Anyone else for tennis? :D

The US Navy doesn't have exclusive use of grey paint Brad. If you'll look around you'll see that just about every country, including Egypt, paints their ships the same flat grey color because that is the best color to use.

Each country has a specific shade(really). I'm not even sure El Quseir was a grey either.

Okay, but those markings seen in the pic you posted - so typical USN and so untypical for a freighter. (A)GTR-5, only the USN uses such abbreviations.

That the jetfighters misidentified this ship is believable - they are just pilots ;).

On the other hand i cannot believe that the torpedo boats were unable to identify it: With all those antennas and this number the ship could be easily recognized with just a look. They had also plenty of time to do this as the Liberty was (almost) unarmed.

The israelis were so close that they could even ask for identification!

I don't think this was necessary to say this but okay, no problem - as we know ourselves (unlike some politicians) that this whole mission is useless and a waste of german taxpayer's money. However there is still no need to provoke our ships as they seem to have enough problems already: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=116569 :oops:

Maybe we should see if we can get some of this tax money back by selling some subs to Iran?
They are probably willing to fully pay for them (unlike Israel).

Many thanks for taking our sub presents ... and for shooting over our (unarmed) reconaissance ships to show us how much you appreciate it ;).

But if it would have been a house full of civilians, would it have been still shelled? Why dont use soldiers to mob up the Hizbollah in situations like this? Or is it acceptable to kill few foreigners to save your own skin? :nope:

So your argument is based on shades of grey? :D

I don't claim to be a naval expert but of the couple hundred USN ship pictures I googled last night before making that post, none of them had small letters before the ship number.

El Qseir
http://palestine1967.site.voila.fr/i...y03elqsair.jpg


Liberty
http://palestine1967.site.voila.fr/i.../liberty04.jpg


note the differences

http://palestine1967.site.voila.fr/i...erty04bis.jpeg

Ah, please don't look for fighting ships but for Auxiliary ships like Replenishment Oilers, Tenders and such:
Here are just a few examples:

http://www.bluejacket.com/usn_ship_image_ad-ah.html

Ammunition ship Mars AFS
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/7...c011gy2.th.jpg

2x Fleet Oiler Kalamazoo AOR
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3005/aor61ue6.th.jpg http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/6937/aor63zt9.th.jpg

Submarine Tender AS
http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/9...c029ip7.th.jpg

The "A" for Auxiliary is normally left away. The way the number is painted is pretty unique and very consistent in the USN (unlike the Soviet Navy, which pennant numbers look much different and change through the ship's life). Among all navies, USN ships are the easiest to identify - even their submarines wear a big number.

The Liberty wore her number which even included a hint on her mission. She could be easily identified by a short look into a book like Weyer's Handbook of combat fleets.

Which recognition book does the USN use? Jane's?
The israelis use none obviously - or they didn't need one because they knew what they were doing ...

You brought up the question of the grey paint on ships and I answered. I'm not going to repeat everything else again.


Edit: You can also add this:
Jamming: An additional point on which Israel did not comment is the use of radio jamming. In the absence of reliable records, it is only left to speculate whether jamming (of Navy tactical and international maritime distress frequencies) did take place, or whether the deficiency in communications originated in the attack itself (i.e., loss of power and damage of antennas). Both Liberty and USS Saratoga radio operators reported hearing the distinctive buzzing sound usually indicative of radio frequency jamming. According to a book by Russell Warren Howe (see below), Captain McGonagle testified that the jamming of his transmissions had been on American, not Egyptian, frequencies, suggesting that the Israelis were aware of the nationality of the ship. The U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry concluded that Liberty experienced jamming (finding 48).

Court's findings document.

Quote:

• Liberty apparently experienced a phenomenon identified as electronic jamming of her voice radio just prior to and during air attacks. This jamming was described as a steady carrier without modulation.

Please give us a very detailed explanation of why such jamming would be unusual when one force attacks an assumed enemy target. Some counter-suggestions here.

Note that the Liberty's voice frequencies were jammed. The Liberty, though with difficulty, did send via high command radio radio circuit (hicom) a flash message that they're being attacked, required assistance and included the Liberty's exact coordinates. This message was received immediately by the carrier USS Saratoga and relayed to USN HQ. (Details on page 28 of this very lengthy NSA report.

Similarly, this article states:

• Mr. Ennes’s assertion raises an obvious question. According to Ennes (and this view seems to be endorsed by the History Channel) the Liberty was attacked to prevent it from intercepting sensitive Israeli radio messages. But why would the Israelis bother to attack the ship if they had the capability to jam all the Liberty’s frequencies? Why not just jam the frequencies and avoid the risk of attacking a US ship?
  
  It should also be noted that Ennes’s claim that the Liberty’s outgoing signals were jammed is physically impossible. The Liberty would have been able to send its distress calls no matter what jamming the Israelis might have attempted. (The technical reason is that incoherent radiation sources cannot interfere with eachother.) Why did the History Channel fail to consult any experts who might have informed viewers of these facts?

All this is above and beyond my AM/FM tuner dial turning life experience. :p It just sounds like there are quite plausible explanations for this.

Regarding ship identification, once again, rather than hear it from you SH3/4 recognition manual holding armchair commanders, I'd prefer a professional's opinion:

• In reconstruction of the attack, the Liberty crew makes much of flying the American flag, as if it would somehow protect them in harm's way (see Ennes, p. 152). Little does the crew appreciate the difficulty of identifying a ship from an aircraft merely on the basis of a flag or even a hull number (GTR 5 displayed by the Liberty). Based on my experience of flying many "low and slow" reconnaissance flights over ships in the Med and Atlantic with VQ2, unless the flights are almost overhead, target identification is virtually impossible. High-powered binoculars are not much good in a bouncing low-level aircraft. Even post facto photos do not always reveal identification. See, for example, Ennes' photo of the ship on page 146. This crisp overhead photo does not clearly show the identity of the American ship. So how could the attacking Israeli forces conclude this was a friendly ship?
  
  Additionally, in an interesting commentary Mr. Ennes takes Captain McGonagle to task about identifying flags. The MTBs were flying the Israeli flag prior to the torpedo attack (pp. 148-148). Ennes says his captain must have erred (Ennes' emphasis) during the Naval Court of Inquiry; because "it would have been practically impossible to identify a tiny and wildly fluttering Star of David [flag] a mile away..." Mr. Ennes also doesn't understand why the Israeli MTB's did not recognize the hull number, GTR 5, in their July 6, 1967 account (pp. 171-173). He claims the Israeli sailors had to understand the significance of GTR 5. I would challenge him; I believe I know American sailors who could not decipher such a hull number.
  
  I point out the above in the interest of showing the difficulty of identifying vessels by flags and hull numbers in the heat of battle. Further, identification of a ship's flag by high-performance jet fighters would be even more difficult. Consider that the Israeli pilots are engaged in a war situation, flying combat air patrols (CAPs) and flying to and from the front. They could hardly be expected to identify a small fluttering flag on a ship far below them. My son, an ex-Navy F18 pilot, confirms my contention. While the Liberty crew thinks these pilots were intent on identifying them, in fact the pilots were probably engaged in more pressing activity to protect their country.

I'm quoting from Enclosure 3: Exculpatory evidence supporting a mistaken attack, one of many documents authored by Dr. Marvin Nowicki. Dr. Nowicki was the US Navy supervisor on the EC-121 aircraft who heard the actual Israel Air Force radio transmissions, in Hebrew, live during the attack and was later instrumental in insisting that the US government release the tape transcripts to the public to clear up many of the rumors once and for all.

And you can read this NSA released transcript of post torpedo boat attack Israeli air communications, where only then was positive ID of a US flag made.

But earlier, post aerial attack, you can read in this NSA released transcript, Israeli pilots state with no doubt (3rd page):

"Pay attn: the ship has now been identified as an Egyptian ship. You are now returning home."

Similarly, on the 6th page:

"For your info, it is apparently an Arab ship."

and a few moments later:

"It is an Egyptian supply ship"




While we're here, maybe someone would like to start a thread about the French traitor Alfred Dreyfus as well.

In other matters:
In that particular incident, I don't know who provokes whom. I do not fully understand the arguments that the German vessel "lit up" the Israeli planes on radar. I simply have no idea of exactly what happened and whose claims are correct. If the Israeli pilots did this fly-over to childishly show off, they should have been severly reprimanded. But again, I have no idea from all the media news reports I read on the events of exactly what took place and more importantly why.
Once again, Israel has denied any shooting and to the best of my knowledge even the Germans that claim there was didn't state that the guns were aimed at the ships, rather than overhead shots.

You yourself mentioned that this mission is useless but it's worse than that. Not only is it money down the drain, it is an unnecesary endangerment to foreign troops, such as the Germans and French. And the fact of the matter is that their expected lack of motivation to fight someone else's battles has lead to everything that their emplacement was supposed to prevent in the first place.

In all honesty, if it will make you feel better, the blame should be laid at Israel's and the UN's feet for opting for this and allowing it to take place. I assure you that it is hard to find bigger morons than our current Prime Minister and Defence Minister, who messed us up completely last year in the first place. Have you seen our DM Peretz lately? :roll:




One last response to Dowly and I must do some work (for a change):
IMO, it very well potentially should have been, if the house was being used to perpetrate attacks.
Are you a military expert and an on-hand witness to know in this particular circumstance what was the most appropriate method of attempting to take out the enemy with minimal risk to our soldiers?

To quote General Patton (unsourced):

"Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
Actually, it is under such circumstances, according to the whatever-it's worth Geneva Convention:

"Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."

One of the fatalities in that UN observer post last year July was Canadian Major Paeta Derek Hess-von Kruedener. Several days before his death, he had sent an email to his former commander, retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, in which he described the Israeli bombardment:

• "The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity."

MacKenzie interpreted this language for a reporter:

• "What that means is, in plain English, 'We've got Hezbollah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the IDF'"

Hi, ho! Hi, ho!.........................................

"electronic jamming of her voice radio just prior to and during air attacks."
Who would jam just prior to and during an attack? I don't think the Egyptians were supporting the Israeli's in the attack by jamming American frequencies just prior to and during the air attacks. That kind of narrows down suspects.
Isn't that part of the $64.00 question? WHY?
In regards to numbers. The actual numbers meaning doesn't mean much to most people. What matters is that the numbers were there. You don't have to understand their meaning.
Kind of sets the tone for for this persons whole argument wouldn't you say?
Again, they would have seen the numbers and if the wind was blowing as the crew says I would think that at mast level the flag would be visible.

"It was made at near masthead level" wish he'd make up his mind.

I'm not much on electronic intercepting but I find it odd that the only intercepts were from the helicopters. None from the recon flights and none from the fighters. Why? The recon and fighters didn't need communications because they knew what they were doing?

Friendly fire seems to be a major problem in war, usually caused by faulty information been passed on to those in the air or on the ground. However, Israel really does take the #1 spot for this kind of thing. Journalists killed in Gaza, UN troops on a well known UN position bombed in the recent Israel/Lebanon war. I'm not saying the US or british, or any other armed force is perfect, they aren't, but Israel is really pushing its luck and is running out of excuses. Personally I think it was a case of mistaken identity, and incredible poor thinking by the Israeli military. As was proven in the conflict with Lebanon, the Israeli armed forces may have the latest tech, but are not the top notch force they would appear to be.

Although, it wouldn't be the first time Israel has twisted events to suit its own purposes.

I never said that Israel didn't do the jamming. Would jamming an assumed opponent's communications during an attack be out of the ordinary?
Simple and all the evidence points to it: Israel thought they were attacking an Egyptian ship.

Remember when $64 used to go a long way?!
Why? Aren't many military ships worldwide numbered? And if they aren't, is that general knowledge?

As Dr. Nowicki stated:

"Based on my experience of flying many "low and slow" reconnaissance flights over ships in the Med and Atlantic with VQ2, unless the flights are almost overhead, target identification is virtually impossible. High-powered binoculars are not much good in a bouncing low-level aircraft. Even post facto photos do not always reveal identification. See, for example, Ennes' photo of the ship on page 146. This crisp overhead photo does not clearly show the identity of the American ship. So how could the attacking Israeli forces conclude this was a friendly ship?"

As I mentioned, "this person", as you prefer to leave him a nameless entity, was the US Navy supervisor on the EC-121 aircraft who heard the actual Israel Air Force radio transmissions, in Hebrew, live during the attack and was later instrumental in insisting that the US government release the tape transcripts to the public to clear up many of the rumors once and for all.

But obviously he's just a nobody, a traitorous American naval servicemen, with ulterior motives to offend his fellow navymen and country. Yep. That must be it.
And again I point out (3rd time, I believe), the ship was actually identified tentatively early that day as American, by those first IAF planes. Here's the relevant snippet from the IDF History Department Report:
http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/5676/53534054dz1.jpg
As I just mentioned above, there was tentative ID that it was American during those earlier flyovers. So Dr. Nowicki was correct.
If you would, for a change, bother reading Dr. Nowicki's documentation, you would know that Dr. Nowicki's involvement began in picking up IAF voice communications on the completion of the aerial attack and thereafter. Therefore the transcripts he got declassified from his flight contain mainly the later chopper communications.

However, I also posted the NSA's transcripts in English of all IAF communications and both sides of the transcripts, from completely separate sources, prior, during and after the attack, all contain different IAF crewmen stating this to be an Egyptian ship.

If the ship had been ID'd as a US ship, why in gods name would the IAF attack it??? Sorry if I'm missing something (I haven't had the time to read the thread in its entirety), but it seems very strange that the IAF would attack a ship they couldn't ID without much thought about it. They could have sent in boarding vessels quite easily, with fighter protection should the vessel prove to be hostile. Its just common sence and proper military planning. The US has a very keen interest in the state of Israel, and I would have thought the top brass in the IAF and the rest of the Israrli military would have been on the look out of US ships in the med.

Although I understand your just supporting your country, as I would support the UK, theres no need to go on the defensive and just ignore any other viewpoint than your own. I don't mean to be offensive, but just listen to other peoples views and assess their validity before we start flaming each other.:up: