Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The debate rages on to this date even though the attack happened way back in 1967 during the 6 day war in the middle east. On the one side are those who say Israel purposely attack the USS Liberty while on the other side they say it was accidental since they thought it was an Egyptian ship(or something to that effect). The American sailors who survived the attack claim it was done on purpose and of course Israel says it was accidental. Lyndon Johnson threw it under the rug stating "we are not going to embarras our allies". Whatever the hell that meant. Here are a couple of links to that controversy.
The Israeli explanation is that they mistook it for an obsolete Egyptian horse transport (what dire threats they anticipated from it, one is unsure). Given that my understanding is the Israelis had just ordered the ship out of the war zone, one wonders why they would order the United States to remove an Egyptian horse transport from the war zone. The Israelis then explained that due to the wind, they couldn't see the US flag flying aboard. This despite strafing it, rocketing it, torpedoing it, etc, in some cases at fairly close range. Why didn't the Egyptian horse transport have an Egyptian flag, hm?
To believe all these things simultaneously, you have to be pretty credulous. My belief is that the Liberty, which was intercepting the combined signal output of the entire war, had picked up stuff the Israelis didn't want us to act on, and that we started acting on it (perhaps their plans to sucker Jordan into the war and capture the West Bank). Only then did they evidently decide, "Well, we didn't think you'd use it against us. If that's the case, get it out of here, or it gets hurt."
The biggest Israeli apologist on the issue is some retired judge from Florida, whose obvious agenda was to dismiss anyone blaming the Israelis for doing it deliberately. His whole tone is dismissive. Plus, he was a judge, so his credibility is more suspect in my eyes than the average Joe or Jane. The thing that muddies the waters is the whole tendency for pro-Israel persons to fling around 'anti-Semitic' at anyone critical of Israel. Putting aside the fact that Arabs happen to be Semites as well, one can perfectly well be critical of something Israel does, and that doesn't make one anti-Jewish by a long shot--any more than criticizing Spanish actions makes one necessarily anti-Catholic.
My opinion...the IDF didn't do it, Mossad did. The reason is probably lost to history, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was done to cover up the Israeli plans to attack Syria. Had the U.S. ship intercepted that information it would have relayed it to their commanders. Chances are the Soviet's would have picked up that communication and in turn relayed that intelligence to Egypt and Syria. Taking out Liberty prevented that information from possibly reaching Israel's enemies.
The ship had been idenitified earlier as American, but then it's mark was taken off the tracking board, making it an unknown target (Mossad). A large explosion happens on shore and is blamed on a warship off the coast (Mossad). Two jets attack (Mossad, not IDF) and disable ships communications tower. The torpedo boats that are sent are IDF and they are told it is an Egyptian ship, but do to the smoke from the ship they cannot make a positive ID and the fact that Liberty fired on them causes them to torpedo it. It is only then that they begin to realize the mistake.
The air attack alone could have easily been written off as a mistake, but it spiraled a little out of control when the IDF boats torpedoed it and it took commanders some time to gain control of the situation. The Israeli government immediately turns to damage control, contacts the United States and apologizes for the mix-up.
As with most things in the Cold War, the incident is quickly cleaned up and put aside.
The Israeli explanation is that they mistook it for an obsolete Egyptian horse transport (what dire threats they anticipated from it, one is unsure)..
where did you get that? Michael Oren in his book says that they thought it was an egyptian destroyer, threatening their troops near el arish.
Its not a question of us sailors lying. Its a question of knowing the state of mind of the pilots. The usual accusation is that the pilots COULDNT have been mistaken about the ship - it didnt look anything like a destroyer, etc. What Oren points out, is that the these pilots had been flying for days with little sleep, and had no training wrt to naval targets. People think of the IAF as supermen, so they wont accept that the IAF could have done it out of incompetence.
Which I think is of a piece with what NJGoat says, except for specificy mossad planes. Im not aware of MOssad having its own air force. I think miscommunication between IAF and IDF-naval is quite possible without the planes being other than IAF.
The debate rages on to this date even though the attack happened way back in 1967 during the 6 day war in the middle east. On the one side are those who say Israel purposely attack the USS Liberty while on the other side they say it was accidental since they thought it was an Egyptian ship(or something to that effect). The American sailors who survived the attack claim it was done on purpose and of course Israel says it was accidental. Lyndon Johnson threw it under the rug stating "we are not going to embarras our allies". Whatever the hell that meant. Here are a couple of links to that controversy.
It sounds like it was a cover up but who knows for sure. Strange that there was never a congressional investigation about the whole affair.
What is your opinion?
There would not be a congressional investigation because so many American politicians need the endorsement and funds suppled by pro-Zionist organizations and groups in the U.S.
This situation has changed only in that one of the two major American parties has swung farther to the Right, and has virtually locked loins with Israel.
My own feeling is that it was probably an impetuous decision but a purposeful attack.
However, by this point in time we will not see an attempt by any U.S. government of either party to investigate and clarify what happened. The sailors are dead, it was many decades ago; whereas, national political campaigns go on, and U.S. politicians you may be sure are not going to kill Zionist cash cows for their sakes. Nothing wags the American dog as hard as the Israeli tail.
where did you get that? Michael Oren in his book says that they thought it was an egyptian destroyer, threatening their troops near el arish.
Its not a question of us sailors lying. Its a question of knowing the state of mind of the pilots. The usual accusation is that the pilots COULDNT have been mistaken about the ship - it didnt look anything like a destroyer, etc. What Oren points out, is that the these pilots had been flying for days with little sleep, and had no training wrt to naval targets. People think of the IAF as supermen, so they wont accept that the IAF could have done it out of incompetence.
Which I think is of a piece with what NJGoat says, except for specificy mossad planes. Im not aware of MOssad having its own air force. I think miscommunication between IAF and IDF-naval is quite possible without the planes being other than IAF.
Overall I am a little split on this case as I can see how the factors you laid out could contribute to a case of mistaken identity. Extremely active "war rooms" responding to every little thing with pilots, troops, sailors, commanders, communications folks, etc. stretched to their limits. It is an environment where mistakes could easily happen. Heck, the Israeli's bombed one of their own armored columns the day before this incident.
However, there is a part of me that believes something deeper was going on. Call it Cold War paranoia, but "events" like this weren't exactly uncommon and got covered up quickly if they even saw the light of day. In that context I think there is enough reason to believe that there was some motivation for the Israeli's to attack the ship. However, such an operation would have been undertaken secretly and that means Mossad. While Mossad certainly didn't have an air force, I would be extremely surprised if they didn't have "assets" planted throughout the IDF from the top down that they could use.
Mossad has also had very strained relations with the U.S. intelligence services and indeed, U.S.-Israel relations are not quite as chummy as everyone thinks. In the Eisenhower years, Mossad completely cut-off relations with the U.S. over the CIA actively recruiting ex-Nazi's (some of whom were indicted war criminals) to serve in the U.S. intelligence service. The U.S. also purchased favor among many Arab countries at that time by giving them all the intel they had on Israel.
It is also rather amusing that part of the agreement reached at Camp David to ensure "peace in the Middle East" was a clandestine agreement by the CIA to share everything we knew about Israel, including their nuclear capability, with Sadat. Not even a year later we began sharing the same with Saudi Arabia including the actual analyses of the data and the Saudi's passed this on to other Arab nations.
The Israeli's don't publicly go nuts over these issues as the United States remains pretty much the only strong ally they have, some friend, lol. So, looking at what is actually a rather tenuous relationship, especially in the intelligence communities, I can see why they may have intentionally attacked the ship.
where did you get that? Michael Oren in his book says that they thought it was an egyptian destroyer, threatening their troops near el arish.
That's long been one of the standard excuses, that it was mistaken for El-Quseir, which had nothing like a destroyer's armament. Now if they mistook it at the time for a destroyer, and then later flipped through Jane's until they found something halfway credible to pass the sighting off as, I can imagine that. Either way, though, allowing for the ability of any military to commit a major f-up, I have a very hard time buying any of the misidentification explanations.
It was four days into the war and Israel had air supremacy. To think the Egyptians would send a destroyer (did they even have any that were seaworthy at the time?) without air cover into the combat zone, to fire a few forlorn shells before being sunk automatically, is to think the Egyptians extremely stupid. Had they been extremely stupid, it would have been them who started the war to begin with.
In the Eisenhower years, Mossad completely cut-off relations with the U.S. over the CIA actively recruiting ex-Nazi's (some of whom were indicted war criminals) to serve in the U.S. intelligence service. The U.S. also purchased favor among many Arab countries at that time by giving them all the intel they had on Israel.
At the time though, relations with the USA (under LBJ) were fairly good, as also documented in Orens book.
I am not sure about Mossad-CIA relations at the time.
I am sure the IAF had assets that could be made available to the Mossad. As I guess other western intell agencies have with their militaries. I am skeptical that the Mossad had assets planted within the IDF without IDF knowledge and approval - perhaps I have not read enough of the kinds of books that discuss the extreme powers of intel agencies and their rogue behavior.
Anyway, it seems like your belief it was the IDF is based on the premise it was not an error. Its not clear to me if you mean Eshkol intended it and CHOSE to act through Mossad because that would be secret (some secret). Or if it was Mossad acting rogue.
It was four days into the war and Israel had air supremacy. To think the Egyptians would send a destroyer (did they even have any that were seaworthy at the time?) without air cover into the combat zone, to fire a few forlorn shells before being sunk automatically, is to think the Egyptians extremely stupid. Had they been extremely stupid, it would have been them who started the war to begin with.
The US had told them there were no ships closeby and they had no particular reason to think there was a US ship close by. Had there been, a non stupid US would have notified them. It was a choice of thinking the US stupid, or the Egyptians stupid.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
