Juan Cole: Israelis Kill UN Peacekeepers

[Ms. Clio]

The Israelis denied that they hit the base deliberately, but Kofi would know. Why do it? When you have in mind war crimes, it is better not to have neutral observers in the region.

Philip Gordon relays the thinking of the Israeli political and military elite behind its inhuman and massive bombing of all Lebanon:


' According to retired Israeli army Col. Gal Luft, the goal of the campaign is to "create a rift between the Lebanese population and Hezbollah supporters." The message to Lebanon's elite, he said, is this: "If you want your air conditioning to work and if you want to be able to fly to Paris for shopping, you must pull your head out of the sand and take action toward shutting down Hezbollah-land." '



In other words, Zbig was right that the Israelis have kidnapped the 3.8 million Lebanese and are holding them all for ranson, while breaking their legs from time to time to encourage prompt payment. The horrible thing is that the Lebanese could not do anything about Hizbullah if they wanted to. Their government is weak and divided (Hizbullah is in it, and the Bush administration and Ambassador Mark Feltman signed off on that!) Their new, green army only has 60,000 men, and a lot of them are Shiites who would not fight Hizbullah. Lebanon was a patient that needed to be nurtured carefully to health. Instead, it has been drafted and put into the middle of the worst fighting on the battlefield.

http://www.juancole.com/2006/07/israelis-kill-un-peacekeepers-halutz.html

[ladjf]

1. I believe that they did it to discourage other countries from sending

any troops in the UN force. That means that if there is no UN force, Israel will stay in Lebanon for as long as they like.

[Ms. Clio]

yes, the goal is NATO forces

or at least that was. If you read all the info at Prof. Cole's blog, it's apparent that things aren't quite working out like they planned.

[CuteNFuzzy]

11. That is my view as well

[cigsandcoffee]

2. Hezbollah is firing on the Israelis from the "immediate vicinity"...

...of the UN observation posts.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=19262&Cr=leban&Cr1=

UN force in southern Lebanon says heavy fire continues near its positions
20 July 2006 – The United Nations peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon said today that heavy exchanges of fire have continued unabated over the past 24 hours along the length of the line of withdrawal that separates the country from Israel.

The UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) reports 31 incidents of firing close to its positions on the so-called Blue Line during the past 24 hours, with three sites suffering direct hits from the Israeli side.

One artillery shell hit the interior of the UNIFIL Headquarters compound in Naqoura, causing extensive damage to its hospital, where doctors were operating at the time, the mission said.

In addition, artillery shells hit the position of the Ghanaian battalion on the coast in Ras Naquora and the patrol base of the observer group in the Marun al Ras area. Extensive material damage, but no casualties, resulted from the incidents, UNIFIL said.

It added that Hizbollah firing was reported from the immediate vicinity of the UN positions in Naqoura and Maroun Al Ras at the time of the incidents.

The mission said that some re-supply convoys to its positions are planned for today, but the ability to move will depend on the situation on the ground. “All UN positions close to the Blue Line are facing shortages of basic supplies, and the need to re-supply them is vital,” it stressed.

On purpose? I'd think so.

[Ms. Clio]

3. hey, either it's "precision" targeting, or it's not

And that report was from 6 days ago.

[malaise]

5. Meanwhile from the link

on your other thread
<snip>
This shit is really getting to me. How about you? Are you feeling the Terror yet? And imagine what those on the frontlines -- all frontlines -- must feel, assuming they're in one piece. And then there's Condi, rushing from target to client, flashing that dopey smile and waving to the cameras like she's on the red carpet at the Oscars as the bombs rain down in her wake. Cynical? Or just cold blooded?
http://www.redstateson.blogspot.com/2006/07/cluster-fuck.html

[Ms. Clio]

9. you should read his recent piece about Hitchens

he knows his stuff.

[cigsandcoffee]

6. Of course it was from six days ago.

It points out exactly why these UN positions (in the middle of a warzone) are being hit. Precision bombing has its limits, and a blue flag isn't going to change a bomb heading a few meters one way or the other.

Hezbollah appears to be trying to hide its attacks from behind UN positions. No surprise that they're getting hit in the process, is it?

[Ms. Clio]

8. That has nothing to do with this case, it's a red herring

the facts are different.

[cigsandcoffee]

12. Red herring, my ass.

It shows a pattern. Hezbollah fires at Israel from the "immediate vicinity" of a UN observation post - as an obvious tactic - because any response that accidentally hits that post will be a PR coup for Hezbollah. People already predisposed to disliking Israel will trumpet the news as if the IDF murdered UN peacekeepeers for sport and humour, and will neglect to mention that the militants set up rocket attacks from the "immediate vicinity" in order to make it unfold that way.

If Israel doesn't attack for fear of hitting a UN camp, Hezbollah fires at will. If they do attack, Hezbollah may well get a great PR coup. It's win-win for them, and people like you (and Juan Cole) are playing right in to their hands. Congratulations.

[Ms. Clio]

13. yes, of course, that's the same excuse for destroying all of Lebanon

Hizbollah fires at Israel from "the immediate vicinity."

The facts in this case are completely different, and if you choose to disregard them, that's your perogative.

[cigsandcoffee]

15. Now that's a red herring

We're talking about the UN camp. I posted a story from the UN itself mentioning that Hezbollah is firing on Israel from the "immediate vicinity" of its camps, and had done so during every one of the incidents that day. This is what's called "a pattern."

If you want to expand that elsewhere, fine, but I'd prefer to stay on topic.

[Ms. Clio]

16. it's the precise same logic

Hizbollah in southern Beirut = the levelling of entire city blocks.

That's what I call a "pattern."

[cigsandcoffee]

18. The UN reported that Hezbollah was firing...

...from the "immediate vicinity" of UN camps. Not Israel. Maybe you should take up your skepticism with them.

[Ms. Clio]

24. you could not be more wrong: The UN says Hezbollah was NOT firing

in their vicinity at the time of this strike.

In a briefing note to the UN, Jane Lute, assistant secretary general for peacekeeping operations, said the IDF had been repeatedly firing too close to the patrol base on Tuesday.

She said 21 strikes occurred within 300 metres of the base and 12 artillery rounds fell within 100 metres of it, with four hitting the base directly.

The strikes occurred despite that fact "Hezbollah firing was not taking place within the immediate vicinity of the patrol base," she said.

Lute said that following the hit, Israeli troops continued to fire during the operation rescue and that incidents of firing close to UNIFIL positions were still happening Wednesday morning.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/07/25/un-lebanon.html

(To be fair, since I am limited to 4 pars, the next one does point out that Hizbollah sometimes targets them with small arms fire. But both are clearly "intentional.")

[Ms. Clio]

26. "Hezbollah firing was not taking place within the immediate vicinity

of the patrol base."

kicking for that crucial FACT.

[CuteNFuzzy]

27. thanks for clearing that up

[stepnw1f]

4. Precision Guided Mistake.. over and over again?

for several hours. Give me a break.

[cigsandcoffee]

7. Hezbollah firing from the "immediate vicinity"

Over and over again. For six hours? Very likely.

[stepnw1f]

10. Don't Buy This

just like I don't buy all your other posts. Looks like somebody found something interesting from the link you provided on another thread.

Having fun?

[cigsandcoffee]

17. Don't take my word for it...

..it's from an actual UN article. One would have to be intentionally blind to doubt it.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=19262&Cr=leban&Cr1=

[Kagemusha]

20. We'd like word of what was happening when the place was actually hit

Guess we'll have to wait for more details on that part.

[Ms. Clio]

25. your skepticism is justified

The UN says that Hizbollah was not "firing from the immediate vicinity" at the time of the strike.

As if that somehow makes wiping out 4 peacekeepers acceptable, anyway.

[Igel]

14. If you're trying to say

that it can't be a mistake because it was hit by one "precision guided missile" in 14 different incidents, I'd say you hardly have a convincing argument.

If you want to say that it was artillery shells being directed at the location of mobile rocket launchers, then you have a viable scenario: you position the launcher, and fire. You rev up the engine and move it, reloading elsewhere as artillery shells fall on your former position, or possibly picking up a second, pre-loaded, launcher. You drive back as soon as the artillery fire stops, you fire the rockets, leave, and chuckle as artillery rounds again land near your previous position. You're not hit, if you're fast enough. The goal of the artillerists is to return fire quickly enough to nail the people trying to kill you. If they hit the UN post, boy do you have a PR victory. If they don't risk hitting the UN post, and therefore don't return fire, you have a magic anti-artillery charm from behind which you can shoot at Israelis.

For Hezbollah, a win-win situation. For Israel, a difficult target, with most of the options being 'lose.'

[Kagemusha]

19. Well that explains a lot. It really does.

I mean, it explains why that Irish fellow was calling frantically to get the Israelis to stop firing so close to the outpost. It also explains how Olmert can say it was a "mistake". However, to treat that as an acceptable excuse is a bit rich. Annan's position can't be that no better can be expected from the Israelis. Also, it was such a direct hit... on a bomb shelter... I can see Annan's thinking, but the real sin was in completely ignoring requests that the Israelis stop firing in the vicinity and making a "mistake" that much likelier, and just not giving two cents whether the UN got hit or not. Callous disregard is not much of a step down from intentionally shelling the place.

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. Ah, that's where you're mistaken

For the apologists, the difference between callous disregard and intentional attack is the whole ballgame. Without that ocean of difference, there would be a lot of Israelis on trial in the Hague. Therefore, one must maintain that distinction at all costs, at least in the rhetorical domain, no matter how lacking in substance it becomes in fact.

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. I was under the impression that the IDF had aircraft

Silly me.

So these Hezbollah are driving their mobile unit in veritable circles around the UN observation post, lobbing off rockets to instigate Israeli return artillery fire, the artillery fire being much less accurate, of course, than attack helicopters or jets that can get an actual visual on the unit (the jets are all busy bombing Tyre, one suspects, and the helicopters are doing loo-de-loops for the benefit of the CBS Morning Show). This goes on for six plus however many hours. Nobody in the IDF says "Let's get some air support up their" (although, according to UNIFIL, there was aerial bombardment of the position as well, but never mind that: it doesn't make as interesting a story). No. Much better to be in the lose-lose position of lobbing artillery near the post. At the very least, it results in more entertaining gymnastics in the after-action. All Israeli after-action reports say the same thing: "WE HAD NO CHOICE!" I give you an 8.6 for the dismount: good twisting double sommersault, but you didn't really stick the landing.

:rofl:

[femrap]

35. That was good...

And didn't the UN keep a huge "Hollywood Opening" laser light shining at night.....so they would NOT get hit?

So...just to be straight on this....Israel wants NATO, not the UN, in southern Lebanon? Also...Israel didn't want the UN around as witnesses to over the top, illegal war behavior?

[poverlay]

23. I have to reply to all these people such as cigsandcoffee, and Aegis

regarding the issue of Hizbollah and other militant groups hiding in the civilian populace.
You are right and you are wrong.
Right in that it is cowardly.

Wrong in that no matter how cowardly, we simply cannot bomb a UN outpost, civilian apartment building, water treatment plant, etc. etc., and still maintain any moral highground, or expect to accomplish any long term solution. It makes us terrorists. It does. Ask what else can we do all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the view from under our(or Israel's) bombs is just as terrible, unjust, immoral and completely tragic as 9-11, Oklahoma city, Beirut, U.S.S. Cole, Haifa, or any other "terrorist" bombings. As long as we continue in this "Bush Doctrine" philosophy, we will continue to create enemies with legitimate hatred for us faster than we can kill them.

It is far more cowardly to bomb a civilian populace with overwhelming force than it is to hide in one. I doesn't matter if Satan is hiding there.

It will NEVER end the violence. It("The Buuush Doctrine") has been tried time and time again. It NEVER works. Neither peace, non-violent democracy, or "lasting ceacefires" can be achieved with violence. The horror of watching all the slow people in the world trying to figure this out over and over again is sickening.

Let me be clear: As long as bombs are being fired, WHOMEVER is firing them deserves the label of "terrorist" and lifelong imprisonment. There is No justification. Please don't waste your time trying.

[stepnw1f]

28. They Don't Give Shit

They ignore posts like yours and mine and just keep frothing shit to excuse the killing. They are as brainwashed into supporting the Israeli Gov. as Ditto-Heads support Bush. If anyone supports the bombing of civilians, they admit to not being Progressive or Liberal. Only in a twisted mind could they rationalize such a thing.

[Ms. Clio]

30. the silence is deafening, yes

although to be fair, I don't necessarily "see" a lot of their shit, either.

[poverlay]

31. It's so easy for people to be provoked into bloodthirsty, hate-filled

war-mongers. Especially when they don't have to directly experience the repercussions.

I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I know with absolute certainty that violence is a failure of imagination and an act which makes much lesser beings out of all of us. We who have so much potential...

That, more than anything is the failure and shame of all those who would support violence of any kind. The Bush administration is the pinnacle of that failure. Their empowerment, the pinnacle of our shame.

At the rate people are floundering towards this understanding, we and our children will never know peace.

[stepnw1f]

33. "have to directly experience the repercussions"

That's exactly right... just like chickenhawks with no skin to lose in the fight. So they push those in front of them into the front line. I have no respect for such a thing.

My family was desimated in the old Soviet Union. Family members were lined up in front of a firing squad, while my grand father was helplessly forced to watch. Then he was sent to Siberia, where later he managed to escape... today the scars run deep, and he can't he talk about it.

On my Mother's side, my family in Germany was executed for either helping Jews or enlisting into the army during WWII.

Today, I have a very small family. I will not fight and die for fanatics. My family blood has been used and abused enough! And here on DU we have dumbasses cheerleading a possible WWIII.

[glitch]

34. Remarkably well said. Thanks for your insightful post. nt

[femrap]

36. Why can't people learn this? Thank you. nt

[Ms. Clio]

29. another kick

mabye somebody is out getting more cigs and coffee, and just hasn't seen this yet.

[oberliner]

32. Kofi Annan accepts the Israeli apology and awaits investigation

How about you?