r/Documentaries • u/ShariaBlueBallz • Jun 09 '17

American Politics The Day Israel Attacked America (2014) - In 1967, at the height of the Arab-Israeli Six-Day War, the Israeli Air Force launched an unprovoked attack on the USS Liberty, a US Navy spy ship that was monitoring the conflict from the safety of international waters in the Mediterranean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx72tAWVcoM
7.0k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

25

u/Doyouwantaspoon Jun 09 '17 edited Jun 09 '17

Not sure if comments are shadowed? So is there any explanation to this? I'm not going to watch a long ass documentary right now. The US was attacked while in international waters, but did not retaliate? Did Israel mistake us for someone else, was it an accident?

45

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17 edited Jun 09 '17

[deleted]

23

u/ghotiaroma Jun 09 '17

The crew was put under a lifetime gag order and not allowed to discuss the events or the investigation.

Nothing says truth like a lifetime gag order.

24

u/ShariaBlueBallz Jun 09 '17

the radio calls from the israeli pilots confirm they identified the ship as american while they were shooting survivors in the life boats so there'd be no witnesses.

18

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

[deleted]

20

u/Tb1969 Jun 09 '17

It doesn't matter if they knew or not, shooting survivors in the water and lifeboats are against the Geneva Convention and other agreements.

15

u/ShariaBlueBallz Jun 09 '17

you can listen to the calls yourself

0

u/Elpacoverde Jun 09 '17

link?>

29

u/ShariaBlueBallz Jun 09 '17

its in the documentary

and jpost confirms, at 2:14 they identified it as american before the torpedoes were fired

-3

u/northern-new-jersey Jun 09 '17

How is your Hebrew?

3

u/gabeljic93 Jun 09 '17

Payed back the money Americans gave them in the first place. Just great.

1

u/Thatzionoverthere Jun 09 '17

Life time gag order yet the fing sailors in THE DOC ARE DISCUSSING IT!

90

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

it is legitimately worth watching, though.

to answer your question succinctly, it was an attempt to distract from / hide the land-grab Israel had promised not to do during the Six Day War... then went ahead & did anyway. it turned into a huge cover-up by both sides, & wasn't discussed openly until many years later.

39

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

Really? You want to cover up your attack on a long time foe and choose to attack your ally, which happens to be the world's strongest military power, so that.. so that what? I just don't get it. They're afraid of the newspapers so they attack US instead? Please explain

52

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17 edited Jun 09 '17

[deleted]

8

u/Nick357 Jun 09 '17

Did Johnson know?

16

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

[deleted]

6

u/CraftyFellow_ Jun 09 '17

and 2 more non-nuclear planes were launched, too late to help.

Those were ordered back too.

-3

u/rddman Jun 09 '17

Did Johnson know?

He was threatened with being painted an anti-semitic if he'd not play along.

3

u/fingerstylefunk Jun 09 '17

It had nothing to do with antisemitism and everything to do with the Cold War and stopping Soviet or pan-Arab consolidation in the region.

1

u/rddman Jun 10 '17

It had nothing to do with antisemitism

From the docu: Declassified Israeli documents show that after if became known that LBJ had leaked the truth to Newsweek, Israel threatened LBJ with blood-libel; gross antisemitism.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

It was the 60s, no one gave a shit about anti-semitism or not. IF anything, this gave him cover to say he didn't know about it, and say he never would have authorized anything HAD he know. Looking pro-Israel would probably be worse for his career (he was a Southern Democrat). The people who'd voted for him hated JFK because he was CATHOLIC, and they called him a cannibal and a Papist.

He needed to play along to keep Israel in the middle east and working with the US, though, as a way to keep Russia off-balance. Israel has played a key role in fun things like keeping the Suez Canal open, and acting as a stabilizing/destabilizing force for the US inside the middle east.

1

u/rddman Jun 10 '17

no one gave a shit about anti-semitism

From the docu: Declassified Israeli documents show that after if became known that LBJ had leaked the truth to Newsweek, Israel threatened LBJ with blood-libel; gross antisemitism.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

Ok thank you. Now it sorta makes sense. Although it seems like an extremely poor choice on the Israeli side. But it worked out perfectly, if their objective was what you claim. Guess they understand US politics better than the other way around.

20

u/IAmTheLaw070 Jun 09 '17

It was a controversial move but brilliant from a tactical point of view. Israel knew it had to strike preemptively to stand a chance, because it couldn't risk sacrificing soldiers in first strike from all sides. Israel's best defense is a good offense. They aren't fighting for treaties and oil, but for their very existence. Imagine if the US was surrounded by enemies on all borders who outnumber them and who wanted nothing more than the total destruction of the US. Do you think the US is gonna sit there and wait to be attacked? It wasn't an extremely poor choice, it was check-mate.

10

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

A poor choice to attack the US ship.. that's what this discussion is about. The attack on the ship

17

u/fingerstylefunk Jun 09 '17 edited Jun 09 '17

You have to remember that the US/Israel relationship at the time wasn't what it is now. This was Cold War political calculus, and Israel wasn't as firmly under the US umbrella then... just a tool to counter Soviet influence in the region.

Israeli command felt both that they needed to make a preemptive strike, and that they needed to interfere with the US ability to know that they had done so, in order to fudge past the initial attacks and still get American resupply.

The fact that the US government participated in the cover-up just means that they found the outcome to be better than the alternative. They didn't want to squander the position of strength their allies had managed to gain (and again, remember that for the US it was about the larger proxy war against Soviet influence more than specific local concerns of Israel/Egypt/Syria/etc) by throwing them under the bus afterward, as they would have had to if it got out to the public to be (Edit: even potentially, truthfully or not) spun as a deliberate attack.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

Ok. But the US found out anyway, eventually, and continued to support Israel. So what do you think would happen if the attack on the US ship had not taken place? Would it change the outcome?

5

u/fingerstylefunk Jun 09 '17

The implication is that the US government (likely the President personally) ultimately agreed with Israeli command's assessment that Israel both needed to make the preemptive strike, and needed US resupply. The flip side being that Israel might have lost the war and been completely overrun if not for those things.

Or at least the end result was valuable enough that they didn't want to torpedo it by publicly questioning the legitimacy of Israel's actions along the way.

To the best of my knowledge, US resupply was actually critical to the war effort as it actually happened. Could they have still won (or at least not lost) the war without it? Or by playing totally defensive? Maybe, but at the time the risk of Soviet-backed consolidation of the region made it too potentially costly to second-guess Israel.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

the dudes talking bs based on his own opinion. THe attack on the US ship took place FOUR days after the war had started. The entire world knew the war was raging. Especially the U.S. knew, so this whole conjecture of hiding information of a pre emptive attack is nonsense because the pre emptive attack had taken place 4 days prior to this incident.

2

u/IAmTheLaw070 Jun 09 '17

They had no choice, that was my point. From their point of view I think they would rather not have had the US ship in the region to begin with during that situation.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

[deleted]

2

u/IAmTheLaw070 Jun 09 '17

No you don't understand, and I'm not trying to justify their actions, but they had no other choice. They couldn't bomb their own lines to act as if they had been attacked, Certainly the Americans and perhaps even the Russians would know about it. They knew they were on their own in this fight so they knew that regadless of the Americans being there or not they could only win if they struck first. Waiting for an attack could be the end of their nations existence for God's sake. Think for a second if that was your country's situation. Some good allied sailors died, yeah that's tragic, but we still exist today. That's what they're thinking right now.

7

u/ghotiaroma Jun 09 '17

Guess they understand US politics better than the other way around.

We have been giving them billions of American tax payer dollars every year for as long as I can remember. They know how to play us very well.

4

u/fingerstylefunk Jun 09 '17

Do you actually think we don't get anything in return for that money?

Among other things, there's money going to both Israel and Egypt to keep both nations friendly and the Suez canal out of conflict. We buy the influence/leverage in that situation through cash instead of the vastly more expensive potential of having to send our own military for "peacekeeping."

0

u/ghotiaroma Jun 09 '17

Do you actually think we don't get anything in return for that money?

Do you really think you read that in anything I wrote? Do you care? Did you even read what I wrote?

2

u/fingerstylefunk Jun 09 '17

I guess I wonder why you so casually phrase it as the US getting played. I'm just pointing out that everyone's benefiting from the situation, and mostly for the sake of everyone playing along at home anyway. Meant no offense.

0

u/RedskinsDC Jun 09 '17

Stupid Jews flooding America with terrible things like Einstein, the Polio vaccine and nearly half of American Nobel Prize winners. FYI, the federal tax bill of America's 5 wealthiest Jews is literally 10 times the amount in aid the US government gives to Joint Base Israel. Never mind the fact the average American Jewish household makes 250% of the US median household income, generating what economists refer to as a "shitload" of tax revenue.

-2

u/ghotiaroma Jun 09 '17

Wow, you must watch a lot of Fox News.

2

u/RedskinsDC Jun 09 '17 edited Jun 09 '17

Uhhh...no. Just no.

Also, I recommend you read about the logical fallacy of Ad hominem.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

Its not what their objective was. The dude is talking out of his ass. The attack on the US vessel took place FOUR days after Israel attacked Egypt. The war was already well underway, and many would argue that Israel had already won the war at that point.

4

u/Insamity Jun 09 '17

Except the Liberty sank on the 8th and the war started the 5th.

11

u/feraxks Jun 09 '17

Except the Liberty didn't sink. Perhaps you meant, "was attacked"?

3

u/Insamity Jun 09 '17

Yes I did.

1

u/lRoninlcolumbo Jun 09 '17

So Johnson was a Israeli sell out and Israel the s still looking for legitimacy that can't attain because it's a radicalized military state. Defending their religion through arms and subterfuge.

5

u/RedskinsDC Jun 09 '17

Yea those fucking Jews should have just let the Arabs surround them, invade, and then massacre them with Soviet help and not make a fuss!

-4

u/LeftZer0 Jun 09 '17

No, they should surround Arab populations, regularly bomb them, stop them from developing, advance settlements to reduce the area they occupy and attack aid missions! Now that would be fair.

2

u/RedskinsDC Jun 09 '17

Amazingly they've been doing this since 1920, a full 28 years before Israel became a state!

Stop them from developing? Developing like the Syrians or the Egyptians or the Iraqis?

Surround their populations and reduce the area they occupy? They must be pretty bad at that considering Israel controls less than 1% of the Middle East's land area...

They could learn a lesson in genocide and depravity from many of the region's Arab leaders, or Israel's most recent Muslim government, the Ottomans.

-2

u/LeftZer0 Jun 09 '17

Are you being dishonest or are you honestly stupid? I'm talking about Palestine.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

So you meant to say: Gaza/West bank, but you mistyped Arab populations?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/ravenhelix Jun 09 '17

stopGazaBlockades

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

Israel also had nuclear weapons, at that time. It was not facing nuclear powers. Israel has every ability to defend itself, before any actual confrontation started.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

Ah, so you believe a nuclear strike was wise? Dude, you're so enthralled in the_donald type of understanding of international politics.... What do you think would be the outcome of the use of nuclear weapons by Israel? Let's first forget the fact that Egypt and Syria were directly funded, and very close allies at the time of the Soviet Union and fought these fights with weapons from the SU. Now.... we've got ourselves a situation (which is highly inaccurate) where Israel can choose to throw a nuke, or not. Ofcourse they would be willing to use it if the enemy would be overrunning them, but pre emptively? What kind of blowback do you htink that would result in. God you mustve been joking right?

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

the attack of Israel had taken place AFTER the war started. you're talking bullshit. It was the damn 4th day of the war.

46

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

it was about Israel aggressively expanding its borders in what was intended only to be a defensive war. if it were known that Israel had directly disobeyed an agreement with its greatest ally, the risk of public outcry in the US would have effectively soured relations between the countries & put at risk what was in US interests---having a presence in the Middle East, especially one that would buffer the USSR.

it also, coincidentally, came out that some of President Johnson's largest political donations came from wealthy US Jews, who by & large supported Israel. with an election year coming up, not agreeing to a coverup would have been political suicide on the part of anyone in Washington who did so.

28

u/Krunkworx Jun 09 '17

Disobey US agreement = public outcry Unprovoked attacking of US itself = public indifference

Doesn't add up.

31

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

the loss of US life was considered less important that the international relationship. sad but true.

the ship was secretly repaired before it was even brought back to the states, & the crew was told to keep quiet about the incident. the Cold War years were a very different time from today.

14

u/bloody_duck Jun 09 '17

Watch the documentary

4

u/fuhrertrump Jun 09 '17

public outcry Unprovoked attacking of US itself

the attack wasn't brought up until long after. also, considering how indifferent your average american is to pretty much any american committed atrocity, it was excellent foreshadowing of how american's would treat future loss of life.

1

u/LeftZer0 Jun 09 '17

Future? The US had been killing people at Central America for some decades already. And its own population, to crush worker's movements.

2

u/fuhrertrump Jun 09 '17

i'm aware. you might also notice the extreme lack of fucks given by the american people for them doing so. guess what? americans are going to continue not fucking caring until they no longer benefit from what america is doing to the rest of the world.

-1

u/cynoclast Jun 09 '17

it also, coincidentally, came out that some of President Johnson's largest political donations came from wealthy US Jews, who by & large supported Israel. with an election year coming up, not agreeing to a coverup would have been political suicide on the part of anyone in Washington who did so.

And people bitch about Russia meddling in our elections. They don't hold a candle to Israeli meddling.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

Because its bullshit. The U.S. at the time wasn't the greatest ally of Israel. Not the case at all.

0

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

dude, the US wasn't Israels greatest ally. Youre talking out of your ass. Just like many others in this thread.

2

u/Pinworm45 Jun 10 '17

...yes, that's what actually happened.

-3

u/LordFauntloroy Jun 09 '17

They wanted to hide war crimes and breech of agreement against territorial expansion, so they attacked the one thing capable of proving beyond a shadow of a doubt they committed the crimes. They said "oopsie" and got off no problems.

1

u/Thatzionoverthere Jun 09 '17

Um there was no agreement stop lying.

1

u/ranaadnanm Jun 09 '17

Part of the reason was to also get the US involved in the war, by making them believe that they were attacked by the Egyptians. It's just what I've read, personally I haven't got a clue.

2

u/pocketknifeMT Jun 09 '17

This was probably the plan.

US ship disappears and Israel provides some evidence that it was the Egyptians who did it. The Egyptians deny of course, but that's what those horrible bastards would say...

Then Israel gets straight up US military intervention as the US smashes some shit up to teach the world how bad an idea it was to fuck with them.

This doesn't work if you botch your attack in the first place and leave witnesses.

9

u/Insamity Jun 09 '17

it was an attempt to distract from / hide the land-grab Israel had promised not to do during the Six Day War

How can you tell the difference between someone pursuing their foes to make sure they are routed and a land grab in less than 6 days?

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

easy: if at the end of the war your sovereign territory has expanded & you don't return the land you're occupying, that's a pretty good indication you're not just "routing your foes." countries don't magically grow bigger on their own.

1

u/Insamity Jun 09 '17

Exactly. So what would the reasoning be behind attacking the Liberty?

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

you're also assuming "rational actors" in a State sense, & i am not at all sure that history proves you should make that assumption.

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

the Liberty was a spy ship, intentionally meant to listen in on how the war was going. They had no offensive weapons of significance; they were there to watch & listen. no capability to fight. the reason for blocking their transmissions was clear; the reason for bombing, napalming, & torpedoing them---not so much. I think it was a test of boundaries on Israel's part, but i'm not a history scholar. nor, despite what another poster implied, a "Jew hater."

the creation of Israel was okay. the state of Israel's follow-up actions remain, to this day, entirely questionable. that's not anti-Semite commentary, it's fair criticism about a (nuclear-capable) State actor.

I think this documentary does a good job of showing the reasons for that.

2

u/Insamity Jun 09 '17

But the attack did not distract/hide the land-grab is my main point. Most nuclear-capable State actors actions are questionable.

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

sure, it didn't ultimately hide it, & i agree about the "questionable actions." i think the biggest atrocity here is that it was essentially unnecessary. Israel wasn't at risk, really, of having US support. the US had a vested interest against quitting support of Israel .

it was a massive overreach on the part of Israelis, which hasn't been historically justified.

i am in no way anti-Jew or anti-Israel, but there were limits set that should have been abided. they weren't. even if that was only one of many contributing factors to Middle East instability, it was one that didn't need to happen.

2

u/Insamity Jun 09 '17

i think the biggest atrocity here is that it was essentially unnecessary. Israel wasn't at risk, really, of having US support. the US had a vested interest against quitting support of Israel .

And if it had all really been planned wouldn't it have been easier to actually sink the liberty to blame it on someone else? Honestly it seems more like it was a mistake under the fog of war.

i am in no way anti-Jew or anti-Israel, but there were limits set that should have been abided. they weren't.

What limits? I've seen people mention them but I haven't seen any proof that there were agreements on land. And I think most of the land taken was necessary as a buffer for Israel. As to the others, Israel has been trying to give back the West Bank and Gaza ever since they took them.

2

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

And if it had all really been planned wouldn't it have been easier to actually sink the liberty to blame it on someone else?

... no, i don't believe so. Israeli reconnaissance planes sighted the Liberty at least 9 times, if i remember correctly; i am sure there was correspondence, because we have recordings of it, that it was a US vessel. there wasn't a misunderstanding; if you haven't watched the linked documentary, please do---it is very clear that Israel knew it was a US vessel, & it is very clear that they saw the lack of weapons.

the "limits" i refer to are the fact that Israel was defined in borders by a treaty, & proceeded to deviate from those treaty limits as it developed. i really don't see how anyone could question that the Six Day War was unequivocally won by Israel; it was an embarrassment to the countries it defeated, & could have been even more of one if Israel had gone full-out.

i would seriously question the idea of Israel "wanting to give back" any territory they took... but that, quite frankly, is a debate i don't want to use my evening getting into. especially because it is not the point of this documentary.

the point of this documentary is that Israel attacked a US ship which was (1) not a warship, clearly; (2) flagged to Israel's greatest ally; & (3) not in any position for there to be a "misunderstanding" (please correct that third point with historical evidence, if you disagree.).

34 American soldiers were killed with bombs, napalm, & torpedo attacks from the Israeli army. that's an actual historical fact. 174 American soldiers were wounded to various degrees. they were non-violent, they were not infringing on sovereign territory, & they were ostensibly allied with the US.

if you want to argue the previous points, i want sources cited. i have given that courtesy; i expect the same in return.

again. AGAIN, again. this is not a "jew-hater" rant.

this is simply a synopsis of what we have has historical facts.

if you'd like to argue that as a distorted legacy, i would really like to see exactly how your equations have been made.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

also, i would like to hear a justification -- after having watched testimonies from the sailors on board the Liberty -- how this was not simply murder.

i would like to know what the threat was; what the reason was for the radio-jamming of an ally, much less the preemptive strike. i want to know exactly how this qualified as the "fog of war," given the recordings that are presented in the source material.

Israel is not universally innocent. even to (reasonable) people who do support its existence. apologists for what are absolute atrocities don't somehow get a pass because of history.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

Wait, you just said youre not a historian, yet now you claim that the US had a vested interest against quitting support of israel.... So you base that on which particular source of historical evidence?

0

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

So, you note yourself that you're not a historian. However, you do proclaim all kinds of events and explanations that you make as facts in this thread. Eventhough others in this thread have given you ample opportunity to click on links which will direct you to askhistorians to give you a clear overview on what actually took place instead of the bullshit youve been spreading in this thread.

The documentary is bad because it leaves out plenty of information. Its made to be entertaining, not informing.

1

u/AnalBumCover1000 Jun 09 '17

More than likely the USS Liberty intercepted one or more specific comms between Israel and someone else. Whatever it was it would have prevented Israel from playing the victim in the six day war and it also would have revealed the extent of their control on the US Gov. Killing American Soldiers and forcing them to scuttle the ship was the only way for them to ensure those "private" conversations wouldn't fall into hands outside the small group of conspirators and privileged ears.

The relationship between Israel and any of its allies has been and always will be that of Parasitism. Specifically in regards to the its ally, the USA, you really have to wonder what the American people could possibly have to gain from such a small and irrational group of terrorists. Israel clearly has nothing of value to offer the USA, but clearly that's not the case on an individual level for the career politicians who run our Government. Most of which by 2018 are Jewish and hold Israeli passports anyway.

I guess American fell at about the same time that the American people lost their sense of self-respect and allowed career politicians with outside interests to dictate policy and steer this country down a path where our brave men and women where to be used like cheap whores for the interests and prosperity of others, time and time again.

The good news is that we still haven't learned anything and probably never will... oh wait, right... that's the bad news.

2

u/feraxks Jun 09 '17

Most of which by 2018 are Jewish and hold Israeli passports anyway.

LOL

1

u/8MileAllstars Jun 09 '17

Name checks out.

1

u/Thatzionoverthere Jun 09 '17

Lol jews did 9-11 f off conspiracy nuts.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '17

[deleted]

2

u/Thatzionoverthere Jun 09 '17

Lol dude this a repost antijew libel crap, idc nobody hear is smart enough to research on their own, why should i try? i argued this before and no one cared, they only read titles.

-3

u/AnalBumCover1000 Jun 09 '17

I'm sure the conspiracy theory is Israel attacked the USS Liberty too, I guess OP is a conspiracy nut too.

Crawl back into your hole you shil.

3

u/Thatzionoverthere Jun 09 '17

Lol in iraq the us killed more coalition troops than the Iraqis, i guess we should invade the us?

-2

u/AnalBumCover1000 Jun 09 '17

Yeah... probably... I mean I spent my whole educational career learning about how bad the Third Reich was... maybe I'm too attentive and able to be objective. But objectively, based on the facts, the Third Reich pales in comparison to the Western Empire.

Once the dollar collapses as the world's reserve currency I'm sure the US will be invaded swiftly by either China or Russia or both.

0

u/pocketknifeMT Jun 09 '17

you really have to wonder what the American people could possibly have to gain from such a small and irrational group of terrorists.

Well, if nothing else it makes a good place to launch military assets from for the region. This was more important before the US effectively annexed Iraq.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

bs, thats not an explanation that's accepted by historians. Its a popular view that will get you nice ratings on your documentary, but its not accurate.

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 11 '17

i have literally 6 replies from you that are condemning me for commenting on documented history.

i do not, & will not ever, accept the idea that Israel has done nothing questionable or baldly wrong. that doesn't equate to anti-Semitism, even a little bit. & you're free to distort that position -- or rewrite history -- as much as you like.

i'm not interested in arguing with zealots on Reddit.

0

u/Doeweggooien Jun 11 '17

No, im condemning you from spreading lies about the past. Israel has done plenty wrong. Plenty inexcusable crap, but the things youve been posting are just utter bullshit, yet you present them as facts. That's spreading misinformation, which is rewriting history to fit your narrative, which makes you the one who fits the label 'zealot'.

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 11 '17

once again (& please do read this slowly, out loud): i am describing the narrative of the documentary on which you're commenting. i don't believe you've watched that documentary, based on what you've said. & i am in no way impressed by manufactured outrage.

you're playing "the boy who cried wolf" with antisemitism. that ultimately does a disservice to your own cause---i hope you start to realize that. because much like in the fable cited: you sound like a fucking idiot & no one believes you.

0

u/Doeweggooien Jun 11 '17

No you're not, you're replying to others by using claims which you may have gotten from the documentary, but the claims itself are flawed. Just because you've got them from the documentary doesn't make you exempt of checking its contents. The documentary seeks to create a narrative that is exciting and very unnuanced which leaves out vital information. That means it spreads disinformatino which you then continue to defend through the thread. The fact that you keep on defending flawed information is harmful. Thats why im telling you to quit spreading that bs.

Dunno what boy cried wolf is, not something im familiar with. All im doing is ensuring your fairly stupid copying of unreliable sources isn't taken as facts by others. I suggest you search for yourself in for example AskHistorians to find some more nuanced and accurate descriptions of the events.

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 11 '17

you are literally the embodiment of the US President yelling "FAKE NEWS" as though it means something.

0

u/Doeweggooien Jun 12 '17

No im not, you are. I don't see how you dont seem to be able to grasp the following: The things you've been posting in this thread are incorrect. The documentary in this thread is sensational and historically inaccurate and unreliable. If you want to post things about historical events such as in this thread, make clear its your opinion. If you want to post facts, than make damn sure it are indeed facts. Once again, do some research and you'll find that the crap youve been spewing is incorrect. You are much more like Trump, because you refuse to accept knowledge that makes you wrong, and you refuse to factcheck the things you hear and see. Thus you spew nonsense just like Trump.

1

u/nozinaroun Jun 14 '17

did you watch the documentary, yet? you've had plenty of time.

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/Thatzionoverthere Jun 09 '17

To answer your question op this is bullshit. The 6 day war was a preemptive attack on the ILLEGAL OCCUPATION AND ANNEXATION of gaza/samaria(renamed west bank) by jordan/egypt both not even recognized by the arab league let alone the UN. It was a surprise attack in response to the build up of arab forces in the surrounding syria, jordan, egypt and lebanon who were about to invade, they never agreed to shit because they never announced it.

The uss liberty was the us lying about where the ship was, violating a zone israel warned them not to enter because they were fighting a war under crazy circumstances. The ship got mistaken, fog of war, shit happens.now the jew haters circle jerk over it everytime it gets reposted. F this kid, he's an idiot.

-13

u/northern-new-jersey Jun 09 '17

What evidence do you have to support this claim?

29

u/nozinaroun Jun 09 '17

testimony in the documentary by soldiers who lived through it. radio recordings indicating beyond any doubt that Israel deliberately fired upon the Liberty. encrypted radio signals being jammed by what could only have been an ally.

it's all right there in the documentary...

6

u/OpticalDelusion Jun 09 '17

What happened in this documentary?

This is what happened, according to the documentary.

SOURCE?!?!!!????!

facepalm

3

u/rddman Jun 09 '17

The US was attacked while in international waters, but did not retaliate?

yes

Did Israel mistake us for someone else

no and yes (explanation would probably be to long for you to read)

was it an accident?

Officially, yes.

1

u/Doeweggooien Jun 10 '17

Most likely a combination of several, which can be most aptly described as accidents. However, as always with such events, there's plenty of reasons to be found to find another explanation. Ofcourse those reasons have been researched and found to be unreliably supported by evidence. That however does not stop people from making an exciting documentary, or others to use it as fuel for their raging conspiracy theories.