| Author | Message | | Cowboy | | Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:56 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Nonetheless, if simply following orders was all the pilots were allowed to do, then I suppose they would have willing attacked the warship ship shown below. After all, purportedly, their orders were to attack if the ship looks like a warship -- any warship will do as long as it's not Israeli. |
Shall we now discuss the fact that the US told Israel that there weren't any such US ships in the area? | |  | | DanielDives | | Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: |
| | Shall we tell the world that you don't give a fuck about US personnel? | | | | Ken Halliwell | | Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:44 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Quote: | | Quote: | | Quote: | | In the IDF's Ram Ron report, it cites one of the IDF's rules of engagement: "...the [IDF] forces should at all cost avoid attacks on any neutral merchant ship or warships." To me, "at all cost" means make damn sure you are certain the target is truly an enemy vessel before unleasing deadly force. This would seem to exclude attacking unidentified vessels, but yet that's exactly what occured -- according to the IDF. |
Now tell us about the instructions that they had about assuming what was a warship. |
Instead of repeating myself here, you can read all about it in this essay: http://usslibertyinquiry.googlepages.com/essay2 |
Now tell us about the instructions that they had about assuming what was a warship. |
From the Ram Ron Report: | Quote: | | Lieut. Col. Shmuel testifies that the Air Force was ordered to attack the ship after it had been identified as a warship by the Naval Force. From the evidence submitted by the Naval Force, this point lacks clarity and it seems that the order given was to attack the ship after its identification as a warship and it is not clear whether the intention was that the absolute identification as a warship was to be made by an additional identification by the pilots, or that the identification as warship by the Naval Force based on the ship's speed was to suffice. At any rate, it appears from the recorded tape of the conversation of the pilots who attacked the ship (Exh. "D"), who were in radio contact with the Torpedo boats, that he ship was identified by the aeroplanes as a military ship with a single mast (gun?) and a single funnel In the report of the pilots after the operation (Ex. "H") it is expressly stated that, "The size of the target appeared to them to be a destroyer or something smaller and that they received confirmation to attack the ships from the Torpedo boats and the Air Control". It appears from Exhibit "L" that the confirmation by the Torpedo boats to the attack by the aeroplanes was given after the pilots had been asked once more to identify the target and had been told that the target was escaping, probably in the direction of Port Said, and that it was a military ship, without the pilots having been able to spot an identification marks or flag. At any rate, it is not certain whether this conversation took place before or during the actual attack |
From the Yerushalmi report: | Quote: | As a result of the request of the Navy H.Q. through its representative with the Air Force, aircraft was dispatched to the target. The aircraft carried out a run over the ship in an attempt to identify it. According to their statements, they were looking for a flag, but found none; likewise no other identification mark was observed As against this, it was established that the painting of the ship was grey (the color of a warship), and two guns were situated in the bow. This was reported to H.Q.
On the assumption that they were facing an enemy target an order was given to the aircraft to attack. |
From the IDF History Report: | Quote: | ...The identification of the vessel was not intended to check the ship's nationality, but rather to emphasize the aim of attacking only a warship, and thus to avoid unnecessarily hitting Israel Navy torpedo boats.
...
The two "Mirage" aircraft reached the ship at approximately 1400 hours. The formation leader, Captain Spector, descended to a height of 3,000 feet and circled the vessel twice; his number two executed one identification run. These runs revealed to the pilots that the ship was not an Israeli vessel since she did not have the identifying markings (a white cross on a red background). The ship was colored battleship grey, had a foremast, one smokestack and two guns an her bow. No flag or other identifying sign was discerned. The formation leader reported this to the torpedo boats and Control and then the aircraft received permission to attack. |
The above mixed-bag of variations on a theme tells us that the pilots were not given specific instructions on how to identify a warship; although, one of the reports tell us that the pilots thought the ship appeared like a "military ship" and maybe a destroyer -- indicating the pilots had some training or knowledge about the appearance of different ships. Additionally, the pilots made at least one attempt to identify the ship, but were not able to see a flag or markings.
In effect, the pilots were the on-the-scene eyes for their ground controllers and the torpedo boat Divison commander. Thus, if any of the above can be believed, it appears the pilots were somewhat on their own regarding assumptions about what was or was not a warship; and, based on target description information from the pilots', they then became dependent on their gound controllers and the torpedo boat division commander for decision making regarding attack orders. So, accurate information from the pilots was paramont for good decision making. Clearly, the description of the ship given by the pilots was inadequate and flawed: the ship had three large and easy to see masts, not one; the ship had a highly visible dish antenna (similar to a large RADAR antenna), on its aft deck house; the ship appeared like a cargo ship, not a destroyer; the ship was well-marked (as evidenced by the IAF's early morning recon sighting); the ship was flying a flag; there would have been no large wake behind the ship, as would be expected for a high-speed ship, and the ship had no large guns on its decks. | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:59 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Shall we tell the world that you don't give a fuck about US personnel? |
You lie about everything else. Why not that also?  | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 2:07 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | The above mixed-bag of variations on a theme tells us that the pilots were not given specific instructions on how to identify a warship; although, one of the reports tell us that the pilots thought the ship appeared like a "military ship" and maybe a destroyer -- indicating the pilots had some training or knowledge about the appearance of different ships. |
If their navy was an indication, that is quite possibly true.
Israel Navy Ship Identification Handbook
http://www.libertyincident.com/ship-ident.html | | | | Ken Halliwell | | Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 2:22 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Have the USS Liberty survivors tried to contact [any of] those involved in the attack [or entire command structure]? | I don't know.
I'm aware of several attempts to communicate with IMOD (Israel Ministry of Defense) in an attempt to obtain an explanation for the different looking "gun camera" photos in the IDF History Report and Cristol's book, and validate that the photos in Cristol's book were truly supplied by the IDF. The IMOD responded, saying nothing to clarify the matter, but promised to check into it. That was several years ago. Still no response after sending IMOD several follow-up letters that were not acknowledged. | | | | Ken Halliwell | | Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Quote: | | The above mixed-bag of variations on a theme tells us that the pilots were not given specific instructions on how to identify a warship; although, one of the reports tell us that the pilots thought the ship appeared like a "military ship" and maybe a destroyer -- indicating the pilots had some training or knowledge about the appearance of different ships. |
If their navy was an indication, that is quite possibly true. | If the IDF story is true, whatever level of ship ID training the IDF Navy guys had, it must have been extremely poor; or, perhaps, the IDF guys only saw what they wanted to see. If you desperately want to see a ship that appears like a known enemy ship, I suspect your mind will find a way to see one -- regardless of its actual appearance. Although, in this case, the differences between Liberty and El Quseir were not minor. And, if the IDF story is true, any ship that appeared a cargo ship with a centrally located superstrucure and stack would have been mistaken for El Quseir.
See http://usslibertyinquiry.googlepages.com/essay3 for more about this matter. | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 7:00 pm Post subject: |
| | Nobody said they made good assumptions. | | | | Ken Halliwell | | Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:00 pm Post subject: |
| Thanks all for an interesting time discussing the USS Liberty attack. I've got to run now -- got other matters that need attention. Yes, I really do have a life...
I'll stop back from time-to-time, to check for activity on this thread, but not the others -- too much of a time killer...
BTW, I update and add stuff to my USS Liberty website on an irregular basis. So, be sure to check it out from time-to-time: http://ussliberty-inquiry.us
And keep in mind the statement by Commander David Lewis, USS Liberty attack survivor: "If it was an accident, it was the best planned accident I've ever heard of." | | | | snowqueen | | Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:33 am Post subject: |
| I have a question. What ever happened to these men | Quote: | | the IDF claims its MTB captains mistakenly identified USS Liberty for the much smaller Egyptian cargo ship El Quseir. | Were they relieved of their duties? | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
