FAQ:  Why was the attack unlawful?

Q:
 Why was the attack unlawful?

A:
 First, you have to bear in mind that USS Liberty was in international waters, had no offensive armament, and was moving so slowly that she was barely making way. No one, not Israel, not Egypt, not the Soviets - no one - had a legal right to fire on such a ship. The attack was, per se, a violation of international law. Under international law, in the absence of an attack against the Israelis by USS Liberty, the only legal right the Israelis had was to approach the ship and identify her. They did not do this.
Q:
 But I've read that USS Liberty fired first on the Israeli torpedo boats?

A:
 That allegation is subject to controversy. First, the ship was already on fire from the repeated, savage Israeli air attacks. Many sailors were dead and dozens more were wounded. The crew members closest to the machine gun that fired say that the fires from the ship as a result of the earlier Israeli napalm attacks "cooked off" the ammunition in the gun. Others say that one of the crewmen fired "a few rounds" toward the attacking Israeli torpedo boats.

Most witnesses agree that the fire cooked off the ammunition. Photos taken after the attack show that all four of the machine guns were inoperative - most likely as a result of the air attacks.

Even if a crewman fired at the attacking torpedo boats it was only after Israeli aircraft had brutally attacked the ship, killing and wounding his shipmates and the torpedo boats were in the process of making an attack run on the ship.

It is important to note that the Israeli torpedo boats were not approaching under a flag of truce, nor did they make any effort to demonstrate peaceful intent. Israeli aircraft had just repeatedly strafed and napalmed USS Liberty in an unlawful attack.  To assert a defense that they were fired upon by USS Liberty and that justified their torpedo attack is absurd.
Q:
 But USS Liberty sailed into a war zone?

A:
 Neither Israel nor Egypt had declared a war exclusion zone nor issued a notice to mariners. USS Liberty had a legal right to be where she was. Israel had no legal right to attack her. A country at war cannot simply attack anything that moves, just because there is a war going on. Assume for a moment that USS Liberty was in fact an Egyptian merchant ship in international waters, Israel still would not have had a legal right to attack her without first trying to stop her and identify her.

International law obligated the Israelis to at least make an attempt to stop the ship and ask for identification. They did not do this. By their own account, the Israelis launched their attack without a positive identification as to who they were attacking in international waters.
Q:
 What about "the fog of war"?

A:
 What "fog of war"? The Israelis positively identified USS Liberty as a specific US Navy ship ("USS Liberty") in the early morning hours of the day of the attack. They maintained aerial surveillance of her throughout the day. They followed her, using their maritime defense radar network. Then they launched a 75 minute coordinated air-sea attack. There was no "fog of war."