I have been accused of a lack of reading comprehension in the following statement: Irgun later on became part of the "Jewish authorities", specifically the IDF by a self-professed wordsmith. To me, it basically states that Irgun became the IDF and I have been taken to task for that interpretation. However, I can see no alternative.
2 Answers
It depends on whether "specifically the IDF" relates to "Irgun ... became" or to "the Jewish authorities" (i.e. he became a part of the authorities, specifically that part known as the IDF). The second reading is just as intuitive as the first, I would say.
An alternative could be:
Irgun later on became part of the "Jewish authorities" (specifically that part known as the IDF)
but I wouldn't say that is an improvement.
I'd read it as "Irgun became part of the "Jewish authorities", and Irgun specifically became part of the IDF."
A quick look on Google leads to Wikipedia where I find:
The Irgun militants were then fully integrated with the IDF and not kept in separate units.
I think an interpretation as you suggest is possible, but not necessarily the only one.