[Radix]

Teddy can't drive.

Look, the incident with the Liberty is problematic, but the Israelis were at war at the time.

Do you understand that?

If the USA were at war against the French for example, would you have a problem bombing a British ship that was giving Intel to the enemy?

I do not know all the details concerning the Liberty back then, but I think that the Israeli's acted prudently based on what I know.

[Johnnyboy2000]

No I wouldn't. But do you realize that you are basically justifying the killing of American service people. Maybe they were giving the enemy intel. I would have no way of knowing. But I am an American, not an Israeli. And I will always sie with our interests rather than Israel's interests.

I also don't want people to think I'm like Iran's president or something. I just feel that Israel has taken advantage of the U.S. at times at our expense; e.g. the Liberty incident and the Pollard incident. They even tried to strong arm Slick Willy into freeing Pollard in order for Israel to back the peace plan. Not giving in was one of Clinton's better moments.

[Alberta's Child]

If you really want an eye-opener on this topic, just talk to someone who has worked in U.S. intelligence for any period of time. Even the non-classified things they can share with you ought to be enough to dispel this silly idea that Israel is really a friend of the United States.

[WoofDog123]

"I do not know all the details concerning the Liberty back then, but I think that the Israeli's acted prudently based on what I know.
"

From an israeli viewpoint, bombing the Liberty might have been 'prudent.'

From a muslim viewpoint, the 9/11 attacks might have been prudent.'

From a russian viewpoint, trying to annex west berlin might have been prudent.

I can provide more examples of actions directly contrary to american interests where the aggressor might have found such action prudent.

what about an american viewpoint?