Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall
A gunman firing from the roofs of one of the vehicles clearly is relevant as to the strike occurred.
No one dispute most of the rest of your points. There were failings, including that the operator thought the gunman got into the vehicle, which he didn't.
|
Given that they didn't strike that vehicle, it isn't really. The sequence of events based on current information was:
1) IDF spots a gunman riding on an aid truck. They try to contact the WCF to see if it's theirs, but cannot.
2) They track the convoy with that truck to an aid warehouse, but don't fire on it because of it's proximity to an aid facility.
3) IDF then spots a guy with a bag leave the aid warehouse and get into a totally different vehicle; they claim it was misidentified as a gun, which may or may not be true.
4) IDF strikes that vehicle, killing several people.
5)2 people surive that strike and get into another car to get to safety. IDF strikes that.
6) Survivors from the 2nd strike then get into a 3rd vehicle to try to get to safety and the IDF strikes that too, killing everyone.
So the guy with the gun on top of the aid vehicle may have been why they were tracking it all, but he had nothing really to do with them striking 3 separate vehicles that had just left an aid facility. They never claimed it was the same person getting into the vehicle, nor did they even provide footage of the bag they claim they mistook to be a gun.
Based on the evidence, it sounds like a trigger happy army that has little to no regard towards preventing collateral damage. They see a guy with a bag get into a car from what they knew was an aid warehouse where some other guy had had a gun earlier on, and that's enough to justify blowing up 3 separate vehicles.