Israel's Attack on the USS Liberty, Revisited

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Patroklos


So he reported an unarmed auxillery vessel, and they sent warplanes? I can understand a recon guy mixing a group 2 auxillary with a group 2 merchant (common back then), but a warship? No visible weaponry? How many merchans did you guys sink during the war?

Are your guys not supposed to get visual or ELINT ID before attacking something? We sure as hell do.

they attacked later after the apparent attack at El Arish. A patrol boat reported the Libertys speed as too high for anything other than a warship.

All the merchies were cleared from the area. The Suez Canal had long been closed, there wasnt really any reason for any merchies to be in the area, it wasnt a merchie route, IIUC. Thats addressed at some length by Oren in his book, IIRC, but you dont want to read that book, because Oren is an eevil likudnik.

[Patroklos]

I have yet to hear anyone bring up an American mistake.

which was thought to have been due to Egyptian naval gunfire.

They were in international waters, territorial waters go out for 12nm. Guess what gun platforms we had back then that could accomplish that range?

[Arrian]

Patroklos,

It's in the Oren article...

the IDF Chief of Staff, Gen. Yitzhak Rabin, informed the U.S. Naval Attaché in Tel Aviv, Cmdr. Ernest Carl Castle, that Israel would defend its coast with every means at its disposal. Unidentified vessels would be sunk, Rabin advised; the United States should either acknowledge its ships in the area or remove them.15 Nonetheless, the Americans provided Israel with no information on the Liberty. The United States had also rejected Israel’s request for a formal naval liaison. On May 31, Avraham Harman, Israel’s ambassador to Washington, had warned Under Secretary of State Eugene V. Rostow that “if war breaks out, we would have no telephone number to call, no code for plane recognition, and no way to get in touch with the U.S. Sixth Fleet.”16

and

the JCS had repeatedly cabled the Liberty the previous night with instructions to withdraw to a distance of one hundred miles from the Egyptian and Israeli coasts. The transmission was delayed, however, by the navy’s overloaded, overly complex communication system, which routed messages as far east as the Philippines before relaying them to their destinations. The JCS’ orders would not be received by the Liberty until the following day, June 9, by which time they would no longer be relevant.17

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Patroklos
I have yet to hear anyone bring up an American mistake.



They were in international waters, territorial waters go out for 12nm. Guess what gun platforms we had back then that could accomplish that range?

Again, IIRC Oren discusses in some depth where the IDF thought the "egyptian destroyer" was headed, and why.

[Patroklos]

they attacked later after the apparent attack at El Arish. A patrol boat reported the Libertys speed as too high for anything other than a warship.

A DDGs max cruising speed is 35kts give or take 1 or 2 either way do to currents/winds. And that is in an emergency, you would wear out the shafts/MRGs/a billion other things that can break in no time, plus the fuel efficiency is horrendous. Merchant ships can easily match that, they usually cruise at 20-25, we usually cruise at 15-18 depending on PIM.

That is a stupid conclusion manufactured for non maritime readers.

it wasnt a merchie route, IIUC.

That part of the med is one big trade route, and who can clear civilian traffic out of international waters? You can warn them sure...

Thats addressed at some length by Oren in his book, IIRC, but you dont want to read that book, because Oren is an eevil likudnik.

I don't know, never heard of him before this thread. But I have read a few books on this already, don't see any compelling reason to add his to that list.

[lord of the mark]

http://members.aol.com/amerwar/ff/ffk.htm

tragic friendly fire incidents in the Korean war. Im sure if someone were to examine each friendly fire incident the US military had been involved in, with a goal of proving US armed forces guilt and challenging the plausibility of an accident, it could be done as solidly as in the case of the Liberty.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Patroklos

That part of the med is one big trade route, and who can clear civilian traffic out of international waters? You can warn them sure...

1. The area adjacent to the Sinai coast was not. What Origin-destination pair of ports would take a merchie past there, back in 1967, when the canal was closed?

2. The war had started a couple of days earlier, and there had been tension for weeks.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Patroklos

But I have read a few books on this already, don't see any compelling reason to add his to that list.

A. This book uses recently declassified material from several sources

B. Have you read any books that make the case for it being an accident, and whats more, for most the mistakes not being that egregious?

[Patroklos]

Ernest Carl Castle, that Israel would defend its coast with every means at its disposal. Unidentified vessels would be sunk, Rabin advised; the United States should either acknowledge its ships in the area or remove them.

Nice, but the Liberty was not in Isreal's territorial waters, so not threatening Isreal's coast. If that is what Isreal wanted, ie to assert an illegal right over international waters, they should have made that zone clear and be ready for us and the Soviets to say **** you and violate it, a la the "Line of Death."

the JCS

The JCS, really. This might not be funny to you guys if you don't know what the JCS is, what it does, or more importantly what it can/can't do.

[Patroklos]

A. This book uses recently declassified material from several sources

Thats what they all say

B. Have you read any books that make the case for it being an accident, and whats more, for most the mistakes not being that egregious?

Who said I didn't think it was a mistake?

[Patroklos]

1. The area adjacent to the Sinai coast was not. What Origin-destination pair of ports would take a merchie past there, back in 1967, when the canal was closed?

OOD a ship out the Suez and then get back to me. I have no idea where they are going, but they are doing something, in all directions. I doubt 1967 would be much different. I would expect more vessels actually, as they were half the size.

EDIT: The only time I ever thought I might hit someone. Rules of the Road dumbasses!!!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Nice, but the Liberty was not in Isreal's territorial waters, so not threatening Isreal's coast. If that is what Isreal wanted, ie to assert an illegal right over international waters, they should have made that zone clear and be ready for us and the Soviets to say **** you and violate it, a la the "Line of Death."

They werent attacking all ships in international waters, they were attacking what were believed to be Egyptian ships, ships of a country with which they were at war. If an Egyptian destroyer approached the coast to fire on ground troops (as they allegedly believed) and then withdrew into international waters, they would have been within their rights to attack it in international waters.

The reason for US ships to avoid the area was not that US presense was a violation of Israeli soveriegnty, but to avoid being mistaken for an Egyptian vessel.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Patroklos


OOD a ship out the Suez and then get back to me. I have no idea where they are going, but they are doing something, in all directions. I doubt 1967 would be much different. I would expect more vessels actually, as they were half the size.

When you were with the 6th fleet, was the Canal open or closed? When you were there, was there a war going on between Egypt and Israel? I dont see how you can generalize from your experience in peacetime to the situation in June 1967.

I cant OOD a ship in June 1967, and neither can you, unless youve got a time machine.

Since you want address it I will. Even when the Canal was open, there was no traffic from Suez to any Israeli port.

The only possible destinations for a merchie headed NE from the canal would be Lebanon, Syria,Cyprus or Turkey. A glance at a map shows that would hardly have taken them close to El Arish even if they were NOT avoiding the coastline due to war.

But there WAS a war, which had started a few days earlier, and tensions had risen for weeks. It would havge been easy for a merchie headed Suez-Beirut, say, to avoid the area.

[Patroklos]

The reason for US ships to avoid the area was not that US presense was a violation of Israeli soveriegnty, but to avoid being mistaken for an Egyptian vessel.

I got you, so it has nothing to do with over zealous Ireali naval commanders, probably a little pissed they were playing almost no role it this historic victory, making ****ed up chest thumping comments to our ambassador.

If you chasing Egyptian vessels bombarding your coast, you might wat to find one with guns on it if your trying to prevent it from happening again.

The IDF was criminally negligent. If we did this today there would be a dozen officers behind bars at least. Your pilots, at least, had a responsibility to identify the target. Whatever commander sent out the second wave should be shot. And those patrol boats should have had zero difficulty identifying the ship. What is the range of those torps they fired? 5nm? In nautical terms thats me stepping on your toes.

[Patroklos]

Since you want address it I will. Even when the Canal was open, there was no traffic from Suez to any Israeli port.

Why would a merchie not want to go to Isreal/Gaza?