This just in

Ogami said:
The Question wrote:

Jesus Listerine-gargling Christ, man!

I assume you are a fighter pilot and can thus speak with authority on identifying targets in the middle of a war. Otherwise, you'd just be blowing smoke out of your ass over this, hmmm?

And I'd assume you know just what it is a reconnaissance aircraft is for, or that someone in a torpedo boat, unlike someone in a fighter, is not moving too fast or at the wrong angle to make a visual identification of a target vessel.

Apparently, though, your "Israel can do no wrong" blinders prevent you from seeing even the most painfully obvious evidence against their sainthood.
 
The Question wrote:

And I'd assume you know just what it is a reconnaissance aircraft is for, or that someone in a torpedo boat, unlike someone in a fighter, is not moving too fast or at the wrong angle to make a visual identification of a target vessel.

Okay, so Israel commanders ordered the jet to fire on an American warship, while they were fighting a war against all of their surrounding Arab neighbors, to do.... what?

The problem with tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories is that they don't explain what happens after the wacko theory. You've got my undivided attention, Question. What amazing strategic advantage would it give Israel to blow up all U.S. warships in the area while they're fighting Arab states armed to the teeth by Soviet advisors?

Can't answer that, can you?

Apparently, though, your "Israel can do no wrong" blinders prevent you from seeing even the most painfully obvious evidence against their sainthood.

And apparently it will take a biblical miracle for you to explain what possible advantage it would give Israel to blow up their only permanent ally. If that was a deliberate choice by Israel, then that choice was certainly a mistake. Which is... exactly what I said in post#25. A mistake either way.

-Ogami
 
Ogami said:
The Question said:
And I'd assume you know just what it is a reconnaissance aircraft is for, or that someone in a torpedo boat, unlike someone in a fighter, is not moving too fast or at the wrong angle to make a visual identification of a target vessel.

Okay, so Israel commanders ordered the jet to fire on an American warship, while they were fighting a war against all of their surrounding Arab neighbors, to do.... what?


The same reason anyone attacks an intelligence-gathering force -- to prevent people from gathering intelligence. Israel didn't want the U.S. to know exactly what Israel was doing.

The problem with tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories is that they don't explain what happens after the wacko theory. You've got my undivided attention, Question. What amazing strategic advantage would it give Israel to blow up all U.S. warships in the area while they're fighting Arab states armed to the teeth by Soviet advisors?

When did attacking one intelligence ship become "blow up all U.S. warships"? Are you even remotely capable of not committing logical errors in defense of Israel? Is putting on the Stupid Helmet the only means at your disposal for trying to make your points in this discussion?

Can't answer that, can you?

Oh, I believe I just did.

Apparently, though, your "Israel can do no wrong" blinders prevent you from seeing even the most painfully obvious evidence against their sainthood.

And apparently it will take a biblical miracle for you to explain what possible advantage it would give Israel to blow up their only permanent ally.

No, it really won't. First, it served to disable American intelligence-gathering in the area. If they had succeeded in convincing the U.S. that it was an Egyptian attack force that sunk Liberty, they would have pulled the U.S. out of neutrality and into active fighting alongside them. Based on the fact that they only informed the U.S. Naval Attache of their attack after failing to actually sink the ship, that scenario can't be ruled out.

If that was a deliberate choice by Israel, then that choice was certainly a mistake. Which is... exactly what I said in post#25. A mistake either way.

And a mistake they should have been (but weren't) made to pay for, and doubly so as a deliberate, premeditated attack.
 
Wilkipedia's entry says pretty much what I said over the Liberty mistake:

Both the Israeli and American governments have conducted multiple inquiries into the incident, and have issued reports concluding that the attack was a tragic mistake, caused by confusion about the identity of the USS Liberty. These conclusions have been challenged from several fronts, most notably by an organization of Liberty survivors, as well as by some former high-ranking officials in the United States government. The matter is considered closed for purposes of Israeli-American relations, but remains controversial in the public debate.

Israel's official position remains to this day that the attack was an accident, claiming that it was assured by the United States that no U.S. ships were in the area. Israel has also claimed that its air and naval forces mistakenly identified Liberty as the Egyptian vessel El Quseir. Proponents of the accident explanation add that mistakes were inevitable and understandable in the tense atmosphere of the Six-Day War, and that no concrete motive existed for Israel to initiate a surprise attack against a country that was quickly becoming its most powerful and important ally.

and

The United States and Israel exchanged diplomatic notes after several inquiries. Though the United States never officially accepted the Israeli explanation, it agreed to accept indemnities of $13 million, for damage and casualties.

Just like the payment the U.S. government made to the people who were in that Iranian airliner we shot down. Case closed. Time to put your tin-foil hat away on that one.

-Ogami
 
The Question wrote:

The same reason anyone attacks an intelligence-gathering force -- to prevent people from gathering intelligence. Israel didn't want the U.S. to know exactly what Israel was doing.

I meant what I said when I stated that I was aware of the Liberty mistake. This includes the knowledge that the Israeli operation to destroy the Egyptian Air Force on the ground (with repeated waves) was already underway. There would have been no advantage gained, even assuming the Americans would have warned the Egyptians in any sense. There is a historical Cold War context to the Six-Day War, and sadly for you, I do have a command of the facts.

Prior to the Six-Day War, the Israelis were threatened by the bellicose Soviet ambassador that they faced direct Soviet invasion if Israel did not back down. Thus Israel had clear reason to maintain the United States as an ally, certainly with the clear threat of Soviet intervention given to them.

Here's an article, not that it will affect your wack conspiracy theories in the slightest:

The Russians Were Coming: The Soviet Military Threat in the 1967 Six-Day War
By Isabella Ginor

Editor's Summary: New evidence reveals that during the 1967 Six-Day War the Soviet Union set in motion military operations to assist Egypt and especially Syria, first in seeking to overcome Israel and then in response to Israel’s pre-emptive attack. These potential steps included a naval landing, airborne reinforcement and air support for ground operations. Action was aborted at the last minute due, among other factors, to a firm US response and dissension among Soviet leaders in Moscow.

8:48 a.m. on June 10, 1967 was “a time of great concern and utmost gravity” in the White House Situation Room, according to U.S. Ambassador to the USSR Llewellyn Thompson, one of the presidential advisors present there. (1) A message had just been received over the Moscow-Washington hotline from Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin threatening a Soviet military action that might lead to nuclear confrontation.(2) Newly received evidence now shows the threat was not an empty one: the Soviets had prepared a naval landing, with air support, on Israel's shores.

New evidence summarized in this article indicates that the Soviet intervention was not only planned but actually set in motion before being aborted. Soviet officials interviewed insist that such operations were meant only to deter Israel from overwhelming Egypt and, especially, Syria, as well as to stop the United States from intervening on Israel’s side. In order to achieve this outcome, however, the projected action had to be made known to these adversaries, and this was carefully avoided by the Soviets. Yet details of the operation were kept in total secrecy, have been denied to this day, and remained generally unknown to Israeli and American intelligence.

Thus, unless the Soviets grossly overestimated the other side’s intelligence capability, this indicates that the operation was to be implemented, not just threatened. Moreover, preparations for this operation began well before the Soviets even accused Israel of offensive designs, the supposed reason for the intervention.

Well before 1967, Israel had been targeted by the KGB's Foreign Intelligence (First) Directorate as a theater of operations during a larger East-West conflict. Preparations had been made there for parachuting at least diversionnye razvedyvatelnye gruppy (DRGs--sabotage-intelligence groups) to destroy Israeli targets. During 1964-66, according to documents supplied by the defecting KGB archivist Vasili Mitrokhin, Israel was one of the countries where caches of arms and radio equipment were prepositioned for such operations. Mitrokhin claims some of these were boobytrapped and may be in place to this day.(3) The direct involvement of Soviet personnel on Israeli soil, at least on a small scale, had thus already been considered and approved.

The Soviet Union played a central role in escalating Middle East tensions to the brink of war in 1967, and evidence is accumulating that it actually instigated the conflict. In his recently published memoirs, Nikita S. Khrushchev asserts that the USSR's military command first encouraged high-ranking Egyptian and Syrian delegations, in a series of “hush-hush” mutual visits, to go to war, then persuaded the Soviet political leadership to support these steps, in the full knowledge they were aimed at starting a war to destroy Israel.(4)

The conventional Western chronology of this crisis starts on May 13, 1967 when Egypt made the false charge, based on information provided by the USSR, that Israel was massing forces on its border with Syria in preparation for an attack. But even as the crisis unfolded, on May 26, a U.S. diplomat remarked to a Soviet interlocutor: “It almost seemed as though the Soviet Union had been aware in advance of the coming Near Eastern crisis, since [Communist Party Secretary Leonid I.] Brezhnev had first called for withdrawal of the Sixth Fleet [from the Mediterranean] on April 24.”(5)
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2000/issue4/jv4n4a5.html
 
Yeah, if that somehow excuses Israel's war crime against the U.S., or our own government's complicity in that crime by allowing it to go unpunished, I really have no idea how.
 
The Question wrote:

They didn't shoot up a warship the first time, you ignorant piece of shit. They shot up a SIGnals INTelligence ship.

You seem to be awfully angry, perhaps because I have not bowed to your awesome intellect. If I tell you I respect you for your brains, will that make you feel better? It's not my fault if you have low self-esteem.

-Ogami
 
Ogami said:
The Question wrote:

They didn't shoot up a warship the first time, you ignorant piece of shit. They shot up a SIGnals INTelligence ship.

You seem to be awfully angry, perhaps because I have not bowed to your awesome intellect.

I'm not angry, I'm amused that someone who has as advanced a vocabulary as yours is so either unable or unwilling to actually demonstrate that he understands what he's reading.
 
Back
Top