Un outpost bombing

[ls317]

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=37278180-a261-421d-84a9-7f94d5fc6d50

The words of a Canadian United Nations observer written just days before he was killed in an Israeli bombing of a UN post in Lebanon are evidence Hezbollah was using the post as a "shield" to fire rockets into Israel, says a former UN commander in Bosnia.
Those words, written in an e-mail dated just nine days ago, offer a possible explanation as to why the post -- which according to UN officials was clearly marked and known to Israeli forces -- was hit by Israel on Tuesday night, said retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie

[niyad]

1. NOTHING excuses israel's precision bombing of that building NOTHING

[CuteNFuzzy]

2. Don't you get it

the Hizballah cowards were hiding behind the UN anti-Israel guys

:sarcasm:

[Scurrilous]

63. Another person...

...who doesn't get it:

UN observer's wife calls attack 'intentional'

<snip>

"The wife of Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, missing and presumed dead after an Israeli attack on his UN observer post, has charged the bombing was "intentional."

"The building was clearly marked, their vehicles were clearly marked, they were clearly marked as UN observers," Cynthia Hess-von Kruedener told reporters Thursday.

"So why were (the Israelis) firing on that base? ... In my opinion, those were precision-guided missiles, so the attack was intentional."

She also said that Israel had attacked the area several times before, "for weeks upon weeks," according to her husband."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060726/harper_soldier_death_060727/20060727?hub=TopStories

[Igel]

7. It wasn't very precise, now was it?

I can't rule out that I've overlooked the UN report that claimed 'precision bombing', but I've seen it in the press.

The UN press releases all say "aerial attack" or "aerial bomb." This doesn't entail "precision bombing".

The more real problem is that the precision bombing took 14 to 21 different assaults to actually hit the target. Think about it: if that bunker was the target, they missed in more than a dozen assaults, each probably comprising more than one projectile.

I'm not convinced it was the target. I'm not saying it wasn't the target. I don't understand what happened. Put together all the available evidence, and there are more questions than answers.

[Lost-in-FL]

13. "Precision Bombing" is a myth

Those "smart" bombs aren't very precise at all. I heard about it in a documentary (Why we fight). I don't know how true that is but the name is just to justify the killing of civilians. If civilians die they just Swift the blame on them for being too close to the target.

[jrd200x]

14. So if their missles were being shot from under it

that would be OK? And we'd have to let Israeli citizens die because the UN guys were letting Hezbollah fire from their position?

I'm sorry, you're logic is assinine.

[WinkyDink]

40. Hezbollah was going against Geneva Convention rules about

using civilian areas to conceal fighting forces.

[Lindacooks]

3. Yeah, right. Then why

were the observers calling the IDF, telling them they were getting too close with their bombs, only to be told that they were safe NOW? And each time the bombs got closer? And why did Kofi Annan get personal reassurance from Israeli commanders that that outpost would be safe?

[jrd200x]

8. Because they KNEW why Israel was shelling the area

The UN said many times before that day that the shelling was getting close, and that they knew why - they know the terrorists were launching missles within yards of their outpost.

What should they do, NOT take out the missle site?

[me b zola]

23. Not that day

It was reported that there were no misseles launched from the area around the compound that day.

FOUR HOURS of phone calls by UN workers warning Israel that they were dangerously close--FOUR HOURS of bombing even after rescue crews were dispatched. The bombing ceased once they destroyed the UN compound. Mission accomplished. :grr:

[jrd200x]

41. You're right. It was the day before

but the equipment was still set up. I guess they should have just let them keep the missles. Been more tolerant and shown more restraint by letting them fire them the next day.

[me b zola]

67. I'm not understanding your logic

So if you kill, wipe-out, every innocent that the "enemy" might hide behind, for instance the UN and every Shiite citizen, then you have a clear shot at the "enemy"?

Before you respond to that, let me reiterate, the bombing stopped as soon as the UN outpost was destroyed. This indicates that the target was the UN outpost.

One of the military commentators on cable news who was spinning this as an accident talked at length about how the cordinates gets sent through the system to the fighter jets. His job was to use his experience to sell the "accident spin" while laughing at those who believe differently. He didn't have his facts about this case correct, however, because he shrugged off the indicent by saying that everything happened so quickly that the Israelis didn't have time to call off the bombing. He wasn't aware that the bombing, and the pleas from the UN for Israel to call off the bombing, occurred over a four hour period. But it wasn't his job to get the facts out there. It was his job to confuse and mislead the public. Mission accomplished.

[mom cat]

24. What factual evidence do you have for your statement:

" and that they knew why - they know the terrorists were launching missles within yards of their outpost."
I have seen no evidence that the Hesbolla were
"launching missles within yards of their outpost." Please cite your source.

[jrd200x]

28. It's been reported many times that they were set up

within yards of the UN outpost. Do your own research.

I guess the UN troops could have been Helen Keller.

[Lost-in-FL]

34. And where is the information coming from?

From reporters in the area? :sarcasm:

[jrd200x]

39. Well it didn't come from reporters NOT in the area

but you can do your own research.

[QuestionAll...]

44. I heard something too...

that the fire coming from around the UN compound were really Blackwater mercs disguised as Jenna and Barbara hired by Cheney to provoke the IDF to smithereeen the UN outpost because Bush doesn't like Koffi's hairdo or taste in literature.

but you can do your own research on that too.

:sarcasm:

[jrd200x]

46. Why do you always retreat into juvenile nonsense when your wrong?

Jenna and Barbara?

A simple mind is a weak tool.

[uppityperson]

73. "you are"="you're" not "your".

"your" means something belongs to you, like (your poor grammar), rather than (you're wrong) in using "your" in this manner.

[mom cat]

70. Welcome to DU!

:hi: QuestionAll. I can see you are living up to your name!

[mom cat]

69. In other words, you can not give us a source!

[mom cat]

68. In other words, you have no specific source, only conjecture.

[Lindacooks]

66. He doesn't. That's the point.

Just repeating the talking points.

[DoYouEverWonder]

32. Then all the Israelis needed to do

was to tell the UN that the building was not safe and it was time for their people to get out.

[Lost-in-FL]

37. Thank you!!

:applause:

[QuestionAll...]

48. dang! you must be a graduate of military strategerists school or something

now who would have thought of that complicated manouever unless you were educationally steeped into the complex way of wars?

;)

[Igel]

4. I saw that.

But the UN says there was no activity around the outpost at the time, while reporting Hezbollah was firing from four other outposts around Bint Jbeil.

[jrd200x]

5. Typical UN and Hezbollah behavior

TO those that claim the terrorists don't hide behind woman, children, civilians, and yes, even UN outposts, this should serve as a reminder that they'll do anything immoral, including using ambulences, to kill innocents if they think it will help their cause.

The UN, for their part, has been covering for these people for years. I have no doubt that the UN peackeepers knew they were being used for cover, and didn't bother to tell anyone.

As a cover for enemy troops firing missles on civilians, they were a legitimate target.

"What do a call a world where you can't go out for pizza or a drink without being worried about being blown up?"

"Isreal"

[magellan]

10. So if your neighbor was shooting at you

...and was using a few strangers as a human shield while he did it, you'd feel perfectly okay with killing them to kill him, would you?

[jrd200x]

12. TO protect my family and my home? Of course, so would you

If he was shooting missles at me from behind innocents, you bet I would.

When the only pther alternative is for my wife and children to die, yes.

I'm sorry, but that's a freaking stupid question.

[Lost-in-FL]

22. Wrong!!

So if you were a Cop and someone had a hostage would you shoot them both?? That's brilliant.

[jrd200x]

31. No. And that's not what you asked

hey brilliant,

You changed your question in your reply. You asked me if I was being shot at by a neighbor, not if I were a cop with a hostage. That's a completely different situation - you know that. Your silly response only proves you couldn't repond with any kind of reason.

[magellan]

36. That was me, not Lost-in-FL

Try and keep up.

[jrd200x]

42. At least try and keep up with the topic

so you changed the topic? I think maybe you need to try and keep up.

[magellan]

51. Not my fault if you can't see the obvious

You think it's Hezbollah's fault that Israel killed 4 UN peacekeepers. That's like blaming the neighbor with the gun for the death of his hostages when it was YOU who shot them to get to him.

Honestly, why do you think cops rarely take such shots when civilians are around or being held hostage? When was the last time authorities blew up a house and everyone inside, intentionally forfeiting the lives of innocents, because they were being held by gun-toting madmen?

[magellan]

33. Oh, so you wouldn't get your family out of the way first?

You'd let them stay while this guy shot at you, just so you could prove you were right by killing him and his hostages?

Nice.

[jrd200x]

45. I would "LET" them stay in the way. What kind of twisted logic is that?

How far can you twist yourself to still be anti-Israeli?

I wouldn't "LET" someone hide behind hostaged and shoot at me. I wouldn't "LET" someone shoot at my family while hiding behind civilians.

At that point all I can do for my family is have them hunker down out of the way - running would only expose them to fire. And yes, then I'd lob a grenade if I have one.

Using your twisted logic I should sacrifice my own family AND leave the gunman alive to kill another day.

In your own words . .. nice. I'm sure all the other neighbors will appreciate that.

[magellan]

55. First of all, it was you who introduced your family into the equation

I asked if YOU were being shot at by a neighbor who was holding hostages. I could have been more specific, but it was still you who expanded on the situation, adding your family and no escape route.

It's rather alarming that in your scenario your first reaction wouldn't be to try to move your family to safety, or to call the cops, but to pick up your gun and get to the shooter through his hostages.

Glad you aren't MY neighbor.

Btw, the Israelis do have escape routes. They have bunkers, and unlike the Lebanese, their roads and bridges haven't been bombed out by Hezbollah, and Israelis fleeing south aren't in danger of being specifically targeted along the road by Hezbollah aircraft. So I guess you really are pro-Israel all the way.

[QuestionAll...]

50. ouch. you're a scarey person.

thankyou for not being my neignbor.

I mean this in a nice way.

;)

[Tanuki]

52. I thought the answer to your riddle

was going to be "Iraq." It would have been a lot more accurate and honest.

[Lost-in-FL]

6. Suuuure!!

:sarcasm:

So if that was the case, why didn't they moved the post? Or informed the UN??

[jrd200x]

9. Duh! Because the UN has been anti-Israel foe years

and they knew the Hez were using them.

You assume the UN wasn't on Hezbollahs side.

[Lost-in-FL]

17. And the USS Liberty was also anti-Israel

:sarcasm:

BS, this was a punishment for the UN resolution for a cease fire. Or maybe they don't want the UN seen how the Israeli military kill Innocent civilians. Notice I wrote "Israeli Army" not the Israelis. I do not support their military decisions this time around.

[jrd200x]

35. That's speculative. Oh, and the Liberty? 50 years old.

Can't you come up with something better to try to "prove" that Israel is bad?

That's some old history that the US says was a mistake anyway.

[Lost-in-FL]

47. Israel is not bad and I never said that,

But of course, that is the single one argument when you don't agree with something. It is a classic and is getting old. Stop putting labels like Anti-semite just because someone doesn't agree with the actions of an ARMY. There better ways to solve problems than with violence.

Israeli Forces are just making sure there's no peace for centuries to come for their actions during the past few weeks. It isn't any different than US attacking Iraq after getting inspectors out of Iraq. At least that is my opinion.

Yes, 50 years is a long time. Old news.

58 years of fighting like cats and dogs over religious fanatism is a lot of years too.

[Scurrilous]

58. Old history?

Who decided that?

You?

[Lost-in-FL]

76. Read

Though the United States never officially accepted the Israeli explanation, it agreed to accept indemnities of $13 million, for damage and casualties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

[QuestionAll...]

53. in what way has the UN been anti-Israel?

you talking about the vetos the US and Israel slap down whenever anything 'anti-israel interests' (and often positive to relieve some hardship for Palestinians?) are brought up?

the UN has never been allowed to be 'anti-Israel'. what you talking about?

[mom cat]

72. He has no answers for yuo either! .. He is just spouting nonsence.

[Igel]

15. That would be one question.

On the other hand, this has been a fairly common practice in S. Lebanon, and that's not going from some e-mail. That's going from UN press releases that report fire originating from adjacent to UN observer posts: multiple press releases for multiple days, and multiple instances per day.

The posts don't move. And the observers are unarmed, and so Hezbollah doesn't see a reason to move.

A serious question is why the UNIFIL commanders haven't instructed their troops to pull out. Instead, Hezbollah takes shots at them, they submit to Hezbollah's instructions, they're used as shields, and they're attacked by the IDF. Even when under intermittent attack, as in this case, and it's obvious that the bombardment continues in spite of repeated assurances, the UNIFIL commander leaves his men there.

I continue to not understand.

[Lost-in-FL]

30. Post don't move

but people in danger move or make others aware if it. That is sad when they have to blow up a UN Post with UNARMED personnel. What a brave action.

[jrd200x]

11. It's wrong to assume that the UN is on Israel's side

because, with the exception of the US and UK, have been on the islamists side for years.

They were LETTING the terrorists use the location. How can you miss that?

[Vinnie From Indy]

16. It could be that it was missed because it wasn't true.

[jrd200x]

19. Oh I don't know. Ray Charles could have seen it

They were in Hezbollah terrority for months, the missles were set up right next to them, and the Isrealy aremy had been going after them for days.

Yes, of course they were allowing it.

[mom cat]

26. How can an UNARMED UN POST "let" Hesbolla do anything

or prevent them from doing anything?

[Crunchy Frog]

64. Let's bomb the UN building!!!11!!1

They're an enemy of Israel1111!! Kill them!!!1

[The Stranger]

18. But that isn't what they said when they hit the UN post.

It was supposed to be an accident, remember. That didn't work so it is on to something else. Fabricating reason after reason after the fact only hurts their credibility worse.

[jrd200x]

20. I don't imagine it was done to attack the UN

but to take out the missles being protected by the obervation post.

[The Stranger]

27. It was a statement to keep countries from sending peacekeepers.

There were no "missles being protected by the observation post."

[QuestionAll...]

54. now 'the UN was protecting Huzbolla missiles'

guess that's another 'research it yourself', thingie if one doesn't believe you.

All you have to do is repeat the lie often enough and some will believe you. Mission accomplished. great work in the name of peace. ;(

[malaise]

25. Israel is always innocent

please understand that - everyone else is wrong:sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[jrd200x]

49. Yes, and Muslims always tell the truth

like when they faked all those funerals - even with live bodies in the coffins.

CNN caught them unloading them from a sky-cam.

[blonndee]

56. Muslims? Surely you didn't mean to say that, did you? nt

[QuestionAll...]

57. and neither do Jews, or Christians or Whirling Dirvishes...

I must tell you, you do No good at all for whatever cause you are on with what appears to be blanket hatred towards an entire population/group.

[jonnyblitz]

74. they are racists i tells ya! everyone one of them eventually

blurts it out, somehow, someway they show their true colors, all the time they are screaming anti-semitism. OH THE IRONY!! :crazy:

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

21. So now it was an intentional bombing?

Or was it both accidental and intentional?

[Spazito]

29. Hezbollah was NOT firing from within the immediate vicinity when

Israel bombed the UN post:

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 the 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 rescue operation and that incidents of firing close to UNIFIL positions were still happening Wednesday morning.

But Lute noted that UNIFIL has also come under direct attacks by small arms fire from Hezbollah.

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

and to add to this, the perspective from another Canadian peacekeeper who spent time in the same area with regard to whether the bombing could have been intentional:


Harry Bloom, eastern vice-president of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry Association, spent a year in the early 1970s patrolling the exact terrain where Hess-von Kruedener served.

snip

Bloom, now retired at 66, said he wasn't surprised by news that an Israeli bomb had hit the post - and he doesn't believe it was an accident.

"I agree with (UN Secretary General) Kofi Annan's comment that it seemed to be an intentional hit. It would have to be. The outposts are so well-identified with blue and white paint and flags. A pilot cannot mistake that outpost for anything else."

Bloom described repeated "altercations" with Israeli forces when he was stationed there.

more

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=7eb2c665-888b-4025-8975-f405d1237e0e&k=7216&p=2

TO REPEAT:

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

[sistersofmercy]

38. Remember Qana (sp?)

What year was that when the Israeli government hit a UN shelter in Lebanon full of families? At first they claimed they didn't know it was a UN shelter. When a video made by a dutch peacekeeper working with UN appeared clearly showing an Israeli drone scouting the area prior to the bombing then Israel claimed, oh a terroist ran inside the shelter.

[Scurrilous]

59. Qana:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qana_Massacre

[Lost-in-FL]

71. Thanks for the information

You would think they would be more careful.

[Octafish]

75. It's called ''Plausibility.''

Just throw out something that could be true and a certain percentage of the public will accept it as true. While people argue over the facts of the case, the feigned possibility provides effective historical cover. After a while, people think about something else. Repeat ad nauseum.

I hate lies and liars. Crooks and warmongers, too.

Speak of the devil...

PSYCHO-MORONO KAKISTOCRAT

[warrens]

43. As It Happens, a CBC show that local NPR airs

Was grilling an Israeli senior officer in Lebanon, calling him a liar when he said it was just an accident. Israel is rapidly squandering what little goodwill it had left after the Sharon years.

[Scurrilous]

60. LBN thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2417633

[Canadian Socialist]

61. My dad was there

many years ago. He was a (Canadian) UN Peacekeeper. The IDF used to shoot at his flag (flying from the back of his jeep) when he patrolled the area. I have one of the flags... it has bullet holes in it. This particular spot has been in place for over 30 years. I call bullshit on Isreal. If Hezbollah had dug themselves in there, the UN forces would have bugged out. The IDF knew they were firing on a UN force.

[Spazito]

62. UN observer's wife calls attack 'intentional'

The wife of Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, missing and presumed dead after an Israeli attack on his UN observer post, has charged the bombing was "intentional."


"The building was clearly marked, their vehicles were clearly marked, they were clearly marked as UN observers," Cynthia Hess-von Kruedener told reporters Thursday.


"So why were (the Israelis) firing on that base? ... In my opinion, those were precision-guided missiles, so the attack was intentional."


She also said that Israel had attacked the area several times before, "for weeks upon weeks," according to her husband.

more

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060726/harper_soldier_death_060727/20060727?hub=TopStories

[oberliner]

65. Kofi Annan

Let me say that I have had the chance to talk to the Prime Minister of Israel this morning. He definitely believes it's a mistake. He has undertaken to investigate and I have suggested we do a joint investigation. And he has expressed his deep sorrow at what happened, and we accept that.

[SidDithers]

77. So ...we accept his condolences...

not that it was a mistake.

Thanks.

Sid