, by conventional warfare alone at once. The Arab world's major problems are internal lack of unity, lack of Islamic belief (all Arab wars against "Israel" or even by Saddam Hussein against America were led by secular regimes that in fact suppressed and worked against all sorts of genuine Islamic movements, for example). Saudi kingdom itself supports the devil Americans' dollar, or currency, as the benchmark for setting SR exchange rate (same as other Gulf Arab countries except Kuwait). All these Arab rulers are aligned with Americans because they are not Islamic at all, nor are their regimes. Their support of American dollar is one of the major reasons that American dollar maintains its position as the "reserve currency" even though there is no logical basis for such a distinction.
All those factors are not closely related to the Egyptian massive victory in the 1973 Ramadan or October war. You are wrong that "Israel" re-occupied Sinai in 1973, they could not move either the Egyptian 2nd or the 3rd Army one inch from the areas captured by Egyptians since 6th of October, 1973 in Sinai.
Their propaganda stunts about moving few military assets west of the canal were simply propaganda. It's like claiming Bangladeshis have surrounded all Western capitals (including Washington DC, London, Paris, Berlin, Rome, etc) and are about to capture them any moment now because there are a few thousand (or more) Bangladeshis in each of those capitals at the moment! The first and most basic requirement to continue any conventional war for any sustained period of time is to maintain supplies (of all sorts), which is maintained via supply lines.
For the same reason that Bangladesh (or any other country) can not claim that all Western capitals are about to be captured by Bangladeshi (or some other nations) but those Western nations are spared by the good will of the Bangladeshis (or other nations), "Israeli" propaganda stunt about cutting of Egyptian 3rd army is propaganda and nothing more.
Some Zionist quoted Saad El Shazly but Saad El Shazly also says Egypt won the war. Any extended war is bound to contain so many events that lengthy discussions, expositions, explanations become necessary, I have no time or intention of going that route, which is why I avoid it, but if there are any knowledgeable Egyptian/Arab/Muslim/other member on this matter, they can show you lots of videos (not "recreated" videos but actual ones during the war), pictures, maps, charts, and quote from actual commanders on the ground regarding the exact locations, nature of attacks and counterattacks etc etc.
If you eliminate Zionist propaganda from Zionist veterans' narratives (like Ariel Sharon the criminal's narratives), you can understand easily that Zionists were terribly defeated in that war which is why they not only gave up Sinai but Americans were up in arms, why American resupplied them so much and still could not turn the tide of the war that the Jewish Kissinger warned Anwar Sadat that liquidating the few propaganda stuntsmen from "Israel" west of the Suez Canal would make Americans intervene directly with troops and so on. American "equipment" lost once already, and Americans "could not allow" the same experience of defeat against Soviet weapons to happen again. Egypt was in quite a politically inconvenient position because only a few months (or maybe a year) back, Sadat had expelled all Soviet advisers, so the Soviets were never as forthcoming on their political aid to Egypt (like threatening to call any American "bluffs", if any, for example).
You need to read lots and lots of books, and volumes could be written about 1973 or any other war for that matter. One of the "first casualties" of any war is the "truth", so if you take all your information from Western/Zionist media and propaganda sources, you are going to be misled.