UN tells Israel to let in nuclear inspectors

[Hossfly]

^^^^^^^ Read the post and get back with me Poindexter

I read the text and my question remains.

 

[RoccoR]

SAYIT, et al,

You are normally a well informed and seemingly unbiased poster so I will treat this as a hole in your knowledge which I will fill with one small fact. By June 8th, the day of the attack, Israel had effectively won the war. Egypt's armed forces were in total retreat. Why then would Israel deem America's involvement necessary considering the risk involved in attacking a US ship?

(COMMENT)

As the theory goes, not everyone understood that (on June 8th) that the war was effectively won. The outcome was not assured that day, as it is today with the benefit of hind sight. Some people still thought the Israelis could still lose the war. They did not understand the logistical limitation that both sides were experiencing at the time. It was not sure what the Arab Forces were intending to do. They may have been making a tactical withdraw to regrouping for a counter attack, or what.

The Israelis where not looking for the US to tactically engage enemy forces. They just wanted a regional footprint of US tactical air forces in the region, of the type that could drop a tactical nuclear device. They wanted the US tactical air to be seen in the area, not their help.

That way, if it became necessary to drop a nuclear device, not only would the forensic evidence of the device leave an American signature (called MASINT analysis today), but that US Air had been seen in the Area. (Plausible denial and confusion.)

There's a lot of "it is believed" stuff in your post, Rocco. Do you at least have a source for it?

(COMMENT)

There is no one source, that I know of for this "Hollywood" type interpretation (people simply couldn't make this shit up) of the facts. But most of the facts can be individually confirmed to an extent. Obviously, the US government is not going to acknowledge that the Israelis grabbed 200 pound of enriched uranium. But the incident did occur.

• Marcoule Nuclear Site Marcoule site - AREVA
• Atoms for Peace Program Atoms for Peace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Israeli Research Reactor at Soreq About Us
• Apollo Affair Zalman Shapiro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Nuclear Weapons test in Algeria (Sahara Desert) Israel's Nuclear Weapons
• EL-102 Reactor in Dimona Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Israeli Nuclear Weapons and Research Program Israeli Nuclear Threats and Blackmail

These are but a few articles on a variety of aspects I mentioned. All of them are biased in one direction or another. None of them are linked together; the are merely starter examples. One of the more comprehensive of the examples is the The Counterproliferation Paper by Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army, The Third Temple's Holy of Holies:
Israel's Nuclear Weapons. Very Interesting.

Note, there are several other links on each of these events I have mentioned. I have given but one link. And each offers something different. Please don't read anything into the fact that I only offer one specific link. You can search the key name and find alternatives.​

I am not trying to slant anyone's opinion, one way or the other, but merely offer another perspective and show how there is a series of linked events that might seem otherwise, independent of one another. The times were heady, and there were many events occurring simultaneously that affected the mind set of the day. You cannot compare the events of yester year using todays hindsight in the same way that these events were unfolding.

(I just now saw that there was some follow-on discussion, about the sample and origin determination. It is true that, for this particular time (late 1967's), the sample of the material could ID it the US, but not to the specific reactor as they can today. But that wasn't necessary at the time. All they had to do was link it to the US. The scope, level and abilities of MASINT are different for each country, and highly compartmentalized.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Sunni Man]

^^^^^^^ Read the post and get back with me Poindexter

I read the text and my question remains.

Whether it's a conventional or nuclear explosion.

There will be residue left that is basically like a finger print.

And can be forensically analyzed to determine when and where the material was manufactured.

 

[Hossfly]

^^^^^^^ Read the post and get back with me Poindexter

I read the text and my question remains.

Whether it's a conventional or nuclear explosion.

There will be residue left that is basically like a finger print.

And can be forensically analyzed to determine when and where the material was manufactured.

Hell, I'm not a scientist. I'm a Republican.

 

[Sunni Man]

I read the text and my question remains.

Whether it's a conventional or nuclear explosion.

There will be residue left that is basically like a finger print.

And can be forensically analyzed to determine when and where the material was manufactured.

Hell, I'm not a scientist. I'm a Republican.

I am also a Republican; so that's no excuse.

 

[SAYIT]

SAYIT, et al,

You are normally a well informed and seemingly unbiased poster so I will treat this as a hole in your knowledge which I will fill with one small fact. By June 8th, the day of the attack, Israel had effectively won the war. Egypt's armed forces were in total retreat. Why then would Israel deem America's involvement necessary considering the risk involved in attacking a US ship?

(COMMENT)

As the theory goes, not everyone understood that (on June 8th) that the war was effectively won. The outcome was not assured that day, as it is today with the benefit of hind sight. Some people still thought the Israelis could still lose the war. They did not understand the logistical limitation that both sides were experiencing at the time. It was not sure what the Arab Forces were intending to do. They may have been making a tactical withdraw to regrouping for a counter attack, or what.

The Israelis where not looking for the US to tactically engage enemy forces. They just wanted a regional footprint of US tactical air forces in the region, of the type that could drop a tactical nuclear device. They wanted the US tactical air to be seen in the area, not their help.

That way, if it became necessary to drop a nuclear device, not only would the forensic evidence of the device leave an American signature (called MASINT analysis today), but that US Air had been seen in the Area. (Plausible denial and confusion.)

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks for the links (I've read many of them in the past). There is a certain follow-the crumbs quality to them I find in most conspiracy theories.
I also find your explanation for your conclusion regarding when Israel knew the 6 Day War was won and their attack on the Liberty to be a bit self-serving ... "as the theory goes" forging your conclusion and then seeking "facts" which support it.

 

[toomuchtime_]

SAYIT, et al,

You are normally a well informed and seemingly unbiased poster so I will treat this as a hole in your knowledge which I will fill with one small fact. By June 8th, the day of the attack, Israel had effectively won the war. Egypt's armed forces were in total retreat. Why then would Israel deem America's involvement necessary considering the risk involved in attacking a US ship?

(COMMENT)

As the theory goes, not everyone understood that (on June 8th) that the war was effectively won. The outcome was not assured that day, as it is today with the benefit of hind sight. Some people still thought the Israelis could still lose the war. They did not understand the logistical limitation that both sides were experiencing at the time. It was not sure what the Arab Forces were intending to do. They may have been making a tactical withdraw to regrouping for a counter attack, or what.

The Israelis where not looking for the US to tactically engage enemy forces. They just wanted a regional footprint of US tactical air forces in the region, of the type that could drop a tactical nuclear device. They wanted the US tactical air to be seen in the area, not their help.

That way, if it became necessary to drop a nuclear device, not only would the forensic evidence of the device leave an American signature (called MASINT analysis today), but that US Air had been seen in the Area. (Plausible denial and confusion.)

There's a lot of "it is believed" stuff in your post, Rocco. Do you at least have a source for it?

(COMMENT)

There is no one source, that I know of for this "Hollywood" type interpretation (people simply couldn't make this shit up) of the facts. But most of the facts can be individually confirmed to an extent. Obviously, the US government is not going to acknowledge that the Israelis grabbed 200 pound of enriched uranium. But the incident did occur.

• Marcoule Nuclear Site Marcoule site - AREVA
• Atoms for Peace Program Atoms for Peace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Israeli Research Reactor at Soreq About Us
• Apollo Affair Zalman Shapiro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Nuclear Weapons test in Algeria (Sahara Desert) Israel's Nuclear Weapons
• EL-102 Reactor in Dimona Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Israeli Nuclear Weapons and Research Program Israeli Nuclear Threats and Blackmail

These are but a few articles on a variety of aspects I mentioned. All of them are biased in one direction or another. None of them are linked together; the are merely starter examples. One of the more comprehensive of the examples is the The Counterproliferation Paper by Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army, The Third Temple's Holy of Holies:
Israel's Nuclear Weapons. Very Interesting.

Note, there are several other links on each of these events I have mentioned. I have given but one link. And each offers something different. Please don't read anything into the fact that I only offer one specific link. You can search the key name and find alternatives.​

I am not trying to slant anyone's opion, one way or the other, but merely offer another perspective and show how there is a series of linked events that might seem otherwise, independent of one another. The times were heady, and there were many events occurring simultaneously that affected the mind set of the day. You cannot compare the events of yester year using todays hindsight in the same way that these events were unfolding.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are entirely mistaken about the progress of the war. While the Israeli population may have had some doubts and even some Israeli politicians, Rabin and the other top generals were supremely confident of victory in short order, and LBJ, who understood the Cold War implications of the situation, had ordered two separate studies by the Pentagon and both reported the Israelis would be easily victorious. Nasser expressed some anxiety about Israeli nukes, but neither the US no Israel ever considered that the use of nukes would be needed. In the minds of the US and Israeli militaries, the war was already won before it began.

"All of our intelligence people are unanimous that if the UAR attacks, you will whip hell out of them", Johnson told Eban during a visit to the White House on May 26.[119][120][121] This assertion was made in accordance with a CIA assessment that Israel could “defend successfully against simultaneous Arab attacks on all fronts... or hold on any three fronts while mounting successfully a major offensive on the fourth."

Origins of the Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Reston, writing in The New York Times on May 23, 1967, noted, "In discipline, training, morale, equipment and general competence his [Nasser's] army and the other Arab forces, without the direct assistance of the Soviet Union, are no match for the Israelis.... Even with 50,000 troops and the best of his generals and air force in Yemen, he has not been able to work his way in that small and primitive country, and even his effort to help the Congo rebels was a flop."[84]

Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The outcome of the war was never in doubt.

In 1973, the Labor government, drunk on the spectacular success of the Six Day War, ignored the signs of danger and were caught by surprise by the Egyptian attack, and for a few days there were widespread fears among the Americans, Egyptians and Russians that Israel might resort to nukes, but in 1967, even before the war began, no one in Israel or the US was thinking about Israel using nukes in the war.

 

[georgephillip]

Israel's alleged nukes are only a threat to those who would attack Israel.
That is assuming Israel even has nukes.

"On February 17, Defense Minister Ehud Barak visited the Hiroshima memorial for the victims of the first atomic bomb used on people in human history. Barak, who according to the Japanese news agency Kyodo described the bombing of the city as 'one of the unavoidable tragedies' of World War II, viewed the exhibits.

"His escorts drew his attention to a map of the world listing the number of nuclear warheads in the possession of the atomic powers. There is a number next to Israel's name, too: "80."

"Barak did not respond."

Proving absolutely nothing. You and the Arab World are still just guessing.

Or you're practicing your backstroke in da Nile:

"Der Spiegel reports that after extensive research they've unearthed proof not only of Israel's nuclear weapons, but that it's deployed them aboard its fleet of new German-built submarines.

"From Der Spiegel:

"Germany is helping Israel to develop its military nuclear capabilities, SPIEGEL has learned. According to extensive research carried out by the magazine, Israel is equipping submarines that were built in the northern German city of Kiel and largely paid for by the German government with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

"The missiles can be launched using a previously secret hydraulic ejection system. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak told SPIEGEL that Germans should be 'proud' that they have secured the existence of the state of Israel 'for many years.'"

Aren't you proud?

Israel Has Deployed Nuclear Weapons On Its New German Built Submarines - Business Insider

 

[Hossfly]

"On February 17, Defense Minister Ehud Barak visited the Hiroshima memorial for the victims of the first atomic bomb used on people in human history. Barak, who according to the Japanese news agency Kyodo described the bombing of the city as 'one of the unavoidable tragedies' of World War II, viewed the exhibits.

"His escorts drew his attention to a map of the world listing the number of nuclear warheads in the possession of the atomic powers. There is a number next to Israel's name, too: "80."

"Barak did not respond."

Proving absolutely nothing. You and the Arab World are still just guessing.

Or you're practicing your backstroke in da Nile:

"Der Spiegel reports that after extensive research they've unearthed proof not only of Israel's nuclear weapons, but that it's deployed them aboard its fleet of new German-built submarines.

"From Der Spiegel:

"Germany is helping Israel to develop its military nuclear capabilities, SPIEGEL has learned. According to extensive research carried out by the magazine, Israel is equipping submarines that were built in the northern German city of Kiel and largely paid for by the German government with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

"The missiles can be launched using a previously secret hydraulic ejection system. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak told SPIEGEL that Germans should be 'proud' that they have secured the existence of the state of Israel 'for many years.'"

Aren't you proud?

Israel Has Deployed Nuclear Weapons On Its New German Built Submarines - Business Insider

Amen!!!

 

[georgephillip]

irosie91, et al,

You may be close, but not that early.

Israel has had nukes for 50 years and never used either the nukes or radioactive materials in war-----(disclaimer -----I am just guessing)

(COMMENT)

The Israeli Nuclear Program has it roots that stretch back to before the country was formed. And after WWII, many believe that the French had help from scientist (from the newly formed Israel) in the construction of the G-1 reactor and UP-1 plant (one for plutonium production and one for reprocessing) at Marcoule Nuclear Site (South-Central France). In the early 1950's, the Israeli scientist had found low grade Uranium near Beersheba, (North of Dimona in the Negev Desert). Additionally, America, under the Atoms for Peace program, gave Heavy Water for the Israeli research reactor at Soreq (15km West of Jerusalem). In 1958, the French secretly began to build an El-102 Reactor in Dimona for the Israelis.

In 1960, the French and Israelis conduct a joint above ground nuclear weapons test in Algeria (Sahara Desert). Then, sometime between 1962 and 1965, 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium disappeared from the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation fuel rod fabrication plant in Apollo, PA. In Intelligence & Security circles it is known as the "Apollo Affair;" and it was commonly believed it went to Israel.

It is believed that the Israelis had a working Nuclear Weapon (one, possibly two) (non-production models) at the outset of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War; built with US enriched uranium. And thus, the reason for the USS Liberty (Navy Technical Research - Intelligence Ship) off the coast. The US was concerned that the Israelis might actually use the weapon.

After the '67 War, Moshe Dayan, approves the formal production program and the Israeli Nuclear Weapons and Research Program goes into a highly accelerated mode.

Most Respectfully,
R

There's a lot of "it is believed" stuff in your post, Rocco. Do you at least have a source for it?

"The Apollo Affair was a 1965 incident in which a US company, Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), in Apollo and Parks Township, Pennsylvania was investigated for losing 200-600 pounds of highly enriched uranium.

"In 1965, the FBI investigated Zalman Shapiro, the company's president, over the loss 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium. After investigations by the Atomic Energy Commission, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, other government agencies, and inquiring reporters, no charges were ever filed.

"A General Accounting Office study of the investigations declassified in May 2010 stated 'We believe a timely, concerted effort on the part of these three agencies would have greatly aided and possibly solved the NUMEC diversion questions, if they desired to do so.'[1]

"Some remain convinced that Israel received 200 pounds of enriched uranium from NUMEC,[2][3] particularly given the visit of Rafael Eitan, later revealed as an Israeli spy and who was later involved in the Jonathan Pollard incident.[4]

"In June 1986, analyst Anthony Cordesman told United Press International:

"'There is no conceivable reason for Eitan to have gone [to the Apollo plant] but for the nuclear material.'”

The Apollo Affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SAYIT]

irosie91, et al,

You may be close, but not that early.


(COMMENT)

The Israeli Nuclear Program has it roots that stretch back to before the country was formed. And after WWII, many believe that the French had help from scientist (from the newly formed Israel) in the construction of the G-1 reactor and UP-1 plant (one for plutonium production and one for reprocessing) at Marcoule Nuclear Site (South-Central France). In the early 1950's, the Israeli scientist had found low grade Uranium near Beersheba, (North of Dimona in the Negev Desert). Additionally, America, under the Atoms for Peace program, gave Heavy Water for the Israeli research reactor at Soreq (15km West of Jerusalem). In 1958, the French secretly began to build an El-102 Reactor in Dimona for the Israelis.

In 1960, the French and Israelis conduct a joint above ground nuclear weapons test in Algeria (Sahara Desert). Then, sometime between 1962 and 1965, 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium disappeared from the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation fuel rod fabrication plant in Apollo, PA. In Intelligence & Security circles it is known as the "Apollo Affair;" and it was commonly believed it went to Israel.

It is believed that the Israelis had a working Nuclear Weapon (one, possibly two) (non-production models) at the outset of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War; built with US enriched uranium. And thus, the reason for the USS Liberty (Navy Technical Research - Intelligence Ship) off the coast. The US was concerned that the Israelis might actually use the weapon.

After the '67 War, Moshe Dayan, approves the formal production program and the Israeli Nuclear Weapons and Research Program goes into a highly accelerated mode.

Most Respectfully,
R

There's a lot of "it is believed" stuff in your post, Rocco. Do you at least have a source for it?

"The Apollo Affair was a 1965 incident in which a US company, Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), in Apollo and Parks Township, Pennsylvania was investigated for losing 200-600 pounds of highly enriched uranium.

"In 1965, the FBI investigated Zalman Shapiro, the company's president, over the loss 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium. After investigations by the Atomic Energy Commission, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, other government agencies, and inquiring reporters, no charges were ever filed.

"A General Accounting Office study of the investigations declassified in May 2010 stated 'We believe a timely, concerted effort on the part of these three agencies would have greatly aided and possibly solved the NUMEC diversion questions, if they desired to do so.'[1]

"Some remain convinced that Israel received 200 pounds of enriched uranium from NUMEC,[2][3] particularly given the visit of Rafael Eitan, later revealed as an Israeli spy and who was later involved in the Jonathan Pollard incident.[4]

"In June 1986, analyst Anthony Cordesman told United Press International:

"'There is no conceivable reason for Eitan to have gone [to the Apollo plant] but for the nuclear material.'”

The Apollo Affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Still more "it is believed." So what?

 

[SAYIT]

"On February 17, Defense Minister Ehud Barak visited the Hiroshima memorial for the victims of the first atomic bomb used on people in human history. Barak, who according to the Japanese news agency Kyodo described the bombing of the city as 'one of the unavoidable tragedies' of World War II, viewed the exhibits.

"His escorts drew his attention to a map of the world listing the number of nuclear warheads in the possession of the atomic powers. There is a number next to Israel's name, too: "80."

"Barak did not respond."

Proving absolutely nothing. You and the Arab World are still just guessing.

Or you're practicing your backstroke in da Nile:

"Der Spiegel reports that after extensive research they've unearthed proof not only of Israel's nuclear weapons, but that it's deployed them aboard its fleet of new German-built submarines.

"From Der Spiegel:

"Germany is helping Israel to develop its military nuclear capabilities, SPIEGEL has learned. According to extensive research carried out by the magazine, Israel is equipping submarines that were built in the northern German city of Kiel and largely paid for by the German government with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

"The missiles can be launched using a previously secret hydraulic ejection system. Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak told SPIEGEL that Germans should be 'proud' that they have secured the existence of the state of Israel 'for many years.'"

Aren't you proud?

Israel Has Deployed Nuclear Weapons On Its New German Built Submarines - Business Insider

You call this proof? "Assumed" and "discussed?" (from your source):
"In the past, the German government has always stuck to the position that it is unaware of nuclear weapons being deployed on the vessels. Now, however, former high-ranking officials from the German Defense Ministry, including former State Secretary Lothar Rühl and former chief of the planning staff Hans Rühle, have told SPIEGEL that they had always assumed that Israel would deploy nuclear weapons on the submarines. Rühl had even discussed the issue with the military in Tel Aviv."

 

[RoccoR]

toomuchtime__, et al,

It is nearly always the case that, before a conflict, the leadership boasts of certain victory. (Even the Arabs thought they would win before the war started.) And it is nearly always the case that the victors claim the outcome vindicates their previous boasts.

The outcome of the war was never in doubt.

In 1973, the Labor government, drunk on the spectacular success of the Six Day War, ignored the signs of danger and were caught by surprise by the Egyptian attack, and for a few days there were widespread fears among the Americans, Egyptians and Russians that Israel might resort to nukes, but in 1967, even before the war began, no one in Israel or the US was thinking about Israel using nukes in the war.

(COMMENT)

Yes, many a defeated army said similar things.

"All of our intelligence people are unanimous that if the UAR attacks, you will whip hell out of them", Johnson told Eban during a visit to the White House on May 26.[119][120][121] This assertion was made in accordance with a CIA assessment that Israel could “defend successfully against simultaneous Arab attacks on all fronts... or hold on any three fronts while mounting successfully a major offensive on the fourth."

I can count the number of times on one hand that the CIA made a correct prediction on the progress and of the outcome of a "war."

Your opinion is an overwhelming held opinion, and your interpretation of the events is a overwhelmingly held interpretation; especially for the period. And it is generally held that everyone told the truth, as they saw it.

I respect that opinion.

It is the perfect logic to defend the attack by the Israelis. It would convince me.

Senator Adlai Stevenson III in 1980, his last year as a United States Senator from Illinois, invited Jim Ennes to his Senate office for a private, two hour meeting to discuss the USS Liberty attack and coverup. Following the private meeting, Ennes was invited back the next day to discuss the attack with members of Stevenson's staff, along with members of the staff of Senator Barry Goldwater and members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

In that meeting, staff members told Ennes that they found his story convincing, but that they would recommend to both senators that they not pursue an investigation because an investigation would only antagonize Israeli interests while "nothing good could come of it." Goldwater accepted that staff recommendation. Stevenson did not. Instead, Stevenson called a news conference in which he announced that he was convinced that the attack was deliberate and that the survivors deserved an investigation. He would, he said, spend the remaining few weeks of his Senate term attempting to arrange for an inquiry.

Almost immediately, the government of Israel contacted the White House and offered to settle the outstanding $40million damage claims for $6million an amount equal to one dollar for each Jewish victim of the Holocaust. Vice President Walter Mondale quickly agreed to that offer just before Christmas while Congress and President Carter were on vacation. The Department of State followed immediately with a press release, reported on the front page of the New York Times, which announced, "The book is now closed on the USS Liberty."
SOURCE: USS Liberty - Israeli Pilot Speaks Up

Then, I'm not the only one:

"We also lost 34 American lives when, on June 8, the fourth day of the war, the U.S. communications ship Liberty came under air and naval attack. We were meeting with President Johnson in the White House situation room, considering the implications had the Soviets or Egyptians attacked the ship, when we received word from Tel Aviv that Israeli forces were responsible. That didn't please us, although an Israeli attack on Liberty was far easier to deal with. But 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."

Rusk's memoirs: "As I Saw It" (W.W.Norton, 1990) p388

I have never believed that the attack on the USS Liberty was a case of mistaken identity. That is ridiculous. I have flown over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, thousands of hours, searching for ships and identifying all types of ships at sea. The Liberty was the ugliest, strangest looking ship in the U.S. Navy. As a communications intelligence ship, it was sprouting every kind of antenna. It looked like a lobster with all those projections moving every which way.

Israel knew perfectly well that the ship was American. After all, the Liberty's American flag and markings were in full view in perfect visibility for the Israeli aircraft that overflew the ship eight times over a period of nearly eight hours prior to the attack. I am confident that Israel knew the Liberty could intercept radio messages from all parties and potential parties to the ongoing war, then in its fourth day, and that Israel was preparing to seize the Golan Heights from Syria despite President Johnson's known opposition to such a move. I think they realized that if we learned in advance of their plan, there would be a tremendous amount of negotiating between Tel Aviv and Washington.

And I believe Moshe Dayan concluded that he could prevent Washington from becoming aware of what Israel was up to by destroying the primary source of acquiring that information the USS Liberty. The result was a wanton sneak attack that left 34 American sailors dead and 171 seriously injured. What is so chilling and cold-blooded, of course, is that they could kill as many Americans as they did in confidence that Washington would cooperate in quelling any public outcry.

SOURCE: Israel's Attack On The USS Liberty

I conclude my comments and thoughts on the subject.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

There's a lot of "it is believed" stuff in your post, Rocco. Do you at least have a source for it?

"The Apollo Affair was a 1965 incident in which a US company, Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), in Apollo and Parks Township, Pennsylvania was investigated for losing 200-600 pounds of highly enriched uranium.

"In 1965, the FBI investigated Zalman Shapiro, the company's president, over the loss 200 pounds of highly enriched uranium. After investigations by the Atomic Energy Commission, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, other government agencies, and inquiring reporters, no charges were ever filed.

"A General Accounting Office study of the investigations declassified in May 2010 stated 'We believe a timely, concerted effort on the part of these three agencies would have greatly aided and possibly solved the NUMEC diversion questions, if they desired to do so.'[1]

"Some remain convinced that Israel received 200 pounds of enriched uranium from NUMEC,[2][3] particularly given the visit of Rafael Eitan, later revealed as an Israeli spy and who was later involved in the Jonathan Pollard incident.[4]

"In June 1986, analyst Anthony Cordesman told United Press International:

"'There is no conceivable reason for Eitan to have gone [to the Apollo plant] but for the nuclear material.'”

The Apollo Affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Still more "it is believed." So what?

So you seem incapable of providing any "it is not believed" Israel possesses nuclear weapons evidence at all.

Does the name Vanunu sound familiar?

"Israel started investigating the nuclear field soon after its founding in 1948 and with French support secretly began building a nuclear reactor and reprocessing plant in the late 1950s.

"Israel is alleged to have developed a nuclear weapon in the late 1960s, but it is not publicly confirmed.[dubious – discuss]

"Mordechai Vanunu, a former Israeli nuclear technician, provided explicit details and photographs to the London Sunday Times of a nuclear weapons program[14] in which he had been employed for nine years, 'including equipment for extracting radioactive material for arms production and laboratory models of thermonuclear devices.'"

Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[RoccoR]

SAYIT,

It is a perfect crime when you pull it off, and don't get prosecuted.

Still more "it is believed." So what?

(COMMENT)

Many a criminal boasts, "so prove it." It doesn't mean they are innocent.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[SAYIT]

toomuchtime__, et al,

It is nearly always the case that, before a conflict, the leadership boasts of certain victory. (Even the Arabs thought they would win before the war started.) And it is nearly always the case that the victors claim the outcome vindicates their previous boasts.

The outcome of the war was never in doubt.

In 1973, the Labor government, drunk on the spectacular success of the Six Day War, ignored the signs of danger and were caught by surprise by the Egyptian attack, and for a few days there were widespread fears among the Americans, Egyptians and Russians that Israel might resort to nukes, but in 1967, even before the war began, no one in Israel or the US was thinking about Israel using nukes in the war.

(COMMENT)

Yes, many a defeated army said similar things.

"All of our intelligence people are unanimous that if the UAR attacks, you will whip hell out of them", Johnson told Eban during a visit to the White House on May 26.[119][120][121] This assertion was made in accordance with a CIA assessment that Israel could “defend successfully against simultaneous Arab attacks on all fronts... or hold on any three fronts while mounting successfully a major offensive on the fourth."

I can count the number of times on one hand that the CIA made a correct prediction on the progress and of the outcome of a "war."

Your opinion is an overwhelming held opinion, and your interpretation of the events is a overwhelmingly held interpretation; especially for the period. And it is generally held that everyone told the truth, as they saw it.

I respect that opinion.

It is the perfect logic to defend the attack by the Israelis. It would convince me.



Then, I'm not the only one:

"We also lost 34 American lives when, on June 8, the fourth day of the war, the U.S. communications ship Liberty came under air and naval attack. We were meeting with President Johnson in the White House situation room, considering the implications had the Soviets or Egyptians attacked the ship, when we received word from Tel Aviv that Israeli forces were responsible. That didn't please us, although an Israeli attack on Liberty was far easier to deal with. But 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."

Rusk's memoirs: "As I Saw It" (W.W.Norton, 1990) p388

I have never believed that the attack on the USS Liberty was a case of mistaken identity. That is ridiculous. I have flown over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, thousands of hours, searching for ships and identifying all types of ships at sea. The Liberty was the ugliest, strangest looking ship in the U.S. Navy. As a communications intelligence ship, it was sprouting every kind of antenna. It looked like a lobster with all those projections moving every which way.

Israel knew perfectly well that the ship was American. After all, the Liberty's American flag and markings were in full view in perfect visibility for the Israeli aircraft that overflew the ship eight times over a period of nearly eight hours prior to the attack. I am confident that Israel knew the Liberty could intercept radio messages from all parties and potential parties to the ongoing war, then in its fourth day, and that Israel was preparing to seize the Golan Heights from Syria despite President Johnson's known opposition to such a move. I think they realized that if we learned in advance of their plan, there would be a tremendous amount of negotiating between Tel Aviv and Washington.

And I believe Moshe Dayan concluded that he could prevent Washington from becoming aware of what Israel was up to by destroying the primary source of acquiring that information the USS Liberty. The result was a wanton sneak attack that left 34 American sailors dead and 171 seriously injured. What is so chilling and cold-blooded, of course, is that they could kill as many Americans as they did in confidence that Washington would cooperate in quelling any public outcry.

SOURCE: Israel's Attack On The USS Liberty

I conclude my comments and thoughts on the subject.

Most Respectfully,
R

Just one more thought before you go:
Adm Moorer, who like you does not believe the US gov't conclusions, nevertheless differs with your opinion about the reason for the attack and this remains the problem with your (and Moorer's) explanation. Why would Israel take such a huge risk?

 

[georgephillip]

"As we know now, if the rescue aircraft from U.S. carriers had not been recalled, they would have arrived at the Liberty before the torpedo attack, reducing the death toll by 25.

"The torpedo boat commanders could not be certain that Sixth Fleet aircraft were not on the way and this might have led to their breaking off the attack after 40 minutes rather than remaining to send the Liberty and its crew of 294 to the bottom.

"Congress to this day has failed to hold formal hearings for the record on the Liberty affair.

"This is unprecedented and a national disgrace.

"I spent hours on the Hill giving testimony after the USS Pueblo, a sister ship to the Liberty, was seized by North Korea. I was asked every imaginable question, including why a carrier in the area failed to dispatch aircraft to aid the Pueblo.

"In the Liberty case, fighters were put in the air not once, but twice. They were ordered to stand down by Secretary of Defense McNamara and President Johnson for reasons the American public deserves to know."

Israel's Attack On The USS Liberty

 

[toomuchtime_]

toomuchtime__, et al,

It is nearly always the case that, before a conflict, the leadership boasts of certain victory. (Even the Arabs thought they would win before the war started.) And it is nearly always the case that the victors claim the outcome vindicates their previous boasts.

The outcome of the war was never in doubt.

In 1973, the Labor government, drunk on the spectacular success of the Six Day War, ignored the signs of danger and were caught by surprise by the Egyptian attack, and for a few days there were widespread fears among the Americans, Egyptians and Russians that Israel might resort to nukes, but in 1967, even before the war began, no one in Israel or the US was thinking about Israel using nukes in the war.

(COMMENT)

Yes, many a defeated army said similar things.

"All of our intelligence people are unanimous that if the UAR attacks, you will whip hell out of them", Johnson told Eban during a visit to the White House on May 26.[119][120][121] This assertion was made in accordance with a CIA assessment that Israel could “defend successfully against simultaneous Arab attacks on all fronts... or hold on any three fronts while mounting successfully a major offensive on the fourth."

I can count the number of times on one hand that the CIA made a correct prediction on the progress and of the outcome of a "war."

Your opinion is an overwhelming held opinion, and your interpretation of the events is a overwhelmingly held interpretation; especially for the period. And it is generally held that everyone told the truth, as they saw it.

I respect that opinion.

It is the perfect logic to defend the attack by the Israelis. It would convince me.



Then, I'm not the only one:

"We also lost 34 American lives when, on June 8, the fourth day of the war, the U.S. communications ship Liberty came under air and naval attack. We were meeting with President Johnson in the White House situation room, considering the implications had the Soviets or Egyptians attacked the ship, when we received word from Tel Aviv that Israeli forces were responsible. That didn't please us, although an Israeli attack on Liberty was far easier to deal with. But 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."

Rusk's memoirs: "As I Saw It" (W.W.Norton, 1990) p388

I have never believed that the attack on the USS Liberty was a case of mistaken identity. That is ridiculous. I have flown over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, thousands of hours, searching for ships and identifying all types of ships at sea. The Liberty was the ugliest, strangest looking ship in the U.S. Navy. As a communications intelligence ship, it was sprouting every kind of antenna. It looked like a lobster with all those projections moving every which way.

Israel knew perfectly well that the ship was American. After all, the Liberty's American flag and markings were in full view in perfect visibility for the Israeli aircraft that overflew the ship eight times over a period of nearly eight hours prior to the attack. I am confident that Israel knew the Liberty could intercept radio messages from all parties and potential parties to the ongoing war, then in its fourth day, and that Israel was preparing to seize the Golan Heights from Syria despite President Johnson's known opposition to such a move. I think they realized that if we learned in advance of their plan, there would be a tremendous amount of negotiating between Tel Aviv and Washington.

And I believe Moshe Dayan concluded that he could prevent Washington from becoming aware of what Israel was up to by destroying the primary source of acquiring that information the USS Liberty. The result was a wanton sneak attack that left 34 American sailors dead and 171 seriously injured. What is so chilling and cold-blooded, of course, is that they could kill as many Americans as they did in confidence that Washington would cooperate in quelling any public outcry.

SOURCE: Israel's Attack On The USS Liberty

I conclude my comments and thoughts on the subject.

Most Respectfully,
R

Whatever your opinion of CIA assessments may be, all of the evidence indicates that everyone in the Israeli government and military and everyone in the US government and military was certain Israel would win a quick victory over the Arab forces, so there is no basis in fact or logic for believing anyone was worried about Israel using a nuclear weapon, one of your many theories about why the Liberty was attacked.

The idea that Israel would attack a US ship to hide its plan to attack Syria is just plain silly. LBJ didn't want Israel to launch the attack on Egypt but Israel attacked anyway, and LBJ would have had to have been an idiot to believe Israel would not attack Syria after all the open threats Israel had made.

It is not surprising that a US admiral would believe Israel would be afraid to take independent action the US disapproved of but Israel has regularly done just that from the 1950's right down to today. There is simply no plausible explanation for why Israel would have knowingly attacked a US ship at that time.

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

I can give you some help here. (UNCLASS Form)

"Israel started investigating the nuclear field soon after its founding in 1948 and with French support secretly began building a nuclear reactor and reprocessing plant in the late 1950s.

"Israel is alleged to have developed a nuclear weapon in the late 1960s, but it is not publicly confirmed.[dubious – discuss]

(COMMENT)

References:

1. http://www.nps.edu/Academics/centers/CCC/conferences/recent/ProlifPathways/Israeli Nukes.pdf
2. http://berkeleyjournalofsocialsciences.com/March4.pdf
3. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/01-01.htm
4. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/02-01.htm
5. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/03-01.htm
6. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/04-01.htm
7. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/06-01.htm
8. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/07-01.htm
9. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/08-01.htm
10. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/09-01.htm
11. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/israel/documents/reveal/10-01.htm
12. http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_10149601a_174.pdf

Note: These are all multiple page documents that require manual paging.​

Ref #1 is my favorite. It gives the general timeline in a very salient points kind of way. Pages 5-6 say:

• 1960 Feb - First French nuclear test, conducted in partnership with the Israelis/djm
• Fall 1960 - Under French pressure, Israel agrees to disclose its nuclear program in
  return for continued French assistance
• 1960 Dec - US State Department reveals existence of secret Israeli nuclear program
  and installation
  Time (16 Dec) publishes a leaked story declaring that a “small power … neither of the
  communist nor the NATO block” was developing nuclear weapons
  AEC chairman John McCone appears on Meet the Press (18 Dec) and declares that
  Israel has an active nuclear program about which the United States was concerned
• 1961 Jan - David Ben Gurion tells the Knesset that Dimona is not a textile plant;
  tells US that programs objective is “peaceful” (~ “defensive” / “deterrent”)
• 1961 May - Kennedy-Ben Gurion meeting establishes framework for US
  inspection regime (lasts until 1969)
• 1963 Apr - Shimon Peres, in a meeting with President Kennedy, declares that Israel
  “will not introduce nuclear weapons to the region.”
• 1963 Dec - Dimona reactor operational

Page #8:

• Early 1968 - CIA reports that Israel has successfully produced four bombs
• 1969 Sept - US begins delivery of nuclear-capable F-4E Phantom jets to Israel
  • State Department objections overruled by Whitehouse, which subsequently denies that the delivery took place.

Page #4 says:

• 1949 -53 - Personal collaborative networks emerge among Israeli and French nuclear scientists
  • Patented Israeli technologies are the glue for Franco-Israeli joint program
  • Both countries had tried and failed to get access to American technology

I hope this helps, in some small way, in answering your questions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf2j-YzZRAA]Hebrew National 1975 - YouTube[/ame]