User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 2:14:32 PM EDT
[#1]
Sorry, folks, but I'm back now! Where were we?
Oh yes... Post from garandman - This was NOT combat. Then, ahem, get your rear out of a war zone! Or was the USS Liberty, after picking up Arabic speaking intel personnel in Spain, there for the purpose of spying on the Russians, as well as the Egyptians, and maybe even the Israelis? The JCS had ordered [u]all[/u] US Naval ships to standoff from Egypt and Israel at least one hundred miles! The USS Liberty was approx. 20 miles off the coast of Egypt, through an error on the American side, not Israel! This was an essentially UNARMED US ship Yes, four 50 cal Brownings don't count for much in a naval battle, but the fact that some sailor was firing at the Israeli torpedo boats when they approached only confirmed in their minds that the ship was Egyptian, or at least an enemy vessel! At the time, we were funding Saddam, and training Osama bin Laden. You could HARDLY consider the US a nation Israel was looking to for support at the time. We were gathering intel about their activities in the Golan Heights, actions our President DID NOT support. Saddam??? Training Osama Bin Laden??? Garandman you need a serious lesson in history! In 1967, Saddam Hussein was still the Assistant Secretary General of the Baath Party. Only in 1968 did the Baath Party overthrow the government in a military coup and Hussein became the Vice-Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council. Bin-Laden was only ten years of age at the time of the 1967 attack, so what were we training him for? The US was gathering intel(?) about Israel's plans to attack the Golan Heights? Why? Every one involved knew that Israel was going to be attacking the Golan Heights! And whether Pres. Johnson approved of this attack is irrelevant, since as you said, we were not really allies anyway! Right? So, Israel attacks our ship, kills 34 of our finest, and to punish them, we become their ally. This game has REAALLY weird rules. Who said the US punished them? Both the Johnson Administration officials [u]and[/u] the Israelis were overjoyed at hearing that the USS Liberty was [u]not[/u] a Russian ship! And if it's just a game, why didn't the US react like we would expect it to? Maybe because some in our government thought that mistakes had been made on both sides that contributed to the tragedy? AND FOR ANYONE TO SAY THAT THE UNITED STATES WOULD NOT GO TO WAR OVER [u]MERELY[/u] THE STRAFING AND BOMBING OF ONE OF ITS WARSHIPS IS F***ING UNBELIEVABLE! After all, how many US warships were sunk in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964 by those rascally North Vietnamese gunboats? Hmmmmmm? Hell, that cost the US a whole lot more than could have ever been imagined. Eric The(BeRightBack)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 2:23:00 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
[/quote] "The attack was preceded by more than six hours of intense low-level surveillance by Israeli photo-reconnaissance aircraft, which buzzed the intelligence ship thirteen times, sometimes flying as low as 200 feet directly overhead. The reconnaissance pilots were heard by intercept operators in Germany and in Lebanon reporting to their headquarters that they could see an American flag and men sunbathing on deck." [url]http://208.56.153.48/jim/ussliberty/summary.txt[/url][/quote] Eric? I think this is damning if true. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 2:39:52 PM EDT
[#3]
Post from Paul -
20 miles is a long way away at sea and clearly in international waters. No doubt! The USS Liberty was clearly sailing in international waters! But they were [u]not[/u] the 100 miles off the Egyptian and Israeli coasts, as they had been ordered, were they? Flying over a ship in a jet you can see the nationalities of the sailors on deck - you can see their faces, read their shoulder insignia, read the fricken bow number, stern markings and see a flag even if it's not windy. You probably have a lot more knowledge on this than I do, never having flown in a jet fighter in a war zone, approaching what may be an enemy ship. I'll have to take your word that all these details were clearly visible to the Israeli pilots. No one, on either side, has said alleged that anything [u]other[/u] was reported as being seen by the Israeli pilots other than the flag. When the USS Liberty was first spotted by the Israeli Air Force it was marked as a 'neutral' ship. You did read the article didn't you? War ships are gray but they are even different enough shades of color that you can tell US from Australian from English gray ships at great distances at sea. Again, I'll have to take your word on this, having never been aboard a warship at sea! But are you saying that there has never been a case of mistaken identity at sea? Let me know if you can think of [u]any[/u] such similar incident that has occurred in the past, say, thirty years! The electronic signature would have been simple to use to determine the ship too. Our radars and communications equipment all have distinctive frequencies and pulse widths which would have been simple to read. To have aircraft attack a navy ship at sea without first knowing exactly what that ship is pure simple suicide as if it was a Cruiser, Destroyer or even a tiny Frigate it would have knocked out half the fricken aircraft that tried strafing it. The Israelis were [u]that[/u] sophisticated back in 1967? I simply did not know that at all! They clearly attacked an American ship intentionally - to think otherwise requires too much irrational thought. And your thoughts on [u]why[/u] they would deliberatly attack a US warhip on the high seas? I mean, that is the ultimate question after all! And why did the US roll over so easily on this one? They had already launched the Vietnam War over a few measley rounds that [u]may[/u] have been fired at two US warships. Eric The(EagerToLearn)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 2:47:25 PM EDT
[#4]
Post from garandman -
So your point stands. The US was not ACTUALLY training HIM specifically, but we were still were siding with the Arabs MUCH more than we were with Israel. And THERE is your motivation for the attack. So Israel was actually challenging the US to a fight over its supposed siding with the Arabs? That's the motivation, that Israel was acting because the US was more of an ally to the Arabs than to Israel??? This attack was to curry favor for Israel with the US??? Well, garandman, that's the first time I've ever heard that excuse given for the attack! If it were true, I would have to reassess my view of Israel - they've got even BIGGER BALLS than I thought they had! Wow! Eric The(NotEvenTheSovietUnionDidThat!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 2:52:15 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: Yes, four 50 cal Brownings don't count for much in a naval battle, but the fact that some sailor was firing at the Israeli torpedo boats when they approached only confirmed in their minds that the ship was Egyptian, or at least an enemy vessel! "[CAPT. McGonagle:] [b]In the latter moments of the air attack,[/b] 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 15 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 wedge 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. [CAPT. McGonagle:] 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." [i]The bold was added by me. The Liberty had already been under attack from the air when it opened fire on the approaching torpedo boats. After the attack, the torpedo boats contacted the Liberty [b]in Enlish[/b]:[/i] "1440 [LOG:] MTB'S STANDING AWAY FROM THE SHIP. ONE MTB HAS HULL NUMBER 206-17 [CAPT. McGonagle:] 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 a range of approximately 500 to 8?0 yards. 1503 [LOG:] ONE MTB RETURNED TO SHIP AND SIGNALLED "DO YOU NEED HELP" IN ENGLISH C.O. SIGNALLED "NEGATIVE" [CAPT. McGonagle:] 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 that they should keep clear." [url]http://208.56.153.48/jim/ussliberty/torpedo.txt[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:00:34 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: AND FOR ANYONE TO SAY THAT THE UNITED STATES WOULD NOT GO TO WAR OVER [u]MERELY[/u] THE STRAFING AND BOMBING OF ONE OF ITS WARSHIPS IS F***ING UNBELIEVABLE! Prior to WW2, a German U-boat sank an American destroyer, and we did not go to war. And, prior to WW2 Japanese planes attacked an American partol boat, and we did not go to war. In 1967, we were in the middle of the Cold War. Going to war with a 'friendly' nation wasn't something we were going to do. Even if they did attack one of our ships. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:08:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Paul, If you were a pilot, serving a country at war, would you "loiter" over an unidentified ship?? I think not, you would try to ID at SAM range +1. quote] What can you see at 81 miles away? An SM-2ER has an [i]unclassified[/i] range of 80 miles. A NATO SeaSparrow an unclassified range of over 30 miles. Even the CIWS (close in weapon system, aka Phalanx) will do a mile and a half and that's considered point defense. Back in those days we had Basic Point Defense Missile Systems which were good for about 10 miles so the pilots could have come that close and been able to outrun a launched missile. A good operations specialist will ID a cold contact at 15 to 18 miles from mother. A good EW will ID an electronic signature from over the horizon. You have to understand the concept of identification of the target before launching on it. It's simply not done PERIOD! You could be putting a five hundred pound warhead into the side of a friendly - or doing repeated bombing and strafing runs on an allied platform. There is no hiding on top of the water - you know what is there. This isn't something new but a principle that has been around since flight. About the only case where the ID isn't 110% before release is with submarines and their electrical and acoustic signature makes it easier that you'd think. Our stuff runs on 60 Hz power theirs on 50 Hz. Electrical motors will oscillate at some frequency of those principle frequencies and create harmonics that are detectable. There are clearly defined go and no go areas for our submarines. They enter the no-go area only under threat of sinking by our own assets. A better example is the use of fighter and missile engagement zones - the MEZ and the FEZ. Under a missile attack friendly fighters will engage incoming missiles. At a certain range they have to pull off as the missile shooters of the inner ring of the battle group will open up - and if it flies it dies. Submarines can't be seen and missiles travel at hypersonic speeds, warships do not. I could spend weeks educating you what I've learned over 20 plus years of studying and practicing real world surface warfare or you could just take my word - or the words of the guys who survived the attack. [red]There is no possible way in HELL that Israel didn't know that they were attacking a US warship PERIOD![/red] Deaf, dumb, and blind folks don't fly fighters, these pilots were fellow warriors and knew EXACTLY who and what they were shooting and who was dying aboard that ship. What we don't completely know is why. Some of what I know I've recorded on my Enlisted Surface Warfare web site take a look at the Mission Area at [url]http://home.earthlink.net/~paul1960/The_Study_Guide/Mission_Areas/mission_areas.html[/url] and look under the Air and the Point Defense and Counter Measure areas. Understand that a carrier is only interested in Point Defense vice a real surface warship which would be able to extend their range of dominance much much farther. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:17:32 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Post from Paul - 20 miles is a long way away at sea and clearly in international waters. No doubt! The USS Liberty was clearly sailing in international waters! But they were [u]not[/u] the 100 miles off the Egyptian and Israeli coasts, as they had been ordered, were they? And this is punishable by death? Wow you're a strict SOB aren't you? You'd figure you'd have our own boys present the punishment vice letting someone else do it. Depending on when the order to transit to the 100 mile point was give and the exact wording would depend if you should kill them really. Normally this would be handled with something less than air to surface missile attacks. The PIM (point of intended movement) is normally forecast day-to-day or as close as about 6-8 hours during a long high speed transit. The CO only has to report when his is off of PIM by a pretty big amount. The Liberty might have been capable of 16-18 knots - should go look in up in the 1967 copy of Janes down the hall at the Defense Visual Information Center (DVIC) but it's a long walk this late at night, so they were only four or five hours off of PIM. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:33:16 PM EDT
[#9]
Post from Paul -
Even if the spy ship was in complete emmission control from overflights the pilots might have been able to read the individual's name tags on their uniforms. If a bunch of armed fighters are swarming overhead why stay in emcon? I know that I have nearly half a brain and would think that one, the gig is up and two, I might ought to want to say howdy to the fighters. But no one on the USS Liberty even mentions any attempt to contact the Israeli warplanes! The only attempt to contact the Israelis occurred when the Israeli torpedo boats signaled the USS Liberty to identify itself! And even then the appropriate countersignal was not given. From the article - "Consequently, 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 [u]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[/u]. On May 31, Avraham Harman, Israel's ambassador to Washington, had warned Under Secretary of State Eugene V. Rostow that '[u]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[/u]'."16 The Israelis' fears proved to be all too true! The shooting was purely criminal and undefencable. And yet, that's [u]never[/u] been the conclusion of any commission, tribunal, court, courtmartial board, congressional committee, or whatever, that has looked into all the evidence which is much more available to them, then it is to us! Eric The(LookingForARealMotive)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:35:41 PM EDT
[#10]
And OJ was found not guilt at a trial...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:39:21 PM EDT
[#11]
Yes, the Israelis were at war! Stupid Americans didn't realize they were interfering! Attack was justified!
Said with BIG TONGUE IN CHEEK! Don |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:42:54 PM EDT
[#12]
Post from DaMan -
Attack on Golan took place the next day after the attack on the Liberty. Israelis wanted to keep the "element of surprise". They were afraid the US might "reign them in". So in order [u]not[/u] to be reigned in by the US, the Israelis thought it a good idea just to shoot the crap outta one of its surface vessels? Wow, what [i]chutzpah[/i]! And what idiot didn't know that Israel was going after Syria, which was and still is, its most implaccable enemy in the Middle East! (With the exception of Osama Bin Laden and other such riff-raff, which I'll get to later!) The Jewish settlements and kitbutzim in Galilee and Samaria were under constant artillery and rocket attacks from the Golan Heights from the very beginning of their existence. Strange, there are no more artillery and rocket attacks from Syria, since the Golan was seized! They took a calculated risk of backlash.... and took action! They brought it off successfully. That's just a supposition of course. Eric The(Successful?IThinkNot-WhatDidTheyGet?)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:49:37 PM EDT
[#13]
[url]http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0693/9306019.htm[/url]
DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:52:45 PM EDT
[#14]
After machine gunning and bombing to shreds and American warship you're going to admit that they were communicating with you over the radio during the attack? That's not smart.
We know where every warship from every nation is at all times (except them damn subs [:)]). Allied ships provide us with there intended areas of operations. The mistake made was not by the Americans but by the Israelis. The penalty for not making PIM or being in Emcon is not death even during war (honest). There is zero chance that this was a case of mistaken identity - zero! A blind man can tell the difference between countries warships. We study their characteristics until we know them rote. Their mast configuration, beam, stacks, length, weapons systems... Like as young kids you could tell a Camaro from a similar Firebird we are taught how to identify ships. M - U - R - D - E - R - ! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:58:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Post from Paul - Even if the spy ship was in complete emmission control from overflights the pilots might have been able to read the individual's name tags on their uniforms. If a bunch of armed fighters are swarming overhead why stay in emcon? I know that I have nearly half a brain and would think that one, the gig is up and two, I might ought to want to say howdy to the fighters. But no one on the USS Liberty even mentions any attempt to contact the Israeli warplanes! The only attempt to contact the Israelis occurred when the Israeli torpedo boats signaled the USS Liberty to identify itself! And even then the appropriate countersignal was not given. From the article - "Consequently, 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 [u]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[/u]. On May 31, Avraham Harman, Israel's ambassador to Washington, had warned Under Secretary of State Eugene V. Rostow that '[u]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[/u]'."16 The Israelis' fears proved to be all too true! The shooting was purely criminal and undefencable. And yet, that's [u]never[/u] been the conclusion of any commission, tribunal, court, courtmartial board, congressional committee, or whatever, that has looked into all the evidence which is much more available to them, then it is to us! Eric The(LookingForARealMotive)Hun[>]:)] The Imperial German government specifically warned via newspaper ads that the Lusitania was liable to be sunk. And it was. However, despite the clear warnings, we place the blame for the sinking on the Germans, not the Brits. This business about lack of liason officers, contact points, and sinking warnings by the Israelis is too thin IMHO. The Israelis would have us believe it was all our fault that their airmen and seamen pulled the trigger. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 3:58:49 PM EDT
[#16]
Several interesting comments and their footnotes:
" In this same moment, Commander Sixth Fleet's message ordering the LIBERTY to move offshore by 100 miles had just arrived at the U.S. Defense Communications System's radio station near Asmara, Ethiopia, and was about to be retransmitted to the Naval Communications Station in Greece for relay to the ship. It was a message that did not arrive aboard the LIBERTY until 10 June when it was hand-delivered to the captain at Malta.9" "[9 The American news media subsequently made much about messages to the LIBERTY being "misrouted," etc., but these accounts are terribly garbled and produce a substantial perversion of the truth. Given the time frame in which everything occurred, there is no way in which the "move off" message could have reached the LIBERTY before the attack except by way of high precedence "flash," but there was no reason to use that precedence until after 1403 Brava.]" " When transmissions ([i]from the Liberty[/i]) became possible, they were sent against intense jamming.10 In spite of this, by 1420 the LIBERTY'S operators had gotten off an attack message to the Sixth Fleet." "[10 [b]One of the most remarkable aspects of the Israelis "error" is that they jammed U.S. Navy communications frequencies, then claimed they were attacking an Egyptian ship.[/b]]" [url]http://208.56.153.48/jim/ussliberty/rksmith.txt[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:06:40 PM EDT
[#17]
Post from DonS -
Recently an Israeli pilot came forward with the story that they knew the ship was American before they attacked it. This was the second Israeli officier to make this charge. Well, this fellow needs to come forward quick! What's his name and where can we find him? How did you come by this knowledge? It hasn't even been posted on the USS Liberty website as yet! Eric The(IKnow,IJustCheckedIt)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:08:28 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: nd yet, that's [u]never[/u] been the conclusion of any commission, tribunal, court, courtmartial board, congressional committee, or whatever, that has looked into all the evidence which is much more available to them, then it is to us! "For the first time in American history, an attack on an American ship resulting in casualties was never investigated by Congress." [url]http://208.56.153.48/jim/ussliberty/reese.htm[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:08:38 PM EDT
[#19]
I think what Israel got were arms and ammo that were originally destined for OUR troops in Viet Nam! But, (silly me!) they needed it much more than WE did!
DaMan PS- By "OUR TROOPS", I mean US troops! How about you, Eric? Who do YOU consider as OUR troops? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:08:40 PM EDT
[#20]
I think what Israel got were arms and ammo that were originally destined for OUR troops in Viet Nam! But, (silly me!) they needed it much more than WE did!
DaMan PS- By "OUR TROOPS", I mean US troops! How about you, Eric? Who do YOU consider as OUR troops? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:12:09 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: Post from DonS - Recently an Israeli pilot came forward with the story that they knew the ship was American before they attacked it. This was the second Israeli officier to make this charge. Well, this fellow needs to come forward quick! What's his name and where can we find him? How did you come by this knowledge? It hasn't even been posted on the USS Liberty website as yet! Eric The(IKnow,IJustCheckedIt)Hun[>]:)] He has come forward. It was all over the news not long ago. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:14:09 PM EDT
[#22]
Post from DaMan -
Eric, you put big foot in mouth! The attack on the Liberty was deliberate and calculated! Who says it was deliberate? What was it 'calculated' to do? DonS.... you forgot to mention that the transmissions reporting the Liberty as a US ship were sent in Hebrew (Which they were)! Which means that.....what? Wouldn't you imagine that their transmissions were sent in Hebrew, it is, after all, their national language. eric is "thinking".....Give him some time! Sorry, I had to go to Court and then visit with a client, but you are right that I am thinking. Eric The(AreYou?)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:14:10 PM EDT
[#23]
Jamming in order to work [b]at all[/b] has to be directed at specific frequencies - which again are country and platform unique and easily identifiable.
Like the nose on your face the facts are and remain perfectly clear. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:17:15 PM EDT
[#24]
What I'm seeing in this thread is, on the one hand, solid, first-hand evidence, offered by experts in the field. Very persuasive in its detail and volume.
On the other hand, we really have offered to us no evidence, but rather a repeated attempt to impeach the evidence offered by the first side. Repeated requests for the underlying motive in the Liberty affair miss the point. It is becoming clear that the attack on the Liberty was intentional, and that the ship's nationality was known to the attackers. Knowing the motive would be desirable, and informative, but such knowledge is not required to reach the conclusion that the attack on a known US warship was deliberate. Sorry Eric. I'm persuaded. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:25:47 PM EDT
[#25]
What it MEANS is that intercepted transmissions in "HEBREW" showed Israeli intentions!
Nice try, Eric! The "shithouse lawyer"! DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:42:50 PM EDT
[#26]
Post by DonS -
"The following appeared in the Fall, 1995 (Vol 8, No 3) Issue of the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence" Yes, an article by Reverdy S. Fishel which is no more believable by me than is the Oren's article, which I cited at the beginning of this thread, believable by you. At least Fishel doesn't mention the idea that the Israelis were attempting to cover up the murder/torture of Egyptian POWs by the IDF! But we need to find out who this Israeli pilot is because he would indeed be the smoking gun. Let me know when you find it. Eric The(I'mSerious)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:57:29 PM EDT
[#27]
Israelis think that they and all Jews are an endangered species, therefore they by virtue of this belief can act in most anyway to maintain there alleged survival. I lnow two former Israelis Army Officers that left Israel, because they did not believe in the policies perpetrated by Israel against its enemies, ie: One of my friends told me of mass graves filled with the bodies of Egyptians (POW's) in the Sinai,,gee did we not later hear of them years later? One of them felt that there were times that he felt that he was not better than the "Nazi's" Israel would do nearly anything,,including not informing of of intel that would help US,,as long as it is in there best interests,,,I have to admit, I'm not quite as nice as my two friends,,I would not have a problem acting in my countries best interests at any level. But I can not for a second believe that Israel would not "kill" US if it was in there best interests. Yes I do not have any problem believing that Israel knew the ship(hard to consider it a warship) was a US Naval Vessel. All being said, I still believe in backing Israel, for I have always detested Arabs,, and their bull shit beliefs,,this of course is my opinion.
In ending, the majority of Arabs fight worse than Women,,,fact! Praise Allah! hell if "we" are "infidels" as they call us, how is it then that, noted in the Koran that the people of the "Book" Christians and Jews not only belive in the same Allah/God but can also enter "paradise" though as a Christian I doubt that I'll get wine and dozens of virigins,, |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 4:59:26 PM EDT
[#28]
I hope you all know that "my" Iron Mike" is not the a hole boxer,,,go to Parris Island to see my Iron Mike,,just wondering how many know of him
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 5:00:56 PM EDT
[#29]
Post from DonS -
(quoting from USS Liberty log) 1503 [LOG:] ONE MTB RETURNED TO SHIP AND SIGNALLED "DO YOU NEED HELP" IN ENGLISH C.O. SIGNALLED "NEGATIVE" This tells me that the Israeli torpedo boat stayed in the area after their attack and attempted to provide help once their mistake was discovered (and they stopped machinegunning the lifeboats). Not the sort of thing that a guilty party would do, is it? I mean someone said they skedaddled right after the attack, fearful of an airstrike by the Sixth Fleet! Eric The(AsISaid,They'veGotBallsToHangAround)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 5:18:47 PM EDT
[#30]
Post from DonS -
Prior to WW2, a German U-boat sank an American destroyer, and we did not go to war. Prior to American [u]entry[/u] into WWII, the USS Reuben James was sunk by the German U-Boat U-552, as it was providing escort to a convoy headed to Great Britain. This occurred on Oct. 31, 1941, just prior to Pearl Harbor. Whether the US would have decided to enter the war against Germany over this one incident will not likely be settled, but I don't think that Israel could be so blithe about sinking a US ship on the high seas and getting away with it so thoroughly. BTW, 100 sailors were lost in this event. And, prior to WW2 Japanese planes attacked an American partol boat, and we did not go to war. As far as China was concerned, WWII had been going on for at least four years when the USS Panay was sunk in the Yangtse River in 1937. Once again, American isolationism and a relative lack of deaths and injuries (3 dead, 11 wounded) meant that there was very little incentive for the US to go to war with Japan. It would have probably been the same for Israel, there would have been too much public opposition of going to war with a country that the American people thought highly of at the time. In 1967, we were in the middle of the Cold War. Going to war with a 'friendly' nation wasn't something we were going to do. Even if they did attack one of our ships. I don't think that the United States even considered it, but can you be certain that tiny Israel would have been that convinced that they could not only successfully attack an American warship on the high seas, in the face of the Sixth Fleet, but yet also escape the eternal enmity of the American people for such treachery? Eric The(TheyNotOnlyHadChutzpah,ButACrystalBall)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 5:20:24 PM EDT
[#31]
Dead men tell no tales! But, you might want to help the survivors you can't kill so they don't talk too badly of you!
DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 5:38:02 PM EDT
[#32]
Post from Paul -
And this is punishable by death? Wow you're a strict SOB aren't you? You'd figure you'd have our own boys present the punishment vice letting someone else do it. Depending on when the order to transit to the 100 mile point was give and the exact wording would depend if you should kill them really. Normally this would be handled with something less than air to surface missile attacks. I don't think anyone needs to be punished over this, there's enough blame to go around. We can determine precisely when the USS Liberty was ordered to standoff, and as to the wording, I imagine that the JCS can be counted on to make certain that it's order is crystal clear enough to get one of their own ships out of harm's way. What seems to be apparent is that someone was unaware of the actual location and mission of this warship. When the White House learned of the 'event' they were told that the USS Liberty was '60 - 100 miles' off the coasts of Egypt and Israel. This caused Johnson and his advisors to worry that the attacking forces may have been Soviet, and not Egyptian or Israeli. And what of our beloved Commander in Chief, LBJ? Was he so much in debt to the Jewish Lobby in Washington DC for their support of his little Vietnam Adventure that he turned his back on the American sailors who died and were wounded? Why was the first and second wave of US Naval fighters called back from going to the assistance of the USS Liberty? If even the second flight of aircraft had been permitted to go to the aid of a damaged American warship in international waters, they would have arrived at least 20 minutes before the Israeli torpedo boats and could have protected the lives of the 25 sailors who died in the torpedo attack! But they were called back on orders from DC and the JCS. You are well versed in this matter, obviously, so tell me, what is your considered opinion on why the Jews would take such a chance on having their amazing victory snatched from their hands and be handed crushing defeat over such a minor problem as the USS Liberty must have presented? Eric The(VeryInterested)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2001 6:08:51 PM EDT
[#33]
Yup, you're right,Eric! Those damn US sailors were snooping on Israel! They DESERVED what they got!
Please choose your country! If Israel is your choice, please move there! DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2001 10:46:26 AM EDT
[#34]
BTT for Eric (I guess we know where your loyalties lie) the Hun [>]:)]
DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2001 7:12:57 PM EDT
[#35]
It's obvious which side of the fence Eric is on,and it's not ours!If someone holds the interests of another country over ours,I say send them on their way w/a one way ticket.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 4:50:56 PM EDT
[#36]
Come on Hun,all I want to hear is that your loyalty is to Israel and not the U.S.,nothing more,I just want you to admit it to yourself and all of us.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 5:05:06 PM EDT
[#37]
Post from sluggolbc -
Come on Hun,all I want to hear is that your loyalty is to Israel and not the U.S.,nothing more,I just want you to admit it to yourself and all of us. I will be as pleased as punch to answer your question on this matter, as well as the Pollard thread, [u]provided[/u] you answer my question to you first! OK? Here goes - Do you think that seriously questioning the official version of the United States Government for any of its actions, at home or abroad, is grounds for believing that the person asking such questions is either not patriotic or not loyal to this country? Eric The(YouGottaThinkHardOnThisOne!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 5:18:15 PM EDT
[#38]
Why do you continue to skirt a simple question?It's not a matter of questioning one's governments take on any particular action(s),even though you counter any and all pro US responses with pro Israeli arguements.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 5:22:31 PM EDT
[#39]
And why do you avoid my very simple question?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 5:24:15 PM EDT
[#40]
I'm done dancing w/you,I think my point has been proven.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 5:28:04 PM EDT
[#41]
Well, it was an extremely awkward dance anyway!
When you find your [i]cojones[/i] and answer my question, then and only then will I answer yours! In the meanwhile, you've proven nothing, nada, nichts, zero! Eric The(TaTa!Don'tLetTheBigGlassDoorSlapYourAssOnTheWayOut!)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 5:29:16 PM EDT
[#42]
I was always told never to answer a question with a question. Eric if you don't want to answer the question just say so. Otherwise you look real silly ducking and dodging this way.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 6:22:29 PM EDT
[#43]
Sorry Aggie1, I would always answer any question which you wanted to ask me. If YOU want to ask me the same question, I'd be more than pleased to answer it immediately!
But as far as answering a question, with a question, that is a debate technique that is of very sound vintage, dating back to at least, the time of Christ! And I know you know that! What I don't know is if you've been closely following this thread, but I think that before my loyalty and patriotism were questioned, you would at the very least want to know the substance of the accusations against me that would cause such a question to arise in the first place! But since [u]you[/u] want me to answer, then I must assume that [u]you[/u] don't know the answer without the question ever being answered by me. I would have hoped that you'd answer for me! That, and that alone, saddens me quite a bit. The others, who gives a flying frig, but you, an Aggie, well, let's just say it's a very different matter entirely now that you've asked me the question. Very well, the answer is very simple, if lengthy. I was born to a Father and Mother who were an Aggie and a Tessie, respectively. They had met on a blind date at the Bonfire in 1947. He was a veteran of the South Pacific, and served in the U.S. Army Reserve as a Captain until 1957, when I was five years old. I can still remember him in his uniform. They were lifelong Church of Christ members, and he was a deacon in the Church until he died at age 54, in 1977. She passed away in my arms at the age of 62, in 1993. The only two times I saw my Father cry was at his own Father's funeral, when we saw my Grandfather in the casket that one last time. We both cried. That was in 1963. The other time I saw him cry was when he came into my bedroom one Sunday morning and told me that General MacArthur had died. That was in 1964. We both cried then, too. I suppose that I cried more because my Father was crying, than for the death of a General from a War that I only knew from what My Father had told me. I know now why he cried, and why he should have cried. Now, so far, has what I've told you given you any idea, any idea at all, of just how I feel about this Country? What would a man, such as I've described, teach his eldest son about patriotism and loyalty to the United States of America? Yes, I love America! Yes, I have nothing but the highest regard for its institutions, its heritage, its heroes, and the quite simple folk who make this great Nation what it is. I would rather perish in oblivion than to see this Country come to any harm. All the nations on the face of the earth could vaporize and yet it would be sufficient for me if this Country alone survived! Is that a good enough pledge of allegiance? Eric The(Satisfied?)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 7:26:13 PM EDT
[#44]
Eric, you're still dancing around the question! Do you support the USA's best interests before any other country in the world?
Simple question....yes or no? Answer it! DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 8:20:26 PM EDT
[#45]
BTT. Waiting for a simple straight forward answer from Eric! DaMan
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/1/2001 8:42:00 PM EDT
[#46]
Certain misguided youths seem to be waiting for things that will never, ever come their way.
Speaking of things coming their way, I wonder if a certain someone is violating 'Poland' again this evening. And again. 1939 redux. Maybe they're pretending to invade some dark, dank area of Araby, in the guise of some harem boy, eager to please the caliph! I suppose that, after all, they can't get off all the time pretending they're Eva Braun's douchebag! Eric The(ButThen,WhoKnows,Hmmmm)Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2001 7:46:04 AM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Eric, you're still dancing around the question! Do you support the USA's best interests before any other country in the world? Simple question....yes or no? DaMan And Eric once again avoids answering this very simple question posted above! AMAZING! But I guess NO ANSWER is also an ANSWER! DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2001 7:55:46 AM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2001 8:20:11 AM EDT
[#49]
Like I said, NO answer is also an answer!
Right, Eric (with the confused loyalties)Hun [>]:)] ???????? DaMan |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2001 8:31:02 AM EDT
[#50]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
