Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The sinking of USS Liberty on June 8 1967
America's Debate > Everything Else > History Debate
Google
Alan Wood
Of the multitude of questions that could be asked concerning this affair I have chosen just 3 pertinant ones.

1...Was the USS Liberty deliberately attacked?.
2...Could it have been a case of mistaken identity?.
3...Should the perpetrators be brought to jusice.


It would be interesting to see American responses to this.
Regards...Roo
Google
skeeterses
1...Was the USS Liberty deliberately attacked?.
2...Could it have been a case of mistaken identity?.
3...Should the perpetrators be brought to jusice.


Putting aside your views on Israel for a moment, there were a few other cases during that period where the US Navy stuck its nose in other country's waters and got stung. The Gulf Of Tonkin incident around Vietnam and the abduction of the USS Pueblo's crew after they strayed in North Korean waters. Later on during the 1980s, Iraq and Iran accidently shot some missiles at US Navy ships in the Persian Gulf.

On question 3, the US can only blame itself for its losses when it places its soldiers and sailors in hostile areas around the Globe. What most likely happened in the case of the USS Liberty was that they were spying on Israel when the sinking occurred and leaders from both countries wanted to hush the matter up in order to keep up the appearance of a happy alliance. In the incident with the USS Pueblo, the US Government couldn't do much military action there because our hands were tied in Vietnam. Whether the countries that do these kinds of things are friendly or hostile, the US military cannot police the entire globe.
Bikerdad
1...Was the USS Liberty deliberately attacked?. Yes.
2...Could it have been a case of mistaken identity?. No.
3...Should the perpetrators be brought to jusice. Who, the CIA higher ups? They've probably passed away from old age by now. The spooks made the decision to deliberately leave the Liberty in place after the Israelis requested multiple times that she move so the Egyptians would not be able to use her as a reference point for their attacks. If still alive, it's very unlikely they will be "brought to justice." To do so would be profoundly embarrassing for the CIA.
Dingo
1...Was the USS Liberty deliberately attacked?.
Yes, obviously. I'm not even sure what the point of this question is.

2...Could it have been a case of mistaken identity?.
Yes it could have been but evidence for it being a deliberate attack on an American ship also appears to be pretty strong.

3...Should the perpetrators be brought to jusice.
Kind of late in the game now. The Israelis paid some damages I understand.

If there were any survivors of the Liberty who didn't feel it was a deliberate attack on an American ship then I am not aware of them. But then again what do they know.


Mrs. Pigpen
QUOTE(Dingo @ Jun 9 2012, 03:59 AM) *
If there were any survivors of the Liberty who didn't feel it was a deliberate attack on an American ship then I am not aware of them.


The Naval Court of Inquiry interviewed many survivors who offered accounts and I didn't read one of them that indicated they believed it to be something other than a case of mistaken identity. Now, it's possible that I missed something....and I only read up to almost 300 pages and there are over 700. But there are several examples of survivors who don't appear to believe that to be the case by their testimony.

QUOTE

First of all, anyone who believes this incident to qualify as a war crime knows nothing about war crime, which would lead me to believe they are ignorant in general to make such a claim. Secondly, I don't see why being a victim or the family of a victim would necessarily place a person in a position to know whether or not the attack was premeditated and/or intentional. That's like saying having a child with autism offers a clear understanding of vaccines and if enough sufferers believe that the MMR series causes autism it must be true!!! Um, not really. It might offer a better understanding of what it is like to be a sufferer but offers little to no insight on the actual cause.

Per the questions:
1) I do not believe so, no.
2) Yes, more than likely considering the USS Liberty had been under orders to stay at least 100 miles from the shoreline (an order that was sent and they didn't receive or they wouldn't have been in that area) and they were attacked slightly over 15 miles from shore, not far from an attack on a city that (ostensibly) the Israelis thought had come from the sea. Secondly there was little if anything to be gained from purposely attacking the US and much to be lost.
3) Investigations were made by both the US and Israeli governments, the Israeli government did pay damages. Friendly fire incidences happen quite frequently, as has been mentioned.
Dingo
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 9 2012, 08:13 AM) *
QUOTE(Dingo @ Jun 9 2012, 03:59 AM) *
If there were any survivors of the Liberty who didn't feel it was a deliberate attack on an American ship then I am not aware of them.


The Naval Court of Inquiry interviewed many survivors who offered accounts and I didn't read one of them that indicated they believed it to be something other than a case of mistaken identity.


Sorry I'm not having any success with the pdf. Could you give me some quotes of testimony with names of survivors, or just names. I'd appreciate it.

QUOTE
QUOTE

First of all, anyone who believes this incident to qualify as a war crime knows nothing about war crime

As far as I'm concerned the issue isn't is it a war crime but whether the Israelis attacked the Liberty knowing it was flying under an American flag.

As far as to the credibility of Israeli claims you might want to check this out from the link I provided.

Edit. I did do some additional checking on google to find out if there were any survivors speaking independently who didn't believe Israel was aware of the Liberty being American. I couldn't find any but I did find one survivor Joe Carpenter who was willing to withhold his opinion pending a serious investigation. That serious investigation never happened according to him and many others.
Mrs. Pigpen
QUOTE(Dingo @ Jun 9 2012, 12:01 PM) *
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 9 2012, 08:13 AM) *
QUOTE(Dingo @ Jun 9 2012, 03:59 AM) *
If there were any survivors of the Liberty who didn't feel it was a deliberate attack on an American ship then I am not aware of them.


The Naval Court of Inquiry interviewed many survivors who offered accounts and I didn't read one of them that indicated they believed it to be something other than a case of mistaken identity.


Sorry I'm not having any success with the pdf. Could you give me some quotes of testimony with names of survivors, or just names. I'd appreciate it.


The quotes span pages and pages of testimony, I couldn't begin to cover. The first are from David Lucas, 1LT gunnery officer. The next is from the Commander William McGonagle, and then there are others.

Interestingly enough, McGonagle is ostensibly quoted on the site you provided regarding the "non"-credibility of Israel's claims). I will post that quote here, and then a quote that I have typed independently from the pdf document (this was painstaking, I can't copy and paste from a pdf). I believe the quote from your site to be apocryphal because it is so contrary to the testimony given, which was extensive.
QUOTE(McGonagle)
After more than two hours of unremitting assault, the Israelis finally halted their attack. One of the torpedo boats approached the Liberty. This same torpedo boat crew had been circling the ship, machine-gunning anyone who stuck his head above decks, as well as the lifeboats the crew had put over the side.
What had changed? The Israeli government knew that US aircraft carriers had just launched aircraft to come to Liberty's aid and the attack was quickly called off. The Israeli government called the US Embassy and said that they had made a "mistake."

A torpedo boat officer asked in English over a bullhorn: "Do you need any help?"

The wounded commander of the Liberty, Captain William McGonagle, instructed the quartermaster to respond emphatically: "F* you."


From the Commander's witness testimony in the pdf document:
QUOTE
Starting at page 143: It is estimated that the total air attack was completed in approximately 5-6 minutes...(snip)
In the latter moments of the air attack, it was noted that three high speed boats were approaching the ship from the northeast on a relative bearing of approximately 135 at a distance of about 5 miles. The ship at the time was still on course 283 true, speed unknown, but believed to be in excess of five knots. At no time did the ship stop during the air attack. It is believed that the time of initial sighting of the torpedo boats, the time was about 1420. The boats appeared to be in a wege type formation with the center boat the lead point of the wedge. Estimated speed of the boats was about 27 to 30 knots. They appeared to be about 150 to 200 yards apart. It appeared that they were approaching the ship in a torpedo launch attitude, and since I did not have direct communication with gun control or the gun mounts, I told a man from the bridge, whose identity I do not recall, to proceed to mount 51 and take the boats under fire. The boats continued to approach the ship at high speed and on a constant bearing with decreasing range. About this time I noticed that our Ensign had been shot away during the air attack and ordered DAVID, signalman, to hoist a second ensign from the yardarm. During the air attack out normal ensign was flying. Before the torpedo attack a holiday size ensign was hoisted. I alerted the crew as best I could to standby for torpedo attack from starboard. I did not have an accurate ship's position at this time, but I knew that to the left of the ship's course at that time lie shoal waters and by turning to the left I would be approaching land closer than had been given me in directives which I held in that instant in time. I realized that if I attempted to turn to starboard, I would exposed a larger target to the torpedo boats. I elected to maintain a heading of 283 yeards, the center boat of the formation was signaling to us.

Also at this range, it appeared that they were flying an Israeli flag. This was later verified. It was not possible to read the signals from the center torpedo boat because of the intermittent blocking of view by smoke and flames. At this time, I yelled to machine gun 51 to tell him to hold fire. I realized that there was a possibility of the aircraft having been Israli and the attack had been conducted in error. I wanted to hold fire to see if we could read the signal from the torpedo boat and perhaps avoid additional damage and personnel injuries. The man on machine gun 51 fired a short burst and the boats before he was able to understand what I was attempting to have him do. Instantly, on machine gun 51 openigng fire machine gun 53 began firing at the center boat. From the starboard wing of the bridge, 03 level, I observed that the fire from machine gun 53 was extremely effective and blanketed the area and the center torpedo boat. It was not possible to get to mount 53 from the starboard wing of the bridge. (snip)
As far as the torpedo boats are concerned, I am sure that they felt that they were under fire from USS Liberty. At this time, they opended fire with the full mounts and in a matter of seconds..


Time between the initial sighting of the torpedo boats (1420) and the last hit (1427), approximately 7 minutes, 13 counting the air strike... after which the commmander adds:
QUOTE
Immediately after the ship was struck by the torpedo the torpedo boats stopped dead in the water and milled around astern of the ship at the range of approximately 500 to 800 yards. One of the boats signaled by flashing light, in English, “DO you require assistance”? We had no means to communicate with the boat by light but hoisted code lima india. The signal intended to convey the fact that the ship was maneuvering with difficulty and they should keep clear.


The aforementioned quote is completely contrary to the testimonial, and makes me wonder how many of the other quotes were similarly pulled out of someone's backside, and/or taken out of context completely, and why. Frankly, I've seen enough information on numerous friendly fire incidences (specifically the comedy of errors leading up to them) that nothing strikes me as odd or unusual or surprising about this event.
Dingo
Thanks for taking the time to copy from the Naval Inquiry pdf. Interesting. I finally got the thing to download and am checking it out. This hardly, I must say, offers the feeling of a clear comprehensive investigation; more of a clunky narrative that goes unchallenged. And why don't they render it in a form that's more user friendly, not even indexed. The lack of seriousness in investigating this matter has I think helped raise the suspicion of a coverup beyond the usual crackpots.

I think I've read enough of the Naval Inquiry for now. One seaman after another offers his flat timeline account. Nothing in here suggests an opinion one way or another as to whether the initial attack by the Israelis involved knowledge of whether or not the Liberty was an American ship. That isn't the nature of the inquiry. The only matter that even comes close are inquiries as to whether the American flag was flying. Invariably, whether before or after an attack, the answer is yes. That has been a crucial issue in challenging Israeli assertions that they did not know the ship was American.
Mrs. Pigpen
I agree it wasn't a comprehensive investigation of Israel's part, it seems more an investigation of the actions of the people on board the USS Liberty following the attack (most likely that is what it was).

But it does offer a pretty good view of the rundown of events that unfolded and the perspectives of some of the witnesses at the time.

QUOTE(Dingo @ Jun 9 2012, 02:32 PM) *
The only matter that even comes close are inquiries as to whether the American flag was flying. Invariably, whether before or after an attack, the answer is yes. That has been a crucial issue in challenging Israeli assertions that they did not know the ship was American.


Sometimes flags aren't seen. In this particular friendly fire incident the Union Jack was on one of the vehicles. Listening to that video, do you conclude the the Americans knew their targets were British? Did the US government intentionally launch an attack on British forces? Or was this a mistake?
Alan Wood
Are we missing or avoiding the prime point here.

USS Liberty was in International waters and flying a very visible U.S. flag before and during the incident.
A certain country has attacked a vessel more than once in International waters in that area regardless of when.

Are you suggesting they should be sunk being suggestively in the wrong place according to your best buddies, with the resulting loss of lfe with America's permission or ?.

Tell me I am wrong...

Regards..Roo

Google
Mrs. Pigpen
QUOTE
Are we missing or avoiding the prime point here.


I have answered all of your questions so I don't know how I could be accused of "avoiding the prime point".

QUOTE
USS Liberty was in International waters and flying a very visible U.S. flag before and during the incident.

How do you know the flag was "very visible"? Furthermore, the flag was not up "during the incident", at least not during the entire incident, which only lasted minutes. But let's sit at our computer now and look at a picture of an absolute best case scenario...notice the "very visible" flag on the naval ship on a clear day; here. Now, we are sitting here looking at that perusing at our leisure and we aren't moving. Imagine the view from a jet (and let's also imagine he is expecting to be shot at) going several hundred miles per hour. Actually, jets have identifying markings on them. Let's look at one and identify the country by the markings as he flies by. He will be low, and this was filmed on a clear day so it shouldn't be too difficult....ready? go. Did you catch that? It is hard enough to see a ship in the middle of the ocean. For just a modicum of perspective, rafts far larger than that flag and painted in the brightest of colors are missed floating on the ocean even when survivors are standing on them and waving and everyone is looking for them planes will pass by without seeing them. And the people looking for them aren't being shot at on a daily basis in hyper-adrenaline mode, which effects the senses in a large way.

QUOTE
A certain country has attacked a vessel more than once in International waters in that area regardless of when.

Are you suggesting they should be sunk being suggestively in the wrong place according to your best buddies, with the resulting loss of lfe with America's permission or ?.


Why was the ship ordered to go no where within 100 miles of shore if it was considered safe anywhere and everywhere in 'international war'? And the US government indicated to the Israeli government that they didn't have a ship within 100 miles of the coast, as they had ordered the ship not to be anywhere within 100 miles of the coast. This was a war zone.

And when has anyone suggested that "they should be sunk"? That wasn't a question you asked. You asked if they were attacked deliberately or could it have been a case of mistaken identity. It absolutely "could have been" a case of mistaken identity. In the annals of history far far more unusual things have occurred. In the history of friendly fire, it isn't even atypical.
moif
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 10 2012, 12:24 AM) *
Sometimes flags aren't seen. In this particular friendly fire incident the Union Jack was on one of the vehicles. Listening to that video, do you conclude the the Americans knew their targets were British? Did the US government intentionally launch an attack on British forces? Or was this a mistake?
It was a mistake, but it was clear very quickly that it was a mistake.

I've read enough material about the USS Liberty incident over the years to form the opinion that the Israeli's knew it was an American vessel but they didn't care because the Americans had placed the ship in the combat theatre deliberately to observe Israeli operations. Israel saw this as a threat from an ally and acted accordingly. The USA accepted and covered up the attack and its losses because it was a natural consequence of their own actions. They probably though Israel would suffer the presence of the USS Liberty due to the relationship between the two countries. When Israel didn't suffer the presence of a US spy ship in its combat theatre, the USA decided it wasn't worth creating an international incident over it because Israel could do as they did, claim friendly fire an exonarate themselves from responsibility (something which the American government has done itself a great many times).
Dingo
QUOTE(moif @ Jun 10 2012, 06:45 AM) *
It was a mistake, but it was clear very quickly that it was a mistake.

I assume from your subsequent comments that the mistake was that of the US for sailing in harms way and the Israelis knew it was an American ship.

moif
QUOTE(Dingo @ Jun 10 2012, 03:55 PM) *
QUOTE(moif @ Jun 10 2012, 06:45 AM) *
It was a mistake, but it was clear very quickly that it was a mistake.
I assume from your subsequent comments that the mistake was that of the US for sailing in harms way and the Israelis knew it was an American ship.
No, that comment was in response to the quote by Mrs Pigpen.

But you are right about the second half of the statement. I believe the American's were at fault for putting a spy ship into a combat zone without adequate cover. They assumed their flag would be enough to protect it. They were wrong.
Mrs. Pigpen
QUOTE(moif @ Jun 10 2012, 09:45 AM) *
I've read enough material about the USS Liberty incident over the years to form the opinion that the Israeli's knew it was an American vessel but they didn't care because the Americans had placed the ship in the combat theatre deliberately to observe Israeli operations.


How do you check the veracity of such material? I posted a direct example of a completely fabricated quote above, which "seems" legitimate. On the other hand, I think it is very unlikely that military members would collaborate to lie under penalty of law, under oath, when questioned about events during an incident investigation. Therefore we can surmise from the transcript I posted (which offered a very detailed explanation of how this occurred) that a message to not go within 100 miles of shore had been sent, and was also not received. And (per friendly fire) it didn't take terribly long to determine this mistake, considering it was 1967 not 2004. Minutes from start to finish... a long time for the people on board, certainly, but a tiny fraction of the time claimed on most "material" available on the web regarding the USS Liberty incident.

Edited to add: Thought I'd add, from the "material" I have read, Israel's greatest fear upon initially discovering their error was that the ship might be a soviet vessel. So it probably came as a bit of a relief that the ship was a US vessel and not a soviet one. For the Israelis to have pulled off the caper you seem to think happened, they would have had to both positively identify the vessel as American, and affirm that the ship was definitely NOT Soviet (no one wanted to anger those fellows, with good reason, and they sometimes took other nations' colors on their vessels), and then expend resources (probably just sitting around anyway during the six day war) to go purposely attack the American ship coincidentally directly following an attack on a city that was surrendipitously close to the American ship. This is all more likely than a case of mistaken identity.
Dingo
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 10 2012, 07:23 AM) *
I think it is very unlikely that military members would collaborate to lie under penalty of law, under oath, when questioned about events during an incident investigation.

And where did the crewmen of the Liberty ever convey the idea that the initial attack on their ship was a case of mistaken identity? And why is it that the only publicly organized expression of Liberty survivors insists that this was a deliberate attack on a US ship by the Israelis?

I don't know whether it was a case of mistaken identity or not, but you don't just throw the testimony of the closest witnesses to the wind and refuse to mount a serious investigation if you are serious about getting to the bottom of the matter. I'm about as down on conspiracy theories as they come, Kennedy assassination, 911 inside job, global warming hoax etc. etc., but this one smells of coverup for whatever reason(s). Even top folks in civilian, military and intelligence have expressed doubts about Israeli claims of mistaken identity.

When you have the repeated low altitude fly overs by the Israeli air force with the flag clearly in view you can't just call this your standard old friendly fire incident.
moif
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 10 2012, 04:23 PM) *
How do you check the veracity of such material? I posted a direct example of a completely fabricated quote above, which "seems" legitimate. On the other hand, I think it is very unlikely that military members would collaborate to lie under penalty of law, under oath, when questioned about events during an incident investigation. Therefore we can surmise from the transcript I posted (which offered a very detailed explanation of how this occurred) that a message to not go within 100 miles of shore had been sent, and was also not received. And (per friendly fire) it didn't take terribly long to determine this mistake, considering it was 1967 not 2004. Minutes from start to finish... a long time for the people on board, certainly, but a tiny fraction of the time claimed on most "material" available on the web regarding the USS Liberty incident.
This is one of those topics which opponents of Israel love to post from time to time, so its more or less impossible for me now to go back over the last decade and pick out those documents and video clips which seemed the most convincing at the time. Those that were the most convincing though, those that stuck in my mind, were accounts offered by some of the Israeli pilots who took part in the attack and who realised as it was taking place that they were attacking a US ship. They passed this information back to their headquarters and were told to press on with the attack regardless. IIRC one of them refused to do so and was duly punished.


QUOTE(Mrs Pigpen)
Edited to add: Thought I'd add, from the "material" I have read, Israel's greatest fear upon initially discovering their error was that the ship might be a soviet vessel. So it probably came as a bit of a relief that the ship was a US vessel and not a soviet one. For the Israelis to have pulled off the caper you seem to think happened, they would have had to both positively identify the vessel as American, and affirm that the ship was definitely NOT Soviet (no one wanted to anger those fellows, with good reason, and they sometimes took other nations' colors on their vessels), and then expend resources (probably just sitting around anyway during the six day war) to go purposely attack the American ship coincidentally directly following an attack on a city that was surrendipitously close to the American ship. This is all more likely than a case of mistaken identity.
Its possible but its equally possible that the Egyptians were using the USS Liberty as a marker, as has been proposed and this angered the Israeli's to the extent that they attacked it.

I don't know what happened. I'm just a cynic and I've read a lot about IDF operations over the years, probably too much. I don't think they mistook the USS Liberty at all. I suspect they knew exactly what it was and what it was doing. I think their high command acted to keep the USA at bay because they didn't want to be spied upon. I don't think this reflects particularly badly on the Israeli's either. I think a lot of this sort of 'push n shove' takes place during combat operations and when faced with ambiguous situations I think a lot of nations act this way. Another example of what I mean would be the British sinking of the Belgrano during the Falklands War.
Mrs. Pigpen
QUOTE(moif @ Jun 10 2012, 04:12 PM) *
Those that were the most convincing though, those that stuck in my mind, were accounts offered by some of the Israeli pilots who took part in the attack and who realised as it was taking place that they were attacking a US ship. They passed this information back to their headquarters and were told to press on with the attack regardless. IIRC one of them refused to do so and was duly punished.


That would certainly convince me as well. Unfortunately I couldn't find anything like that on the web...outside of one site with several astounding factual inaccuracies that render it uncredible. The only pilot I could find was Brigadier General (res.) Yiftah Spector . I found a few of his quotes, though some taken out of context (including the link I provided). He led the mission and he claims the contrary.
QUOTE
"I did not fire on the Liberty as a human target. I was sent to attack a sailing vessel. This ship was on an escape route from the El Arish area, which at that same moment had heavy smoke rising from it," Spector said. "It was thought to be an Egyptian vessel. This ship positively did not have any symbol or flag that I could see. What I was concerned with was that it was not one of ours. I looked for the symbol of our navy, which was a large white cross on its deck," he told the Jerusalem Post. "This was not there, so it wasn't one of ours."


He wrote a book apparently.
QUOTE
"Both of us had sharp eyes," Spector writes. They looked for flags on the ship, which looked like a military vessel, but in vain. "If you are certain that it is a military ship, you are authorized to attack," the controller said. Spector still hesitated, and transmitted, with a minor error, letters and a number that were painted on the ship's flank. The ship was identified, the controller updated him, as a "mobilized cargo ship" of the Egyptians, which carried out combat activity against IDF troops at El Arish and fled west. "Attack it and stop it."

So vague was the information that when Spector landed at Hatzor airbase, the squadron's duty operations officer, David Ivry, later the commander of the Israel Air Force, told him, "with a strange expression," that "you were mistaken in the identification. It was our ship."

Spector was appalled. "I dropped the flight equipment, left the room, suffered a dizzy spell, almost threw up. Without doubt I had caused a terrible disaster. I started to become more and more convinced and to recall clearly seeing an Israeli flag on the mast. What had I done? I had shot at my friends. I would not be able to live in this country anymore. Maybe suicide? Maybe escape - to America, to Australia, to Brazil?" Ivry put Spector out of his misery. "There was a mistake. It wasn't our ship." The ship that was attacked, Ivry told him, was French.


Edited to add: Thought I would add a link to the IDF inquiry. It is long (though not nearly as long as the navy one) but worth the read.
Hobbes
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 10 2012, 09:23 AM) *
Edited to add: Thought I'd add, from the "material" I have read, Israel's greatest fear upon initially discovering their error was that the ship might be a soviet vessel. So it probably came as a bit of a relief that the ship was a US vessel and not a soviet one. For the Israelis to have pulled off the caper you seem to think happened, they would have had to both positively identify the vessel as American, and affirm that the ship was definitely NOT Soviet (no one wanted to anger those fellows, with good reason, and they sometimes took other nations' colors on their vessels), and then expend resources (probably just sitting around anyway during the six day war) to go purposely attack the American ship coincidentally directly following an attack on a city that was surrendipitously close to the American ship. This is all more likely than a case of mistaken identity.


True dat. Had it been a Soviet vessel, and much more severe mistake would likely have occurred somewhere on land...Israels land. The Soviets were not known for being forgiving of such 'mistakes' (knowing that they often aren't).

Case in point...there were Soviet diplomats in some of the embassies the Iranian's stormed...they were immediately expelled from the premises, as Soviet policy when threatened with the death of their diplomats was to immediately hasten their end, along with any and all of their captors who happen to be in the vicinity.

Do the silhouettes of any of the suspected Egyptian vessels come close to matching the Liberty? Were Egyptian vessels Soviet built? If so, they are quite distinctive, and clearly different from US Vessels of the time (usually by the raised foredeck and elongated prow with very sweeping bow entry lines).
Mrs. Pigpen
QUOTE(Hobbes @ Jun 10 2012, 07:45 PM) *
Do the silhouettes of any of the suspected Egyptian vessels come close to matching the Liberty? Were Egyptian vessels Soviet built? If so, they are quite distinctive, and clearly different from US Vessels of the time (usually by the raised foredeck and elongated prow with very sweeping bow entry lines).


They might (or not). I think we should consider they didn't have computer imagery. We have the benefit of looking at two types of ships side by side and pick out details "That one was obviously 3/4 the size!". They only had the images they learned from memory, a LOT of ships/planes/et al (and I'm sure the average pilot couldn't say, "oh look! That's not Ol Nelly the Egyptian cargo ship with this and that er details...it's Ol Sally, the US piece of kit!") and leaned heavily on the voluminous Jane's fighting ship manual/Jane's aircraft manual, ect for specifics. This is why WEFT (wings, engine, fuselage, tail) for aircraft identification became an acronym for wrong every fing time when it was put into practice in a warzone. A lot of error can occur. At any rate, the IDF pdf brought to light some of the things that went wrong and some extenuating details of how a few errors could add up to what occurred. I find the explanation of the sequence of events pretty plausible though I'm sure others disagree.
Dingo
This is a little bit of a side show, not adding anything material to the evidence, but from a past posting there may be an implication that Liberty Captain McGonagle was satisfied with the Naval Inquiry conclusions. This should put that to rest. It's a kind of plague on both your houses(Israel and the US) with Johnathon Pollard thrown in for good measure.
Mrs. Pigpen
Thanks for that link, Dingo. I was under the impression that he believed the attack to be a case of mistaken identity.
Hobbes
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Jun 10 2012, 07:30 PM) *
They might (or not). I think we should consider they didn't have computer imagery. We have the benefit of looking at two types of ships side by side and pick out details "That one was obviously 3/4 the size!". They only had the images they learned from memory, a LOT of ships/planes/et al (and I'm sure the average pilot couldn't say, "oh look! That's not Ol Nelly the Egyptian cargo ship with this and that er details...it's Ol Sally, the US piece of kit!") and leaned heavily on the voluminous Jane's fighting ship manual/Jane's aircraft manual, ect for specifics. This is why WEFT (wings, engine, fuselage, tail) for aircraft identification became an acronym for wrong every fing time when it was put into practice in a warzone. A lot of error can occur. At any rate, the IDF pdf brought to light some of the things that went wrong and some extenuating details of how a few errors could add up to what occurred. I find the explanation of the sequence of events pretty plausible though I'm sure others disagree.


All true, but I would expect that all their pilots would have been briefed on typical silhouettes of enemy ships they might engage (although quite possibly those of the U.S., which they would not expect to engage), prior to the war if not reinforced again during the mission briefing.

Well, while looking to see what types of ships Egypt had at the time, I came across the following (from a very biased source, refuting the allegations, but think this passage can be taken at face value, unless anyone has any contradictory information):

QUOTE
The attack on the USS Liberty was tragic, but the Liberty was mistakenly identified as an Egyptian supply vessel. The Liberty and the El-Quesir resembled each other. They had a similar deck line. the bridge structure was in mid-ship for both of them. A single smokestack was in mid-ship. The Liberty's antennae on the aft and fore decks resembled El-Quseir's masts. The antennae on the Liberty's fore deck also resembled a gun.


Given this, I find mistaken identity very plausible, at least initially. The Liberty looked like a vessel they would have been briefed on as a potential target. Yes, the ships were very different sizes, but size is deceptive, that is why I asked about silhouette. The Missouri, for example, looks like the Missouri, whether one is looking at a 2 ft. long model, or the nearly 900 ft long real thing--its silhouette is recognizable either way.
There are, of course, numerous sources citing positive identification of the ship as American, prior to and during the attack. I think I agree completely with Moif's assessment--even if this were mistaken identity originally, it ceased to be so at some point prior to the end of the attack. How much the usual delays and relays of battle communications had to play in that...only the parties involved really know.
Alan Wood
As is usual the facts are wrapped up in a multitude of the usual American word waffle decending from the absolute and undeniable truth to the official account .
Waffle enough and it might just go away.

A bad thing happened to American lives by a country insisting that it is your friend and contests it is sorry for it and it was a mistake and we give a few bucks you already gave us.
I beat the living hell out of your next of kin but it was a mistake and I am sorry for it and heres a few bucks.

Is there some sort of double standard here or what?

From skeeterses
Putting aside your views on Israel for a moment
No not putting aside simply for even one moment.
The actions of your ally needs some consideration regarding it's effect on the U.S and us out here.

Regards...Roo
moif
QUOTE(Alan Wood @ Jun 11 2012, 11:22 AM) *
A bad thing happened to American lives by a country insisting that it is your friend and contests it is sorry for it and it was a mistake and we give a few bucks you already gave us.
I beat the living hell out of your next of kin but it was a mistake and I am sorry for it and heres a few bucks.

Is there some sort of double standard here or what?
Who are you to tell the Americans who their friends are? If the American government regards Israel as a friend then it is a friend and if some Americans were killed by Israel, then it is for the American government to decide upon the implications. Obviously they have done so and to their own satisfaction. Whats that to you?
Hobbes
QUOTE(Alan Wood @ Jun 11 2012, 04:22 AM) *
As is usual the facts are wrapped up in a multitude of the usual American word waffle decending from the absolute and undeniable truth to the official account .
Waffle enough and it might just go away.


Can you name one country that doesn't do this? Just one? If not, then what makes this 'American'?

Have you yourself never 'word waffled'? Word waffling is just 'spin', and EVERYONE does it. In fact, spinning things in their own favor is what every country SHOULD do--that is what foreign diplomacy boils down to. If anything, the U.S. does it much less than most countries, and certainly less than any superpower in the history of the world. How many humanitarian missions has the Soviet Union ever undertaken, for example? Hmmmm? Given that, exactly what is America being criticized for here? And yet you have the gall to mention 'double standards'? Really???? Wow.
Bikerdad
QUOTE(Alan Wood @ Jun 11 2012, 03:22 AM) *
A bad thing happened to American lives by a country insisting that it is your friend and contests it is sorry for it and it was a mistake and we give a few bucks you already gave us.
I beat the living hell out of your next of kin but it was a mistake and I am sorry for it and heres a few bucks.


How's about "I beat the hell out of your next of kin because he was peeping through my wife's window, the perv. I warned him"

QUOTE
Is there some sort of double standard here or what?

Why yes, there is. You seem to be more worked up over an incident that happened more than 40 years ago between two countries, neither of which is yours, than you are over the loss of an Australian life at the hands of the British military less than 2 years ago.

Perhaps if we cook up some conspiracy that lays the blame at the feet of the jooooos you might take an interest.
Alan Wood
Salient points picked out by me

QUOTE(Bikerdad @ Jun 12 2012, 06:11 AM) *
How's about "I beat the hell out of your next of kin because he was peeping through my wife's window, the perv. I warned him"
A good point but did they?. I would appreciate solid information regarding these warnings.

Why yes, there is. You seem to be more worked up over an incident that happened more than 40 years ago between two countries, neither of which is yours, than you are over the loss of an Australian life at the hands of the British military less than 2 years ago.
A life..just one and the case is not as yet closed by the Australian public.
neither of which is yours. So there we have the nub of it all. I have no right to involve myself in a percieved injustice because I am neither Israeli or American.
Is that how you see it?
Perhaps if we cook up some conspiracy that lays the blame at the feet of the jooooos you might take an interest.

It would be preferable if you didn't refer the them in such derogatory terms.
I have a few Australian Jewish friends who are saddened by the actions of the Zionist governments actions as am I.

Something interesting regarding this subject here and it is worth reading the posts.
This is a little more open to illogical abuse but still pertinant.

Regards....Roo
skeeterses
QUOTE(Alan Wood @ Jun 11 2012, 06:22 PM) *
A bad thing happened to American lives by a country insisting that it is your friend and contests it is sorry for it and it was a mistake and we give a few bucks you already gave us.
I beat the living hell out of your next of kin but it was a mistake and I am sorry for it and heres a few bucks.

Actually, a lot of bad things happened to the US military lives during that time frame, including the death of over 58,000 GIs in Vietnam. Just like the war in Vietnam, the trouble the US got into with the USS Liberty was of its own doing. We simply have no business maintaining a military presence in the Middle East. I find it interesting that you like to bring up threads involving Israel but are very quiet when there are debate threads on other foreign policy issues like Iraq and Afghanistan.
Alan Wood
QUOTE(skeeterses @ Jun 13 2012, 11:46 AM) *
QUOTE(Alan Wood @ Jun 11 2012, 06:22 PM) *
A bad thing happened to American lives by a country insisting that it is your friend and contests it is sorry for it and it was a mistake and we give a few bucks you already gave us.
I beat the living hell out of your next of kin but it was a mistake and I am sorry for it and heres a few bucks.

Actually, a lot of bad things happened to the US military lives during that time frame, including the death of over 58,000 GIs in Vietnam. Just like the war in Vietnam, the trouble the US got into with the USS Liberty was of its own doing. We simply have no business maintaining a military presence in the Middle East. I find it interesting that you like to bring up threads involving Israel but are very quiet when there are debate threads on other foreign policy issues like Iraq and Afghanistan.


Yes, you are correct I do dredge up Israel and the US connection often because it intriques me how the information we get is quite different than the information you seem to get from the media.
Oz was involved in both Iraq and Afghanistan, for better or worse and I have withheld my opinions because this, as so rightly pointed out is 'America's Debate' and, as so rightly pointed out by Bikerdad I am not American or whatever.

There are few enough of us international regular entrants to this interesting, and thought provoking site, of which I was an early entrant, but there is little for us to get our international teeth into and those topics posted just died a death.
We out in the wilderness have an opinion also based on the information we are given.

Injustice is international and has no time limits.
Is the American context of Pearl Harbour forgotten after all these years?......Your injustice.
Is the American nuclear devastation of Nagisaki and Hiroshima forgotten by the Japanese after all these years?.....Their injustce.
Is the bombing of Darwin forgotten by Australia after all these years?...Our injustice.

So why should USS.Liberty be forgotten?.
Injustice.


Regards...Roo
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.