Second, we were there to support Israeli operations.
How so? For one thing, at the outbreak of the war, President Johnson exhorted Americans to practice neutrality "in word, thought and deed." For another thing, you yourself stated in post #21 that you aught [sic] to research the topic, as you would find their reasons interesting. It was a matter of breaking Israeli codes and then broadcasting their intentions in the clear. From the Israeli standpoint, the US ship was breaching their security and divulging battlefield tactics to the enemy. How does that amount to "support for Israeli operations"?
Third, we are in constant need to know what is going on in the world, particularly during hostilities.
If, as you imply in post #21, we intended to meddle and to undermine Israel's war effort, that goes beyond merely gathering intelligence.
You are not well informed about much of anything, it seems...It must be nice to have a simplistic world view.
Can we not hold a rational discussion sans the personal insults?
President Johnson is such a font of credibility. < /sarcasm>
...divulging battlefield tactics to the enemy. How does that amount to "support for Israeli operations"?
It wasn't much help, was it? I recall that breach was caused by excited youngsters operating outside of training by yaking with friends on other vessles. (I'm thinking back to material I read in the 1970s.)
Can we not hold a rational discussion sans the personal insults?
Sorry, my bad. That is one thing I hate about discussions on this board myself. I get peeved when anyone thinks we are "meddling" or "poking our nose where it doen't belong". We have a right and a need to gather intelligence anywhere or anytime we please. If we are hammered inside territorial waters, then we should take our lumps. Otherwise, we should be very upset when attacked.