3 ms·

>They knowingly attacked and destroyed USS Liberty in 1967 Both sides agree it was an accident. >Israel apologized for the attack, saying that USS Liberty had

by gruez 2y ago

>They knowingly attacked and destroyed USS Liberty in 1967 Both sides agree it was an accident. >Israel apologized for the attack, saying that USS Liberty had been attacked in error after being mistaken for an Egyptian ship.[5] Both the Israeli and United States governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity.[6]

Gud 2y ago
And if you scratch the surface, you will quickly realise that their apology is bullshit. Israel wanted the US involved and conducted a false flag operation: “Some intelligence and military officials dispute Israel's explanation.[79] Dean Rusk, U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote: I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous.[80]” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident
- gruez 2y ago
  >I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. If the attack was due to mistaken identity, wouldn't you expect the Israelis to go all out? I also skimmed the section and there's not much in the way of arguments besides that and "Israel pressured US to admit it was an accident".
  - clown_strike 2y ago
    There was no mistaken identity. They knew it was an American ship and attacked it on purpose. It was witnessed and documented that they made the decision to deliberately attack an American warship, then tried to excuse themselves from responsibility. They were targeting lifeboats and engaging in other dishonorable behavior we've since seen repeated in Gaza as well. "Going all out" is not warfare, it is sadism in violation of the Geneva Convention. https://web.archive.org/web/20211111095447/https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/but-sir-its-an-american-ship-never-mind-hit-her-1.5492908 https://web.archive.org/web/20211111095447/https://www.haare...
    - gruez 2y ago
      >There was no mistaken identity. They knew it was an American ship and attacked it on purpose. It was witnessed and documented that they made the decision to deliberately attack an American warship, then tried to excuse themselves from responsibility. What evidence is of this? The article you linked only has an "anonymous source", and hearsay supposedly from a diplomat. If this is the bar for believing that a conspiracy is real, you should probably believe the moon landing is faked as well.
wkat4242 2y ago
There's also many voices saying it was a coverup.
- gruez 2y ago
  The same could be said of the JFK assassination, or the moon landing.
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    The moon landing was a cover up for what?
    - Loughla 2y ago
      Not having happened. Not a cover up for something else. Just that it didn't happen, but the US was so hard up to beat the Russians at something that they staged it. It's ridiculous. But the world we live in is also ridiculous, and the internet has enabled idiots to meet in numbers that have never been possible before.
    - SAI_Peregrinus 2y ago
      To cover up that the moon doesn't exist, of course. I'm sure we can come up with a ridiculous conspiracy hypothesis around what we're actually seeing when we think we're seeing the moon. Might need to involve time travel to explain historical records.
arresin 2y ago
The survivors themselves say it was deliberate.

by gruez 2y ago

Gud 2y ago

And if you scratch the surface, you will quickly realise that their apology is bullshit. Israel wanted the US involved and conducted a false flag operation: “Some intelligence and military officials dispute Israel's explanation.[79] Dean Rusk, U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote: I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous.[80]” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

gruez 2y ago
>I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. If the attack was due to mistaken identity, wouldn't you expect the Israelis to go all out? I also skimmed the section and there's not much in the way of arguments besides that and "Israel pressured US to admit it was an accident".
- clown_strike 2y ago
  There was no mistaken identity. They knew it was an American ship and attacked it on purpose. It was witnessed and documented that they made the decision to deliberately attack an American warship, then tried to excuse themselves from responsibility. They were targeting lifeboats and engaging in other dishonorable behavior we've since seen repeated in Gaza as well. "Going all out" is not warfare, it is sadism in violation of the Geneva Convention. https://web.archive.org/web/20211111095447/https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/but-sir-its-an-american-ship-never-mind-hit-her-1.5492908 https://web.archive.org/web/20211111095447/https://www.haare...
  - gruez 2y ago
    >There was no mistaken identity. They knew it was an American ship and attacked it on purpose. It was witnessed and documented that they made the decision to deliberately attack an American warship, then tried to excuse themselves from responsibility. What evidence is of this? The article you linked only has an "anonymous source", and hearsay supposedly from a diplomat. If this is the bar for believing that a conspiracy is real, you should probably believe the moon landing is faked as well.

wkat4242 2y ago

There's also many voices saying it was a coverup.

gruez 2y ago
The same could be said of the JFK assassination, or the moon landing.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  The moon landing was a cover up for what?
  - Loughla 2y ago
    Not having happened. Not a cover up for something else. Just that it didn't happen, but the US was so hard up to beat the Russians at something that they staged it. It's ridiculous. But the world we live in is also ridiculous, and the internet has enabled idiots to meet in numbers that have never been possible before.
  - SAI_Peregrinus 2y ago
    To cover up that the moon doesn't exist, of course. I'm sure we can come up with a ridiculous conspiracy hypothesis around what we're actually seeing when we think we're seeing the moon. Might need to involve time travel to explain historical records.

arresin 2y ago

The survivors themselves say it was deliberate.