NationStates Jolt Archive

BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) -- An Israeli airstrike hit a United Nations post in the southern Lebanon late Tuesday, killing four of the agency's observers, according to the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon. (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html)

No one likes the UN anyway, they are pesky with all that "cease fire" nonsense!

The question remains: Will this have any impact on Israel's actions?

Those people were in the border right in the heart of the conflict. It is not much of a surprise that something like this will happen.

Remember it is not intentional, but it is what happens in war.

No, I doubt it will change their plans at all.

BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) -- An Israeli airstrike hit a United Nations post in the southern Lebanon late Tuesday, killing four of the agency's observers, according to the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon. (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html)

No one likes the UN anyway, they are pesky with all that "cease fire" nonsense!

The question remains: Will this have any impact on Israel's actions?
The story doesn't say what the target was. I doubt they were aiming at the blue helmets, though.

Didn't they shell a UN shelter last time, and killed a couple of hundred people? Doesn't surprise me in the least. Today's paper had story and photos of an air strike on an ambulance. :rolleyes:

Those people were in the border right in the heart of the conflict. It is not much of a surprise that something like this will happen.

Remember it is not intentional, but it is what happens in war.

For fuck sake, how can you still defend the IDF? They're not even bothering to check their targets anymore. It's not as if the blue tops don't tell everyone where they are.

The IDF is either criminally incompetent or deliberatly hitting these targets.

I doubt they were aiming at the blue helmets, though.I guess we will never know. ;)

You know, I think it was a calculated attempt to nerf the proposed UN peacekeeping force before talks began. There are meetings scheduled through this week to hammer out the details of who is contributing what to the UN stabilisation force. But I don't think Israel wants to share that border with anyone, not even with the UN. Can you imagine anyone reaching agreement on troop deployments now?

The IDF is either criminally incompetent or deliberatly hitting these targets.I would bet like this.. 40% on the first or 60% on the second.

No, I doubt it will change their plans at all.

Or their ability to aim.

You know, I think it was a calculated attempt to nerf the proposed UN peacekeeping force before talks began. There are meetings scheduled through this week to hammer out the details of who is contributing what to the UN stabilisation force. But I don't think Israel wants to share that border with anyone, not even with the UN. Can you imagine anyone reaching agreement on troop deployments now?

July 25, 2006


PARIS, July 24 — Support is building quickly for an international military force to be placed in southern Lebanon, but there remains a small problem: where will the troops come from?

The United States has ruled out its soldiers’ participating, NATO says it is overstretched, Britain feels its troops are overcommitted and Germany says it is willing to participate only if Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that it would police, agrees to it, a highly unlikely development.

“All the politicians are saying, ‘Great, great’ to the idea of a force, but no one is saying whose soldiers will be on the ground,” said one senior European official. “Everyone will volunteer to be in charge of the logistics in Cyprus.”

There has been strong verbal support for such a force in public, but also private concerns that soldiers would be seen as allied to Israel and would have to fight Hezbollah guerrillas who do not want foreigners, let alone the Lebanese Army, coming between them and the Israelis.

There is also the burden of history. France — which has called the idea of a force premature — and the United States are haunted by their last participation in a multinational force in Lebanon, after the Israeli invasion in 1982, when they became belligerents in the Lebanese civil war and tangled fatally with Hezbollah.

They withdrew in defeat after Hezbollah’s suicide bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut in October 1983.

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/nyt7_25_06_2.htm

You know, I think it was a calculated attempt to nerf the proposed UN peacekeeping force before talks began. There are meetings scheduled through this week to hammer out the details of who is contributing what to the UN stabilisation force. But I don't think Israel wants to share that border with anyone, not even with the UN. Can you imagine anyone reaching agreement on troop deployments now?

that's entirely possible..your suspicions..but i prefer to here a few more facts.

...Germany says it is willing to participate only if Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that it would police, agrees to it, a highly unlikely development...
That's bullshit and they know it is.

They need to ask the population, because I bet you that most citizens in Germany would actually agree to sending forces to help the people there, even if that meant that a few might get hurt. Same as with Afghanistan.

And besides, the Germans are fairly well-liked by both sides. The Israelis know that they can rely on the Germans thanks to history, and the Arabs like the Germans for somewhat less savoury reasons relating to the same event. Hell, even Ahmadinejad would be happy, afterall it is the Germans' fault that Israel exists, hey?

You know, I think it was a calculated attempt to nerf the proposed UN peacekeeping force before talks began. There are meetings scheduled through this week to hammer out the details of who is contributing what to the UN stabilisation force. But I don't think Israel wants to share that border with anyone, not even with the UN. Can you imagine anyone reaching agreement on troop deployments now?

That wouldn't surprise me in the least.

I guess we will never know. ;)
The good thing about is that the Israelis are willing to use as much force as necessary to solve the problem at hand. Unfortunately, a few blue helmets are no longer gracing the heads of representatives of the most useless organization in the world.

The best thing that could happen is that the Hezbolah is completely wiped out. The next best thing that could happen is for the Hezbolah to be within a hair of being wiped out. Then the Israelis could offer to negotiate over surrender terms.

Hell, even Ahmadinejad would be happy...Ahmadinejad and the Muslims do think Germany is a fair Country? Really??
Then why Ahmadinejad did not fly to Germany for the world Cup?

I mean.. if it was in Asia, Africa, South-America or elsewhere in Europe.. he would have give used his privilege as head of state.

What makes Germany so troublesome?
.

Anyways.. Ahmadinejad is a pussy .. he should have exerciced his Presidential rank anyways.

For fuck sake, how can you still defend the IDF? They're not even bothering to check their targets anymore. It's not as if the blue tops don't tell everyone where they are.

The IDF is either criminally incompetent or deliberatly hitting these targets.

Why the fuck would they intentionally aim for UN staff.

Why the fuck would they intentionally aim for UN staff.

This makes sense:

You know, I think it was a calculated attempt to nerf the proposed UN peacekeeping force before talks began. There are meetings scheduled through this week to hammer out the details of who is contributing what to the UN stabilisation force. But I don't think Israel wants to share that border with anyone, not even with the UN. Can you imagine anyone reaching agreement on troop deployments now?

Or maybe they aren't checking their targets, or maybe they just suck.

Which ever it is, someone need to take away theirs toys.

Ahmadinejad and the Muslims do think Germany is a fair Country? Really?
Ahmadinejad is not "the Muslims". Fact of the matter is that the Germans are well-respected in the Arab world, for many reasons. That's why it's always German companies involved with virtually any project in the region.

Then why Ahmadinejad did not fly to Germany for the world Cup.
Because they wouldn't have let him. President or not, he probably would've had to face serious questions about his Holocaust denial. And besides, his team sucked anyways.

Why the fuck would they intentionally aim for UN staff.

because they are out of control and hammering home the point they can, and will do whatever they want to whomever they want to because the US have their back.

if anyone believes this is an accident, the IDF didnt know it was a fixed UN observation tower, they need a serious reality check. ambulances, cars escaping as per IDF instructions, family homes at night and now the UN. this has to stop and if it takes economic sanctions, so be it

Isreal needs to be treated like the bloodthirsty rogue nation it has become and marginalised by civilised nations everywhere.

Because they wouldn't have let him. President or not, he probably would've had to face serious questions about his Holocaust denial. And besides, his team sucked anyways.

I believe holocaust denial is a crime in Germany is it not?

Iran would have looked a little silly having their president arrested just after kick-off.

because they are out of control and hammering home the point they can, and will do whatever they want to whomever they want to because the US have their back.

if anyone believes this is an accident, the IDF didnt know it was a fixed UN observation tower, they need a serious reality check. ambulances, cars escaping as per IDF instructions, family homes at night and now the UN. this has to stop and if it takes economic sanctions, so be it

Isreal needs to be treated like the bloodthirsty rogue nation it has become and marginalised by civilised nations everywhere.

As has been said in many other threads: "yay for propagander and conspiracy".

Slightly selfish I know, but as I live near a military base myself and also a UN training area- I'm just relieved that the 4 dead aren't anyone that I know from home.

Like I said, a bit selfish.

This is another example for my lack of sympathy for the IDF. :(

I believe holocaust denial is a crime in Germany is it not?
Holocaust denial in public that is deemed to be what is called "public agitation" is, yes.

Iran would have looked a little silly having their president arrested just after kick-off.
Not sure whether they can just arrest another government official just like that. There's probably legal issues. Nonetheless, he wouldn't have had a good time at all, because his views haven't exactly found much support in Germany.

As has been said in many other threads: "yay for propagander and conspiracy".

As had been said in many other threads 'Israel had up-to-date weaponry and hits its targets with a minimum of collateral dammage'.

This was a fixed observation tower, either they mean to hit it or alot of the claims made by hawks about the effectiveness of Israeli weapons need to be re-evaluated.

As has been said in many other threads: "yay for propagander and conspiracy".

im propagandising that the UN, ambulances and civilian homes and cars have been hit?

its a conspiracy that it was the IDF?

use your brain you sheep, no army accidentally hits a 25 year old fixed UN compound on their border.

Because they wouldn't have let him.who is "they" ?

Iran would have looked a little silly having their president arrested just after kick-off."President of Iran arrested by the German Gov.."

Imagine that.. CNN, FOX and the other NEWS Media stock would skyrocket..

use your brain you sheep, no army accidentally hits a 25 year old fixed UN compound on their border.

Thats because usually UN compounds are not usually smack bang in the middle of the fiering.

who is "they" ?
Politicians and the public alike. It would have been pretty unanimous, if you ask me.

Thats because usually UN compounds are not usually smack bang in the middle of the fiering.
So it was just gross incompetence then? Not looking at the map?

"Whoops. My finger slipped."?

These 'accidents' are beginning to occur with ever increasing regularity. There's a lot even for the "Its a war- accidents happen" excuse.

Politicians and the public alike. It would have been pretty unanimous, if you ask me.If that really ever came to happen.. It would develop into a huge evenement.. It would overshadow the World Cup.. and anything else.

I would pay big.. BIG PPV money to see that develop all the way.
popcorn city. ;)

Thats because usually UN compounds are not usually smack bang in the middle of the fiering.

thats why it was there for fucks sake, its on the border.

are you tellng me the IDF were unaware of the existance of the UN monitors?

get real

If that really ever came to happen.. It would develop into a huge evenement..
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,642135,00.jpg
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,420760,00.html
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,410756,00.html
http://www.ejpress.org/article/in_depth/world_cup/9064

He made the right choice in being a pussy and staying away. It could not possibly have ended with anything but a huge embarassment for him.

Iran would have looked a little silly having their president arrested just after kick-off."silly" is the last word that comes to my mind.

the first words that comes to my mind is "wholy cow.. they lost it"

Annan says that the strike was "apparently deliberate."

More innocent blood on the hands of the Israeli Deathshead Force, it seems.

July 25, 2006


PARIS, July 24 — Support is building quickly for an international military force to be placed in southern Lebanon, but there remains a small problem: where will the troops come from?

The United States has ruled out its soldiers’ participating, NATO says it is overstretched, Britain feels its troops are overcommitted and Germany says it is willing to participate only if Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that it would police, agrees to it, a highly unlikely development.

“All the politicians are saying, ‘Great, great’ to the idea of a force, but no one is saying whose soldiers will be on the ground,” said one senior European official. “Everyone will volunteer to be in charge of the logistics in Cyprus.”

There has been strong verbal support for such a force in public, but also private concerns that soldiers would be seen as allied to Israel and would have to fight Hezbollah guerrillas who do not want foreigners, let alone the Lebanese Army, coming between them and the Israelis.

There is also the burden of history. France — which has called the idea of a force premature — and the United States are haunted by their last participation in a multinational force in Lebanon, after the Israeli invasion in 1982, when they became belligerents in the Lebanese civil war and tangled fatally with Hezbollah.

They withdrew in defeat after Hezbollah’s suicide bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut in October 1983.

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/sf/nyt7_25_06_2.htm

withdrew in defeat ?????? from a peace keeping mission ????

That sites not one bit biased....:rolleyes:


Why is the UN there anyway ? They are not really doing anything ...but it seems getting bombed...why are they there ?

withdrew in defeat ?????? from a peace keeping mission ????

That sites not one bit biased....:rolleyes:its an European site..

http://www.foodsubs.com/Photos/clam-quahog.jpg

From the BBC:
...the four, from Austria, Canada, China and Finland, had taken shelter in a bunker under the post after it was earlier shelled 14 times by Israeli artillery.

A rescue team was also shelled as it tried to clear the rubble.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5215366.stm

Despicable.

use your brain you sheep, no army accidentally hits a 25 year old fixed UN compound on their border.
Correction:
no army accidentally hits a 25 year old fixed UN compound on their border FIFTEEN times.
Then, again, when a rescue team attempts to get to the victims.

It said the four, from Austria, Canada, China and Finland, had taken shelter in a bunker under the post after it was earlier shelled 14 times by Israeli artillery.
A rescue team was also shelled as it tried to clear the rubble.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5215366.stm

Correction:
no army accidentally hits a 25 year old fixed UN compound on their border FIFTEEN times.
Then, again, when a rescue team attempts to get to the victims.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5215366.stmthe USS Liberty was attacked for 2-and-a-half hours.. and still the US congress/US media called it an accident.

-snip-
Sorry...but what is this clam supposed to mean? :confused:

Whoops.

Whoops.

Israel troops 'ignored' UN plea

UN peacekeepers in south Lebanon contacted Israeli troops 10 times before an Israeli bomb killed four of them, an initial UN report says.

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile after six hours of shelling, diplomats familiar with the probe say.

The four unarmed UN observers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland, died after their UN post was hit by an Israeli air strike on Tuesday.

The UN report says each time the UN contacted Israeli forces, they were assured the firing would stop.
Israel troops 'ignored' UN plea (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5217176.stm)

Whoops?
http://rdfweb.org/people/danbri/2001/06/mmw/images/thumbs/p5250054.jpg
Horse's ass, whoops.

Sorry...but what is this clam supposed to mean? :confused:
I think he's alluding to the many uses the word 'shell' has.

For fuck sake, how can you still defend the IDF? They're not even bothering to check their targets anymore. It's not as if the blue tops don't tell everyone where they are.

The IDF is either criminally incompetent or deliberatly hitting these targets.


i'd be deliberate as the hezzies use all sorts of places we consider non targets as hiding/firing spots

they do that 1. to kill isralies 2. play the media card when something happens to the area

The story doesn't say what the target was. I doubt they were aiming at the blue helmets, though.


Im with you, why aim at a UN reconnisance building? The UN is there to help (HA like they could do that) but Israel is not nearly ready for a confrontation with the UN. The desperately need the support and right now they have only 3 allies, the US EU and some of the UN. If they deliberately target the UN they will lose all 3 and then where would they be.

thats right...up shits creek without a paddle.

Im with you, why aim at a UN reconnisance building? The UN is there to help (HA like they could do that) but Israel is not nearly ready for a confrontation with the UN. The desperately need the support and right now they have only 3 allies, the US EU and some of the UN. If they deliberately target the UN they will lose all 3 and then where would they be.

thats right...up shits creek without a paddle.
I refer you to this:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11441252&postcount=45

Maybe it wasn't delibrate initially, but they definitely didn't bother stopping when they were informed - repeatedly - what it was they were shelling.

i'd be deliberate as the hezzies use all sorts of places we consider non targets as hiding/firing spots

they do that 1. to kill isralies 2. play the media card when something happens to the area

Ummm, when was the last time Hezbollah hid their weapons in a UN observation post?

i'd be deliberate as the hezzies use all sorts of places we consider non targets as hiding/firing spots

they do that 1. to kill isralies 2. play the media card when something happens to the area

Lol, yes, they were hiding in the UN building. Not like the IDF could have made a call to them or anything. Nope, better bomb just to be sure. Just like every other square inch of lebanon.

Why the blazes was a UN encampment established ina warzone at the height of the conflict? That might just constitute "asking for it".

I refer you to this:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11441252&postcount=45

Maybe it wasn't delibrate initially, but they definitely didn't bother stopping when they were informed - repeatedly - what it was they were shelling.

You left out the best part from the link:

White House spokesman Tony Snow said "something went really wrong" to cause the deaths, but also said there was no reason to suggest the bombing was deliberate.

....despite being hit by a precision-guided missile .

Shells can be somewhat indiscriminate.
Missiles are told to hit the target- deliberately.

A disgrace. I spit on the IDF.

Why the blazes was a UN encampment established ina warzone at the height of the conflict? That might just constitute "asking for it".
Warzones are where and why UN establishes encampments!

Do you expect them to encamp in bloody Tonga in order to observe and (attempt to) keep the peace in the ME?

Still, at least I can see what the right-wing spin on this will be.
"It's the UN's fault! They shouldn't have been there!"

Warzones are where and why UN establishes encampments!

Do you expect them to encamp in bloody Tonga in order to observe and (attempt to) keep the peace in the ME?

Still, at least I can see what the right-wing spin on this will be.
"It's the UN's fault! They shouldn't have been there!"

I can also comprehend quite why the UN do establish encampments in such regions, but surely, given the relatively diminutive size of Lebanon,. it would have been prudent to be based a little futher north?

If they propose to keep the peace, anyway, surely wouldn't a magic castle in the sky and a troop of wizards be a little better suited?

I can also comprehend quite why the UN do establish encampments in such regions, but surely, given the relatively diminutive size of Lebanon,. it would have been prudent to be based a little futher north?

Observers should be placed away from the place they should be observing. Thats what you're telling us?


If they propose to keep the peace, anyway, surely wouldn't a magic castle in the sky and a troop of wizards be a little better suited?
Well done.

And this excuses the IDF how?

You left out the best part from the link:

White House spokesman Tony Snow said "something went really wrong" to cause the deaths, but also said there was no reason to suggest the bombing was deliberate.

....despite being hit by a precision-guided missile .

Shells can be somewhat indiscriminate.
Missiles are told to hit the target- deliberately.

A disgrace. I spit on the IDF.
Sorry. My bad. Thought the first part was dreadful enough, without needing that part to really ice the turd.

No reason to suggest the bombing was delibrate?

How about six hours of bombing and 10 calls from the UN telling the IDF to stop? Followed up by a precision-guided missile and then further shelling on the rescue team.

If that's not delibrate enough for the White House, then what is?

Observers should be placed away from the place they should be observing. Thats what you're telling us?


Well done.

And this excuses the IDF how?

Not perhaps entirely removed, but sufficiently so as to be safe. A war will inevitably entail non-combatant casualties and collateral damage, hence why establish an observation post in a war zone? Why not a few milesremoved from said warzone?

Why the blazes was a UN encampment established ina warzone at the height of the conflict? That might just constitute "asking for it".
They are there because that's where they have been since UNIFIL was deployed to the region in 1978 as per its agreement with Israel (and other countries).

On the other hand I found this blackly amusing ...
Gillerman said "Israel is carrying out a thorough inquiry into this tragic incident and will inform the UN of its results as soon as possible".
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1197718.ece

Hmm, I bet the investigation is going to be as effective as all the other ones launched by the IDF.

Sorry. My bad. Thought the first part was dreadful enough, without needing that part to really ice the turd.

No reason to suggest the bombing was delibrate?

How about six hours of bombing and 10 calls from the UN telling the IDF to stop? Followed up by a precision-guided missile and then further shelling on the rescue team.

If that's not delibrate enough for the White House, then what is?

I would have given anything, absolutely anything to have been in that press conference and use exactly what you just said.

I can also comprehend quite why the UN do establish encampments in such regions, but surely, given the relatively diminutive size of Lebanon,. it would have been prudent to be based a little futher north?

It was a boarder observation post. The clue to it's location is in the name really.

More details emerging:

The Irish foreign ministry said one of its officers in the UN's Unifil peacekeeping force in south Lebanon, placed six warning calls to the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) prior to the attack.

"On six separate occasions he was in contact with the Israelis to warn them that their bombardment was endangering the lives of UN staff in South Lebanon," Reuters news agency quoted an unnamed foreign office spokesman as saying.

"He warned: 'You have to address this problem or lives may be lost'," the spokesman said.

The Associated Press news agency named the officer as Lt Col John Molloy.

Oh also,

The UN post was on high ground, in an area once occupied by Israel. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5216230.stm

At the rate israel's going, with its despicable mass-killing of civilians and destruction of Lebanon, these finks probably laughed when they heard they had the opportunity to kill some UN troops.

Those people were in the border right in the heart of the conflict. It is not much of a surprise that something like this will happen.

Remember it is not intentional, but it is what happens in war.

What? You shell friendlys for 6 hours despite 10 requests to lay off and then hit them with a missile?


Why the fuck would they intentionally aim for UN staff..

To make sure they cant put together a peace-keeping force for a ceasefire.

You know, this isn't the first time they've attacked a U.N. base be it on purpose or "By Accident". Also, they claimed the attack on a US Navy ship was "an Accident" when it was waving a US flag, and begging them to stop.


I think the UN should embargo the shit out of Israel.


EDIT: When Israel attacked the US's navy ship, it resulted in the death of many good sailors.


The following Liberty personnel were killed in the incident:

Cryptologic Technician 3rd Class William B. Allenbaugh, USN
Lieutenant Commander Philip A. Armstrong Jr., USN
Seaman Gary R. Blanchard, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Class Allen M. Blue, NSA
Quartermaster 3rd Class Francis Brown, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Ronnie J. Campbell, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Class Jerry L. Converse, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Class Robert B. Eisenberg, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Class Jerry L. Goss, USN
Cryptologic Technician 1st Class Curtis L. Graves, USN
Cryptologic Technician Lawrence P. Hayden, USN
Cryptologic Technician 1st Class Warren Hersey, USN
Cryptologic Technician 3rd Class Alan Higgins, USN
Seaman Carl L. Hoar, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Class Richard W. Keene, USN
Cryptologic Technician James L. Lenau, USN
Chief Cryptologic Technician Raymond E. Linn, USN
Cryptologic Technician 1st Class James M. Lupton, USN
Cryptologic Technician 3rd Class Duane R. Marggraf, USN
Cryptologic Technician David W. Marlborough, USN
Cryptologic Technician 2nd Class Anthony P. Mendle, USN
Cryptologic Technician Carl C. Nygren, USN
Lieutenant James C. Pierce, USN
Sergeant Jack Raper, U.S.M.C.
Corporal Edward Rehmayer II, U.S.M.C.
Interior Communications Electrician David N. Skolak, USN
Cryptologic Technician 1st Class John C. Smith Jr, USN
Chief Cryptologic Technician Melvin D. Smith, USN
Postal Clerk 2nd Class John C. Spicher, USN
Gunner's Mate 3rd Class Alexander N. Thompson, USN
Cryptologic Technician 3rd Class Thomas R. Thornton, USN
Cryptologic Technician 3rd Class Phillipe C. Tiedtke, USN
Lieutenant Stephen S. Toth, USN
Cryptologic Technician 1st Class Frederick J. Walton, USN

"oof, ve sot zay vuhhs hitzbuolluh commander in bunku wiss zem using radio"

Israel's words dont excuse its murder. The IDF has proven itself worse than either hitzbollah or hamas.

"oof, ve sot zay vuhhs hitzbuolluh commander in bunku wiss zem using radio"


What does that mean?

What does that mean?

Translation:

'oops, we thought they were hezbollah commanders in the bunker using the radio'

Those people were in the border right in the heart of the conflict. It is not much of a surprise that something like this will happen.

Remember it is not intentional, but it is what happens in war.
Try again?

UN observers' warnings were ignored, Annan says (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStories/ContentPosting.aspx?newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20060725%2fisrael_fighting_060726&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V2&showbyline=True)

Annan, speaking at a news conference in Rome, said he accepted the regrets offered by Olmert, but said "you need to look at the events of yesterday."

He said the UN observers warned Israeli soldiers that they were shelling near the post, and urged them to stop.

"That shelling of the UN position, which is long established and clearly marked, started early in the morning and went on until after 7 p.m., when we lost contact," Annan told reporters.

"People on the ground were in touch with the Israeli army trying to warn them," Annan said.

"And many calls went out until this happened."

An initial UN report says UN observers contacted Israeli troops 10 times in six hours before an Israeli bomb killed four of them.

The Israeli officer promised after each call to have the bombing stopped, but then a bomb exploded directly on the UN post, said an officer from the UN force in Lebanon known as UNIFIL.
When I was in the militia (artillery), when the CO yelled CEASEFIRE, we stopped pulling on the lanyard. Really simple stuff, for most to understand?

Then why Ahmadinejad did not fly to Germany for the world Cup?Because Iran didn't make it to the next round. Next question.

You know, this isn't the first time they've attacked a U.N. base be it on purpose or "By Accident". Also, they claimed the attack on a US Navy ship was "an Accident" when it was waving a US flag, and begging them to stop.
*snip*The list of sailors is a pretty good indicator as to why Israel attacked in the first place and why the US doesn't want justice: That many cryptologists show that it was on an espionage mission.

Israel is out of control, thanks to getting the green light from the US. They have become the monsters they are fighting.

I wash my hands of them.

Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein.

While I agree that Israel has done something indescribably stupid, we need to be very careful about becoming too bipolar on this issue. It's not a case of "Supporting Israel" versus "Supporting Islamists"; we're dealing with very subtle shades of a darker grey here that need to be held individually as well as collectively responsible, rather than simply dubbing one white and one black at any given time.

Israel has been using the West's approach to Iraq as its role model, and we need to take our own share of the responsibility for these events as well. As I have said before, the stench of the legacy of Osama bin Laden continues to hang prominently over every side of the conflict, and nobody can be held to be in the right, whether it is the Lebanese and Israeli citizens too stubbornly patriotic to stand up to their militaristic governments, the Islamists too blinded by fear of Israel's political and religious rivalry to realise the suffering they're causing, the Syrians and Iranians who are relishing their spot in the limelight once again at the expense of their own allies, the US who explicitly turn a blind eye to the countermeasures to let as much damage as possible be caused, Europe who (in their typical conceited manner) sit back, criticise and wallow in their own self-satisfaction at doing so or the soldiers of either side just following orders without care or consideration for the repercussions of their actions.

Oh, how the mighty human race has fallen.

And yet, if we all realised it, it would be so easily solved.

We could just stop sucking so badly and actually get on for a change.

Is that really too much to ask?

</rant>

Its simple: Do not support islamists and do not support israelis.

If both parties insist on behaving like animals, neither should get a dime of support.

8 israeli soldiers killed today - a little different from shooting rock-throwers and bombing houses I guess.

http://www.bloggingbeirut.com/

From the BBC:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5215366.stm

Despicable.
Isn't most of israeli shelling counter-battery fire? I'm not completely certain but I think so.

Isn't most of israeli shelling counter-battery fire? I'm not completely certain but I think so.
Are you claiming the 4 UN observers shelled the IDF?

Are you claiming the 4 UN observers shelled the IDF?
No, I'm claiming they were in the general vicinity of those who were. Counterbattery-fire isn't quite as accurate as you seem to think, and given the level of corruption of the UN, iit's quite possible they were paid to look the other way.

No, I'm claiming they were in the general vicinity of those who were. Counterbattery-fire isn't quite as accurate as you seem to think,

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile. Next?


and given the level of corruption of the UN, iit's quite possible they were paid to look the other way.
Link? Source to the claim that UNIFIL were paid by the IDF to sacrifice 4 soldiers in 6 hours of shelling?

No?

Then be a good fellow and have a nice cup o' STFU.

No, I'm claiming they were in the general vicinity of those who were. Counterbattery-fire isn't quite as accurate as you seem to think, and given the level of corruption of the UN, iit's quite possible they were paid to look the other way.

that has to be the most pathetic attempt to justify the indefensible i have ever come across

get to fuck

How about we take a look at this:

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/pr010.pdf
Let's see....
It does say that Israel was contacted repeatedly, but notice what else it says.
It says that Hezbollah has also been attacking UN buildings.
It also says that Hezbollah has been firing from the vicinity from UN buildings.
Yep, those evil Israelis. Stuff goes wrong in war, you know.

They should do something or leave ....being a target by both sides does'nt count...its bullshit...they just happen to be in the middle of a WAR ...and expect ...what ?


Wake the fuck up .

They should do something or leave ....being a target by both sides does'nt count...its bullshit...they just happen to be in the middle of a WAR ...and expect ...what ?


Wake the fuck up .


After giving six warnings you expect not be murdered and back-stabbed.

The despicable israeli military is guilty of yet another crime in their indiscriminate and vile war on lebanon and its civilian population.

How about we take a look at this:

Yes, Lets:
It says that Hezbollah has also been attacking UN buildings.

And? Hezb'allah didn't kill anyone. Had they, there would have been an outcry too. That still doesn't give justification to the IDF for the willful destruction of a neutral observation post, and the killing of 4 neutral parties.

It also says that Hezbollah has been firing from the vicinity from UN buildings.
You're forgetting the major point here:

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile

There are no accidents with that.

Yep, those evil Israelis. Stuff goes wrong in war, you know.
14 different periods of shelling in 6 hours.
6 seperate phone calls from UNIFIL to the IDF.
10 seperate phone calls from the observation post to the IDF.
IDF assurances the shelling will stop after every phone call.
Precision guided missile.

Conclusion: Deliberate.

They're no better than the people they claim to be fighting against.
*dusts hands*
I'm done.

if the fox report of email from killed canadien un guy is correct [Hezbollah located 10 feet from post], then hitting the Hezbollah with a precision guided bomb will still have killed the un guys from blast effects

also blame kofi a for not having the guts to pull the observers out when they knew that they were targeted

ymmv :confused:

if the fox report of email from killed canadien un guy is correct [Hezbollah located 10 feet from post], then hitting the Hezbollah with a precision guided bomb will still have killed the un guys from blast effects

also blame kofi a for not having the guts to pull the observers out when they knew that they were targeted

ymmv :confused:
http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif

Annan says that the strike was "apparently deliberate."

More innocent blood on the hands of the Israeli Deathshead Force, it seems.

Buh? Today I heard on the news about this, and Annan accepted the IDF's apology for the incident.

Buh? Today I heard on the news about this, and Annan accepted the IDF's apology for the incident.
Accepting an apology for their deaths does not equal accepting their version of events.

Not sure whether you heard of it, but Bolton blocked a UN Statement condemning the attacks.

Not sure whether you heard of it, but Bolton blocked a UN Statement condemning the attacks.
Oh wonderful.

Why not take the rape victims' wallet while they're at it?

Am I really that surprised?
http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/shocked016.gif

Oh wonderful.

Why not take the rape victims' wallet while they're at it?

Am I really that surprised?

Actually, I expect that if an Israeli precision missile somehow found its way into oh, the Capitol building Washington DC, Bolton would block a motion condemning that too.

And a bunch of people on this board would say "It's an accident" too.

Apparently, the UN observers were being used as human shields by Hezbollah, and the Canadians who died had been complaining to their UN commanders that they were being used that way.

I guess the UN commanders didn't give a hoot about Hezbollah doing that.

Welcome to the IDF telephone hotline. If you want to set up a bank account or chequing account, press one. For information on current exchange rates, press two. If you're being shelled by IDF artillery and believe that this is in error, hang up the receiver and we will return your call... not bloody likely.

Apparently, the UN observers were being used as human shields by Hezbollah, and the Canadians who died had been complaining to their UN commanders that they were being used that way.

I guess the UN commanders didn't give a hoot about Hezbollah doing that.

Oh! Well that justifies it then.

I mean, I'm sure the IDF did everything in its power to warn the Observers of the impending attack. To evacute as quickly as possible, to leave. I mean if they wanted to stop Hezb'allah from using the base, then the Observers could have left and the IDF could have destroyed it.

But no.

The IDF killed the Observers while still inside the base despite assurances to them they would be left alone.

Oh! Well that justifies it then.

The Canadian peacekeepers who were killed had complained of days of being used as human shields by Hezbollah to their senior UN commanders.

The UN commanders should have moved them to a location where Hezbollah could not be near them.

Alternatively, if UN forces feel that some combat unit is hugging them in order to find protection against being killed, the UN should not only have the authority, but the obligation to force the people trying to use them as shields to move away - by force if necessary, by killing if necessary.

The Canadian peacekeepers who were killed had complained of days of being used as human shields by Hezbollah to their senior UN commanders.

The UN commanders should have moved them to a location where Hezbollah could not be near them.

How do you move them when all roads, highways, bridges and methods of transport have been destroyed?

How do you move them when the IDF targetd vehicles under the premise (rightly or wrongly) that Hez'bollah might be transporting weapons?

Use UN vehicles? Hasn't stopped the IDF from firing on UN vehicles before.
Odds are, it was probably safer to stay indoors in South Lebanon than move around, ehich goes to show you how dangerous it actually is.


Alternatively, if UN forces feel that some combat unit is hugging them in order to find protection against being killed, the UN should not only have the authority, but the obligation to force the people trying to use them as shields to move away - by force if necessary, by killing if necessary.
Agreed.

HOWEVER, the IDF will hit anything that has a weapon in South Lebanon that isn't IDF.


He added that Israel had given the civilians of southern Lebanon ample time to quit the area and therefore anyone still remaining there could be considered a Hezbollah supporter.
"All those now in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah," Mr Ramon said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5219360.stm

You stay in your post, you get bombed.
You try to leave your post, you get bombed.
You try to flee, you get bombed.
You defend yourself, you get bombed.

...'cause the base was so difficult to know whas there, and so easy to move too:
UN officials said the observation position was well marked. A picture the world body released Wednesday showed the three-story building was painted white with the letters "UN" emblazoned in large black letters on all sides, and a light blue UN flag hung from a nearby flagpole that was roughly 50 feet high.

Witnesses said the building, which was surrounded by concrete blast walls and barbed wire, also had the letters UN painted on the roof and it was illuminated by floodlights at night.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1153292007546&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
In his statement, Mr. Annan said that the “coordinated artillery and air attack” occurred despite personal assurances given to him by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that UN positions would be spared fire. The Secretary-General said the post, near the Lebanese town of Khiyam, was “long established and clearly marked.”

In addition, he said the UN Force Commander in south Lebanon, General Alain Pelligrini, had been in repeated contact with Israeli officers throughout the day, stressing the need to protect this particular UN position from attack. At least 14 incidents of firing close to that post have been reported since this afternoon. A UN spokesman added that the firing continued while a search and rescue operation was taking place.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=19306&Cr=leban&Cr1=

The Canadian peacekeepers who were killed had complained of days of being used as human shields by Hezbollah to their senior UN commanders.

The UN commanders should have moved them to a location where Hezbollah could not be near them.

Alternatively, if UN forces feel that some combat unit is hugging them in order to find protection against being killed, the UN should not only have the authority, but the obligation to force the people trying to use them as shields to move away - by force if necessary, by killing if necessary.
Are we going to find that the Canadians surrendered operational control of their units to some UN commander? If so, this is a very good reason to never supply peacekeeping troops to the U.N. If not, the Canadians are lousy leaders.

Here is a copy of the UNIFIL press release... http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/pr010.pdf

here is an excerpt from it, but i'm sure the lefties and israel haters here on NS general will ignore it.

Another UN position of the Ghanaian battalion in the area of Marwahin in the western sector was also directly hit by one mortar round from the Hezbollah side last night. The round did not explode, and there were no casualties or material damage. Another 5 incidents of firing close to UN positions from the Israeli side were reported yesterday. It was also reported that Hezbollah fired from the vicinity of four UN positions at Alma ash Shab, Tibnin, Brashit, and At Tiri. All UNIFIL positions remain occupied and maintained by the troops.

The prime minister of Canada also seems to doubt that the incident was deliberate:

OTTAWA (AFP) - Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper said an Israeli attack on a UN outpost that killed four, including a Canadian, was a “terrible tragedy” but not likely deliberate.

At the same time, he questioned why the UN had manned the outpost in Lebanon near the Israeli border as bombs exploded all around.

“We want to find out why this United Nations post was attacked and also why it remained manned during what is now, more or less, a war during obvious danger to these individuals,” he told reporters.

Asked about UN head Kofi Annan’s statement suggesting Israel had targeted the outpost, Harper said: “I certainly doubt that to be the case.”

Retired Canadian Major General Lewis Mackenzie recieved e-mails from the decease Canadaian UN worker complaining that the position was being used y Hizballah as cover:

We received emails from him a few days ago, and he was describing the fact that he was taking fire within, in one case, three meters of his position for tactical necessity, not being targeted. Now that’s veiled speech in the military. What he was telling us was Hezbollah soldiers were all over his position and the IDF were targeting them. And that’s a favorite trick by people who don’t have representation in the UN. They use the UN as shields knowing that they can’t be punished for it.

link: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21786_Canadian_General-_UN_Observer_Post_Used_By_Hizballah&only

The prime minister of Canada also seems to doubt that the incident was deliberate:
It is a distinct possibility that the IDF is astoundingly incompetent, yes. I've been thinking that myself.

Here is a copy of the UNIFIL press release...
Seen it.


However you appear to quote the wrong part. The UN based targeted by the IDF was in the area of Khiyam, not Marwahin, Alma ash Shab, Tibnin, Brashit, or At Tiri (areas hit by Hezb'allah mortar fire).

Therefore, the IDF targeted a base that had not received fire from Hezb'allah according to their report. Your point is dismissed as irrelevant.


Retired Canadian Major General Lewis Mackenzie recieved e-mails from the decease Canadaian UN worker complaining that the position was being used y Hizballah as cover:

Seen that too. Doesn't change the fact that the IDF could have made a very simple phone call the the observers to evacute as an incoming bombardment was about to occur. The phones were working - 6 from UNIFIL HQ to the IDF. 10 from the targeted Observers to the IDF directly calling for a ceasefire.



link: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21786_Canadian_General-_UN_Observer_Post_Used_By_Hizballah&only
Oh goody. A blog to back up your points.

It is a distinct possibility that the IDF is astoundingly incompetent, yes. I've been thinking that myself.


Hmmm...or it's a war zone, and accidents happen, especially when Hizballah uses the UN as a shield.

Hmmm...or it's a war zone, and accidents happen, especially when Hizballah uses the UN as a shield.
You may have had a point with some random shelling.
That point is tenuous at best after 14 seperate cases of shelling.
That point is destroyed by the fact they were hit by a precision guided missile.

Accidents don't happen with precision guided missiles. Its deliberate.

You may have had a point with some random shelling.
That point is tenuous at best after 14 seperate cases of shelling.
That point is destroyed by the fact they were hit by a precision guided missile.

Accidents don't happen with precision guided missiles. Its deliberate.
In addition, let us add this:
Officials in the outpost called the IDF 10 times during those six hours, and each time an army official promised to have the bombing stopped, according to a preliminary UN report on the incident.
So were they lying or incompetent?

And the IDF knew where the post was located. It apparently wasn't difficult to observe either:
UN officials said the observation position was well marked. A picture the world body released Wednesday showed the three-story building was painted white with the letters "UN" emblazoned in large black letters on all sides, and a light blue UN flag hung from a nearby flagpole that was roughly 50 feet high.

Witnesses said the building, which was surrounded by concrete blast walls and barbed wire, also had the letters UN painted on the roof and it was illuminated by floodlights at night.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1153292007546&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Seen it.


However you appear to quote the wrong part. The UN based targeted by the IDF was in the area of Khiyam, not Marwahin, Alma ash Shab, Tibnin, Brashit, or At Tiri (areas hit by Hezb'allah mortar fire).

Therefore, the IDF targeted a base that had not received fire from Hezb'allah according to their report. Your point is dismissed are irrelevant.

My point is that this is a war zone, and when you have a bunch of people "observing" the war from between the two warring sides, chances are they might be hit by accident, by either side. Moreover, by Kofi Annan and the likes of you ignoring the fire coming from Hizallah at UN outposts and only condemning Israel, the DOUBLE STANDARD IS EXPOSED.

Seen that too. Doesn't change the fact that the IDF could have made a very simple phone call the the observers to evacute as an incoming bombardment was about to occur. The phones were working - 6 from UNIFIL HQ to the IDF. 10 from the targeted Observers to the IDF directly calling for a ceasefire.

It's a warzone. Don't want to get hit by either side? GET OUT. Israel has halted fighting and provided windows of escape for others, and I'm sure the same could be done for the UN as long a Annan asks for it. Furthermore, Hizballah clearly uses the UN as a shield knowing they won't be condemned because they arent a member nation.

Oh goody. A blog to back up your points.

The blog has the radio broadcast on it. It's not an opinion. It's a fact.

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/4702/idfll9.png

You know, I think it was a calculated attempt to nerf the proposed UN peacekeeping force before talks began. There are meetings scheduled through this week to hammer out the details of who is contributing what to the UN stabilisation force. But I don't think Israel wants to share that border with anyone, not even with the UN. Can you imagine anyone reaching agreement on troop deployments now?

But...

You can't not share a border. If there's no one else on the other side of the border, it's not a border anymore, now is it?

My point is that this is a war zone, and when you have a bunch of people "observing" the war from between the two warring sides, chances are they might be hit by accident, by either side. Moreover, by Kofi Annan and the likes of you ignoring the fire coming from Hizallah at UN outposts and only condemning Israel, the DOUBLE STANDARD IS EXPOSED.

I can't ignore something that didn't happen. The base that was destroyed did not come under Hezb'allah fire.

That base is all that matters as that base is the only one the IDF destroyed and killed a Canadian, an Austrian, a Chinese and a Finn.


It's a warzone. Don't want to get hit by either side? GET OUT. Israel has halted fighting and provided windows of escape for others, and I'm sure the same could be done for the UN as long a Annan asks for it. Furthermore, Hizballah clearly uses the UN as a shield knowing they won't be condemned because they arent a member nation.
As I said earlier:

How do you move them when all roads, highways, bridges and methods of transport have been destroyed?

How do you move them when the IDF targetd vehicles under the premise (rightly or wrongly) that Hez'bollah might be transporting weapons?

Use UN vehicles? Hasn't stopped the IDF from firing on UN vehicles before.
Odds are, it was probably safer to stay indoors in South Lebanon than move around, which goes to show you how dangerous it actually is.

You stay in your post, you get bombed.
You try to leave your post, you get bombed.
You try to flee, you get bombed.
You defend yourself, you get bombed.


The blog has the radio broadcast on it. It's not an opinion. It's a fact.
I wasn't commenting on the radio broadcast, the Candian PM or the Candian military officer. I was commenting on your use of a blog as a reference. You know that is never a wise move on these forums.

My point is that this is a war zone, and when you have a bunch of people "observing" the war from between the two warring sides, chances are they might be hit by accident, by either side. Moreover, by Kofi Annan and the likes of you ignoring the fire coming from Hizallah at UN outposts and only condemning Israel, the DOUBLE STANDARD IS EXPOSED.
No. The difference is: Hizballah has so far only damaged UN material. IDF has killed 4 UN observers.

It's a warzone. Don't want to get hit by either side? GET OUT. Israel has halted fighting and provided windows of escape for others, and I'm sure the same could be done for the UN as long a Annan asks for it. Furthermore, Hizballah clearly uses the UN as a shield knowing they won't be condemned because they arent a member nation.
Heh. In your dreams. Israel won't halt their fighting at anyones request except the US. And Rice isn't asking.

And Israel claims to "want" the observers there...
The blog has the radio broadcast on it. It's not an opinion. It's a fact.
It's unsubstantiated claims from a retired officer anyway. Why not go with more official statements?
Jane Lute, assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping, told the UN Security Council in New York that the UN observation post near Khiam came under close IDF fire 21 times Tuesday - including 12 hits within 100 yards and five direct hits - until the peacekeepers' post was destroyed.

UN officials said Hezbollah guerillas had been operating in the area of the post near the eastern end of the border with Israel, a routine tactic to prevent Israel from attacking them.

"We did repeatedly in recent days say (to Israel) that this was an exposed position, that Hezbollah militants were 500 meters (yards) away shielding themselves near UN workers and civilians," UN humanitarian chief Jan Egeland said. "That's why it is so inexplicable that what happened happened."

IDF officials had told the United Nations that the bombing around the base was part of an "an aerial preparation for a ground operation," said the senior official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1153292007546&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I can't ignore something that didn't happen. The base that was destroyed did not come under Hezb'allah fire.

That base is all that matters as that base is the only one the IDF destroyed and killed a Canadian, an Austrian, a Finn and a Chinese.

This war isn't taking place strictly around this specific outpost. You keep ignoring the point that it's a war zone and observers in the middle of a war are being fired upon accidentally by BOTH sides all over the battlefront. You continue to single out the fire coming from Israel and ignoring the fire coming from Hizballah, regardless of which base is being hit.


As I said earlier:

How do you move them when all roads, highways, bridges and methods of transport have been destroyed?

How do you move them when the IDF targetd vehicles under the premise (rightly or wrongly) that Hez'bollah might be transporting weapons?

Use UN vehicles? Hasn't stopped the IDF from firing on UN vehicles before.
Odds are, it was probably safer to stay indoors in South Lebanon than move around, which goes to show you how dangerous it actually is.

You stay in your post, you get bombed.
You try to leave your post, you get bombed.
You try to flee, you get bombed.
You defend yourself, you get bombed.

And the IDF has allowed for people to leave, Kofi Annan just hasn't given the order. REPEAT: Kofi Annan has not called for his troops to leave, so as long as they are sitting in the middle of a battle, they are at risk.

"Haifa, Israel (CNSNews.com) - The four United Nations peacekeepers killed in an Israeli attack on their outpost were required to stay at that post “until they were ordered by the [U.N.] secretary general to withdraw,” said a member of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization on Wednesday.

But the peacekeepers apparently never received such an order, despite the fierce cross-border fighting that erupted in southern Lebanon two weeks ago."

I wasn't commenting on the radio broadcast, the Candian PM or the Candian military officer. I was commenting on your use of a blog as a reference. You know that is never a wise move on these forums.

If my reference has a radio broadcast of someone I am quoting, I will cite it regardless of which site is posting the audio clip.

Moreover, by Kofi Annan and the likes of you ignoring the fire coming from Hizallah at UN outposts and only condemning Israel, the DOUBLE STANDARD IS EXPOSED.

Hezbollah isn't the military of a civilized nation. Hezbollah is a fanatical militia with a long history of terrorist attacks. Things like this are simply par for the course for them, and if we were to condemn all of the wrong things that Hezbollah does we wouldn't really have time to do anything else, now would we?

It's not a double standard. It would be a double standard if Hezbollah were a proper army under the direct control of a government or if the IDF were a terrorist militia organization.

Also, condemnation of Israel could possibly lead to diplomatic action to get them to change their methods. Condemnation of Hezbollah, of course, wouldn't do anything of the sort.

Anyway, you're making the false assumption (which is rife on this board) that condemnation of Israel = support for Hezbollah.

This war isn't taking place strictly around this specific outpost. You keep ignoring the point that it's a war zone and observers in the middle of a war are being fired upon accidentally by BOTH sides all over the battlefront. You continue to single out the fire coming from Israel and ignoring the fire coming from Hizballah, regardless of which base is being hit.
No, but that's what this thread is about. Referring to other posts being hit be Hezb'allah and not being levelled by the IDF is irrelevant to this thread, this argument and to the matter at hand.


And the IDF has allowed for people to leave, Kofi Annan just hasn't given the order. REPEAT: Kofi Annan has not called for his troops to leave, so as long as they are sitting in the middle of a battle, they are at risk.
Find me the order from the IDF that told the UN Observers to leave the tower before they destroyed it.


"Haifa, Israel (CNSNews.com) - The four United Nations peacekeepers killed in an Israeli attack on their outpost were required to stay at that post “until they were ordered by the [U.N.] secretary general to withdraw,” said a member of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization on Wednesday.
Why should they have been ordered to withdraw?
Why should they have been in fear of their lives from the IDF?
The IDF should not have attacked a neutral third party.

End of.



If my reference has a radio broadcast of someone I am quoting, I will cite it regardless of which site is posting the audio clip.
Do what you will. Just don't be surprised if people rag on you for using blogs as your source.

Personally I don't see what the IDF have to gain from killing UN observers. A handful of deaths and injuries (10 so far) as a result of IDF attacks aren't going to change any international government opinions.

On the other hand. It is inconceivable, given the evidence presented so far, that the IDF was not deliberately targeting the UN. You might be able to get away with "We shelled the area that might have contained Hizbollah and we accidentally caught the UN base in it". But you can not get away with "we repeatedly shelled the UN base and then targeted a precision guided munition on their location and fired it".

Saying that it was the UN's fault for being there is the same as a Policeman saying that the 4 innocent bystanders he gunned down were standing in the way of his warning shots and that it was their fault he killed each of them with a precision shot to the forehead from close range.

Everything the IDF has said since the incident has only reinforced the idea that it was a deliberate strike. Turning down the offer of a joint investigation, refusing an independent investigation, etc. I have yet to hear anything convincing from the incident that suggests that the IDF did not specifically choose to kill four nationals whose nations they are not at war with and whose actions in now way directly threatened, or risked threatening, the IDF or Israeli civilians.

No, but that's what this thread is about. Referring to other posts being hit be Hezb'allah and not being levelled by the IDF is irrelevant to this thread, this argument and to the matter at hand.


Find me the order from the IDF that told the UN Observers to leave the tower before they destroyed it.


Why should they have been ordered to withdraw?
Why should they have been in fear of their lives from the IDF?
The IDF should not have attacked a neutral third party.

End of.



Do what you will. Just don't be surprised if people rag on you for using blogs as your source.


The IDF did not attack the UN. The IDF was attacking Hizballah and inadvertantly struck the UN post.

Since I'm tired of writing the same thing over and over again, I'll pose this to you. Condemn Hizballlah for hitting UN outposts. Do it. I dare you.

You keep ignoring the point that it's a war zone and observers in the middle of a war are being fired upon accidentally by BOTH sides all over the battlefront.

Precision guided munitions are not 'accidently' aimed. That is why they are called precision. Long story short, the IDF wanted the UN post gone. Their motives can be debated, but that is the goal they set for themselves.

To accidently hit a UN outpost with a precision weapon is like accidently punching the wrong man in a different building.

It certainly doesn't excuse Hezbollah for doing what it does, but at the same time, Hezbollah's actions should not be an excuse for Israeli actions.

Or are you firmly convinced that the attack on the US ship in the 1960s (I believe it was the USS Liberty), which also involved attempting to kill everybody on board was an 'accident'?

Since I'm tired of writing the same thing over and over again, I'll pose this to you. Condemn Hizballlah for hitting UN outposts. Do it. I dare you.

I condemn Hizbollah for deliberately and /or indiscrimnately attacking UN outposts with mortars and small arms, despite the lack of UNIFIL casualties.
I condemn the IDF for deliberately and/ or indiscriminately attacking UN outposts with artillery and executing 4 members of other nationalities with PRECISION GUIDED MUNITIONS.

I expect you to do the same? Or do you hold the same double-standards that you accuse everyone else of holding?

The IDF did not attack the UN.



GAH!? :eek: :confused:


The IDF was attacking Hizballah and inadvertantly struck the UN post.
http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif


Since I'm tired of writing the same thing over and over again, I'll pose this to you. Condemn Hizballlah for hitting UN outposts. Do it. I dare you.

Excellent.

Criticising the IDF = Defending Hezb'allah.

Wonderful.
Of course I condemn Hezb'allah you twit! Why would I defend them?

Or are you firmly convinced that the attack on the US ship in the 1960s (I believe it was the USS Liberty), which also involved attempting to kill everybody on board was an 'accident'?


It was an accident, ten US inqueries and three Israeli inqueries ahve proven so. That too, was an incident that took place IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR. I don't understand what you guys don't get about that.

As for the "precision guided" bomb theory. It hasn't been proven. Get back to me when it has. Even if true, humans make errors and so do their inventions. No weapon is infallible.

GAH!? :eek: :confused:


ahhh...nothing better than taking things out of context. way to go PM.

I said, and I'll put it in caps for you... THE IDF DID NOT ATTACK THE UN. THE IDF WAS ATTACKING HIZBALLAH AND INADVERTANTLY HIT A UN OUTPOST.

Criticising the IDF = Defending Hezb'allah.

Wonderful.

You forgot the whole Equation:

Criticizing the IDF = Criticizing Israel = J00-hating Muslim NeoNazi + Defending Hezbullah

I expect you to do the same? Or do you hold the same double-standards that you accuse everyone else of holding?

Anytime Valinor....

It was an accident, ten US inqueries and three Israeli inqueries ahve proven so. That too, was an incident that took place IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR. I don't understand what you guys don't get about that.

The Liberty wasn't an accident. The US just forgave Israel as it was their only bastion in the middle east. Unless you would like to contend that the IDF are so inept that the 8 recon flights over the ship failed to notice that it was a US ship of the line?

It was an accident, ten US inqueries and three Israeli inqueries ahve proven so. That too, was an incident that took place IN THE MIDDLE OF A WAR. I don't understand what you guys don't get about that.

An accident involves several torpedo attacks on ship followed by raking it with machinegun fire in an attempt to kill everyone on board.

Hmmm, I think I will take a gun, a car, and perform a driveby in your neighborhood. Then I will call it an accident. Think that will fly?

What next? Maybe lob some ballistic missiles into Russia and call that an 'accident'?

The inquiries proved squat. What kind of inquiry do you have when you want it done in 24 hours? They were called 'accidents' because the then President didn't want to have a war with one of their biggest customer in arms.


As for the "precision guided" bomb theory. It hasn't been proven. Get back to me when it has. Even if true, humans make errors and so do their inventions. No weapon is infallible.

Precision guided bombs as a theory or do you think that precision guided bomb that hit the UN outpost was a theory?

If you think precision guided bombs aren't all they're cracked up to be, then it's obvious that the IDF ought to stop touting them as 'something to help lower civilian casualties'.

In the case of the latter, the fact that it was a precision guided bomb is indisputable. If you'd like to dispute that, go find your own proof. No going "it's false" and asking other people to do your legwork you lazy bum.

The Liberty wasn't an accident. The US just forgave Israel as it was their only bastion in the middle east. Unless you would like to contend that the IDF are so inept that the 8 recon flights over the ship failed to notice that it was a US ship of the line?

The attack on the Liberty (there's a statement there) and AIPAC is proof that whenever Israel stabs America in the back, the government bends over like a good little prison bitch and goes "Thank You Please May I Have Another?"

Anytime Valinor....


I REGRET the deaths of the UN workers, however, I beleive Kofi Annan should have pulled out these "observers" from the warzone. They clearly have no point in being there as they did nothing to stop the initial assault on Israel. I condemn Hizballah for using civilians as human shields, but I won't condemn them for attacking UN outposts unless it is proven that they had done so on purpose, just as I won't condemn Israel until it is proven that they did so on purpose (which seems insane seeing as it woul dnot help their cause by any means).

As far as I'm concerned, as long as there are a bunch of people observing the war from between the two warring parties, casualties and accidents are bound to happen, and should be expected.

I condemn Hizballah for using civilians as human shields, but I won't condemn them for attacking UN outposts unless it is proven that they had done so on purpose
Look at the AAReps following the deaths suffered by UNIFIL. At least one of them states the cause of death as deliberate gunfire from Hizbollah militant forces.

just as I won't condemn Israel until it is proven that they did so on purpose
I would imagine that multiple communications about shelling and then the firing of a precision guided weapon that specifically hit the bunker (that has been marked on all maps for years) is proof.

So, condemnation time...

An accident involves several torpedo attacks on ship followed by raking it with machinegun fire in an attempt to kill everyone on board.

Hmmm, I think I will take a gun, a car, and perform a driveby in your neighborhood. Then I will call it an accident. Think that will fly?

What next? Maybe lob some ballistic missiles into Russia and call that an 'accident'?

The U.S. said they had no ships within 100 miles of the coast, and the Israel high command got word they were being fired on from the sea. it was the middle of a war.

The inquiries proved squat. What kind of inquiry do you have when you want it done in 24 hours? They were called 'accidents' because the then President didn't want to have a war with one of their biggest customer in arms.

13 inquiries in 24 hours? RIGHT. there were 13 total inquiries and they took place in longer time than 24 hours.

Precision guided bombs as a theory or do you think that precision guided bomb that hit the UN outpost was a theory?

If you think precision guided bombs aren't all they're cracked up to be, then it's obvious that the IDF ought to stop touting them as 'something to help lower civilian casualties'.

In the case of the latter, the fact that it was a precision guided bomb is indisputable. If you'd like to dispute that, go find your own proof. No going "it's false" and asking other people to do your legwork you lazy bum.

link? where is the link that says the bomb was indisputably precision guided?

precision guided weapons are all they are cracked up to be, but they are not infallible

Look at the AAReps following the deaths suffered by UNIFIL. At least one of them states the cause of death as deliberate gunfire from Hizbollah militant forces.


I would imagine that multiple communications about shelling and then the firing of a precision guided weapon that specifically hit the bunker (that has been marked on all maps for years) is proof.

So, condemnation time...


Communcations about shelling in a warzone is a shocker. Seriously, it's shocking that the UN outpost in the middle of a battlefield is reporting shelling.

As for the precision guided weapon.. wheres the link with indisputable confirmation and as i said in another post, all weapons are fallible.

As for the precision guided weapon.. wheres the link with indisputable confirmation and as i said in another post, all weapons are fallible.

No. The onus is on you to show the precision guided missile that hit the clearly marked UN base was malfunctioning in some way.

Oh and by the by, you're a hypocrite.

As for the precision guided weapon.. wheres the link with indisputable confirmation and as i said in another post, all weapons are fallible.

Dodging the question?

The attack on the Liberty (there's a statement there) and AIPAC is proof that whenever Israel stabs America in the back, the government bends over like a good little prison bitch and goes "Thank You Please May I Have Another?"


Hmmm....Jewish conspiracy theorist much??? That's right Gauth, those damn Jews in Washington control everything!!! MUAHAHAHAHA.

I just got back last night from a 4 day long AIPAC conference in DC. AIPAC is so successful because it's members are so dedicated to the cause and work their asses off lobbying. I personally got to lobby Representative Cliff Stearns and Robert Wexler on a variety of issues pertaining to Israel.

I actually have an awesome story about me confronting Howard Dean in front of the conference during Q&A and making him look pretty stupid, but i'll save that for another thread and when i dont have a huge organic chem test tomorrow.

No. The onus is on you to show the precision guided missile that hit the clearly marked UN base was malfunctioning in some way.

Oh and by the by, you're a hypocrite.


lol, the onus is on YOU, to prove the missile was precision guided.

lol, the onus is on YOU, to prove the missile was precision guided.

Dodge, dodge, dodge...

@ Greater Valinor

You still haven't answered the question of how the 8 recon flights over the Liberty failed to spot that it was a US ship.

Dodge, dodge, dodge...


dodging what...I'm waiting for proof that the missile was precision guided. Find me proof, and we can move on.

The IDF did not attack the UN. The IDF was attacking Hizballah and inadvertantly struck the UN post.

Since I'm tired of writing the same thing over and over again, I'll pose this to you. Condemn Hizballlah for hitting UN outposts. Do it. I dare you.

If you realy want me to waste the key strokes yes I condem the terrorist bastards of Hesballah or however you spell it (seen it several diferent ways on official news sites) for striking every fucking civilian they have ever struck. I do the same for the IDF who shelled the UN building 14 times while the occupents repeatedly informed them of their mistake and then hit them with a guided missile knowing they were not an enemy target. I condem the USA for the civilan casualtys caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I condem every other country, group, church, circus or WHATEVER that kills civilains.

dodging what...I'm waiting for proof that the missile was precision guided. Find me proof, and we can move on.
You are the internet equivalent of jamming your fingers in your ears and going "Lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalala...I CAN'T HEEEARRR YOU"

dodging what...I'm waiting for proof that the missile was precision guided. Find me proof, and we can move on.

*Laugh*
As you are clearly going to dodge the question, I'll have a look.

But, as you are demanding that I disprove a fact that has not been questioned by any of those involved, be it on a military or a political level; Israeli or the rest of the world I would ask you to do the same.

Prove to me the Hizbollah have deliberately targeted or killed anyone of Israeli nationality at anytime in the last three months...

And that the world isn't flat...

And that you exist and are not a figment of my imaginations

@ Greater Valinor

You still haven't answer the question of how the 8 recon flights over the Liberty failed to spot that it was a US ship.

MG Bard:

"A CIA report on the incident issued June 13, 1967, also found that an overzealous pilot could mistake the Liberty for an Egyptian ship, the El Quseir. After the air raid, Israeli torpedo boats identified the Liberty as an Egyptian naval vessel. When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack which killed 28 of the sailors."

"The day fighting began, Israel has asked that American ships be removed from its coast or that it be notified of the precise location of US vessels."

Also, the US had made an announcement on the UN floor days earlier saying they dind't have Naval forces within hundreds of miles of the battle front.

Ok, im not sure why Israel hit that UN base but lets look at it rationally.

#1 Israel has no incentive to discourage nor harm the UN. Ultimatly Israel needs an international force as a buffer and Israel of course realizes this. Israel tried leboneese occupation for 22 years and its clear that it didnt work and Israel has no interest in having thier own version of Iraq. It is clear that the Israelis believe what im saying as they are very intentionally not sending in an occupying force. Therefore, its against Israels own best interest to intentionally attack or antagonize a peacekeeping force that will one day pick up the bill for Israels border security.
Do you HONESTLY think that if Israel had wanted to blow up the UN base it would have taken 6 hours of shelling and not 6 seconds?

However the fact remains that the UN base was indeed hit. However mistakes happen. Anyone remember the U.S. destroying the Chineese Embassy cause some dumbasses couldnt read a map? The Chineese Embassy was just as obviously not a military tareget as the UN base. I dont know how Israel made a mistake. Maybe the army couldnt pinpoint the exact unit that was doing the firing on the taregt. Maybe there were unfriendlys nearby. Maybe the commander was on the wrong channel and didnt get he order to stop firing. Maybe the Chineese UN member killed was sleeping with the shelling commanders wife. Who the hell knows, the point is, this isnt the case of the IDF as a whole running around killing anything that moves just because they are bloodthirsy maniacs. So these blanket condemnations are simply uninformed people with absolutly NO understanding of the actual real and tactical reasons that there was clearly a communications breakdown in the field. To make an incident that is clearly regrettable to all sides and turn it into a condemnation of Israel and its policies is simply absurd.

Hmmm....Jewish conspiracy theorist much??? That's right Gauth, those damn Jews in Washington control everything!!! MUAHAHAHAHA.

Criticizing Israel /= critizing Jews.

Prove to me the Hizbollah have deliberately targeted or killed anyone of Israeli nationality at anytime in the last three months...

And that the world isn't flat...

And that you exist and are not a figment of my imaginations


Are you serious? Do I even need to do this?

12 Jul 2006 - Hizballah terrorists infiltrated into Israeli territory and attacked two IDF armored jeeps patrolling the border with Lebanon, killing three soldiers and kidnapping two. Ground forces entered Lebanon in the area of the attack. A large explosive device was detonated underneath an Israeli tank, killing all four of the tank crew. An eighth soldier was killed when IDF troops entered Lebanon to try to retrieve the bodies of the tank crew. Throughout the day, Hizballah terror organization fired Katyusha rockets and mortar shells at Israel's northern borders' communities and IDF posts.

Criticizing Israel /= critizing Jews.


While I understand why you say this, read the original post that I was responding to from Gauthier. He was specifically targeting AIPAC and implied that AIPAC controls the U.S. Gov't by telling them to do something along the lines of "bending over and taking another one" from Israel. Something along those lines.

Criticizing Israel /= critizing Jews.


While I understand why you say this, read the original post that I was responding to from Gauthier. He was specifically targeting AIPAC and implied that AIPAC controls the U.S. Gov't by telling them to do something along the lines of "bending over and taking another one" from Israel. Something along those lines.

FYI: AIPAC is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It is a group predominantly made up of American Jews that lobby on behalf of Israel. There are however Christian activists that are members of AIPAC, but the vast majority are Jews.

. I condem the USA for the civilan casualtys caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I condem every other country, group, church, circus or WHATEVER that kills civilains.

You might just as well condem humanity and get it over with then. I do not believe there has ever been a war in the history of this planet where civilians wernt killed. 95% of the people on Earth live where they do because some group killed some other group in some fight at some time. And civilians died each and every time.













----No civilians were harmed in the making of this post.

While I understand why you say this, read the original post that I was responding to from Gauthier. He was specifically targeting AIPAC and implied that AIPAC controls the U.S. Gov't by telling them to do something along the lines of "bending over and taking another one" from Israel. Something along those lines.

FYI: AIPAC is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It is a group predominantly made up of American Jews that lobby on behalf of Israel. There are however Christian activists that are members of AIPAC, but the vast majority are Jews.

And if you know so much about AIPAC, then you'd know what part of AIPAC I was specifically referencing too, Comrade Bushevik. But since you don't seem to...

AIPAC espionage scandal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIPAC_espionage_scandal)

But I guess you just wanted to hang on to that "Oh noes! He's another J00-Hating Muslim NeoNazi conspiracy nut l0l!" delusion.

MG Bard:

"A CIA report on the incident issued June 13, 1967, also found that an overzealous pilot could mistake the Liberty for an Egyptian ship, the El Quseir. After the air raid, Israeli torpedo boats identified the Liberty as an Egyptian naval vessel. When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack which killed 28 of the sailors."

"The day fighting began, Israel has asked that American ships be removed from its coast or that it be notified of the precise location of US vessels."

Also, the US had made an announcement on the UN floor days earlier saying they dind't have Naval forces within hundreds of miles of the battle front.

Fifteen years after the attack, an Israeli pilot approached Liberty survivors and then held extensive interviews with former Congressman Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey about his role. According to this senior Israeli lead pilot, he recognized the Liberty as American immediately, so informed his headquarters, and was told to ignore the American flag and continue his attack. He refused to do so and returned to base, where he was arrested.

Later, a dual-citizen Israeli major told survivors that he was in an Israeli war room where he heard that pilot's radio report. The attacking pilots and everyone in the Israeli war room knew that they were attacking an American ship, the major said. He recanted the statement only after he received threatening phone calls from Israel.

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0693/9306019.htm

At approximately 0600 hours (all times local) on the morning of June 8, 1967 an Israeli maritime reconnaissance aircraft observer reported seeing "a US Navy cargo type ship," just outside the coverage of the Israeli coastal radar defense net, bearing the hull markings "GTR-5".[11] This report, made to Israeli naval HQ, was also forwarded immediately to the Israeli navy intelligence directorate.[12]

Throughout the remainder of the day prior to the attack, Israeli reconnaissance aircraft regularly flew out to USS Liberty’s position and orbited the ship before returning to their bases in Israel. A total of no fewer than eight (8) such flights were made.[13]

At approximately 1050 hours, the naval observer from the early morning reconnaissance flight arrived at Israeli air force HQ and sat down with the air-naval liaison officer there. The two officers consulted Janes’ Fighting Ships and learned that the ship reported earlier in the day was USS Liberty, a United States Navy technical research ship.[14]

http://www.ussliberty.org/report/report.htm

They knew what they were doing.

In all honesty guys, it's ok to admit that there are alot of flaws in the argument that you have been making and that you are having a hard time finding flaws in mine.

It's not a bad thing. The sooner the world unites together against these terrorist scum and removes them from the earth all together, the sooner there will be peace in this world. Imagine if the world united behind Israel, to push out Hizballah and restore a democracy in Lebanon without a state within a state in the south controlled by terrorist armies. If the world united behind Israel to root these people out, then there would be no more fighting in Lebanon, or any more war.

So these blanket condemnations are simply uninformed people with absolutly NO understanding of the actual real and tactical reasons that there was clearly a communications breakdown in the field. Although, oddly, all the evidence points towards there being excellent communication.
To make an incident that is clearly regrettable to all sides and turn it into a condemnation of Israel and its policies is simply absurd.I'm not.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4075171.html
Not a shell, a different style of attack.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5215366.stm
Not shell, a different style of attack.

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=2853
No member of the IDF or Israeli government has released a statement (that I can find) saying that it was not a precision guided munition.
Mark Regev, Israeli foreign Ministry spokesman, when asked directly whether Kofi Annan was wrong, refused to answer the question.
The graphic, cleared by IDF censors, states 'Precision guided missile strike’. Michael Williams, political advisor to the UN secretary General. He refers to the graphic and accompanying report as ‘an excellent report’, he refers to the correspondents in the field who “documented the many, many artillery shots and attacks that came very near this post yesteraday before the final precision guided missile hit the post.’

No mention of other craters of a similar size to “A very heavy bomb” unlike a 155m shell. Also it pierced the bunker indicating that it was a ‘Bunker-buster’ rather than an anti-personnel bomb. I’m not sure that the IDF has any Bunker-busting bombs that aren’t guided onto the target. In fact, I would be willing to bet that they don’t.
Looks like an AGM-142 as that is the standard air-to ground bunker-buster of the IDF air force. An inertial guidance system pilots the missile towards the target; for terminal homing the pilot can control the missile directly via an INS and data link, aiming via either a television or imaging infrared seeker depending on the missile model.

In all honesty guys, it's ok to admit that there are alot of flaws in the argument that you have been making and that you are having a hard time finding flaws in mine.

It takes time to research multiple sources.
You don't have an arguement.
You are still dodging the question.

On a more comical note, you still haven't proved that Hizbollah actually meant to target Israelis. I think they were after Eskimos and they just got confused. Their rockets just accidentally keep striking Israel and they publicly don't want to appear weak to their enemies, the Eskimos, so they only pretend they meant to attack. They have launched a full and transparent investigation into their conduct of the war with the Eskimos and the results will be revealed soon.
Prove I'm wrong...:rolleyes:

snippage
I like you. :)

It takes time to research multiple sources.
You don't have an arguement.
You are still dodging the question.

On a more comical note, you still haven't proved that Hizbollah actually meant to target Israelis. I think they were after Eskimos and they just got confused. Their rockets just accidentally keep striking Israel and they publicly don't want to appear weak to their enemies, the Eskimos, so they only pretend they meant to attack. They have launched a full and transparent investigation into their conduct of the war with the Eskimos and the results will be revealed soon.
Prove I'm wrong...:rolleyes:


No Eskimos in Israel. ALOT of Hizballah in Lebanon. :rolleyes:

No Eskimos in Israel. ALOT of Hizballah in Lebanon. :rolleyes:

Indeed. Anyway, we'll leave the Eskimo hunting Hizbollah snatch squads to one side...for now.

So, the IDF killing 4 unarmed members of a UN observation mission with a precision munition after artillery strikes?

You opportunity awaits...

Those people were in the border right in the heart of the conflict. It is not much of a surprise that something like this will happen.

Remember it is not intentional, but it is what happens in war.

Israel was told like 10 times NOT to bomb the area around the post.

They didnt listen. The bombs kept getting closer. Then they finally hit.

Israel kills UN staff, IDF "will look into it"

What I love about the way the title is worded, it sounds like there were UN office workers in New York City who had their throats slit by the IDF at their desks...

Try "UN Observers" instead of "UN staff". Staff could be the janitor at the UN building.

In all honesty guys, it's ok to admit that there are alot of flaws in the argument that you have been making and that you are having a hard time finding flaws in mine.

It's not a bad thing. The sooner the world unites together against these terrorist scum and removes them from the earth all together, the sooner there will be peace in this world. Imagine if the world united behind Israel, to push out Hizballah and restore a democracy in Lebanon without a state within a state in the south controlled by terrorist armies. If the world united behind Israel to root these people out, then there would be no more fighting in Lebanon, or any more war.
It's just not that simple, and sure as hell a lot less black and white!

You do realize that the current campaign is turning neutral or friendly lebanese against the Israelis, right?

What I love about the way the title is worded, it sounds like there were UN office workers in New York City who had their throats slit by the IDF at their desks...

Try "UN Observers" instead of "UN staff". Staff could be the janitor at the UN building.
I think after 155 posts, people understand the issue. :D

I think after 155 posts, people understand the issue. :D
I'm sure - just pointing out the obvious bias in the OP.

I'm sure - just pointing out the obvious bias in the OP.
Would
"IDF strike kills 4 unarmed UN Observers" be any less truthful but anymore biased.

Aren't you one railing against the encroachment of PCness? ;)

It's just not that simple, and sure as hell a lot less black and white!

You do realize that the current campaign is turning neutral or friendly lebanese against the Israelis, right?

I'll let you keep that last word for a while, and I'll be back. I have bio lab for the next 2 hours.

Although, oddly, all the evidence points towards there being excellent communication.
.

Actually the evidence( blown up building and dead people) actually points to the fact that clearly communications did fail. Just because the UN talked to someone in the IDF doesnt mean communications didnt break down within the IDF organization as it seems to clearly have. I will say again and will until im blue in the face. Israel has ZERO interest in intentionally targeting a UN base. Do you understand this? Talk of guided missiles vs non guided vs shells is a completly misguided debate. Israel has NO desire,will nor interest in alienating the UN or any other multinational force that will soon be thier neighbors. The ONLY logical and rational expalnation is, for whatever reason that we simply are not yet privy to, it was a mistake. Israel has apologized and im sure they will make whatever restoration is due to the families of the UN members that were killed.

Actually the evidence( blown up building and dead people) actually points to the fact that clearly communications did fail. Just because the UN talked to someone in the IDF doesnt mean communications didnt break down within the IDF organization as it seems to clearly have. I will say again and will until im blue in the face. Israel has ZERO interest in intentionally targeting a UN base. Do you understand this? Talk of guided missiles vs non guided vs shells is a completly misguided debate. Israel has NO desire,will nor interest in alienating the UN or any other multinational force that will soon be thier neighbors. The ONLY logical and rational expalnation is, for whatever reason that we simply are not yet privy to, it was a mistake. Israel has apologized and im sure they will make whatever restoration is due to the families of the UN members that were killed.

Perhaps comms did go down, I can even stretch to believeing that the Israelis allowed there to be no comms for 6 hours in a combat zone, it's extremely unlikely but possible.

What I don't believe is that noone firing the shells looked at a map and said 'shit, we're targeting a un bunker here, I better check for conformation'.

Would
"IDF strike kills 4 unarmed UN Observers" be any less truthful but anymore biased.

Aren't you one railing against the encroachment of PCness? ;)

Yes. And if PCness works for the left, it must also work for the right.

Every time.

Israel has apologized and im sure they will make whatever restoration is due to the families of the UN members that were killed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1831067,00.html
Israel hasn't apologised. It has expressed regret.

Anyway, as I am sure you read in my earlier post, I agree that, based on current knowledge, the attack makes little sense. However, the motivation behind the attack is not the issue here.

I fear logic and rationality have little to do with conflict in the Middle East :( .

I'll let you keep that last word for a while, and I'll be back. I have bio lab for the next 2 hours.
Have fun :)

Yes. And if PCness works for the left, it must also work for the right.

Every time.

Agreed of course.

Shall I request a thread title change to "IDF strike kills 4 unarmed UN Observers"

Agreed of course.

Shall I request a thread title change to "IDF strike kills 4 unarmed UN Observers"

That's a neutral title, and I would agree.

What I don't believe is that noone firing the shells looked at a map and said 'shit, we're targeting a un bunker here, I better check for conformation'.

Yea well the Chineese Embassy certainly looked like nothing but the Chineese Embassy, and that didnt prevent the US from making a mistake and blowing it to bits too. Shit happens.
Plus your assuming that the UN building was in fact targeted. Again if the UN building was ACTUALLY targeted do you think it would have taken REMOTELY 6 hrs for the Israelis to reduce it to cinders? Please, it was a simple targeting/communications mistake. Move along , nothing else to see here.

That's a neutral title, and I would agree.
Hmm, after checking ze rules aparrently I can't.
Only the thread owner may request a title change for their thread

Harumph.

Actually the evidence( blown up building and dead people) actually points to the fact that clearly communications did fail. Just because the UN talked to someone in the IDF doesnt mean communications didnt break down within the IDF organization as it seems to clearly have. I will say again and will until im blue in the face. Israel has ZERO interest in intentionally targeting a UN base. Do you understand this? Talk of guided missiles vs non guided vs shells is a completly misguided debate. Israel has NO desire,will nor interest in alienating the UN or any other multinational force that will soon be thier neighbors. The ONLY logical and rational expalnation is, for whatever reason that we simply are not yet privy to, it was a mistake. Israel has apologized and im sure they will make whatever restoration is due to the families of the UN members that were killed.
There are some interests involved that you might not want to see.

This is just speculation on my part, but here's a couple of reasons that Israel might want to target the UN post:


They don't want observers around when they smash the enemy - maybe using a bit over-the-line methods.
They don't want a UN presence - this came just before the meeting in Rome, remember. Could be they want to reestablish a "security zone", could be they want to grab some territory, could be other reasons. Seems effective though, Australia has pulled it's UN troops out as a direct result of this.
They want to show muscles to the international community - send a veiled threat / message: "Let us do what we feel we need to do"
They aren't interested in peace just yet, and this will slow negotiations concerning a peacekeeping force and a ceasefire.
Other powerplays

It's not unthinkable, Israel has targeted UN forces that were "in the way" before.

Hmm, after checking ze rules aparrently I can't.


Harumph.

harumph harumph, for all the good it does...

Just to put my oar in, at least the IDF said it will look into it. Hezbollah would have sponsored block parties with dancing in the streets had they done it, and the message would be the observers deserved what the got. The Middle East makes me tired and I hope it doesn't somehow make me dead.

Just to put my oar in, at least the IDF said it will look into it. Hezbollah would have sponsored block parties with dancing in the streets had they done it, and the message would be the observers deserved what the got. The Middle East makes me tired and I hope it doesn't somehow make me dead.
There are no good guys there anymore...

Just to put my oar in, at least the IDF said it will look into it. Hezbollah would have sponsored block parties with dancing in the streets had they done it, and the message would be the observers deserved what the got. The Middle East makes me tired and I hope it doesn't somehow make me dead.

Well according to a still living UN observer (Jan), the Hezbollah have indeed been celebrating the death of civilians and bragging about how few casualties they've suffered because the civilians are in close proximity.

The observer was shocked and dismayed. But, I suppose that's better than dead, so no one will care that Hezbollah brags about getting their friends, neighbors, and relatives killed.

Yea well the Chineese Embassy certainly looked like nothing but the Chineese Embassy, and that didnt prevent the US from making a mistake and blowing it to bits too. Shit happens.

The US bombing the chinese embassy was due to an out of dat map. The UN post has been in position for 25 years, surely you aren't suggesting that the IDF is so incompetent that it is using maps more than 25 years old to prosecute a military campaign :rolleyes:

Plus your assuming that the UN building was in fact targeted. Again if the UN building was ACTUALLY targeted do you think it would have taken REMOTELY 6 hrs for the Israelis to reduce it to cinders? Please, it was a simple targeting/communications mistake. Move along , nothing else to see here.

Again, I could accept the comms argument if it weren't for the fact it was hit by different types of ordinance from differnent locations. Now the IDF not only have out of date maps but they can't even manage to keep in touch with any of their troops?

You're really reaching.

Jesus christ in a handbag.

You shouldn't make bomb strikes when you don't know what the target is. Any commander who approved a bomb strike, a percision one at that, without doing any recon of the target, checking any maps, etc... should get canned.

What the hell were they aiming at with the percision munition? Thats what I want to know. What did they think, what could they possibly think the building was? The one that was quite clearly UN, both on maps and by visuals. I want to know what the hell they thought it was, then maybe we can get into whether they can be forgiven.

Well according to a still living UN observer (Jan), the Hezbollah have indeed been celebrating the death of civilians and bragging about how few casualties they've suffered because the civilians are in close proximity.

The observer was shocked and dismayed. But, I suppose that's better than dead, so no one will care that Hezbollah brags about getting their friends, neighbors, and relatives killed.

You mean Jan Egeland, the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator, (and not an Observer) who was in Haifa yesterday condemning the Hezb'allah rocket attacks that were causing so much destruction?

You mean like the way everyone here seizes on his condemnation of the IDF actions as an example of the UN being anti-Semitic, but then quietly ignores his condemnations of Hezb'allah?

That guy?

Well according to a still living UN observer (Jan), the Hezbollah have indeed been celebrating the death of civilians and bragging about how few casualties they've suffered because the civilians are in close proximity.

The observer was shocked and dismayed. But, I suppose that's better than dead, so no one will care that Hezbollah brags about getting their friends, neighbors, and relatives killed.
Not an "observer", if you're talking about Jan Egeland. You know, the UN's humanitarian chief who said the devastation in Beirut was "a violation of humanitarian law"?

You mean Jan Egeland, the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator, (and not an Observer) who was in Haifa yesterday condemning the Hezb'allah rocket attacks that were causing so much destruction?

You mean like the way everyone here seizes on his condemnation of the IDF actions as an example of the UN being anti-Semitic, but then quietly ignores his condemnations of Hezb'allah?

That guy?
:)

Not an "observer", if you're talking about Jan Egeland. You know, the UN's humanitarian chief who said the devastation in Beirut was "a violation of humanitarian law"?
Yes, he had some interesting things to say about Hezbollah, and he seemed appalled at the bragging.

The US bombing the chinese embassy was due to an out of dat map. The UN post has been in position for 25 years, surely you aren't suggesting that the IDF is so incompetent that it is using maps more than 25 years old to prosecute a military campaign :rolleyes:



Again, I could accept the comms argument if it weren't for the fact it was hit by different types of ordinance from differnent locations. Now the IDF not only have out of date maps but they can't even manage to keep in touch with any of their troops?

You're really reaching.

If im reaching and indeed Israel for some wildly inexplicable reason was actually targeting the UN base, then why, when it can reduce an entire city block to rubble in hours be unable to take out a simple unarmed and undefended bunker in 1/3 of an entire day despite by your own assertions it was attcked from multiple directions by multiple teams? (which i have no idea at all if this fact actually true or not).Your being rediculous to the point of a complete logical breakdown to in any way assert that this was a real and intended target.

Yes, he had some interesting things to say about Hezbollah, and he seemed appalled at the bragging.
He's been condemming both sides quite publicly. I agree with much of what he is saying. I like him :)

If im reaching and indeed Israel for some wildly inexplicable reason was actually targeting the UN base, then why, when it can reduce an entire city block to rubble in hours be unable to take out a simple unarmed and undefended bunker in 1/3 of an entire day despite by your own assertions it was attcked from multiple directions by multiple teams? (which i have no idea at all if this fact actually true or not).Your being rediculous to the point of a complete logical breakdown to in any way assert that this was a real and intended target.

Actually, you're making sense here. I mean, it's not as if bunkers are designed to withstand military attack. If the mighty military strengths of city buildings are so easy to destroy, what chance would a bunker have?

Actually, you're making sense here. I mean, it's not as if bunkers are designed to withstand military attack. If the mighty military strengths of city buildings are so easy to destroy, what chance would a bunker have?
It's wasn't much of a bunker, really. Hez has better bunkers than the UN one in Khiam area. It certainly wasn't meant to resist anything other than light arms fire.

It's wasn't much of a bunker, really. Hez has better bunkers than the UN one in Khiam area. It certainly wasn't meant to resist anything other than light arms fire.

If a bunker has any kind of vision slit, all you need is a Carl Gustav round (or even a hand grenade) in through the opening. I would imagine that the UN position was made for observation, which might mean that it didn't even have overhead cover over most of the position.

I like how some people use the phrase "designed to resist military attack" as though there was some sort of magical force field called "military defense" that kept the bullets and bombs from damaging the position.

Even in a nearly impenetrable bunker, you can be buried alive by a well-placed round that isn't big enough to scratch the concrete.

If a bunker has any kind of vision slit, all you need is a Carl Gustav round (or even a hand grenade) in through the opening. I would imagine that the UN position was made for observation, which might mean that it didn't even have overhead cover over most of the position.

I like how some people use the phrase "designed to resist military attack" as though there was some sort of magical force field called "military defense" that kept the bullets and bombs from damaging the position.

Even in a nearly impenetrable bunker, you can be buried alive by a well-placed round that isn't big enough to scratch the concrete.
Yeah. Couldn't find the picture they had in the newspapers here of the actual OP Khiam... Couldn't find any in our Blue Berets Association site either... but imagine a slightly modified beach guard tower with a shallow 'bomb shelter' underneath it with concrete walls, and there you have it.

Yeah. Couldn't find the picture they had in the newspapers here of the actual OP Khiam... Couldn't find any in our Blue Berets Association site either... but imagine a slightly modified beach guard tower with a shallow 'bomb shelter' underneath it with concrete walls, and there you have it.
that sounds oddly familiar...

Actually, you're making sense here. I mean, it's not as if bunkers are designed to withstand military attack. If the mighty military strengths of city buildings are so easy to destroy, what chance would a bunker have?

Are you serious? Breaching bunkers is Army 101. There isnt an undefended bunker on the planet that a modern military force cant breach with ease. Let alone a glorified UN hole in the ground in Lebonon. These arnt nuclear bunkers buried 300 feet underground here. If breaching undefended bunkers was hard Hitler would still be alive.

My dad said that the UN workers were "caught in the crossfire" and that Israel is bombing "terrorists" that kidnapped Israelis. I don't believe him one bit there...

Yeah. Couldn't find the picture they had in the newspapers here of the actual OP Khiam... Couldn't find any in our Blue Berets Association site either... but imagine a slightly modified beach guard tower with a shallow 'bomb shelter' underneath it with concrete walls, and there you have it.
While I cannot find an online picture myself:

The Jerusalem Post says this:

A picture the world body released Wednesday showed the three-story building was painted white with the letters "UN" emblazoned in large black letters on all sides, and a light blue UN flag hung from a nearby flagpole that was roughly 50 feet high.

Witnesses said the building, which was surrounded by concrete blast walls and barbed wire, also had the letters UN painted on the roof and it was illuminated by floodlights at night.
Not exactly a 'modified beach tower'.

Link (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=2&cid=1153292007546&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

Not exactly a 'modified beach tower'.

Oh. Sorry. I'll be sure to use the 'slight sarcasm' tags next time. But; was I personally feeling safe when in one of these impenetrable bunkers..? No.

While I cannot find an online picture myself:

The Jerusalem Post says this:

Not exactly a 'modified beach tower'.

No three story building above ground can take artillery fire or a missile hit or a bomb hit.

Not one.

If it had been under 100 feet of earth, it would have been resistant to attack, but the entrances could be destroyed by artillery fire or a missile hit or a bomb hit, burying the people inside alive.

A three story reinforced concrete building isn't even resistant to .50 BMG rounds from a heavy machinegun. The bullets WILL go through the entire building.

No three story building above ground can take artillery fire or a missile hit or a bomb hit.

Not one.

If it had been under 100 feet of earth, it would have been resistant to attack, but the entrances could be destroyed by artillery fire or a missile hit or a bomb hit, burying the people inside alive.

A three story reinforced concrete building isn't even resistant to .50 BMG rounds from a heavy machinegun. The bullets WILL go through the entire building.

I know.

I'm just issuing a description is all. There appeared to be confusion over what the observation post was exactly.

Not exactly a 'modified beach tower'.

[

Im not quite sure i get your point. Are you asserting that the bunker was robust enough to sustain a multiple point source attack from an Israeli army bent on the death of the UN inhabitants but they were somehow able to heroically stave them off for 6 hours? Or is that just all bullshit semantics? its 100% CRYSTAL clear that if the UN building was a designed israeli target it would have been disintegrated before anyone even heard the first incoming bomb whistle. An undefended bunker wouldnt even have been a speed bump for the IDF.

Edit: you cleared up my point a bit before i posted this

Im not quite sure i get your point. Are you asserting that the bunker was robust enough to sustain a multiple point source attack from an Israeli army bent on the death of the UN inhabitants but they were somehow able to heroically stave them off for 6 hours? Or is that just all bullshit semantics? its 100% CRYSTAL clear that if the UN building was a designed israeli target it would have been disintegrated before anyone even heard the first incoming bomb whistle. An undefended bunker wouldnt even have been a speed bump for the IDF.

I'm not asserting anything. People were looking for a description. Now you have one.

If they wanted to destroy it with shells they could have, easily. Everyone here knows that.
In fact that could have been passed off as accidental.

Except sombody fucked up- somebody decided to use a precision-guided missile to destroy it.

That could not be seen as accidental.

And that is the overriding point that some people appear to be missing.

If a bunker has any kind of vision slit, all you need is a Carl Gustav round (or even a hand grenade) in through the opening. I would imagine that the UN position was made for observation, which might mean that it didn't even have overhead cover over most of the position.

All of which might have some relevence if we were dicussing an infantry assault. We're not. The position may not have had overhead cover, but if it didn't then I doubt we would be hearing it described as a bunker.

I like how some people use the phrase "designed to resist military attack" as though there was some sort of magical force field called "military defense" that kept the bullets and bombs from damaging the position.

pfft.

Even in a nearly impenetrable bunker, you can be buried alive by a well-placed round that isn't big enough to scratch the concrete.

Well they were, it just took a while for the round.

Well they were, it just took a while for the round.
Sounds like it only took one round - one missile.

Missiles usually have much lighter warheads than bombs.

The building in question looks like a three story reinforced concrete building - not really resistant at all to air attack.

Even the smallest air dropped bomb or guided missile (made for surface attack) would have blown it up.

Or, you could have pulled up in front of it and hosed it with an M2 .50 cal with a few thousand rounds and turned it, and all of its occupants, into holes.

I really love your "resistant to military attack". You have no idea how naive that makes you sound.

Except sombody fucked up- somebody decided to use a precision-guided missile to destroy it.

That could not be seen as accidental.

And that is the overriding point that some people appear to be missing.

Do i really need to point out the patently obvious answer that just because a bomb lands somewhere it doesnt mean that its the intended target? Unless you can cite 100% accuracy ratings in these weapons systems(smart or otherwise) then what you said doesnt prove a bloody thing. Noone is missing any point. I prefer to discount those points as irrelevant for the legions of reasons ive already posted.

Do i really need to point out the patently obvious answer that just because a bomb lands somewhere it doesnt mean that its the intended target? Unless you can cite 100% accuracy ratings in these weapons systems(smart or otherwise) then what you said doesnt prove a bloody thing. Noone is missing any point. I prefer to discount those points as irrelevant for the legions of reasons ive already posted.
See this post:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11448524&postcount=149
....which you seem to have bypassed/ignored.

I really love your "resistant to military attack". You have no idea how naive that makes you sound.

It seemed a concise way to get across what I meant. Next time I'll be more verbious.

Oh, and I've never seen a .50 GPMG round travel through more than about 40cm of concrete, you probably could do it with one but you'd need a packed lunch.

During the invasion of Afghanistan, the US dropped a 2000-lb JDAM on the Special Forces unit that was asking to have it dropped.

In a world of high tech, super accurate equipment, the SF team wanted to make sure the GPS equipped computer they used to talk to the bomber overhead was in good working order, so in mid-operation, they changed the battery in the fire control computer on the ground that was linked to the bomber in the air.

The moment the batteries were changed, the fire control computer reset to its current location.

The JDAM fell within 30 feet of their position, killing some and wounding the rest.

I suppose everyone thinks that just because it was super accurate, and super precise, and high tech, that the pilot somehow intentionally dropped the bomb on his own people, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Without an extensive investigation, it will be difficult to say whether or not the attack on the UN post was intentional or unintentional, regardless of "how accurate" the weapons are.

It seemed a concise way to get across what I meant. Next time I'll be more verbious.

Oh, and I've never seen a .50 GPMG round travel through more than about 40cm of concrete, you probably could do it with one but you'd need a packed lunch.

I've put more than one through a reinforced concrete building with multiple internal walls. The building had concrete internal walls, and the building itself was over 100 feet from front to back where I put the rounds through.

It was like the building wasn't even there.

During the invasion of Afghanistan, the US dropped a 2000-lb JDAM on the Special Forces unit that was asking to have it dropped.

In a world of high tech, super accurate equipment, the SF team wanted to make sure the GPS equipped computer they used to talk to the bomber overhead was in good working order, so in mid-operation, they changed the battery in the fire control computer on the ground that was linked to the bomber in the air.

The moment the batteries were changed, the fire control computer reset to its current location.

The JDAM fell within 30 feet of their position, killing some and wounding the rest.

I suppose everyone thinks that just because it was super accurate, and super precise, and high tech, that the pilot somehow intentionally dropped the bomb on his own people, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Without an extensive investigation, it will be difficult to say whether or not the attack on the UN post was intentional or unintentional, regardless of "how accurate" the weapons are.

Had the US also been shelling that postion? If not your analogy doesn't work too well.

I've put more than one through a reinforced concrete building with multiple internal walls. The building had concrete internal walls, and the building itself was over 100 feet from front to back where I put the rounds through.

It was like the building wasn't even there.

I don't know what rounds you were using but they sound a hell of a lot better than British Army issue.

Had the US also been shelling that postion? If not your analogy doesn't work too well.
It's not an analogy.

The US was trying to hit a position some 3 Km from the SF observers.

They ended up accidentally asking the bomber to send the bomb to their own position, which it did, fairly accurately.

The point here is that unless you know what the IDF was aiming at (or intended to aim at), you don't know if it was intentional. The mere fact that a guided weapon lands on you doesn't mean that they meant to hit you.

During the invasion of Afghanistan, the US dropped a 2000-lb JDAM on the Special Forces unit that was asking to have it dropped.

In a world of high tech, super accurate equipment, the SF team wanted to make sure the GPS equipped computer they used to talk to the bomber overhead was in good working order, so in mid-operation, they changed the battery in the fire control computer on the ground that was linked to the bomber in the air.

The moment the batteries were changed, the fire control computer reset to its current location.

The JDAM fell within 30 feet of their position, killing some and wounding the rest.

I suppose everyone thinks that just because it was super accurate, and super precise, and high tech, that the pilot somehow intentionally dropped the bomb on his own people, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Perfectly acceptable scenario, except for this part:
The moment the batteries were changed

There is nothing to indicate a similar occurance in this case.

As for an internal inquiry from the IDF? They hold no water with me (or the UN itself).

I'm not asserting anything. People were looking for a description. Now you have one.

If they wanted to destroy it with shells they could have, easily. Everyone here knows that.
In fact that could have been passed off as accidental.

Except sombody fucked up- somebody decided to use a precision-guided missile to destroy it.

That could not be seen as accidental.

And that is the overriding point that some people appear to be missing.
I wouldn't dispute the fact that the IDF is guilty of gross incompetence on this one ... but I can't see any reason why they would delibrately target UN observers. The last thing Israel needs is trouble with the UN.

As for precision guided missiles, they're not quite as inerrant as you seem to believe. See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1184086.stm

Officials quoted by AP, however, say America's newest precision-guided bombs performed far worse than that, hitting fewer than 50% of targeted radars.

The fact that the post was in the middle of a war zone gives the IDF plenty of targets that the missile could have been aimed at. Sure, there's the possibilty that it was delibrate, but I wouldn't call it proof.

he position may not have had overhead cover, but if it didn't then I doubt we would be hearing it described as a bunker.

The media is almost entirely incapable of getting terminology right when it comes to military matters.

I wouldn't dispute the fact that the IDF is guilty of gross incompetence on this one ... but I can't see any reason why they would delibrately target UN observers. The last thing Israel needs is trouble with the UN.

Why would Israel care about what the UN thinks? Bolton will veto anything even mildly threatening (which most UN actions aren't, but that's another issue).

Perfectly acceptable scenario, except for this part:


There is nothing to indicate a similar occurance in this case.

As for an internal inquiry from the IDF? They hold no water with me (or the UN itself).


There are many, many other ways to send a guided missile or bomb to the wrong place. I'm saying that human error is far more likely than intent (unless the IDF was receiving fire from the UN position, in which case, shooting back at Hezbollah who want to use the UN mission as a shield have no legal reason to expect the IDF to hold its fire (fourth geneva).

It's not an analogy.

The US was trying to hit a position some 3 Km from the SF observers.

They ended up accidentally asking the bomber to send the bomb to their own position, which it did, fairly accurately.

The point here is that unless you know what the IDF was aiming at (or intended to aim at), you don't know if it was intentional. The mere fact that a guided weapon lands on you doesn't mean that they meant to hit you.

But in conjunction with the shelling it raises the odds just a smidgin wouldn't you agree?

I wouldn't dispute the fact that the IDF is guilty of gross incompetence on this one ... but I can't see any reason why they would delibrately target UN observers. The last thing Israel needs is trouble with the UN.
Very easy: Israel does not like the UN. That has been quite clear for a number of years.

Payback? *shrug*
A 'while-we're-in-the-area' attitude? *shrug*
Accident? No.


The fact that the post was in the middle of a war zone gives the IDF plenty of targets that the missile could have been aimed at. Sure, there's the possibilty that it was delibrate, but I wouldn't call it proof.

Article is 5 years old. Anything more modern?

The Canadian peacekeepers who were killed had complained of days of being used as human shields by Hezbollah to their senior UN commanders.

The UN commanders should have moved them to a location where Hezbollah could not be near them.

Alternatively, if UN forces feel that some combat unit is hugging them in order to find protection against being killed, the UN should not only have the authority, but the obligation to force the people trying to use them as shields to move away - by force if necessary, by killing if necessary.

And where was the "international community" when Hezbollah was using the UN peacekeepers as human shields? Why, demanding that Hezbollah immediately stop hiding in "civilian areas" and calling for a "cease-fire" to "stop the killing," of course!

Er . . . wait a minute. Most of the "international community" supports Islamofascist terrorism and hates Israel.

Hey, I know--I must have confused Hezbollah with Israel!

And where was the "international community" when Hezbollah was using the UN peacekeepers as human shields? Why, demanding that Hezbollah immediately stop hiding in "civilian areas" and calling for a "cease-fire" to "stop the killing," of course!

Er . . . wait a minute. Most of the "international community" supports Islamofascist terrorism and hates Israel.

Hey, I know--I must have confused Hezbollah with Israel!

I don't understand, what's your point?

Article is 5 years old. Anything more modern?
Even so, it casts doubt on the accuracy of precision bombs. I find it difficult to believe that improvement in the technology have cured a 50% failure rate in 5 years. Unless you can prove otherwise?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/death-in-the-bunker--israel-accused-of-deliberate-attack/2006/07/26/1153816254818.html
Suggests that it had already resisted hits from 155mm shells.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1199359.ece
States that four rounds hit directly.
Yet the observers remained in contact with the outside world and reported no casualties.

*snip*
*sigh* Perhaps it was neither strategically sensible to target the site with anything other than artillery. Perhaps they were hoping to force the UN to flee and the bomb was the last resort. Perhaps it was logistically inviable to task a warplane to carry out the mission at any time before.
Accidental hit? What else would the IDF be targeting with a precision guided munition with a bunker busting warhead? Reports state Hezbollah troops were in the area. Surely an anti-personnel munition would be more useful than a munition designed to bury itself in the ground?
Let's suppose that it was an accidental drop, that the plane was heading for a target within the non-occupied zone and the bomb just fell off, armed itself and then accidentally landed directly on a UN bunker. Could you please calculate the odds?

Er . . . wait a minute. Most of the "international community" supports Islamofascist terrorism and hates Israel.
Comedy Gold :rolleyes:

OP Khiam in all its former glory (http://www.swedint.mil.se/images/local/ops.jpg)

LMAO great picture, it looks like a summer home in a gated community. Ive seen better defended Amish barns.

The IDF did not attack the UN. The IDF was attacking Hizballah and inadvertantly struck the UN post.

Since I'm tired of writing the same thing over and over again, I'll pose this to you. Condemn Hizballlah for hitting UN outposts. Do it. I dare you.

I condemn Hezbollah for hitting UN outposts. However over the last 40 years, if a shell or bullet hits a UN outpost, school or worker, its either from their IDF or their mercanary sucm bag mates in the SLA.


I condemn Hizballah for using civilians as human shields,.

And Israel.....?

What I love about the way the title is worded, it sounds like there were UN office workers in New York City who had their throats slit by the IDF at their desks...,.

Nobody would believe such a thing. We all know the Israelis prefer to deal with the UN workers by sniper. Far more civillised - "light of the middle east" and all that.


I wouldn't dispute the fact that the IDF is guilty of gross incompetence on this one ... but I can't see any reason why they would delibrately target UN observers. The last thing Israel needs is trouble with the UN....,.

They could Bomb all of Beirut into dust and kill everything in it, and guess what? No trouble at the UN. Its called the "veto". As long as America approves, they have nothing to worry about.

To the people who asked why, if the building was being bombed intentionally, it took Israel so long to finally drop something that'd destroy it.............has it occurred to anyone that maybe Israel wants this to look like an accident? That maybe the reason they took their time was so that later they could say "Well, we didn't mean to hit it, they were just in the way."? Obviously it would make them look better to the international community if it appeared to be an accident. Also, while the US government may be publicly saying it was probably an accident, who knows what they're saying in private? As much as I think Bush is psychotic, I wonder if he's looking at this incident and wondering if his giving them the greenlight was a good idea.

has it occurred to anyone that maybe Israel wants this to look like an accident? That maybe the reason they took their time was so that later they could say "Well, we didn't mean to hit it, they were just in the way."? Obviously it would make them look better to the international community if it appeared to be an accident.

Ok ill reluctantly bite....why the hell would Israel WANT to kill 4 UN members? And do it unnessesarily slowly and drawn out with plenty of time for the people inside to get thier story out and repeatedly ask for help? Sounds like a brillaint strategy with no end purpose or point..

Ok ill reluctantly bite....why the hell would Israel WANT to kill 4 UN members? And do it unnessesarily slowly and drawn out with plenty of time for the people inside to get thier story out and repeatedly ask for help? Sounds like a brillaint strategy with no end purpose or point..

Maybe Israel do't want a UN force on the ground at the minute. This has given the UN a damn good incentive to leave.

I'm also pretty sure that Israel don't want a UN force as a buffer zone between them and Lebanon and this act will make it all the more difficult to put together a group of countries willing to offer their troops.

...Australia pulled out as a reaction to the shelling? Maybe they want a reduced UN presence for the time being?

LMAO great picture, it looks like a summer home in a gated community. Ive seen better defended Amish barns.

Not that I am suggesting that you are ignoring my posts you understand. But apparently the bunker withstood at least four direct hits by 155mm artillery shells.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/dea...816254818.html
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle1199359.ece

Yet the observers remained in contact with the outside world and reported no casualties.
The word 'bunker' also suggests that it might not be immediately visible, even from the one and only angle we have a picture of. It might even have been...mostly underground.

What it does show is that it is a substantially different building to the others. That it is clearly marked visually and that it is unlikely to be hit 'by mistake'.

Ok ill reluctantly bite....why the hell would Israel WANT to kill 4 UN members? And do it unnessesarily slowly and drawn out with plenty of time for the people inside to get thier story out and repeatedly ask for help? Sounds like a brillaint strategy with no end purpose or point..

Aside from this summary describing the strategy of the IDF since the initial kidnapping I'm not certain what you are trying to get at.

Perhaps it was neither strategically sensible to target the site with anything other than artillery. Perhaps they were hoping to force the UN to flee and the bomb was the last resort. Perhaps it was logistically inviable to task a warplane to carry out the mission at any time before.
Or perhaps there are a number of reasons that the military arm of a government waging war on an international stage has decided not to share with you, or indeed the rest of us.

As I have said, more than once, whatever the motive (or lack of it) was, it is undeniable that it was hit and that the chance of the incident being an 'accident' is vanishingly small.

I'm also pretty sure that Israel don't want a UN force as a buffer zone between them and Lebanon and this act will make it all the more difficult to put together a group of countries willing to offer their troops.

What makes you think Israel wants to pay in both blood and huge sums of money to create thier own buffer, when the UN will do it free of charge?

Not that I am suggesting that you are ignoring my posts you understand. But apparently the bunker withstood at least four direct hits by 155mm artillery shells.
[

Trust me if the Israelis intended to destroy that base, 4 155mm artillery shells would have hit the target in the first 10 seconds with dozens or hunderds more to follow. Four 155mm shells would be the LEAST of thier problems in thier shelter.

What makes you think Israel wants to pay in both blood and huge sums of money to create thier own buffer, when the UN will do it free of charge?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5567793
"UNIFIL, I'm afraid, is a joke. They’ve been there for 26 years and since then, there have been so many skirmishes [along the border]." - former Israeli ambassador Itamar Rabinovich
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/08/03/un.lebanon.report/index.html
IDF views UNIFIL as an enemy after it is alledges that UNIFIL aided Hezbollah kidnap IDF forces
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=623427
Distrust of the UN following the October 2000 abduction.
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N05/420/36/PDF/N0542036.pdf?OpenElement
IDF has little regards for safety of UN

Trust me if the Israelis intended to destroy that base, 4 155mm artillery shells would have hit the target in the first 10 seconds with dozens or hunderds more to follow. Four 155mm shells would be the LEAST of thier problems in thier shelter.

Bearing in mind that UNIFIL kept calling the IDF, telling them each time their bunker was hit, it is more than possible that the IDF realised that the shelling was having no affect and then tasked an air sortie to deal with it?
Or perhaps the UN bunker was simply attacked with artillery shells as a preliminary to the bomb itself (which may have been delayed until its actual strike for a number of reasons I have already given)?

From the descriptions given by the Observers it would seem that the artillery barrage that caught them (like other barrages that have been treated, probably correctly, as accidental) was aimed at suppressing Hizbollah insurgents.

The key point is the use of a precison targeted munition to hit a target that could not be confused with anything other than a UN compound.

Yet the number of troops ive read about being a part of this new UN border force numbers in the 10-20,000 range. Sure its just talk at this stage but the era of a 2,000 man border force is past. Israel will defang Hez the best they can in a few months, hit the easiest and highest value to effort targets and then get a free pass back home while getting a new and far stronger UN force to replace the system that they clearly dont like now. None of that plan involves pissing off multinational peacekeepers.

Except that they don't trust the UN to do the job of keeping the Peace fairly.

As indicated in the articles I linked...

*sigh*

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292016352&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

From JPost:

The small group of Ghanaian soldiers manning UNIFIL Position 6-52, to the west of the village of Maroun a-Ras, less than a kilometer from the border, hasn't left its base in the last two weeks.

"Those are the orders of our superior officers," explains one of them who presents himself as commander of the post, but refuses to give his name. "We have been visited by our officers three times since the fighting began and a supply truck arrives here every three or four days."

On the wall nearest to the gate of the white-washed building is an "Alert State" board with the arrow pointed to black. But none of their information on the current situation has come from their own sources. "We know what's going on from the television," says the commander.

Even the deaths of four UNTSO members on Tuesday night in an IAF bombardment, at a base not so far away, wasn't communicated to them from headquarters. That, too, they learned from TV.

As I said before guys, these people could leave if they wanted to. It's up to Kofi Annan to give the order. Maybe he just likes keeping UN forces in the middle of a warzone.

As for the TV comments, they are obviously doing the same kind of observing as the rest of us.

No Eskimos in Israel. ALOT of Hizballah in Lebanon.
Indeed.
Anyway, we'll leave the Eskimo hunting Hizbollah snatch squads to one side...for now.;)

So, the IDF killing 4 unarmed members of a UN observation mission with a precision munition after artillery strikes?

You opportunity awaits...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292016352&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

From JPost:



As I said before guys, these people could leave if they wanted to. It's up to Kofi Annan to give the order. Maybe he just likes keeping UN forces in the middle of a warzone.

As for the TV comments, they are obviously doing the same kind of observing as the rest of us.

Yes, the UN should leave, otherwise israel has no choice but to bomb them!

Yes, the UN should leave, otherwise israel has no choice but to bomb them!

How'd you come to that conclusion chief?

Yes, the UN should leave, otherwise israel has no choice but to bomb them!


Hmmm...not so much. They are in the middle of a warzone and should leave because chances are, if you are in the middle of two warring parties, you might get hit by something from either side.

Hello! :D

Last chance...

Hmmm...not so much. They are in the middle of a warzone and should leave because chances are, if you are in the middle of two warring parties, you might get hit by something from either side.

And if its a completely well marked UN immobile building, then neither side has any excuse to hit it.

Shit like this is why I think the israeli's shouldn't rely on so many munitions, as they simply cause too much collateral damage in a war like this. They should have feet on the ground, taking suspects under arrest, and shooting those posing an active threat.

After bombing cell phone towers, refugee buses, powerplants, etc, this doesn't surprise me.

Isreal needs to be treated like the bloodthirsty rogue nation it has become and marginalised by civilised nations everywhere.

I really suggest you look at history. Israel has won every war it has faught in. They are most definitely not a rogue nation but a nation at war.

In regards to this incident, either it was accidental or that it was used by Hezbollah for something other than legit reasons. Either way, the IDF is looking into it and hopefully we will have some answers.

Hello! :D

Last chance...


lol, you still never provided me with evidence that the weapon was precision guided. Therefore, I stand by my decision of regretting the deaths of the UN workers, but continuing to place no direct blame on Israel for intentionally bombing the outpost. I also stand by my ascertation that hanging around in the middle of a war will highly increase your chances of mistakenly being hit by bombs, shelling, small arms fire, what have you. The UN should pull these observers immediately, for their own sake. As the article clearly indicates, they aren't doing any more observing that you and I have been doing by watching CNN.

Israel makes a mistake and kills some civilians and it is taken as intentional and evil.
Hezbollah targets civilians on purpose all the time and it is taken as somthing they have to do

the anti-Israel bias on this site is astounding.

Great Pics here: those evil IDF soldiers, they are just bloodthirsty...

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?topic_id=1990937

*snip*
Still posting other stuff in an attempt to dodge the question? *sigh*

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11448524&postcount=149
Having shown you mine, again, either agree or produce evidence specifically disproving it.

Or continue to ignore anything that proves you wrong...
I think you have already made your choice.

Good night

Israel makes a mistake and kills some civilians and it is taken as intentional and evil.
Hezbollah targets civilians on purpose all the time and it is taken as somthing they have to do

the anti-Israel bias on this site is astounding.

To make sure they cant put together a peace-keeping force for a ceasefire.

I do not think that was their motivation. Unless you have proof backing that up, I am going to chalk it up as a conspiracy theory.

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile. Next?

Was it one missile or several? If it is just one then the missile could have malfunctioned, if it was several then I would start asking questions. To convict on one missile is really fruitless.

I do not think that was their motivation. Unless you have proof backing that up, I am going to chalk it up as a conspiracy theory.

A conspiracy theory that is anti-Israel....on this site? No....could'nt be...:p

Israel makes a mistake and kills some civilians and it is taken as intentional and evil.
To be honest, I don't know why they'd want to do it. So official policy it ain't. Whether it was some sort of local commander going nuts, or they just couldn't be bothered to be careful while attacking presumed Hezbollah positions close-by, I don't know.

Fact of the matter is that it was unethical, because an honest mistake it wasn't. It was either intentional or gross negligence.
And now we have four families who'll never see their loved ones again. As thanks for their willingness to sign up as peacekeepers and perhaps help some people.

Hezbollah targets civilians on purpose all the time and it is taken as somthing they have to do
Who does that? Be honest now...aren't you just imagining it?

http://www.schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif

May I ask why you are laughing? I mean, I know from your posts you find this dispicable but if it is right, it does stand to reason alittle bit about what happened.

Also, precision guided weapons, though accurate, do tend to miss from time to time.

Was it one missile or several? If it is just one then the missile could have malfunctioned, if it was several then I would start asking questions. To convict on one missile is really fruitless.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/25/D8J39A4O0.html

it was one. Fruitless indeed.

To be honest, I don't know why they'd want to do it. So official policy it ain't. Whether it was some sort of local commander going nuts, or they just couldn't be bothered to be careful while attacking presumed Hezbollah positions close-by, I don't know.

Fact of the matter is that it was unethical, because an honest mistake it wasn't. It was either intentional or gross negligence.
And now we have four families who'll never see their loved ones again. As thanks for their willingness to sign up as peacekeepers and perhaps help some people.

Who does that? Be honest now...aren't you just imagining it?

No, you do not understand how laser guidence works on a smart bomb. Mistargeting can occur very easily, and happens a certain percentage of the time. The fact that this was one bomb and not official policy proves that it was a mistake. Laser guidence can be faulty when smoke or other bombs are in the area, which they most clearly were.